FORMER SURVEY OFFICE 178 HIGH ST, HEATHCOTE

North elevation (side) of the stone survey office building with timber additions to the right.

CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN FEBRUARY 2011

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E Frontier Architects for Heritage Pty Ltd ACN 124 012 871 Suite 5, 16 York Street, St Kilda West, 3182 ABN 34 641 447 963 Ph +61 3 9534 8963

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

CONTENTS PAGE

Executive Summary 3

1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Location 4 1.3 Heritage Status 5 1.4 Methodology 5

2.0 History 7 2.1 Introduction 7 2.2 The McIvor Gold Fields 7 2.3 Philip Lamothe Snell Chauncy (1816-1880) 8 2.4 Heathcote Township 9 2.5 The Survey Office 12 2.6 Private Residence and Doctor‟s Surgery 16

3.0 Architecture 18 3.1 Introduction 18 3.2 Colonial Architecture of the 1850s 18 3.3 Comparative Analysis 18

4.0 Physical Evidence 24 4.1 The Site and Landscape 24 4.2 The Buildings 25

5.0 Cultural Significance 41 5.1 Introduction 41 5.2 Assessment of Cultural Heritage Significance 41 5.3 Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance 43 5.4 State and Local Significance Conflicts 44 5.5 Levels of Significance 45

6.0 Conservation Policy 46 6.1 Introduction 47 6.2 General Policy 46 6.3 Use of the Site 46 6.4 Existing Building Fabric 47 6.5 Setting 47 6.6 Landscape 48 6.7 Future Development 48

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 1

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

6.8 Environmental Risk 48 6.9 Management and Maintenance 48

7.0 Conservation Action 50 7.1 Conservation Works 50 7.2 Urgent Works 50 7.3 Essential Works 50 7.4 Recommended Works 51

8.0 Select Bibliography 52

APPENDIX 1 The Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter 53

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 2

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Executive Summary

The Conservation Management Plan draws the following conclusions:  The former Survey Office, Heathcote is culturally significant at a State level. Refer to Statement of Significance in Section 5.3 of this report. The Statement of Significance should form the basis for future planning.  The future conservation and development of the former Survey Office should be carried out in accordance with the Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter) A copy of the Burra Charter is attached in the Appendices.  Four tiers of significance have been adopted to establish the relative levels of significance of elements of the former Survey Office, Heathcote (refer to Section 5.5). Generally, the level of intervention into the fabric should relate to the level of significance attributed to the element or area of the stone structure. For example, the level of intervention into the fabric should be kept to a minimum for elements considered to be of primary significance, though a higher level of intervention may be considered appropriate for elements considered to be of secondary or tertiary significance, or intrusive.  A copy of this Conservation Management Plan, and any updates, should be kept in a permanent and accessible archive for interested parties, and those responsible for the future care of the place.  Photographic records and dimensioned drawings should be kept of existing conditions before any changes are undertaken to the existing fabric of buildings and structures, so that, in the event that the structure is returned to its original condition by future generations, clear evidence exists of the original condition.  Any new additions and alterations should be recessive in relation to elements of primary significance, and preferably be of a contemporary design. Any major additions and alterations to the buildings, structures and elements of primary significance should be subject to consultation with a conservation practitioner, to ensure that changes are handled in the most sympathetic manner possible, and the significance of the place is not compromised.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 3

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background The aim of this Conservation Management Plan (CMP) for the Former Survey Office, Heathcote is to review the research material gathered in relation to the place and examine the site, make an assessment of the cultural heritage significance, and formulate conservation policies and a management plan to ensure the retention, and where appropriate, enhancement of the cultural heritage significance of the place. This CMP was commissioned by the owners, Ron and Elva Laughton, to provide a guideline document for planning future redevelopment of the site. The CMP will enable informed decisions to be made relating to the future development, management, interpretation and enhancement of the place, without compromising the cultural heritage significance.

1.2 Location Heathcote is located 120km north of Melbourne, 45 km south east of Bendigo, and is within the City of Greater Bendigo.

Figure 1- Location of Heathcote, indicated by the red star. Map generated using GeoVIC, Department of Primary Industries, Aug 2009. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p3]

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 4

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The subject site has three frontages: High, Wright and Chauncey Streets1. The actual property description is Allotment 25, Section 10, Township of Heathcote, and the street address is 178- 180 High Street, Heathcote.

Figure 2 - The Subject Site (pink with red border) has frontages to High, Chauncey and Wright Streets. Map generated using Planning Maps Online, Department of Planning and Community Development Aug 2009. [source: adapted from AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p3]

1.3 Heritage Status Victorian Heritage Register The Former Survey Office, Heathcote was included on Victorian Heritage Register (H2247) on 8th July 2010.

City of Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme The Former Survey Office, Heathcote is included in the City of Greater Bendigo Heritage Overlay (HO467) as an individual listing.

Australian Heritage Commission The building has no individual or group listing on the Register of the National Estate and is not included on the National Heritage List pursuant to the Environment Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act 1999.

The National Trust of Australia (Victoria) The Former Survey Office, Heathcote is not currently classified by the National Trust.

1 Although Chauncey Street is understood to have been named after Philip Chauncy, the spelling is different. How this error occurred is not known.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 5

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

1.4 Methodology As previously stated, the purpose of this CMP is to make an assessment of the cultural heritage significance of the Former Survey Office, Heathcote and its component parts, to undertake an assessment of the integrity of the complex, and to prepare conservation policies and a management plan to ensure the retention of significance into the future. The assessment of the significance of the various component parts of the place was undertaken with reference to the publication by J S Kerr, The Conservation Plan: A guide to the preparation of conservation of European cultural significance, Fifth Edition (2000), The National Trust of Australia (NSW). The CMP was also undertaken in accordance with the definitions, conservation principles, processes and practices outlined in the Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter). A copy of the Burra Charter is attached in Appendix 1.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 6

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

2.0 HISTORY

2.1 Introduction This section of the CMP is intended to provide an historical context for the period of the initial construction of the Former Survey Office, Heathcote and to record the historical development of the place since that date. In addition, this history will explore the various historic and social themes that assist in the assessment of cultural heritage significance of the place.

The following history of Heathcote and the subject site has been based on „Former Survey Office, Heathcote: Heritage Assessment for Ms Laughton‟ prepared by AHMS (November 2009). Additional historical research has been undertaken as part of this current study and has been incorporated into the following section.

2.2 The McIvor Gold Fields In 1836, the Surveyor General of New South Wales, Major Thomas Mitchell passed through the area now known as Heathcote on his third journey to Portland Bay. He coined the term „Australia Felix‟ during this time and named the McIvor Creek after a member of his exploration party. Pastoralists soon followed, settling large runs in the area. To service the pastoralists, a basic track with a few Inns developed through what was to later become the town of Heathcote. This track enabled produce to be carted to and from the northern sheep stations.

The McIvor diggings, which were the catalyst for the establishment of the town of Heathcote, began with the first gold strike in 1851. A series of gold finds followed with a major strike made in 1852 at Golden Gully, west of the later township. Settlement intensified and the population increased substantially when the gold fields at McIvor (now the Heathcote area) were officially opened on the 19th of March 1853. By June of that year, there were 16,000 diggers on the field.2

A government camp was established that same year with the resident Gold Commissioner, Mr Brackenbury, arriving at Easter, 1853. The government camp, set up to administer the law on the goldfields also housed other officials including Senior and Junior Commissioners, a postmaster and his clerk, the Deputy Sheriff and his clerk, a Bailiff, a Clerk of the Peace and his bailiff, other clerks, a Camp Inspector, tent keepers and labourers, and a few drivers. The camp was established on a rise adjacent to the main diggings at Golden Gully and some of the tents were quickly replaced by a range of buildings constructed by the Crowle brothers who had arrived from Adelaide. By the end of 1853 they had constructed a Gold Office, Courthouse, storerooms, other offices, barracks and stables.

In addition to the Government Camp and the facilities provided by it, a township to cater for the increasing populations needs was addressed with the despatch from Melbourne of land surveyor, Philip Chauncy to the McIvor diggings. Chauncy arrived in September 1853 to commence the „laying out [of] the Township of Heathcote and marking off agricultural lands in the neighbourhood.‟3

2 James Flett, The History of Gold Discovery In Victoria, p86. 3 PRO, NoA53/308, letter from A Clarke (Surveyor General) to Brackenbury 25 August 1853.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 7

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

2.3 Philip Lamothe Snell Chauncy (1816-1880) Land Surveyor, Philip L S Chauncy, was born in 1816 in Buckinghamshire, England. His older sisters had migrated to South Australia in 1836 and he joined them in 1839. Two years later, Chauncy married Charlotte Kemmis and took up the position as assistant government surveyor at the Swan River Colony (Western Australia). Charlotte died in 1847 and in 1848 Philip married Susan Augusta Mitchell at Middle Swan Church (WA).

In 1853, Philip, Susan and their children moved to Melbourne, Victoria, where Chauncy set up as a private land agent and surveyor with offices at 14 Swanston Street, Melbourne. His venture into private practice was short lived as on 23 August 1853 the Surveyor-General, Andrew Clarke appointed him to the position of Temporary Assistant Surveyor to be stationed at the McIvor Goldfields.4 On September 13th, Chauncy, his wife, three children, a servant Betsy, five men and two drayloads of belongings and equipment set off on the 72 mile journey taking „ten days, of which it rained nine‟ to reach the government camp at McIvor. Chauncy‟s appointment with the Surveyors General department was with a salary „at the rate of three hundred and fifty pounds per annum, and an allowance in lieu of equipment at the rate of two hundred pounds per annum‟.5

Figure 3 - Portrait of Philip Chauncy, 1863. [source: Title page Illustration for Memoirs of Mrs. Poole and Mrs. Chauncy by Phillip Chauncy re-printed 1976.]

