2 Jarvisfield Road , Picton: Historical Heritage Assessment

2 Jarvisfield Road, Picton: Historical Heritage Assessment DRAFT REPORT

Prepared for Michael Brown Planning Strategies

29 June 2018

Biosis Pty Ltd

This document is and shall remain the property of Biosis Pty Ltd. The document may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of the Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

Disclaimer:

Biosis Pty Ltd has completed this assessment in accordance with the relevant federal, state and local legislation and current industry best practice. The company accepts no liability for any damages or loss incurred as a result of reliance placed upon the report content or for any purpose other than that for which it was intended.

© Biosis 2018 - Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting - www.biosis.com.au i

Biosis offices

NEW SOUTH WALES

Newcastle

Phone: (02) 4911 4040 Email: [email protected]

Sydney


Wollongong


Albury


VICTORIA

Melbourne


Ballarat


Wangaratta


Document information

Report to: Michael Brown Planning Strategies

Prepared by: Lian Flannery and Amy Butcher

Biosis project no.: 26717

File name: 26717.2.Jarvisfield.Road.Picton.HA.DFT02.20180628

Citation: Biosis 2018. 2 Jarvisfield Road, Picton: Historical Heritage Assessment. Report for Michael Brown Planning Strategies. Authors: L. Flannery & A. Butcher, Biosis Pty Ltd, Wollongong. Project no. 26717

Document control

Version Internal reviewer Date issued

Draft version 01 Ashley Edwards 26/06/2018

Final version 01 TBA TBA

Acknowledgements

Biosis acknowledges the contribution of the following people and organisations in undertaking this study:

• Michael Brown, Michael Brown Planning Strategies

Biosis staff involved in this project were:

• Sonika Kumar for mapping

http://www.biosis.com.au/

mailto:[email protected]







© Biosis 2018 – Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting ii

Contents Glossary.........................................................................................................................................................................

Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................... i

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1

Project background .............................................................................................................................................1 Scope of assessment ..........................................................................................................................................1 Limitations .............................................................................................................................................................1

2 Statutory framework ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ................................................................5 NSW Heritage Act 1977 .........................................................................................................................................5

2.2.1 State Heritage Register ...........................................................................................................................5 2.2.2 Archaeological relics ................................................................................................................................6 2.2.3 Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Registers............................................................................7

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 ..........................................................................................7 2.3.1 Local Environmental Plan .......................................................................................................................7

Summary of heritage listings ............................................................................................................................7

3 Historical context ......................................................................................................................................... 10

Aboriginal past ................................................................................................................................................... 10 Picton – historical development .................................................................................................................... 11

3.2.1 Early settlement and exploration ...................................................................................................... 11 3.2.2 The Village of Picton.............................................................................................................................. 12 3.2.3 Major Henry Colden Antill and “Jarvisfield” ..................................................................................... 13

Chronology of the study area ........................................................................................................................ 20 Research themes .............................................................................................................................................. 20

4 Physical inspection ....................................................................................................................................... 22

4.1.1 Views to and from the study area ..................................................................................................... 22 4.3.2 Integrity of sub-surface deposits ....................................................................................................... 25 4.3.3 Research potential ................................................................................................................................ 25

5 Significance assessment ............................................................................................................................. 28

Levels of heritage significance ....................................................................................................................... 29 Evaluation of significance of the study area ............................................................................................... 29 Statement of Significance................................................................................................................................ 30

6 Statement of heritage impact .................................................................................................................... 32

7 Conclusions and Recommendations......................................................................................................... 33

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 33 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 33

References ................................................................................................................................................................ 34

© Biosis 2018 – Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting iii

Tables

Table 1 Summary of heritage listings within and adjacent to the study area .............................................. 8 Table 2 Chronological development of the study area ................................................................................. 20 Table 3 Identified historical themes for the study area ................................................................................ 21 Table 4 Assessment of archaeological potential ............................................................................................ 26

Figures

Figure 1 Location of the study area in a regional context ................................................................................. 2 Figure 2 Extent of the study area .......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3 Proposed works ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 4 Location of heritage items within the study area and in the vicinity ................................................ 9 Figure 5 Assessment of archaeological potential ............................................................................................. 27

Plates

Plate 1 1900 Crown Plan of the Hume Hwy, which runs through "Jarvisfield", the study area is outlined in red (Source: Department of Land Services) ................................................................... 12

Plate 2 1927 Parish Map of Picton, showing the study area outlined in red, the private village of picton and the village of picton (Upper Picton) (Source: Department of Land Services) ............. 13