Chauncy selected the site and surveyed Heathcote and Echuca during his seven years at the McIvor diggings site. He made sketches of the developing Heathcote township and district in

4 PRO, VPRS 97/P0001/4 , Philip Chauncy (Heathcote) Correspondence 5 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/1, No A53/749

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 8

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

the 1850s, including a view of the cemetery containing the grave of his eldest son, Philip Lamothe, who died in 1854, aged three. He was the first burial in the new cemetery, the location of which Chauncy had selected and laid out the plots and paths.6 Chauncy settled in Heathcote, purchasing a number of blocks of land for his family and generally participating in the local community. In 1857, he was appointed Magistrate of Heathcote. In 1860, Chauncy was moved from his post at Heathcote to the Dunolly Survey District. This is recorded in his memoirs as a source of much distress as it caused him to lose a „good deal of money‟.7 After Chauncy left, the government did not replace him, rather they „employed contract surveyors to mark out land selections‟.8 While in Dunolly, he took a series of photographic views of the area in 1865. At about this time, his large family (wife and eight children) had settled in Melbourne due to Susan‟s ill health. She died in 1870 and Philip‟s sister Theresa (now the widowed Mrs Poole) came to look after the eight surviving Chauncy children. Chauncy published affectionate tributes to both wife and sister in 1873 and 1876, reprinted as Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy (Kilmore 1976) and illustrated with some of his sketches. Chauncy continued to be employed as a Victorian district surveyor at Castlemaine, Ararat, Camperdown and Ballarat until „Black Wednesday‟ in 1878. He then became registrar to the Anglican Bishop of Ballarat, retiring through ill health in November 1879. He died at Ballarat on 9 April 1880. His obituary in the Ballarat Star stated that he was a highly competent and imaginative surveyor and planner. Wherever he lived he became acquainted with the Aboriginal people and learned their languages, contributing an appendix and helping Robert Brough Smyth with other material for his book, The Aborigines of Victoria (Melbourne 1878).9

2.4 Heathcote Township When Philip Chauncy arrived at the McIvor diggings in September 1853 to commence the survey of the area, McIvor was „one of the principal gold-fields‟10 of Victoria with a population of in excess of 16,000 people. The Gold Commissioner stationed at McIvor, Mr Brackenbury, was of the opinion that the quantities of gold were such that it would become a permanent establishment and the associated government support staff and permanent buildings were required. There were few buildings, many tents and a random array of tracks. Within a fortnight of arriving, Chauncy had explored the general area and prepared a sketch with options for the location of a township to be known as Heathcote (see below).

The sketch was sent to the Surveyor General in Melbourne with a written description of each option (A, B, C, D) and a recommendation. Chauncy was pleased with the acceptance of his recommendation for Option A which he described as follows;

„This is a beautiful site for a township and probably the best within many miles. The ground is generally high and slightly undulating, but not too steep in any part. It is sheltered from the north and east by Mt Ida and a high range of hills. The soil is more or less sandy and gravelly and appears in many places to be the debris of

6 P Chauncy, Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy, p47-8 7 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169 8 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169 9 Ballarat Star, 10 April 1880 10 P Chauncy, Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy, p46

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 9

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

the adjacent hills, it is therefore dry and salubrious. Patches of the table land, having the clay nearer the surface, are somewhat wet and boggy in winter but could easily be drained. There are some fine permanent pools of water in the main creek and there are several small tributaries which are at present running. The whole is lightly timbered with pine “Blue gums” and other eucalypti, some Banksias and Casuarinas where the soil is sandy and Acacias where on the richer alluvial deposits. It would be an advantage to the town for the creek to run through it instead of forming one outer boundary as in the description of the Reserve. Mr Brackenbury approves of this site‟.11

Figure 4 – ‘Sketch shewing the proposed Site for a Township on Mt Ida Creek’ Philip Chauncy, Assistant Surveyor, 30th Sept, 1853 [source: PRO VPRS...... 53/863] Note – the pink area is the Commissioners Camp and the yellow area the diggings.

Clarke responded directing Chauncy to proceed at once to design the intended township, laying out streets, squares etc. and pointing out the most suitable sites for churches, schools, markets, Court House and other public buildings.12

11 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence 12 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 10

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Chauncy and his four assistants laid out Heathcote within the natural boundaries of McIvor Creek and Mt Ida. The Commissioners Camp and garden was surveyed, the site for the hospital pegged out and 64 allotments of which 52 lots fronted the 2 chain wide main road (later High Street). The first land sales, at which Chauncy officiated, were held on 24 January 1854.

Figure 5 – ‘Allotments in Heathcote as Figure 6 – Survey Plan prepared by P Chauncy marked on the ground by Philip Chauncy, 1853. [source: Public Records Office Historical Asst Surveyor, November 1853 Maps and Plans District 65 ‘Heathcote- Township’]

The Telegraph line from Bendigo to Heathcote was completed in 1859,13 and road works, including stone kerbing and guttering, were undertaken in 1860.14 As a result of the decline in Gold returns in the area, the population rapidly declined, however many miners „either took up small acreages and began to farm or returned to their original trade and settled to supply the growing small townships‟.15

The Heathcote region became an important agricultural area and continued the timbercutting industry. The railway (Figure 7), built in 1888 from Heathcote to Bendigo, facilitated the movement of timber, other important goods, and people, to the gold fields and larger towns. The line was extended to Kilmore by 1890. The railway line between Heathcote and Bendigo was

13 P Chauncy, Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy, p29. 14 P Chauncy, Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy, p36. 15 Earth Tech 2002 p.24

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 11

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

closed to traffic in 195816, and between 1965 and 1966 both passenger and goods services between Kilmore and Heathcote had ceased.17

Figure 7- Map shows a compulsory purchase order of land required for railroad construction. Railway indicated green existing telegraph orange. [source: ‘Victorian Railways, Wandong, Heathcote and Sandhurst line plan of land belonging to 'Benjamin Flea' occupied by '[blank]' situated in the parish of Heathcote in the county of Dalhousie’ 1887. State Library of Victoria.]

2.5 The Survey Office When Philip Chauncy, his family and staff arrived at the McIvor diggings their accommodation was in tents at the Government Camp. A separate tent (with timber floor) was provided as the Survey Office. Chauncy understood this to be a temporary arrangement and that a permanent structure would be erected for both his family home and a Survey Office. Probably unbeknown to Chauncy, the construction of a survey office at McIvor was being delayed, if not thwarted, by the beauracracy of the various government departments. In August

16 The Age, March 30 1963, p.5. 17 J O Randall, Pastoral Settlement in Northern Victoria (Vol 2), pp.31-32.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 12

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

1853, prior to Chauncy arriving in McIvor, Andrew Clarke (Surveyor General) requested rooms be added to the Government Offices currently under construction at McIvor for the purposes of a temporary Survey Office.18 This request seems to have been unsuccessful as shortly after, Clarke wrote to the Acting Colonial Architect requesting that he ‘have the goodness to cause the arrangements authorized in the annexed letter requesting a Survey Office at the McIvor Gold Fields to be carried out with as little delay as possible as [he has] detached a surveyor to that locality’.19 James Balmain (Acting Colonial Architect) advised that ‘the buildings at the Gold Fields are all being erected under the direction of the CC of Gold Fields and he has overseers in charge of them, there is no officer of this Department at the McIvor and therefore perhaps if Mr Clarke would communicate with Mr Wright [Chief Commissioner of the Gold Fields] his office might be directed to erect this building.’20 By October 1853, Chauncy had had enough of the tent and wrote to Clarke stating that the „2 rooms for a survey office and bedroom which you were pleased to direct to be erected here have not yet been commenced and appear to be postponed for an indefinite period. It would seem necessary that a survey office should be of brick or stone for I find myself greatly retarded in office work by the heat of the tent which also warps and contracts the instruments and drawing paper’.21 Clarke replied that the 2 rooms for the Survey Office will be attended to ‘with all possible despatch’, however, he had never mentioned ‘anything respecting a bedroom, the providing of which is quite out of the question’.22 Works were progressing on the other government buildings which were being constructed by the Crowle Brothers, builders from Adelaide who had recently arrived at the McIvor diggings. Presumably, they had experience building in stone in South Australia, and employed their stonemason skills in the buildings at the McIvor diggings. By the end of 1853, the contractors were experiencing financial strains claiming the increase in labour costs and the fact that they had decided to „cut the whole of the front‟ of the Government buildings rather than stone rubble as specified. The Crowle Brothers requested an early progress payment of £200 on the current contract and to be given approval to proceed with the construction of the Court House immediately, or they would be forced to withdraw their tender. Both requests were granted and the contractors continued on with the buildings and commenced work on the Court House. In February 1854, as Chauncy‟s diary records, progress was being made in both his employment and in the construction of a Survey Office : „Mr Clarke [had] pleasure in telling me that he highly approved of my surveys and works and that I was now placed (as of 1st) on permanent staff with increase of £100 per annum. He also gave me my choice of an acre allotment in Heathcote for a survey building and drew a design himself for a stone house of 5 rooms which is to be built for us immediately.‟23 It is not known if Clarke‟s design was adopted nor who documented the works for the construction of the Survey Office as no details regarding this have been sourced to date. However, the Surveyor General, Andrew Clarke was becoming impatient with Chauncy

18 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence No A53/308 19 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence No A53/74 20 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence No A53/74 21 PRO, VPRS 97/P0001/4 , Philip Chauncy (Heathcote) Correspondence, 21 October 1853 From Chauncy to Surveyor General‟s office (Survey Office Heathcote (tent) 22 PRO, VPRS 1258/P0001/3, Surveyor General, Correspondence No A53/937 25 October 1853 (to Phillip Chauncey) Surveyor Generals Office 23 Philip Chauncy diaries and survey books, 1840-1975, Item 11 (Library of NSW)

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 13

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

continually drawing attention to the urgent need of the building, and consequently, „on the 28th February [he] instructed Mr Philip Chauncey the Assistant Surveyor in charge of the District to call tenders in order that an opinion might be formed as to the cost of erecting a suitable office‟. Apparently the prices received were all in excess of the funding available and considered to be loaded due to the contractors being based in Melbourne. They sought a price from the Crowle Brothers which was accepted and works on the construction of a stone Survey Office commenced in March 1854. In early April, Chauncy recorded the progress on the allotment with the excavation works for the building and trenching being underway. The building progressed steadily until mid August when Chauncy reported that the labourers had stopped work stating that they had received no wages for weeks. By this stage, the contractors had been paid £700 of the total contract price of £920. The Crowle Brothers history of financial difficulties continued such that James Crowle advised the Surveyor General‟s Department that he „had discovered that the Contract was taken at much too low a rate, that he had already expended £1300 on the building; that it would require at least £500 to complete it, and that unless the Government would advance that sum he would be compelled to relinquish the contract.‟ The request for an increase to the contract sum was refused and the construction works halted. James and John Crowle, trading under the firm of Crowle Brothers, filed a declaration of insolvency in October 1854. The amount of their debts cited as £884 3s; their assets £373 14s 9d. „The insolvents say they have been contractors, and their insolvency arises from losses on contracts‟.24 Chauncy was authorised by the Surveyor Generals department to supervise the completion of the building using day labour with Clarke stating that he would hold Chauncy „responsible for the proper execution of the trust confided to him‟. An additional £500 was provided to get the building completed. The tents at the Government Camp which housed the Chauncy family, Survey Office and staff were relocated to the new Survey Office site to enable Philip Chauncy to supervise the works while continuing his surveying duties. They had been living in the tent for a year by this stage and continued to do so for a further few months. Chauncy‟s diary records that it was 114 degrees Fahrenheit in their tent on Christmas Day 1854, however, by February 1855 the building was completed and they had moved in. Chauncy sketched the Survey Office and associated permanent and temporary structures, clearly illustrating the main stone building with portico and arched windows, outbuildings and two of his children playing in the front yard. The main building was the Chauncy‟s residence and the Survey Office. The other structures and tents would have provided shelter for day-to-day activities, including additional housing for his staff and their families, as well as a kitchen area and stables.