Plate 3 1900 Parish Map of Picton, study area is outlined in red (Source: Department of Land Services) .................................................................................................................................................. 14

Plate 4 1961 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red within the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services) .............................................................................................................. 15

Plate 5 'Jarvisfield' showing old house on left, with vault hill in background. Present house on the right. The study area is located out of view behind the two front structures (Source: J.M Antill, 1946) ............................................................................................................................................. 16

Plate 6 The “Jarvisfield” residence, the third structure to be built. The residence is located to the north of the study area (Source: Wollongong City Library) .............................................................. 17

Plate 7 1980 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red within the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services) .............................................................................................................. 19

Plate 8 1990 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red, witihin the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services) .............................................................................................................. 19

Plate 9 Southern view from the study area, toward Vault hill .......................................................................... 23 Plate 10 Eastern view of the study area toward the Old Hume Highway ....................................................... 23 Plate 11 View north toward the Antill Country and Golf Club from the study area ...................................... 23 Plate 12 Western view of the study area toward main dwelling and Vault Hill .............................................. 23 Plate 13 Front view of modern dwelling located in the western portion of the study area ........................ 24 Plate 14 Shed located infront of the modern dwelling, within the western portion of the study

area .......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Plate 15 Additional dwelling associated with the main dwelling ...................................................................... 24 Plate 16 Fencing associated with farming located throughout the study area .............................................. 24

© Biosis 2018 – Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting

Glossary

CBD Central Business District

c. Circa

DP Deposited Plan

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

Heritage Act Heritage Act 1977

LEP Local Environment Plan

m Metre

mm Millimetre

NHL National Heritage List

NSW New South Wales

OEH NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

SoHI Statement of Heritage Impact

SHR State Heritage Register

SHI State Heritage Inventory

SLEP Shellharbour Local Environmental Plan 2013

Study area The area of impact for the proposed works

© Biosis 2018 – Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting i

Summary

Biosis Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Michael Brown Planning Strategies Pty Ltd (MBPS) to undertake an archaeological assessment for 2 Jarvisfield Road, Picton (study area). The study area is located within the Wollondilly Shire and is approximately 32.3 kilometres south west of Campbelltown and approximately 54.7 kilometres north-west of the Wollongong Central Business District (CBD). It encompasses 100 hectares of private land and the adjacent road reserves.

The study area is defined by the extent of proposed works, which are located throughout the entire study area. The proposed works consist of the construction of a Seniors Housing Development including a number of small buildings, pathways, gardens, large areas of greenspace and the retention of the existing two ponds on the property.

Heritage values

There were no heritage values identified within the study area; however, there was one item of significance identified within the study area:

• One historical landscape area, Jarvisfield historic landscape. The curtilage of the historical landscape area covers the entirety of the study area and neighbouring lots.

The study area is considered to be significant at a local and level.

Impact to archaeological resource

The proposed works will have minimal impact upon the significance of the cultural historical landscape. In addition, these impacts are considered acceptable from a heritage standpoint as previous impacts have already occurred in the vicinity of the study area and wider surrounds.

Recommendations

These recommendations have been formulated to respond to client requirements and the significance of the site. They are guided by the ICOMOS Burra Charter with the aim of doing as much as necessary to care for the place and make it useable and as little as possible to retain its cultural significance.1

Recommendation 1 No further assessment required for rezoning

For the purposes of rezoning, this assessment fulfils the requirements for a Planning Proposal submission. Should the Planning Proposal be successful and the project proceed to Infrastructure Development Application or State Significant Development (SSD) stage, Biosis recommends mitigation measures be implemented, as outlined in Recommendation 2 below.

Recommendation 2 Development of an Unexpected Finds procedure

Relics are historical archaeological resources of local or state significance and are protected in New South Wales under the Heritage Act 1977. Relics cannot be disturbed except with a permit or exception/exemption notification. Should unanticipated relics be discovered during the course of the project, work in the vicinity must cease and an archaeologist contacted to make a preliminary assessment of the find. The Heritage Council will require notification if the find is assessed as a relic.

1 Australia ICOMOS 2013

© Biosis 2018 – Leaders in Ecology and Heritage Consulting 1

1 Introduction

Project background

Biosis Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Michael Brown Planning Strategies Pty Ltd to prepare a historical archaeological assessment for 2 Jarvisfield Road, Picton, New South Wales (NSW) (Figure 1 and Figure 2).

The study area consists of Lot 4 DP 873571, which is located within the Wollondilly Shire Council (LGA), Parish of Picton, County of Camden (Figure 1). It is bounded by Jarvisfield Road to the east, the Hume Highway to the south and west, and Antill Park Country Golf Course to the north.

Scope of assessment

This report was prepared in accordance with current heritage guidelines including Assessing Heritage Significance, Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and "Relics" and the Burra Charter.2 This report provides a heritage assessment to identify if any heritage items or relics exist within or in the vicinity of the study area. The heritage significance of these heritage items has been investigated and assessed in order to determine the most appropriate management strategy.

The following is a summary of the major objectives of the assessment:

• Identify and assess the heritage values associated with the study area. The assessment aims to achieve this objective through providing a brief summary of the principle historical influences that have contributed to creating the present–day built environment of the study area using resources already available and some limited new research.

• Assess the impact of the proposed works on the cultural heritage significance of the study area.

• Identify sites and features within the study area which are already recognised for their heritage value through statutory and non–statutory heritage listings.

• Recommend measures to avoid or mitigate any negative impacts on the heritage significance of the study area.

Limitations

This report is based on historical research and field inspections. It is possible that further historical research or the emergence of new historical sources may support different interpretations of the evidence in this report.

Although this report was undertaken to best archaeological practice and its conclusions are based on professional opinion, it does not warrant that there is no possibility that additional archaeological material will be located in subsequent works on the site. This is because limitations in historical documentation and archaeological methods make it difficult to accurately predict what is under the ground.

The significance assessment made in this report is a combination of both facts and interpretation of those facts in accordance with a standard set of assessment criteria. It is possible that another professional may interpret the historical facts and physical evidence in a different way.

2 NSW Heritage Office 2001; NSW Heritage Branch, Department of Planning 2009; Australia ICOMOS 2013

!(

!(

Razorback

Picton

Maldon

WOLLONDILLYWOLLONDILLY

LumsdaineStreet

Menangle Street

Picton Road

Hill Street

Remembrance Driveway

Fairleys Road

Argyle

Stree

t

Mount Hercules Road

Menangle Road

Prince Street

Jarvisfield RoadBarkers LodgeRoad

Bridge

Stree

t

Mount Vi ewClo

se

Matthews Lane

Star S

treet

Antill Street

HerefordWay

Wild

Stree

t

Picton Avenue

Starga

rdCrescent

Margaret Street

RegremeRoad

Henry

Stree

t

Clintara Crescent

Staff R

oad

Col denhamRoadJan St

reet

KyeemaStr eet

Gove

rnors

L ane

Thirlmere WayToby Place

Tyrone Place

Thurn

s Roa

d

Westminster PlaceCrawford Creek Place

PictonMittagong LoopLine

Main Southern Railway

S tonequ arryCreek

Carriage Creek

CrawfordsCreek

Crawf o rds C reek

TeatreeGully

Redbank Creek

R a cecourseCr eek

Maldon

Picton

MoreeBourke

Parkes

CanberraSydney

Wollongong

Albury

Ballina

Broken HillNewcastle

Acknowledgement: Topo (c) NSW Land and Property Information (2016); Overivew (c) State of NSW (c.2003)

Matter: 26717Date: 04 April 2018,Checked by: AB, Drawn by: SSK, Last edited by: skumarLocation:P:\26700s\26717\Mapping\

LegendStudy area

Scale 1:25,000 @ A4, GDA 1994 MGA Zone 56

0 250 500 750 1,000

Metres ±Biosis Pty LtdAlbury, Ballarat, Melbourne, Newcastle, Sydney, Wangaratta & Wollongong

Figure 1: Location of the study area


Jarvisfield Road

Governors Lane

Colden

ham Ro

ad

0 20 40 60 80 100

Metres

LegendStudy area

±Ma tter: 26717Da te : 29 Jun e 2 018, Ch ecked by: A B, D raw n by: SSK, Last ed ited by: lha rleyLocation :\\bio -d ata-01\m atters$\2 6700s\26 717\M ap p in g\26717_F2 _Stud yArea

Biosis Pty LtdAlbury, Ballarat, Melbourne,

Newcastle, Sydney, Wangaratta & Wollongong

!(

!(

!(

Picton

Maldon

Scale: 1:2,000 @ A3

Figure 2: Extent of the studyarea

Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 56

Acknowledgements: Basemap © Land and Property Information 2016; Imagery © Nearmap 2018


2 Statutory framework

In NSW cultural heritage is managed in a three-tiered system: national, state and local. Certain sites and items may require management under all three systems or only under one or two. The following discussion aims to outline the various levels of protection and approvals required to make changes to cultural heritage in the state.

Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act) is the national Act protecting the natural and cultural environment. The EPBC Act is administered by the Department of Environment and Energy (DEE). The EPBC Act establishes two heritage lists for the management of the natural and cultural environment:

• The National Heritage List (NHL) contains items listed on the NHL have been assessed to be of outstanding significance and define "critical moments in our development as a nation".3

• The Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL) contains items listed on the CHL are natural and cultural heritage places that are on Commonwealth land, in Commonwealth waters or are owned or managed by the Commonwealth. A place or item on the CHL has been assessed as possessing "significant" heritage value.4

A search of the NHL and CHL did not yield any results associated with the study area.

NSW Heritage Act 1977

Heritage in NSW is principally protected by the Heritage Act 1977 (Heritage Act) (as amended) which was passed for the purpose of conserving items of environmental heritage of NSW. Environmental heritage is broadly defined under Section 4 of the Heritage Act as consisting of the following items: "those places, buildings, works, relics, moveable objects, and precincts, of State or Local heritage significance”. The Act is administered by the NSW Heritage Council, under delegation by the Heritage Division, Office of Environment and Heritage. The Heritage Act is designed to protect both known heritage items (such as standing structures) and items that may not be immediately obvious (such as potential archaeological remains or ‘relics’). Different parts of the Heritage Act deal with different situations and types of heritage and the Act provides a number of mechanisms by which items and places of heritage significance may be protected.

2.2.1 State Heritage Register

Protection of items of State significance is by nomination and listing on the State Heritage Register (SHR) created under Part 3A of the Heritage Act. The Register came into effect on 2 April 1999. The Register was established under the Heritage Amendment Act 1998. It replaces the earlier system of Permanent Conservation Orders as a means for protecting items with State significance.

A permit under Section 60 of the Heritage Act (NSW) is required for works on a site listed on the SHR, except for that work which complies with the conditions for exemptions to the requirement for obtaining a permit. Details of which minor works are exempted from the requirements to submit a Section 60 Application can be

3 "About National Heritage" http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/about/national/index.html 4 "Commonwealth Heritage List Criteria" http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/about/commonwealth/criteria.html

http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/about/national/index.html

http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/about/commonwealth/criteria.html


found in the Standard Exemptions for Works requiring Heritage Council Approval guidelines. These exemptions came into force on 5 September 2008 and replace all previous exemptions.

There is one item or conservation area listed on the SHR within the study area.

• Jarvisfield Historic Landscape (Item no. SHR00305) Hume Highway Deviation.

2.2.2 Archaeological relics

Section 139 of the Heritage Act protects archaeological 'relics' from being 'exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed' by the disturbance or excavation of land. This protection extends to the situation where a person has 'reasonable cause to suspect' that archaeological remains may be affected by the disturbance or excavation of the land. This section applies to all land in NSW that is not included on the State Heritage Register.

Amendments to the Heritage Act made in 2009 changed the definition of an archaeological ‘relic’ under the Act. A 'relic' is defined by the Heritage Act as:

“Any deposit, object or material evidence:

(a) which relates to the settlement of the area that comprises New South Wales, not being Aboriginal settlement, and

(b) which is of State or Local significance"

It should be noted that not all remains that would be considered archaeological are relics under the NSW Heritage Act. Advice given in the Archaeological Significance Assessment Guidelines is that a “relic” would be viewed as a chattel and it is stated that:

In practice, an important historical archaeological site will be likely to contain a range of different elements as vestiges and remnants of the past. Such sites will include ‘relics’ of significance in the form of deposits, artefacts, objects and usually also other material evidence from demolished buildings, works or former structures which provide evidence of prior occupations but may not be ‘relics’.5

If a relic, including shipwrecks in NSW waters (that is rivers, harbours, lakes and enclosed bays) is located, the discoverer is required to notify the NSW Heritage Council.

Section 139 of the Heritage Act requires any person who knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that their proposed works will expose or disturb a 'relic' to first obtain an Excavation Permit from the Heritage Council of NSW (pursuant to Section 140 of the Act), unless there is an applicable exception (pursuant to Section 139(4)). Excavation permits are issued by the Heritage Council of NSW in accordance with sections 60 or 140 of the Heritage Act. It is an offence to disturb or excavate land to discover, expose or move a relic without obtaining a permit. Excavation permits are usually issued subject to a range of conditions. These conditions will relate to matters such as reporting requirements and artefact cataloguing, storage and curation.