24 The Argus, 11 October 1854, p5

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 14

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Figure 8 – Philip Chauncy’s sketch of the Survey Office, Heathcote

Figure 9 - Detail of Survey Office plan Chauncy 1853 (Public Records Office Historical Maps and Plans District 65 ‘Heathcote-Township’)

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 15

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

A plan of the buildings on the allotment was included by Chauncy in the plan of the township (Figure 9). Chauncy recorded that he lived at the Survey Office for six years, but owned and improved land in „various other places‟, including a brick house on High Street. He called the High Street house Myrtle Cottage, and planted a vineyard and orchard there. Chauncy also had interests in Datchett Farm, six miles out of Heathcote.25 The problems experienced during the construction of the building may be reflected in the extent of repairs required during the first 6 years of occupation. The records from the Yearly Abstracts of Costs and Registration of Works and Buildings – Country Districts identify repairs undertaken to the Heathcote Survey Office in 1856, 1858, 1860 and 1861 – these expenses being in addition to costs for furnishings, alterations etc. The Chauncy family lived there until 1861 when Philip Chauncy was relocated to Dunolly. As Chauncy was not replaced by a resident surveyor, the use of the building following his departure in 1861 till it was sold in 1872 is not known.

2.6 Private Residence and Doctor’s Surgery In 1872 the former Survey Office allotment was purchased by Fredrick John Spinks for a sum of £800. The land was alienated from the Crown under Section 99 of the „Land Act 1869‟26. Spinks was a „reputable member of the Heathcote community‟, financially successful and a member of the Hospital Board. He was involved in a syndicate with Hugh Moore and James Christie, buying „Cox and Routeledge‟ a company that sold groceries, wine and spirits, drapery and timber in several branch stores within the Heathcote vicinity.27

Figure 10 - Detail of parish plan, Heathcote township showing Spinks’ ownership. (c1880 Public Records Office Historical Maps and Plans ‘Heathcote- Township’ Shire of Dalhousie)

25 P Chauncy, Memoirs of Mrs Poole and Mrs Chauncy, p49. 26 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169 27 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p306-7.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 16

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

When Spinks purchased the property, he named it „Helenslee‟ after his wife. Randall, in his history of the district, reports that Spinks „appears to have extended the house and improved the grounds‟.28 He also reports that “the house was said to have had nine rooms, a cellar, outbuildings, a beautiful garden and orchard, on and a quarter acre of land29… and a “tennis ground”…‟ At the time of his death, the Spinks estate was valued at £12,387.30 „Helenslee‟ was bought from the Spinks family by Dr. Esler in 1896.31 Randall states that „Dr Esler had a lot of building work done at „Helenslee‟ and took the house to something like its present size. He moved into the house and conducted his practice from there after the improvements were finished in October 1897. The McIvor Times reported this, adding that the building was „quite an ornament to the town‟.32 Between 1902 and 1942 a series of doctors owned and operated a private general medical practice from the premises. Dr James and Julia Owen took over the practice from Esler (from 1902), until it was transferred to Dr Bull in 1923. The practice was then transferred to Dr Spencer in 1930, from whom Dr Speed purchased the practice in 1942. It appears that the use of the building changed from a private medical practice to a private residence with the purchase of the property by the Latta family in 1968. During the 1980s the building rapidly deteriorated and was declared unfit for habitation by the Director of Housing (Department of Planning and Housing, Victoria) on the 26th of April 1991. The place has remained vacant since then and was purchased by the current owners in December 2007.

28 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169. 29 The title at this time included the former Survey Office (178-180 High St) as well as the adjoining 182 High Street block. It is believed at this time these blocks were separated. They were not included on the original title of the former Survey Office which was one acre. 30 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p308. 31 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169. 32 J O Randall, McIvor: A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, p169.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 17

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

3.0 ARCHITECTURE

3.1 Introduction This section of the CMP is intended to provide an architectural context for the period in which the former Survey Office was built and to discuss the stylistic expression of the resultant building. A comparative analysis with other survey office buildings and contemporary Heathcote buildings is provided.

3.2 Colonial Architecture of the 1850s Building in Victoria prior to the 1850s was driven largely by necessity and architectural pretensions were a rarity. Vernacular modes of building predominated with the use of log and sapling, slab and bark, wattle and daub and drop-log construction. Architectural styles, such as Georgian were influential primarily in New South Wales and Tasmania for significant public and substantial private buildings, and to a lesser extent in Victoria during the 1850s and 1860s. In Victoria, the 1851 Gold Rush resulted in significant changes. The overall population increased dramatically, while the available skilled tradespersons diminished as many turned to gold prospecting. The resultant shortage of available building materials and the increase in demand for buildings created „canvas towns‟ and imported prefabricated buildings began to arrive. The huge demand resulting from the gold rush was often reflected in the quality of buildings constructed. The need was immediate and the skills not always available so buildings were raised in any way possible. The Georgian style adopted in Victoria was essentially a simplified version of the Georgian architecture which was popular in England during the late 17th and early 18th century. This style was the most familiar to the early European settlers in Victoria. The essence of the classical Georgian style is order; all parts of a building have to harmonise visually with one another as well as with the whole. The most important means of achieving harmony is proportion.33 The characteristics of the style suited the materials and skill levels available in the early years of European settlement in Victoria with the simple symmetrical plan form and the understated detailing and ornamentation meant that it was readily transported to the colonies including Australia

3.3 Comparative Analysis Other Survey Offices During the second half of the nineteenth century, survey offices were set up in many areas of Victoria, as settlement and the development of townships progressed. Some offices were a room in an existing building, while others were purpose built Survey Offices, sometimes incorporating accommodation for staff. The 1850s gold rush which was concentrated in central Victoria, was largely responsible for the settlement patterns of the colony and the Surveyor General‟s Office in Melbourne responded with the establishment of survey offices in the areas of greatest population. There are ten Survey Offices recorded in the Heritage Victoria database (Hermes) of which five have been demolished – Ballarat (1856), Ararat, Kilmore, Maryborough and Warrnambool (all built in 1858). Although a typological study has not been undertaken, of the known purpose

33 R Apperly, Indentifying Australian Architecture, p24

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 18

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

built Survey Offices in Victoria, the Heathcote Survey Office (1853-4) is believed to be the oldest remaining.

Figure 11- former Bendigo Survey Office (1858-9) (source: Hermes database no.146)

The Bendigo Survey Office (now Dudley House) was constructed in 1858-9 as one of the first government offices erected in Bendigo‟s Camp Hill area following the discovery of gold. The two storey face brick building with stone entrance loggia provided the office and home for the Government District Surveyor, Richard Larritt. Larritt was responsible for the current Bendigo street layout.

Figure 12- former Beechworth Lands (Survey) Office (1858 and 1888) (source: Hermes database no.108)

The former Beechworth Lands (Survey) Office was constructed in 1858 and was significantly altered and enlarged with additions to the front of the building in 1888. Like at Heathcote, the Beechworh office was constructed of local stone (granite). The building was later to be used as the Telegraph Office for Beechworth.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 19

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Figure 13 – former Lands Office, Benalla (1861) (source: Hermes database no.4753)

The former Lands Office, Benalla also known as the Clerk of Courts Cottage, is a simple asymmetrical brick two-roomed building with verandas. It was constructed in 1861 as a survey office, but taken over for use by the Law Department 1882 and later, in 1960, by the Anglican Church.

Figure 14 – former Lands Office, Dunolly (18621) (source: http://members.westnet.com.au/likelyprospects/dunolly_buildings.htm)

The former Dunolly Survey Office was built in 1862. At the time, Philip Chauncy was the Surveyor of the Dunolly district and would therefore have been the original occupant of the building. It is a single storey red brick building with gabled slate roof and cross-gabled entry porch. The porch has a large arch which presumably provided public access but which has since been bricked in. An enclosed verandah has been constructed at the front of the building.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 20

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Of these extant former survey office buildings in Victoria, Heathcote is the earliest example of the building type. It is also distinguished from each of these (except for Bendigo) in that private accommodation was provided as well as the office.

Contemporary Heathcote Buildings The former Survey Office is understood to be the oldest surviving building in Heathcote. A number of buildings which were constructed during the 25 year period following the Survey Office remain; some of which are clearly comparable to the Survey Office in both style and period.

Figure 15 – Budd Hall (former Christ Church, 1854) Original stone rear wall on the left and the modern brick clad front and side addition on the right.

The first church constructed in Heathcote was the sandstone Christ Church built in 1854. Now known as Budd Hall, the buildings heritage is substantially disguised behind the modern brick facade and additions. The original stonework however, is reminiscent of the material and workmanship evident in the former Survey Office building.

The Heathcote Hospital was established in a tent on the Government Camp Hill area in 1853 and it remained there for six years till the permanent hospital building was constructed in 1859. In 1858, a competition was held for the design and construction of a hospital. Mr Branscombe, a builder, submitted the winning entry and was commissioned to construct the building. It is not known if Branscombe designed the building himself or he engaged an architect. A clerk of works, James Crowle, was appointed to supervise the construction work undertaken by Branscombe and the foundation stone was laid on the 19th of March 1859, by the Chief

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 21

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Secretary of Victoria, John O'Shanassey. James Crowle was one of the brothers Crowle who had commenced the construction of the Survey Office in Heathcote five years earlier and went into liquidation during the contract. The construction detailing and materials are clearly comparative to the Heathcote Survey Office building, although perhaps the stonework is not as finely crafted.

Figure 16 – Heathcote Hospital (1859)

Figure 17 – Heathcote Gaol (1861)

The former Heathcote gaol (1861) is located on the land set aside for the Government Camp. It is built of a high quality quarry faced local stone laid in coursed ashlar and conforms to a standard design by the Public Works Department. The powder magazine in Heathcote is built of the same stone. The two buildings may have been designed by the same architect. Although

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 22

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

substantially a plain and functional building devoid of decoration, it exhibits the fine quality of stonemasonry that is evident on most government buildings of the period. The roof is likely to have been originally clad in slate and has been replaced in corrugated iron.