Exceptions under Section 139(4) to the standard Section 140 process exist for applications that meet the appropriate criterion. An application is still required to be made. The Section 139(4) permit is an exception from the requirement to obtain a Section 140 permit and reflects the nature of the impact and the significance of the relics or potential relics being impacted upon.

If an exception has been granted and, during the course of the development, substantial intact archaeological relics of state or local significance, not identified in the archaeological assessment or statement required by this exception, are unexpectedly discovered during excavation, work must cease in the affected area and the Heritage Office must be notified in writing in accordance with section 146 of the Heritage Act. Depending on

5 NSW Heritage Branch, Department of Planning 2009, 7


the nature of the discovery, additional assessment and, possibly, an excavation permit may be required prior to the recommencement of excavation in the affected area.

2.2.3 Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Registers

Section 170 of the Heritage Act requires that culturally significant items or places managed or owned by Government agencies are listed on departmental Heritage and Conservation Register. Information on these registers has been prepared in accordance with Heritage Division guidelines.

Statutory obligations for archaeological sites that are listed on a Section 170 Register include notification to the Heritage Council in addition to relic's provision obligations. There are no items within or adjacent to the study area that are entered on a State government instrumentality Section 170 Register. There are no items within or adjacent to the study area that are entered on a State government instrumentality Section 170 Register.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

2.3.1 Local Environmental Plan

The Wollondilly Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2011 contains schedules of heritage items that are managed by the controls in the instrument. As the project is being undertaken under Part 4 of the EP&A Act, council is responsible for approving controlled work via the development application system. Heritage items in the vicinity of the study area are identified in Figure 4.

This study area is not listed as an item of either local or state significance on the Wollondilly LEP 2011 Schedule 5. There are however, a number of listed items within the vicinity of the study area:

• Jarvisfield house and barn (Item no. I175) 4 Jarvisfield Road, Picton, Local

• Vault Hill cemetery (Item no.I208) Remembrance Drive, Local

Summary of heritage listings

A summary of heritage listings within and in the vicinity of the study area is presented in Table 1 and Figure 4.


Table 1 Summary of heritage listings within and adjacent to the study area

Site number

Site name Address / Property description Listings Significance

Individual item As a Conservation Area

00305 Jarvisfield Lot 1 DP 789555, Lot 2 DP 789555 Lot 3 DP 873571 and Lot 4 DP 873571

N Y State

I175 Jarvisfield – house and barn 4 Jarvisfield Road (Antill Park Golf Club) Y N State

I208 Vault Hill Cemetery Remembrance Drive Y N Local


Jarvisfield Road

Governors Lane

Colden

ham Ro

ad

I175

5045544

0 20 40 60 80 100

Metres

LegendStudy area

Heritage ItemsState Heritage ActItem - General

±Ma tter: 26717Da te : 29 Jun e 2 018, Ch ecked by: A B, D raw n by: SSK, Last ed ited by: lha rleyLocation :\\bio -d ata-01\m atters$\2 6700s\26 717\M ap p in g\26717_H A _F4_H er Item s



!(

!(

!(

Picton

Maldon

Scale: 1:2,000 @ A3

Figure 4: Location ofHeritage items within andin the vicinity of the studyarea




3 Historical context

Historical research has been undertaken to identify the land use history of the study area, to isolate key phases in its history and to identify the location of any archaeological resources within the study area. The historical research places the history of the study area into the broader context of the Illawarra region and specifically the Shellharbour area.

Aboriginal past

It is generally accepted that people have inhabited the Australian landmass for at least 65,000 years.6 Dates of the earliest occupation of the continent by Aboriginal people are subject to continued revision as more research is undertaken. The timing for the human occupation of the Sydney Basin is still uncertain. Whilst there is some possible evidence for occupation of the region around 40,000 years ago, the earliest undisputed radiocarbon date from the region comes from a rock shelter site north of Penrith on the Nepean River, known as Shaws Creek K2, which has been dated to 14,700 + 250 Before Present (BP).7 The assessment of the deposits concurred that the people living in the shelter exploited the food and resources from the nearby creeks and rivers, as well as the surrounding countryside. East of Campbelltown, a sandstone rock shelter site (known as Bull Cave) was excavated and yielded a basal date of 1,820 + 90 BP.8 In general, the majority of both open and rock shelter sites in the Sydney region date to within the last 3,000 to 5,000 years.