Figure 18 – Heathcote Powder Magazine (1864)

The Heathcote Powder Magazine was constructed by the Public Works Department in 1864, in high quality quarry faced local stone laid in coursed ashlar. Like several other magazines built during the 1860s, the Heathcote Powder Magazine features a brick vaulted space inside a buttressed rectangular building, with a small used entry and office space. The vault, buttressing and baffled air vents were a manifestation of the (erroneous) belief prevalent at the time that massive masonry would help to contain explosives. The gable roof over the vault was originally of slate. Sawn Oregon racks remain in the main room, together with a two door iron safe with decorative stencilling.

In addition to the above mentioned buildings which are of similar date and building materials to the former Survey Office, there are a number of early prominent public and private buildings along High Street. Most of these buildings are located in the centre and southern portions of the length of the road which is a significant distance from the former Survey Office. The buildings include one and two-storey hotels, a former courthouse, Federation post office, churches, general stores. These buildings are comparative in date having been constructed in the nineteenth century however their location, function and design are not directly relatable to the Survey Office. As a whole, though, these buildings along with the former Survey Office are an important representation of nineteenth century township.

.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 23

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

4.0 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

The following physical evidence pertaining to the site and buildings at 178-80 High Street, Heathcote has been based on the Physical Description in the „Former Survey Office, Heathcote: Heritage Assessment for Ms Laughton‟ prepared by AHMS (November 2009). In addition, the coloured floor plans from that study, and some of the photographs have been reproduced here. Additional details from the current author‟s inspections of the site and buildings have been included in this section of the CMP.

4.1 The Site and Landscape The site is a large block located on the corner of High Street and Chauncey Street, Heathcote. High Street is the main thoroughfare through the township of Heathcote and Chauncey Street appears to be the cross road dividing the town between areas of commercial and residential activity. It is also the only road within the centre of the town to cross the creek to the north- east (and then becomes North Costerfield Road), and was the main connecting road to the rail station.

The site has two main structures, being the large former residence in the centre of the block, and the large outbuilding on the western property boundary to the north of the residence. The remainder of the site largely consists of various plantings with large and mature trees, and largely overgrown lawns and shrubs. Remnant fence lines including posts, rails and wire are located along the northern and southern boundaries and parts of the eastern boundary (adjacent to the residence). A timber paling fence runs along the full extent of the western boundary.

Figure 19 – Left - the Norfolk Pine, located to the north-east of the existing building, and right, a view of the Irish Strawberry tree on the eastern side of the Survey Office.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 24

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The landscape and gardens of the subject site comprise remnant plantings associated with the historic development of the property, albeit overgrown and retaining almost no trace of any early landscaping visions or plans. The most dominant features within the remnant gardens of the property are established plantings such as the Norfolk Pine, Hoop Pine, Cypress Pines surrounding the tennis court, Irish Strawberry trees and the date palm adjacent to the Victorian entrance portico. While none of these plantings are visible in historic photographs of the subject site they are all of considerable age, and may simply have been too small at the time of these photographs to show above rooflines, or may have been located just out of frame. The date palm adjacent to the Victorian entrance portico was planted post-c.1905, as it does not appear in a photograph from this date. None of the plantings observed and identified during the site inspection can be definitively linked to the earliest phase of this property‟s history – that of the Survey Office and Chauncy‟s residency. While trees such as the Norfolk Pine can live for up to 150 years, it cannot be stated definitively that this tree was planted as part of Chauncy‟s landscaping works. It is considered more likely that these plantings are associated with the improvements made to the property by Spinks following his purchase of the property in the 1870s.

Randall‟s statement that the property included beautiful gardens and an orchard does not indicate if these features were already present at the time of Spinks‟ purchase of the property. He also does not detail the contents of the garden however it is reasonable to assume that the orchard was, if not wholly, at least partially incorporating that established by Chauncy. The tennis court is likely to have been installed by Spinks.

4.2 The Buildings There are two buildings extant on the site – the main residential building of stone and timber and a large timber outbuilding. This report provides an account of the condition of the building, based on a simple visual inspection. It does not provide a detailed, nor structural assessment of the integrity of the building.

Main Building

Figure 20 – Floor plan of the main building indicating the various sections described below. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p34]

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 25

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The residential building can be considered as three distinct sections, which are discernable both internally and externally. These sections, which are colour identified in the plan above are referred to throughout this description as follows:  The former Survey Office (stone structure shown red),  The large Victorian era timber addition attached to the stone structure on both south and east sides (shown yellow), and  The simple timber service areas attached to the west side of the stone structure (shown green).  The central orange section is an open courtyard.

The former Survey Office (stone building)

The former Survey Office building is constructed of local sandstone and consists of four rooms and a hallway. The external sandstone walls are approximately 500mm thick and the internal hardplastered rubblestone walls are approximately 350mm thick. The original roof form was two hipped sections each running north south. With the later additions to the southern side of the building, one of the southern hips was removed to connect the new sections of roof.

Figure 21- Floor plan of the main building indicating the 1854 Survey Office section shown red. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p35]

The exterior presentation of the building is of simple and symmetrical form in typical Georgian style. The centrally positioned entry door is on the east side of the building fronting Chauncey Street. The original stone portico which is clearly visible in early sketches was removed and

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 26

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

replaced with a timber porch and verandah, probably early in the twentieth century. The stonework of the exterior of the building is rough faced and tuckpointed for the main wall, with dressed stone, raised and chamfered quoining at each corner. The quoining around windows is of flush dressed stonework. There is a plinth course of dressed and chamfered stone around the building.

Figure 22 – East elevation of the Survey Office with the later verandah and entry porch.

During recent replacement of the corrugated sheet iron roofing material, evidence of earlier roof cladding was noted. The timber framing of the two hip roof sections varies both in roof pitch and in quality of timbers, possibly reflecting the change in contractors when the Crowle Brothers went into insolvency. The rafters are spaced at approximately 540mm centres and the battens which are in the same plane as the rafters are spaced at approximately 820mm centres. These dimensions suggest the original cladding material was sheet iron tiles, although no evidence of such material remains on site. Within the roof space, there are remnants of slates, suggesting that the roof was slate clad at some stage.

The facade (east) is distinguished by an elegant parapet with simple cornice mouldings and a string course just below window transom level. The symmetrical windows, either side of the entrance door, are large arched, double hung sashes with sills at floor level. The windows have multi-paned, arched tops in a fanlight pattern. The stonework to this elevation has been painted at some stage. In a similar manner to the other elevations, terracotta wall vents have been installed below floor level.

The north elevation (side) is more simply detailed. The hip ends of the roof are expressed with approximately 300mm wide eaves, timber fascia and eave gutters. The west end of this elevation has a centrally positioned timber window of simple rectangular form and double hung sash with a stone sill and dressed stone quoining. The wide window has similar glazing bars to the front facade windows, with nine sections to each sash. The east side of the north elevation

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 27

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

which has a centrally located chimney in line with the wall has windows either side of the chimney which are clearly not original, although they do appear to be an early alteration. The double hung timber sash windows are of different proportions to the original (same height, less width) and without glazing bars. Both these windows have rendered quoining and sills.

Figure 23 – East facade of the survey office, note painted stonework and later timber porch.

The west elevation has been partially subsumed with the later timber additions, however, the original form and detailing remains clearly discernible. There is a single opening in this elevation, a centrally positioned doorway leading into the hall. There are no windows. The hipped roof, fascia and eaves gutter remains similarly to the north elevation. Part of this stone wall has been rendered, at the time the timber additions were made this section of the wall became an internal surface.

Similarly, the southern elevation of the sandstone building has been partially subsumed by the later additions and the eastern end is now an internal wall and has been hardplastered. A masonry fireplace and chimney has been added to this end of the southern elevation as has a door opening to connect to the timber additions. However, the west end of the southern elevation remains in original form fronting onto an internal courtyard created by the timber additions. There is a centrally positioned window in this wall which is a mirror image of the window in the north elevation.

Internally, the original floor plan layout is not clear and some internal wall detailing is rather confusing. The large front room (facing Chauncey St) recently had a timber partition wall dividing it (north of the entrance door) and the timber floor boards change in sizes and directions suggesting a different floor plan layout again (possibly central hall with a room either side). It has not been determined what the original form of this space was, although it is quite possible that it was originally one large open space which functioned as the Survey Office. There is clear evidence on the west wall of this room that there were door openings into the rear

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 28

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

rooms which have subsequently been filled in. The central doorway to the rear hall has been altered too at some stage as it appears to have originally been a large arched opening, possibly without a door. The hall, between the two rear rooms, has a section of wall on the south side which is thinner than the main wall and constructed of brickwork, unlike the rest of the construction being of rubble sandstone. The bricks vary in colour but appear to be nineteenth century handmade bricks, suggesting an early alteration. This unusual wall section is a mystery. It does not seem feasible that there was an opening in that location originally and it conflicts with the symmetry of the original building form and materials generally.

Figure 24 – view of the interior of the main room and entrance door.

The interior detailing and finishes of the building are typical of the period. The large arched windows have splayed timber reveals, architraves and rounded edge timber sills. The windows at the northern end of the front room have a later minimal simple timber architrave and sill. The walls are all hard plastered with various layers of paint and wallpaper covering. The floors are of timber boards and beaded timber boards line the ceilings generally. There is a simple timber mould cornice throughout and the doors are typically 4 panel timber doors. The fireplaces are of a simple arched top form with stone hearths. The inserts, surrounds and mantels no longer exist.

Victorian era timber addition (shown yellow)

In the late nineteenth, when the building was no longer government owned and operated as a Survey Office, it was converted for residential and medical rooms use. This adaptation included the construction of a large, two storey with tower timber addition to the south side of the original stone building.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 29

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Figure 25 - Floor plan of the main building indicating the Victorian era timber additions indicated in yellow. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p49]

The timber framed and clad addition is connected to the original stone structure on the southern side with a gabled roof section created by modifying the hip end of the stone building roof and extending it southward to a decorative gable end. The gable end is timber battened and stuccoed, and projects forward of the wall plane on a series of curved decorative brackets. There is a timber verandah on the east of the addition which extends along the stone building to the original entrance. Centrally positioned in the east elevation is a pair of timber-framed double- hung windows. At the southern end of this room is a full height and large proportioned double hung window with small side panes.

At the time this timber addition was constructed, the orientation of the building and principle access point was changed with the formal entrance now being at the southern end of the building (fronting High St). The entrance was clearly distinguished by the location of the decorative timber tower.

The entry tower has a two storey verandah to the front (south). The external walls are painted weatherboard at the lower level and exposed battens and stucco to the upper level. The hipped roof has minimal boxed eaves and is corrugated sheet metal clad with a decorative cast iron ridge detail. A stucco with curved decorative bracket detailing feature is below the eaves.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 30

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Figure 26 – South elevation (fronting High Street).

Figure 27 – East elevation showing connection between Victorian timber addition and original stone buildings (right).

The verandah on the south side of the tower has turned timber posts similar to those on the eastern verandah The upper level features a single door out to the front verandah, a single double hung sash window to the eastern elevation, and a small casement door to the rear northern elevation giving access to the rooftop. The ceiling to the upper verandah is timber boarded.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 31

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The entry door is a solid timber panelled door with very narrow sidelights with mottled glass to each side. The top light is an extended tall arch and has fixed glass panes in a fan pattern. The panes within the toplight are various solid colours. The door includes early original furniture. The moulding to the timber panels within the door is more elaborate than the other doors.

Adjacent to the tower and entrance porch is an hexagonal bay window of the southern most room. It has a hipped corrugated iron roof extending back along the western side of the entry tower. It has three separate timber framed double hung sash windows facing south, one to each of the splayed angles and a window along within the western wall. An external doorway provides direct access from with the western wall of the entry porch through its western wall.

Figure 28 – view of the roof and tower

The interior of this Victorian period addition retains some of the original features but has undergone substantial alterations on at least one ocassion with the re lining of most of the walls with masonite sheeting and expressed timber battening. The joinery is painted in a dark brown throughout. On the eastern wall of the larger room, adjacent to the fireplace part of the masonite sheeting has peeled away and revealed the underlying wall which is of smooth render and wallpaper.

The entry hall interior is surprisingly compact, given the granduer of the tower externally. The staircase is located uncomfortably close to the swing of the entry door on the eastern side. A moderately wide passage extends along the western side of the staircase and returns at the end to the west. A narrow timber framed double hung window is located in the end wall of the passage with daylight accessed from the internal courtyard. A single door is located adjacent to the

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 32

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

window on the abutting eastern wall and gives access to the large single eastern room. A single doorway is located on the western wall of the passage opposite the stair and gives access to the western reception room. The stair has a large turned timber newel post and a turned timber balustrade reminiscent of the turned timber frieze to the lower entry verandah. The joinery of the stair is stained dark brown.

Figure 29 – interior views of the Victorian era timber additions.

The ceiling through the entry hall is timber boarded with a small timber cornice. The alignment of the ceiling boards changes direction at the western return of the corridor. The upper level tower room is entered by the turn of the stairs along the eastern side. It has a timber post at the top of the stairs and a similar detailed balustrade across to the northern wall. The room is small and only large enough for a single bed and a walkway to the rear casement door which accesses the roof in the western corner of the northern wall. The walls are lined with masonite sheeting. The door to the front verandah has similar detailing to the unusual door in the eastern wing. It has a double hung timber framed window to the upper portion and a pair of timber paneled casement doors to the lower section. (At the time of inspection this door and window were nailed shut and the verandah could not be accessed).

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 33

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Western Services and Accommodation Wing

The western services wing consists of seven rooms, the inter-joining connecting eastern corridor, and the western verandah. It is much less decorative throughout than the rooms described in the previous sections, denoting it‟s back of house nature.

Figure 30 - Floor plan of the main building indicating the service and accommodation areas indicated in green. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p64]

Internally and externally the western services wing is clearly of utilitarian nature and does not have the level of detail nor interest that the attached Victorian reception rooms and tower have. This wing of the building is of two distinct sections – the southern section is a gabled wing that links alongside the southern bayed reception area and the north section houses the bathroom, laundry and two bedrooms. The northern section is hip roofed.

The external walls are painted weatherboard. The southern gabled end is a smaller, less-grand reflection of the projecting eastern gabled end including the curved, bracketed frieze. There are two narrowly separated timber framed double hung sash windows. The main corridor in the services wing runs north-south between the original sandstone building and the service rooms including the bathroom, bedrooms and kitchen. The corridor returns to the east and continues along the edge of the internal courtyard leading into the reception rooms. A single doorway along the eastern wall provides access to the internal courtyard. The ceiling is of a lower-level than the reception rooms and is lined with masonite sheeting.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 34

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

On the west side of the corridor is the kitchen which includes a large chimneybreast and later added stove. Backing onto the kitchen and accessed externally from the western verandah is a laundry room which shares the rear of the kitchen chimney breast. The internal walls of the laundry are painted weatherboard. The internal walls of the kitchen are masonite sheeting. The kitchen has a timber boarded ceiling. The two northern rooms are small, simple bedrooms. The north- western bedroom appears to have had a double window added in the northern elevation. The bedrooms have masonite walls and ceilings.

Figure 31- view of the northern end of the services wing attached to the stone survey office building (on the left)

Figure 32 – looking to the west side of the services wing.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 35

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The western verandah is a skillion verandah that extends the full length of the western elevation and returns along the northern elevation to abut the sandstone building. The verandah extends to the same outer line even though the building steps within the verandah to two alignments. The floors are concrete although in a bad condition with much shifting and subsidence causing the slabs to sink and crack in many places. The verandah is supported on square timber posts and a lattice fence has been added to the western edge. The southern edge end has been enclosed with weatherboards and a simple four panel timber door.

Internal Courtyard

The internal courtyard is bitumen paved at close to the floor level of the western services and accommodation wing. Other than the sandstone building, which forms the northern wall of the courtyard, the other walls are weatherboard, previously painted but now mostly raw finish. Each of the openings to the timber weatherboard walls feature the minimal less decorative architrave seen throughout the western services and accommodation wing.

Figure 33- Floor plan of the main building indicating the internal courtyard in orange. [source: AHMS Heritage Assessment (2009) p72]

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 36

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Figure 34 – views of the internal courtyard.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 37

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The Outbuilding

The rear outbuilding has a large rectangular footprint along the western boundary close to the northern alignment of the main building and runs perpendicular to the site. It is a high, single storey building with steeply pitched hipped corrugated iron roof with central attic space. The walls are largely weatherboard clad with some areas on the northern elevation are timber drop slabs. The building consists of three internal sections being eastern, central and western. The building is in a generally deteriorated state and is of poor construction.

The eastern section is accessed through a large opening on the southern elevation. The opening has been either widened or increased in height at some stage as it is not rectangular and steps in at the upper corners. This increase in height or width may have been to accommodate vehicular access into the building. The doors or other enclosures of the opening are no longer in situ. The eastern section comprises one large space including up to the underside of the corrugated iron roof. The floor is compacted earth. A later added enclosed water closet with masonite walls, accessed externally from the northern elevation, is located in the north eastern corner.

Figure 35 – south side of the outbuilding

The central section comprises three small, enclosed rooms running across the centre of the building. The southern elevation of the central section has a single low height door opening and window opening which accesses the southern most of the three rooms which form this section. The door and window closings are no longer in situ. The centre room is accessed internally from the west. The northern room is also accessed internally from the west. Flooring in each of these rooms is constructed of timber boards that are currently in a greatly deteriorated state. A timber

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 38

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

boarded ceiling protects or encloses the three rooms, forming a mezzanine or open attic in the ceiling space above.

The western section of the outbuilding is accessed from the southern elevation through a moderately large single opening located below a full height barn style gabled opening elevated at the attic height. The gable end of the elevated opening has a turned timber finial and a cantilevered gang beam. The upper level doors are extant however the lower level doors are no longer in situ. The western section comprises a large open space with a central row of timber poles supporting the roof above. The floor is compacted earth. A later added external covered walkway runs along the eastern elevation and connects to the main residence. The walls of the external eastern elevation are corrugated iron sheeting.

Services

Services throughout the building are minimal and basic. There is electrical lighting to most rooms with wall fixed light switches, or ceiling mounted pull switches. Much of the electrical supply to the lights or switches is surface mounted. Plumbing is provided in the service areas of the western wing only. A relatively new water tank is located between the main residence and the outbuilding.

A sewer pit is located adjacent to the western boundary fence approximately 5m south of the outbuilding. It was initially thought that this sewer pit serviced a line running approximately east-west across the property however inspection of the grounds within this vicinity indicate it is more likely to service a line which follows the boundary fence.

4.3 Areas of Archaeological Potential

While detailed assessment of the archaeological potential of the subject property is beyond the scope of the current report, a few observations on likely areas of archaeological potential and features which may be visible in the archaeological record of the site were noted during the inspection of the property. The results of the historic research also identified items and buildings which may remain as physical traces within the archaeological record of this site. Below is a list of items and/or structures which are considered likely to have contributed to the archaeological potential of this site, along with the reasons why this is thought to be the case. Specific areas of archaeological potential within the site are not detailed as this would require more comprehensive mapping and comparison of historic sources with current survey plans.

Items and structures identified as contributing to the archaeological potential of the subject property are as follows:

Building to the north-west of the Survey Office

The sketch of the Survey Office by Phillip Chauncy indicates a substantial structure to the north west of the stone survey office. The location of this structure may correlate to an area of stone flagging and brick paving identified during the site inspection. This flagging and paving may be a flooring or verandah surface linking the residence to a separate kitchen or laundry building. Chauncy‟s map of the town of Heathcote also indicates the presence of a substantial sized

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 39

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

building to the north west of the Survey Office, although its location is closer to the boundary of this property than the sketch indicates.

Assistant Surveyor’s Residence

Chauncy‟s sketch of the Survey Office also shows the approximate location of the Assistant Surveyor‟s residence, on the corner of High and Chauncey Streets. This location is confirmed by the Chauncy plan of Heathcote.

Cellar

The presence of a cellar associated with the subject property is noted by Randall in his history of McIvor, however this appears to refer to the cellar in the context of renovations and improvements undertaken by Spinks, rather than being associated with Chauncy‟s occupation of the site. No reference is made regarding the location of the cellar, however one possible location for this structure could be below a series of concrete slabs under the northern verandah. These slabs are subsiding and the fill below them appears to be introduced. This fill may have been used to level a cellar prior to the construction of the verandah and adjacent building extensions.

Chauncy‟s memoirs make references to the amount of people occupying the property surrounding the Survey Office, and the not inconsiderable infrastructure accompanying such a household. These included horses, a buggy and servants. It is likely that a household of this scale would have had at least a stables, kitchen, rooms for the house servants (either within the main house or detached), quarters for the stable hands, a privy or cess pit and possibly also a well.