Our knowledge of Aboriginal people and their land-use patterns and lifestyles prior to European contact is mainly reliant on documents written by non-Aboriginal people. The inherent bias of the class and cultures of these authors necessarily affect such documents. They were also often describing a culture that they did not fully understand, a culture that was in a heightened state of disruption given the arrival of settlers and disease. Early written records can, however, be used in conjunction with archaeological information and surviving oral histories from members of the Aboriginal community in order to gain a picture of Aboriginal life in the region.

The study area is recognised as being within the traditional lands described as Wodi Wodi. The traditional Wodi Wodi boundary extended from around Stanwell Park to the Shoalhaven River, and as far inland as Picton, Moss Vale and Marulan. The Wodi Wodi spoke the Dharawal language, however Dharawal (Tharwal) was not a word they had heard of or used themselves.9

The arrival of settlers in the region and new competition for resources began to restrict the freedom of movement of Aboriginal hunter-gatherer inhabitants from the early 1800’s. European expansion along the Cumberland Plain was swift and soon there had been considerable loss of traditional lands to agriculture. This led to violence and conflict between Europeans and Aboriginal people as both groups sought to compete for the same resources. In the Cowpastures region, it began following the murder of an Aboriginal woman and her children, which resulted in violent clashes between several Aboriginal men and European settlers between 1814 and 1816.10 The violence had escalated by 1816 following the outlaw proclamation by Macquarie, resulting in the massacre of 14 Aboriginal people hiding at Appin.11 This event is known as the

6 Clarkson et al 2017. 7 Attenbrow 1987, 2002: 20 8 Koettig 1985 9 Tindale 1974, Navin Officer 2000: 20 10 Liston 1988: 50 11 Liston 1988: 54


‘Appin Massacre’ and is regarded as a pivotal part of the history of the destruction of the Aboriginal people in the region. The outlaw proclamation was withdrawn in November 1816.

Picton – historical development

3.2.1 Early settlement and exploration

New South Wales was founded by Captain Arthur Phillip on 26th January 1788 upon the arrival of the first fleet which contained a number of cattle that wandered away shortly after the ship landed. The first reference to the district, known as the County of Camden was in November 1795. It was reported to Governor John Hunter that a herd of some sixty head of cattle had been seen to the south-west. The cattle were found on the banks of the Nepean River in Cowpastures. The tracks of the cattle were found along the banks of the Nepean River and in 1802, 600 cattle were sighted near what is now known as Picton. Governor King visited the district of Menangle and Picton during his term in office in 1805. He recommended the construction of large stockyards at Stonequarry Creek, in which to impound the cattle when they came to drink. 12

The township of Picton was first explored by two brothers, Hamilton Hume and John Kennedy Hume. In August of 1814, they left their home in Appin on an exploring expedition. They were the first white men to cross the Razorback Range, accompanied by a local Aboriginal boy from Appin. The brothers made their way through the present site of Picton and continued south through the Bargo Bush.13

In 1818, Hamilton Hume joined Surveyor James Meehan and Charles Throsby on a journey to determine if an overland route between Sydney and Jervis Bay could be found. The travellers explored as far as Moss Vale, then continued on a line to the north of the present route of the Hume Highway. Hume and Meehan disclosed the existence of promising land to the south and Governor Macquarie ordered the construction of a ‘cart road’ to the Goulburn area in 1819. The work was completed in February 1821. In the same year, Surveyor William Harper identified a route from near Camden, located to the north of the study area, over the Razorback Range to Paddys River, then in 1830 Surveyor White marked an improved route via Cawdor. In 1835, the construction of the convict built road over Razorback Range was completed with the planning for a link between Campbelltown and Camden via Narellan commenced.14

12 Steel 1904. Early Days of Picton 13 Steel 1904 14 RMS 2013


Plate 1 1900 Crown Plan of the Hume Hwy, which runs through "Jarvisfield", the study area is outlined in red (Source: Department of Land Services)

3.2.2 The Village of Picton

The Village of Picton began as a private village built on the “Jarvisfield” land grant awarded to Major Henry Antill in 1822. The private town of Picton was laid out on the western extent of his Jarvisfield grant by Henry Antill (Plate 2). Town lots were sold for 8 pounds per acre and in July 1841, Major Antill advertised in the Sydney papers that there would be an auction of his subdivision, to be called the Village of Picton. He stressed that many blocks had frontages to the main road, known today as Argyle Street.15