Landscaping

Chauncy makes reference to his purchase of the adjacent lot for the purposes of gardens and orchards. There may be some traces of the landscaping and early agricultural practices used in the laying out and cultivation of the grounds. Remnants of early paths and garden beds along the Chauncey Street frontage of the Survey Office (including fence lines shown in Chauncy‟s Sketch) may also be discernable within the archaeological record.

It is considered that despite bulldozing being undertaken across the north-eastern portion of the site, between the outbuilding and tennis court, there is still potential for deep features such as wells, cess pits or privies to remain within the archaeological record. The level of disturbance caused by the bulldozing appears to have been minimal, with sections of modern garden bed edging still intact across this area of the property.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 40

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

5.0 CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

5.1 Introduction This assessment of Cultural Heritage Significance of the Former Survey Office, Heathcote is undertaken utilising the Heritage Victoria criteria. It is acknowledged that these criteria are focused on places of State significance, however, where appropriate the criteria has been modified to represent local thresholds.

5.2 Assessment of Cultural Heritage Significance Criterion A Importance to the course, or pattern, of Victoria's cultural history.

The former Survey Office at Heathcote is historically significant for its association with the history of settlement in the State, and as a reflection of the importance of survey offices in this settlement process.

The former Survey Office is historically significant as the oldest surviving building in Heathcote and as a demonstration of the importance of the McIvor Goldfields.

The timber additions to the former Survey Office are of historical significance at a local level due to the place operating as a medical practice and residence and due to the form and scale of the timber tower which became a local landmark.

Criterion B Possession of uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of Victoria’s cultural history.

The provision of regional Government Survey Offices was not uncommon in the early years of European settlement in Victoria, but they are rarely provided for now. The survey functions are now undertaken by other government or public/private agencies and processes. Therefore, the former Survey Office at Heathcote is a surviving example of a once common aspect of Victoria‟s cultural history which is now rare.

Criterion C Potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Victoria’s cultural history.

The former Survey Office has the potential to inform further research as part of a comparative study of Georgian style Government buildings of the period as these are considered rare.

The potential archaeological resource associated with the former Survey Office and the site generally may yield information that will contribute to a better understanding of the early settlement of Heathcote.

Criterion D Importance in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of cultural places or objects.

The former Survey Office is architecturally significant as a fine and unusual example of a public building constructed in the early years of the Colony of Victoria. The building is notable for its Georgian-influenced style and for the use of local Heathcote sandstone, which was also used for

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 41

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

other early Government buildings in the town. The building demonstrates the simple style of early government buildings compared to the often more decorative styles of later decades.

The Victorian timber additions are of local significance architecturally as representative of the place being a fine wealthier class residence of the successful working gentry in the local township. The noteworthy elements include the decorative timber detailing and the tower which is a symbol of wealth and perhaps eccentricity.

Criterion E Importance in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics.

The former Survey Office is important as a fine example of Georgian influenced stylistic characteristics which were common in the early years of European settlement in the colony.

The Victorian timber additions, most notably the tower element is important at a local level for its landmark characteristics.

Criterion F Importance in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period.

The former Survey Office, Heathcote is an important early example of technical skills required with stonework construction. The building includes, rough faced, dressed, chamfered and tuckpointed local sandstone.

Criterion G Strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. This includes the significance of a place to Indigenous peoples as part of their continuing and developing cultural traditions.

An indigenous heritage assessment was not undertaken as part of this CMP, and therefore, any associated indigenous associations and significance is not known.

Criterion H Special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in Victoria’s, or the local areas, history.

The former Survey Office, Heathcote is significant for its association with Philip Chauncy, the surveyor who was sent to the McIvor goldfields in 1853, who laid out the towns of Heathcote and Echuca, and who lived in the survey office building with his family from its completion in 1854 until he was relocated to the Dunolly Survey District in 1861. Chauncy had an interest in ethnography and made a major contribution to Robert Brough Smyth‟s 1878 book, The Aborigines of Victoria.

The former Survey Office is significant at a local level for its associations with the prominent local community member, James Crowle. The Crowle Brothers (James and John) were the original contractors for the survey office and had built a number of the earlier government buildings in the town. The Crowle Brothers business became insolvent late in 1854 but James Crowle remained in Heathcote and became a prominent community member including serving on the McIvor Council.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 42

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Other associations of local significance include, Frederick John Spinks, the first grantee of the site in 1872. He is believed to have built the Victorian additions to the residence. Spinks was a successful local merchant, owning both the main store in the township and one of the prominent flourmills. The renovations and improvements made to the property by Spinks established many of the landmark and aesthetic qualities of the property.

5.3 Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance The following Statement of Significance has been prepared using the Heritage Victoria Registration Statement of Significance for the place as the basis. Some alterations and additions have been made to the HV Statement to incorporate further information and clarifications that have become available during the course of research for this CMP.

What is significant? The former Survey Office at Heathcote was built in 1854 by the Surveyor General‟s Department as an office and accommodation for resident surveyor and his family.

Gold had been discovered at McIvor Creek in 1852 and there was a short-lived rush to the area in 1853. As a result of the rapid increase in population in early 1853, and the belief that the gold field was prosperous and would become permanent, a Government Camp was set up on Camp Hill. In September 1853, Philip Chauncy (1816-80), surveyor and his family were despatched to the McIvor diggings to ascertain the site for the township of Heathcote and to survey the town. The Chauncy family and the Survey Office staff spent over a year in tents at the Government Camp, Heathcote, while the Surveyor Generals office secured the land and had the sandstone building constructed.

The construction of the sandstone survey office was commenced by the Crowle Brothers, in March 1854 and following the insolvency of their building company later that year, the construction was completed by day labour under the supervision of Philip Chauncy. Chauncy lived in the survey office from 1855 until 1861, during which time he surveyed the towns of Heathcote and Echuca, and was then relocated to Dunolly. As well as being a surveyor Chauncy was a sketcher, and made drawings in the 1850s of Heathcote and of the survey office. He also contributed to R Brough Smyth's 1878 book, The Aborigines of Victoria. After 1861 the survey building became redundant and it was bought in 1872 by Frederick Spinks, the owner of the local store, who made substantial timber additions to the stone building for use as a residence, which he named Helenslee. It was described then as having nine rooms, a cellar and outbuildings, a notable garden and a tennis court. In 1896 it was bought by a local doctor, Alfred Esler, who made further additions, and from then until 1968 it was owned by a series of medical practitioners who used it as a residence and surgery, following which it again became a private residence.

The former survey office is a single storey symmetrical Victorian-period Georgian style sandstone building with walls of coursed rubble with dressed quoining and three chimneys of ashlar. The 1850s drawings show the building fronting Chauncey Street, with a small arched entrance porch and arched windows with fanlights on either side. There were two rooms at the front and an arched opening leading to a passage at the rear with two more rooms opening off it. The roof, which is thought to have originally been clad with sheet metal tiles, is now clad with corrugated iron. Changes made to the survey building in the late nineteenth century, when

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 43

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

extensive timber additions were made on the north and west and a verandah added along the south, include the removal of the entrance porch, the cutting of two square-headed windows in the east wall, and the cutting of a new opening into the new building in the west side.

On the site there is a large Norfolk Island Pine (Araucaria heterophylla), a Hoop Pine (Araucaria cunninghamii), a Canary Island Date Palm (Phoenix canariensis) and an Irish Strawberry (Arbutus unedo). Chauncy's drawings show buildings to the north of the survey office and on the corner of High and Chauncey Sts, and there may be archaeological remains.

This site is part of the traditional land of the Taungurung people.

How is it significant? The former Survey Office at Heathcote is of architectural and historical significance to the state of Victoria.

Why is it significant? The former Survey Office is architecturally significant as a fine and unusual example of a public building constructed in the early years of the Colony of Victoria. It is notable for its Georgian- influenced style and for the use of the local Heathcote sandstone, which was also used for other early Government buildings in the town.

The former Survey Office at Heathcote is historically significant for its association with the history of settlement in the State, and as a reflection of the importance of survey offices in this settlement process in the post-gold rush period. The discovery of gold in various parts of Victoria in the 1850s led directly to the establishment of settlements in these areas, and surveyors were sent to lay out new towns. The Heathcote survey office is a demonstration of the importance of the McIvor goldfield in the early 1850s, and is significant as the oldest surviving building in the town. It is significant for its association with Philip Chauncy, the surveyor who was sent to the Mc Ivor goldfields in 1853, who laid out the towns of Heathcote and Echuca, and who lived in the survey office with his family from its completion in 1854 until he was sent to the Dunolly Survey District in 1861, and also made an important contribution to Robert Brough Smyth's 1878 book, The Aborigines of Victoria.

5.4 State and Local Significance conflicts The assessment of significance of this place has been undertaken considering both State and Local levels of significance. The outcome of this dual assessment is that some components of the place are clearly of State Significance while others do not meet the threshold for State significance, but are undoubtedly of Local Significance. In simplistic terms, the former Survey Office (sandstone structure) is of State significance and the remaining late nineteenth and early twentieth century timber additions are of Local significance.

This situation is even more complex due to the conflict between the levels of significance. When considering the 1854 former Survey Office as a building of State level significance, the later timber additions (late nineteenth and early twentieth century) are considered to be intrusive. The additions are dominant in scale and form. The additions have altered the orientation of the building as a whole to front High Street, when the original Survey Office fronted Chauncey Street and the additions to the south and west of the original structure obscure

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 44

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

the reading of the sandstone building scale and form. Further to this, the timber additions have added to the physical deterioration of the sandstone structure by preventing clear ventilation around the building and the application of render to original face stonework walls. These issues have been considered when attributing the levels of significance to the components of the site (below) and in the preparation of an appropriate Conservation Policy and Conservation Action recommendations.

5.5 Levels of Significance Based on the Statement of Significance and Comparative Analysis, together with the analysis of the physical and documentary evidence contained in this report, the levels of significance of the component parts of the place can be determined.

For the purpose of this CMP the author has chosen a system of attributing degrees of significance to built fabric, as follows:

Primary Significance fabric of considerable significance

Secondary Significance fabric of some significance

Tertiary significance fabric of little significance

Intrusive fabric considered detrimental to the significance of the place

The degrees of significance of the former Survey Office, Heathcote can be summarised as follows –

Fabric of Primary Significance  All building fabric which dates from the original construction phase of 1854-60.

Fabric of Secondary Significance  Roof cladding to the stone building.

 Norfolk Island Pine (Araucaria heterophylla), Hoop Pine (Araucaria cunninghamii), Canary Island Date Palm (Phoenix canariensis) and Irish Strawberry (Arbutus unedo).