However, in 1847 the Government laid out a township on the southern side of Stonequarry Creek, and to distinguish the new from the older town, it was named Upper Picton.16Surveyor Galloway was employed to survey the area and make half acre blocks of purchase. These blocks were offered for sale in 1847 and in 1855, all the land was sold. Parcels of land were held back for grants to churches and for the school and courthouse.17

Picton, prior to 1940 was known as Stonequarry but was later altered when the private town was surveyed by Surveyor Stubbs. Major Antill renamed the town Picton after General Sir Thomas Picton, who was killed in the Battle of Waterloo, 1815. In a census return dated 24 October 1833, the name Picton appears as one of the districts from which returns were forwarded.18

15 Vincent, L 1996 16 Bertie, C.H 1932 17 Vincent, L 1996 18 Steel 1904


Plate 2 1927 Parish Map of Picton, showing the study area outlined in red, the private village of picton and the village of picton (Upper Picton) (Source: Department of Land Services)

3.2.3 Major Henry Colden Antill and “Jarvisfield”

Major Henry Colden Antill (1779 – 1852) was born in New York in 1779, the second son of John and Margaret Antill. He grew up in Canada, but when pursuing a military career, he joined the British Army in 1796, as an ensign in the 73rd regiment.19. Antill served in India and at Seringapatam he was severely wounded in the shoulder. It was then in 1799, Henry was promoted to lieutenant and about the same time, became associated with Captain Lachlan Macquarie and soon forged a strong friendship.20

In 1807, Henry Antill retuned with his regiment to England and on the 11 January 1809 the regiment sailed for Australia. Henry Antill was then a captain and was appointed aide-de-campe to Governor Lachlan Macquarie on 1 January, 1810. It was then in 1815 that Antill was appointed a Major of Brigade.21 Major Antill married Eliza Wills, who was the daughter of Edward Spencer Wills, a Sydney merchant and an emancipated convict. Eliza Wills was only 16 years old when she married Henry, who was 39 years of age. Eliza and Henry had nine children, Margaret, John Macquarie, Alice Sophia, Henry Colden, William Redfern, Thomas Wills, Edward Spencer, James Alexander and Selina. 22

Antill resigned his commission in 1821 and made a decision that he would settle in Australia with his new wife Eliza. Antill had been appointed a Justice of the Peace in the same year and had first sat on the Parramatta bench.23

19 Vincent, L 1996 20 J.M. Antill, ‘Antill Henery Colden (1779-1852)’, Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/antill-henry-colden-1710, published first in hardcopy 1966, accessed 14 march 2018. 21 Vincent , L 1996 22 Wills Cooke, 1997 23 Martin, J.B 1883

http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/antill-henry-colden-1710


On 9 July 1822, Major Henry Colden Antill was granted 2,000 acres which was then enlarged by an additional grant of 900 acres in 1826 (Plate 3). This was to be the first land grant in the district. Here he built a small wooden cottage, located to the north of the study area, in 1823, which was situated in front of where the future homestead would be built. However, the wooden cottage was demolished in 1883.24

Plate 3 1900 Parish Map of Picton, study area is outlined in red (Source: Department of Land Services)

In 1825, Antill and his new wife Eliza Wills moved onto his estate, named Jarvisfield in honour of Macquaries first wife, Jane Jarvis. The 1828 Census of New South Wales stated that ‘Jarvisfield’, which enclosed the study area, was said to have consisted of 2,900 acres with 232 cattle and 1,400 sheep. Furthermore, a newspaper article dated 1888, describes that the Jarvisfield Estate was a very pretty piece of property and describes the entrance to the property as noted:

Leaving Picton, and passing by the show ground which lies on the flat between Stone Quarry Creek and the steep ridge of Vault Hill, a short and stif grade is encountered, upon surmounting which, the gates of Jarvisfield are met with just as the road wheels to the right and turn the flank of the hills. Passing through some good paddocks from which all the trees were not cut, some being wisely kept for shafe and shelter, and as a result, for ornament also, a swing to the right brings the visitor to the main homestead on the crest of an early rise. 25

24 Martin, J.B 1883 25 1888, ‘Jarvisfield, Picton’. Australian Town and Country Journal (Sydney, NSW: 1870-1907) Saturday 9 June, p. 21 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=%22Jarvisfield%22%20Picton%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20&searchLimits= Accessed 28 May 2018

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=%22Jarvisfield%22%20Picton%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20&searchLimits

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=%22Jarvisfield%22%20Picton%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20&searchLimits


The reporter notes that grass has now taken the place of grain; and dairying reigns in the place of crop growing, owing to its more remunerative character. It was further noted that no more than 10 acres of the 3,000 acres was kept to cereals and chiefly oats. There was also four acres of Lucerne, which were growing near the brook and an acre of sorghum.26 However, it is not specified where there crops were located upon the Jarvisfield Estate.