Fabric of Tertiary Significance  The fireplace and chimney on the south wall of the stone building.

 The terracotta wall vents.

 The outbuilding.

Fabric which is Intrusive  All paintwork on the stone walls (external)

 Render on the west stone wall (originally an external wall)

 Victorian era timber additions including services wing

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 45

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

6.0 CONSERVATION POLICY

6.1 Introduction The Conservation Policy has been developed pursuant to the assessment of the cultural significance of former Survey Office, Heathcote. The intention of the Conservation Policy is to provide a framework for the future use and conservation of the cultural significance of the place. It is vital that all the pertinent features of the cultural significance of the place are managed in an appropriate manner. This can include the conservation of significant building fabric, landscape, archaeological sites. It can also provide assistance in determining an appropriate use and guide any proposed changes to the place.

The policy is based on the processes outlined in the Burra Charter - Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance. Special reference should be made to the definitions outlined in Articles 1 to 29 of the Burra Charter (refer to Appendix A), and which provides the basis for the terminology used in this policy.

As suggested within the Burra Charter, a preliminary to developing the policy is to consider the factors which may affect the future of the place. Thus specific factors have been defined and considered in the development of the policy for this place.

6.2 General Policy Policy The Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance set out in Section 5.3 is to be accepted as the basis for all future planning.

The future conservation and development of the former Survey Office, Heathcote is to be carried out in accordance with the Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter). A copy of the Burra Charter is attached in Appendix 1.

Rationale An understanding and acknowledgement of attributed cultural heritage significance is the basis for appropriate protection of places of heritage significance.

Action A copy of this Conservation Management Plan, and any updates, is to be kept in a permanent and accessible archive for interested parties, and those responsible for the future care of the place.

Photographic records and dimensioned drawings are to be kept of existing conditions before any changes are undertaken to the existing fabric.

6.3 Use of the Site Policy The original function of the place (survey office) is unlikely to ever be a viable use again, and therefore, alternate uses may be considered. Appropriate alternate uses are those that require minimal alterations to the existing fabric.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 46

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Rationale The future survival of the place will only be secured by means of an appropriate and sustainable use.

Action It is anticipated that the place will retain some residential function. However, alternate private or public uses may also be appropriate. When considering new uses, the objective should be to make as few changes to the existing building fabric as possible, including maintaining the plan form, finishes etc. All service areas (eg. kitchen, bathrooms, laundry etc) would ideally be accommodated in a new addition rather than adapting the existing structure to accommodate these facilities.

6.4 Existing Building Fabric Policy Building fabric of primary significance should be retained and conserved and modifications are generally discouraged. Reconstruction of missing, but known original detailing, is generally encouraged.

Building fabric of secondary significance should be retained, however, some alterations may be considered if they are crucial to the ongoing viability of the place or are necessary to maintain an amenity that is expected in the 21st century.

Building fabric of tertiary significance may be retained and adapted, but may be removed or replaced with more sympathetic, contemporary fabric.

Intrusive building fabric should ultimately be removed.

Rationale In order to maintain the cultural significance of the place it is important that the significant building fabric is retained and conserved. The ability to read the original form and components of the building is crucial to appreciating its significance.

Action Undertake conservation and reconstruction works where appropriate. When undertaking any works to significant building fabric, adopt the approach of changing as much as necessary but as little as possible. Refer to Section 7 for recommendations of appropriate conservation works.

6.5 Setting Policy No new construction, demolition or modification which would adversely affect the setting should be allowed.

Rationale Any compromise to the setting or the presentation of the place by the removal and/or irreversible alterations to building fabric of primary significance is likely to diminish the cultural significance of the place and should be avoided.

Action Retain and conserve building fabric of primary significance. Any new building works should be recessive in relation to buildings of primary significance.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 47

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

6.6 Landscape Policy Any landscaping should complement the existing buildings and respect the function of the place.

Rationale Landscape has been minimised on the site, due primarily to changes in function, age of plantings and general lack of maintenance in the past. Therefore, there are few elements in the landscape of significance, however, new landscape should be sympathetic to the building.

Action Future landscaping proposals should not dominate.

6.7 Future Development Policy All new additions to the place should respect the cultural heritage significance of the existing building fabric and preferably be of a contemporary design. New building should not attach to the north, south or east sides of the existing stone building, nor be closer to the east boundary (Chauncey St) than the existing building.

Rationale It is recognized that for the place to be habitable, change will be part of the ongoing management. An evolution of building fabric has already been occurring. However, some of the resultant changes to the building fabric have not always considered the impact that these have had on significant fabric. It is important to the cultural heritage significance of the site that the stone building remain the visually dominant element on the site.

Action Any future development will need to look at what is significant and how the proposed changes will affect the cultural significance of the place.

6.8 Environmental Risk Policy An assessment of environmental risks, including the presence of hazardous materials (such as lead and asbestos), fire and flood risk and security measures should be undertaken on a regular basis.

Rationale Environmental risks can be managed by appropriate assessment and implementation of preventative measures which will ultimately assist in the preservation of cultural heritage significance.

Action When undertaking any development works to the place, include the preparation of a risk assessment audit in association with an experienced heritage practitioner and address any deficiencies.

6.9 Management and Maintenance Policy A dedicated maintenance program (with appropriate budget allocations) should be implemented. The building owner, in association with a recognised conservation practitioner, should prepare, implement and regularly review the maintenance program.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 48

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

Rationale Maintenance is the simplest, least interventionist, and least destructive and inexpensive form of conservation. It is the responsibility of the owner of the site to maintain building fabric and to recognise that all building fabric will require some form of maintenance. Regular inspections will identify possible areas where building fabric decay is likely to occur and if this is attended to quickly it should preclude the need for expensive remedial works and additional costs.

Action The maintenance program should include a regular periodic condition survey undertaken in order to review maintenance and conservation requirements. The custodians/owners should regularly review the maintenance program as a necessary component to the implementation of this policy.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 49

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

7.0 CONSERVATION ACTION

7.1 Conservation Works In accordance with the Conservation Policy, those areas and elements identified as being of primary significance in this report should be conserved and should be subject to specific preservation works as a matter of priority. In addition, it is recommended that the identified restoration and/or reconstruction works be undertaken in due course.

The following list of identified conservation works should be considered as a preliminary survey. These defects have come to the attention of the authors during the preparation of this CMP however a comprehensive survey of the fabric was not undertaken. Three groups of conservation works have been defined in order of priority: urgent; essential; and recommended conservation works.

A regular (every three to five year), detailed survey of the building fabric should be undertaken by a qualified and experienced conservation practitioner to determine whether any further maintenance works are required. If defects are identified, the next step is to resolve how to best rectify these problems without impacting upon the cultural significance of the place. Subsequently the conservation practitioner should be retained to document, specify, and supervise the conservation works. It is also important to ensure all permit requirements have been observed prior to commencing any works at the site.

7.2 Urgent Works Urgent conservation works should be implemented as soon as possible preferably within six months. These works are required to arrest further deterioration and provide appropriate protection of significant fabric, as well as comply with the BCA. They are as follows:

 Remove the timber additions which have been identified as intrusive building fabric attached to the stone structure as a matter of priority. This is required to arrest further decay of primary significance building fabric and to enable a detailed inspection of the condition of the significant structure,

 Undertake an environmental risk assessment, prepare strategy and implement recommendations to overcome any identified deficiencies,

 Prepare and implement a maintenance schedule,

 Complete roof plumbing repair/replacement works to ensure building is watertight.

7.3 Essential Works Essential conservation works should be implemented within at least two years to avoid the potential for further deterioration of significant building fabric. These works are essential conservation works although the implementation does not have the same degree of urgency as those outlined above. They include the following:

 Remove the paint from the external stone walls.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 50

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

 Remove the render from the west stone wall.

 Restoration/replacement of stonework pointing where required including chimneys.

 Conservation works to the east wall parapet.

 Repair and render operable all windows and doors.

 All original joinery should be retained, restored or reconstructed as appropriate to match the original detailing as existing.

 All floors and ceilings should be retained, restored, or reconstructed to match original detail.

 Clean out all wall vents to ensure maximum ventilation throughout and under building is achieved.

7.4 Recommended Works Recommended conservation works are not crucial to the ongoing maintenance of the site. The implementation of these works may enhance the interpretation of the place or improve its amenity. The time frame for these works is therefore wider than for the two previous categories, although it is suggested that they be undertaken within five years. They include the following:

 Remove building fabric identified as intrusive (other than that listed as urgent).

 Reconstruct the original stone entry porch using photographs, sketches, and on site archaeological information to ensure an accurate reconstruction.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 51

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

8. SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources Public Records Office – files (various) Philip Chauncy diaries and survey books (Library of NSW)

Newspapers, Journals and Magazines The Age The Argus The Ballarat Star

Secondary Sources

Apperly, Richard et al A Pictorial Guide to Identifying Australian Architecture, Sydney 1995

Chauncy, P. L. S. Memoirs of Mrs. Poole and Mrs Chauncy. Kilmore, 1976.

Flett, James The History of Gold Discovery In Victoria, Melbourne 1981

Priestly, Susan The Victorians: Making Their Mark, Sydney, 1984.

Randall, J.O. A History of the Shire and the Township of Heathcote, Shire of McIvor, Heathcote, Victoria, 1985

Randall, J.O. Pastoral Settlement in Northern Victoria Volume Two The Campaspe District, Melbourne 1982

Unpublished Reports

Earth Tech City of Greater Bendigo Heathcote-Strathfieldsaye Heritage Study. Stage One – Thematic Environmental History and Identification of Places of Potential Cultural Significance. Unpublished Report. (2002)

Context (2009) City Of Greater Bendigo Heritage Study Stage 2: Former Shire of McIvor & Strathfieldsaye. Volume 1 Key Findings and Recommendations. Unpublished Report (2009)

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 52

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

APPENDIX 1 The Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 53

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

The Australia ICOMOS GUIDELINES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF PLACES OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE Known as THE BURRA CHARTER

PREAMBLE

Considering the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (Venice, 1964), and the Resolutions of the 5th General Assembly of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) (Moscow 1978), the Burra Charter was adopted by Australia ICOMOS (the Australian National Committee of ICOMOS) on 19 August 1979 at Burra, South Australia. Revisions were adopted on 23 February 1981, 23 April 1988 and 26 November 1999.

ARTICLES

ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS

For the purposes of this Charter:

1.1 Place means site, area, land, landscape, building or other work, group of buildings or other works, and may include components, contents, spaces and views.

1.2 Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects.

1.3 Fabric means all the physical material of the place including components, fixtures, contents and objects.

1.4 Conservation means all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance.

1.5 Maintenance means the continuous protective care of the fabric and setting of a place, and is to be distinguished from repair. Repair involves restoration or reconstruction.

1.6 Preservation means maintaining the fabric of a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration.

1.7 Restoration means returning the existing fabric a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or by reassembling existing components without the introduction of new material.

1.8 Reconstruction means returning a place to a known earlier state and is distinguished from restoration by the introduction of new material into the fabric.

1.9 Adaptation means modifying a place to suit the existing use or a proposed use.

1.10 Use means the functions of a place, as well as the activities and practices that may occur at the place.

1.11 Compatible use means a use which respects the cultural significance of a place. Such a use involves no, or minimal, impact on cultural significance.

1.12 Setting means the area around a place, which may include the visual catchment.

1.13 Related place means a place that contributes to the cultural significance of another place.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 54

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

1.14 Related object means an object that contributes to the cultural significance of a place but is not at the place. 1.15 Associations mean the special connections that exist between people and a place.

1.16 Meanings denote what a place signifies, indicates, evokes or expresses.

1.17 Interpretation means all the ways of presenting the cultural significance of a place.

CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES

ARTICLE 2. CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT

2.1 Places of cultural significance should be conserved.

2.2 The aim of conservation is to retain the cultural significance of a place.

2.3 Conservation is an integral part of good management of places of cultural significance.

2.4 Places of cultural significance should be safeguarded and not put at risk or left in a vulnerable state.

ARTICLE 3. CAUTIOUS APPROACH

3.1 Conservation is based on a respect for the existing fabric, use, associations and meanings. It requires a cautious approach of changing as much as necessary but as little as possible.

3.2 Changes to a place should not distort the physical or other evidence it provides, nor be based on conjecture.

ARTICLE 4. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND TECHNIQUES

4.1 Conservation should make use of all the knowledge, skills and disciplines which can contribute to the study and care of the place.

4.2 Traditional techniques and materials are preferred for the conservation of significant fabric. In some circumstances modern techniques and materials which offer substantial conservation benefits may be appropriate.

ARTICLE 5. VALUES

5.1 Conservation of a place should identify and take into consideration all aspects of cultural and natural significance without unwarranted emphasis on any one value at the expense of others.

5.2 Relative degrees of cultural significance may lead to different conservation actions at a place.

ARTICLE 6. BURRA CHARTER PROCESS

6.1 The cultural significance of a place and other issues affecting its future are best understood by a sequence of collecting and analysing information before making decisions. Understanding cultural significance comes first, then development of policy and finally management of the place in accordance with the policy.

6.2 The policy for managing a place must be based on an understanding of its cultural significance.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 55

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

6.3 Policy development should also include consideration of other factors affecting the future of a place such as the owner‟s needs, resources, external constraints and its physical condition.

ARTICLE 7. USE

7.1 Where the use of a place is of cultural significance it should be retained.

ARTICLE 8. SETTING

Conservation requires the retention of an appropriate visual setting and other relationships that contribute to the cultural significance of the place.

New construction, demolition, intrusions or other changes which would adversely affect the setting or relationships are not appropriate.

ARTICLE 9. LOCATION

9.1 The physical location of a place is part of its cultural significance. A building, work or other component of a place should remain in its historical location. Relocation is generally unacceptable unless this is the sole practical means of ensuring its survival.

9.2 Some buildings, works or other components of places were designed to be readily removable or already have a history of relocation. Provided such buildings, works or other components do not have significant links with their present location, removal may be appropriate.

9.3 If any building, work or other component is moved, it should be moved to an appropriate location and given an appropriate use. Such action should not be to the detriment of any place of cultural significance.

ARTICLE 10. CONTENTS

Contents, fixtures and objects which contribute to the cultural significance of a place should be retained at that place. Their removal is unacceptable unless it is the sole means of ensuring their security and preservation: on a temporary basis for treatment or exhibition for cultural reasons: for health and safety: or to protect the place. Such contents, fixtures and objects should be returned where circumstances permit and it is culturally appropriate.

ARTICLE 11. RELATED PLACES AND OBJECTS

The contribution which related places and related objects make to the cultural significance of the place should be retained.

ARTICLE 12. PARTICIPATION

Conservation, interpretation and management of a place should provide for the participation of people for whom the place has special associations and meanings, or who have social, spiritual or other cultural responsibilities for the place.

ARTICLE 13. CO-EXISTENCE OF CULTURAL VALUES

Co-existence of cultural values should be recognised, respected and encouraged, especially in cases where they conflict.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 56

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

CONSERVATION PROCESSES

ARTICLE 14. CONSERVATION PROCESSES

Conservation may, according to circumstance, include the processes of: retention or reintroduction of a use: retention of associations and meanings: maintenance, preservation, restoration, reconstruction, adaptation and interpretation: and will commonly include a combination of more than one of these.

ARTICLE 15. CHANGE

15.1 Change may be necessary to retain cultural significance, but is undesirable where it reduces cultural significance. The amount of change to a place should be guided by the cultural significance of the place and its appropriate interpretation.

15.2 Changes which reduce cultural significance should be reversible, and be reversed when circumstances permit.

15.3 Demolition of significant fabric of a place is generally not acceptable. However, in some cases minor demolition may be appropriate as part of conservation. Removed significant fabric should be reinstated when circumstances permit.

15.4 The contributions of all aspects of cultural significance of a place should be respected. If a place includes fabric, uses, associations or meanings of different periods, or different aspects of cultural significance, emphasising or interpreting one period or aspect at the expense of another can only be justified when what is left out, removed or diminished is of slight cultural significance and that which is emphasised or interpreted is of much greater cultural significance.

ARTICLE 16. MAINTENANCE

Maintenance is fundamental to conservation and should be undertaken where fabric is of cultural significance and its maintenance is necessary to retain that cultural significance.

ARTICLE 17. PRESERVATION

Preservation is appropriate where the existing fabric or its condition constitutes evidence of cultural significance, or where insufficient evidence is available to allow other conservation processes to be carried out.

ARTICLE 18. RESTORATION AND RECONSTRUCTION

Restoration and reconstruction should reveal culturally significant aspects of the place.

ARTICLE 19. RESTORATION

Restoration is appropriate only if there is sufficient evidence of an earlier state of the fabric.

ARTICLE 20. RECONSTRUCTION

20.1 Reconstruction is appropriate only where a place is incomplete through damage or alteration, and only where there is sufficient evidence to reproduce an earlier state of the fabric. In rare cases, reconstruction may also be appropriate as part of a use or practice that remains the cultural significance of the place.

20.2 Reconstruction should be identifiable on close inspection or through additional interpretation.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 57

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

ARTICLE 21. ADAPTATION

21.1 Adaptation is acceptable only where the adaptation has minimal impact on the cultural significance of the place.

21.2 Adaptation should involve minimal change to significant fabric, achieved only after considering alternatives.

ARTICLE 22. NEW WORK

22.1 New work such as additions to the place may be acceptable where it does not distort or obscure the cultural significance of the place, or detract from its interpretation and appreciation.

22.2 New work should be readily identifiable as such.

ARTICLE 23. CONSERVING USE

Continuing, modifying or reinstating a significant use may be appropriate and preferred forms of conservation.

ARTICLE 24. RETAINING ASSOCIATIONS AND MEANINGS

24.1 Significant associations between people and a place should be respected, retained and not obscured. Opportunities for the interpretation, commemoration and celebration of these associations should be investigated and implemented. 24.2 Significant meanings, including spiritual values, of a place should be respected. Opportunities for the continuation or revival of these meanings should be investigated and implemented.

ARTICLE 25. INTERPRETATION

The cultural significance of many places is not readily apparent, and should be explained by interpretation. Interpretation should enhance understanding and enjoyment, and be culturally appropriate.

CONSERVATION PRACTICE

ARTICLE 26. APPLYING THE BURRA CHARTER PROCESS

26.1 Work on a place should be preceded by studies to understand the place which should include analysis of physical, documentary, oral and other evidence, drawing on appropriate knowledge, skills and disciplines.

26.2 Written statements of cultural significance and policy for the place should be prepared, justified and accompanied by supporting evidence. The statements of significance and policy should be incorporated into a management plan for the place.

26.3 Groups and individuals with associations with a place as well as those involved in its management should be provided with opportunities to contribute to and participate in understanding the cultural significance of the place. Where appropriate they should also have opportunities to participate in its conservation and management.

ARTICLE 27. MANAGING CHANGE

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 58

Former Survey Office, Heathcote Conservation Management Plan

27.1 The impact of proposed changes on the cultural significance of a place should be analysed with reference to the statement of significance and the policy for managing the place. It may be necessary to modify proposed changes following analysis to better retain cultural significance.

27.2 Existing fabric, use, associations and meanings should be adequately recorded before any changes are made to the place.

ARTICLE 28. DISTURBANCE OF FABRIC

28.1 Disturbance of significant fabric for study, or to obtain evidence, should be minimised. Study of a place by any disturbance of the fabric, including archaeological excavation, should only be undertaken to provide data essential for decisions on the conservation of the place, or to obtain important evidence about to be lost or made inaccessible.

28.2 Investigation of a place which requires disturbance of the fabric, apart from that necessary to make decisions, may be appropriate provided that it is consistent with the policy for the place. Such investigation should be based on important research questions which have potential to substantially add to knowledge, which cannot be answered in other ways and which minimises disturbance of significant fabric.

ARTICLE 29. RESPONSIBILITY FOR DECISIONS

The organisations and individuals responsible for management decisions should be named and specific responsibility taken for each such decision.

ARTICLE 30. DIRECTION, SUPERVISION, AND IMPLEMENTATION

Competent direction and supervision should be maintained at all stages, and any changes should be implemented by people with appropriate knowledge and skills.

ARTICLE 31. DOCUMENTING EVIDENCE AND DECISIONS

A log of new evidence and additional decisions should be kept.

ARTICLE 32. RECORDS

32.1 The records associated with the conservation of a place should be placed in a permanent archive and made publicly available, subject to the requirements of security and privacy, and where this is culturally appropriate.

32.2 Records about the history of a place should be protected and made publicly available, subject to requirements of security and privacy, and where this is culturally appropriate.

ARTICLE 33. REMOVED FABRIC

Significant fabric which has been removed from a place including contents, fixtures and objects, should be catalogued, and protected in accordance with its cultural significance.

Where possible and culturally appropriate, removed significant fabric including contents, fixtures and objects, should be kept at the place.

ARTICLE 34. RESOURCES

Adequate resources should be provided for conservation.

F R O N T I E R Architects for H E R I T A G E 59