Plate 4 1961 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red within the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services)

The 1961 aerial photo of the study area shows that a small area of the western and northern portions of the study area was subject to ploughing. These fields have the potential to have contained the crops noted above. The aerial photo does not show any form of farming sheds or farming infrastructure within the study area. However, the remaining study area would have been used for grazing. Furthermore, the aerial does not show any built structures.

Following Antills move to Jarivsifeld, the responsibility of law and order of the town was given to Henry from 1825. Furthermore, on 1 July 1825, Antill was appointed resident magistrate of Stonequarry Creek and held the position until his death.27 Major Henry Antill was also appointed Superintendent of Police on 5 September 1829. He was noted as being painstaking and showed undue sympathy toward convict servants.28 As the town of Picton had yet to be established, the first court case was held in Major Antill’s home, located to the north of the study area upon the Jarvisfield Estate, then from 1829 the court was held in a small wooden building near the gates to the old entrance of the estate. The wooden structure also served as a church for protestant services on Sundays. 29

26 1888, “Jarvsifield, Picton”. Australian Town and Country Journal (Sydney, NSW: 1870-1907) Saturday 9 June, p. 21 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=Jarvisfield%2C%20Picton&searchLimits 27 Vincent, L 1996 28 Steel 1904 29 Vincent, L 1996

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=Jarvisfield%2C%20Picton&searchLimits


A second house was built c. 1850 at the Jarvisfield Estate which was made of brick, however this was built as a home for Henry’s and Eliza’s son John Macquarie Antill. It was located, to the north of the study area, below the main house, which was not built until 1864. The second house remained in use as a laundry until it was pulled down in the 1950s. 30 The main house was the third residence to be built on the estate and was built in 1864 after Henry Antill’s death (Plate 3).31The Jarvisfield Estate was the centre of hospitality, due to its location along the Hume Highway. If any travellers to the south passed by, they would have to camp out as there were no other dwellings to shelter them.32

Plate 5 'Jarvisfield' showing old house on left, with vault hill in background. Present house on the right. The study area is located out of view behind the two front structures (Source: J.M Antill, 1946)

30 Steel 1904 31 1837. The Antills of Jarvisfield: Death of Major- General J.M. Antill. Sydney Mail (NSW: 1912-1938) Wednesday 10 March. P. 12 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/160504662/17001898 Accessed 25 May 2018 32 Bertie, 1932

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/160504662/17001898


Plate 6 The “Jarvisfield” residence, the third structure to be built. The residence is located to the north of the study area (Source: Wollongong City Library)

Major Henry Antill’s agricultural and pastoral ventures were thriving and this lead him to take up more land on the Molonglo River where several of his sons received their early pastoral training.33 Which lead to John Henry Antill, Major Henry Antill’s son, being devoted to the breeding of Ayrsire cattle.

Major Henry Antill’s diary entries from between 1848-50 detailed the life at ‘Jarvisfield’. Major Antill noted that his estate was flourishing and this was evident from entries referring to his crops of wheat and maize. It also referred to the planting of cabbages, pumpkins, melons, cucumbers, radishes, cauliflowers, Swedish turnips, potatoes and grape vines. The garden around the house consisted of fruit trees, almonds, walnut, roses and other flowers.34 However, Jarvisfield suffered from the trials of drought in 1849, this was made apparent in Antills comments in his diary.

After Major Antills death on August 14, 1852, 35 his son John Macquarie Antill took over the ‘Jarvisfield’ Estate. A newspaper article from 1888 recorded the activities of the estate. J.M. Antill had entered into the butter

33 Steel 1904 34 J.M. Antill 1946 35 Jervis, J 1941


making, as well as already being involved in the dairying industry with the bulk of the milk produced on the estate having been sent to Sydney.36

Major Henry Colden Antill, died August 14, 1852 and was buried in the family cemetery which was called Vault Hill. Vault Hill is located to the south of the study area on the opposite site of the old Hume Highway or as it is known today as Remembrance Driveway. The cemetery is located on the summit of the hill and is visible from a wide area due to the mature trees that mark its location. Major Henry Antill wasn’t the first family member to have been buried on the hill. Sadly, the first burial was that of Henry’s eldest daughter Margaret, who died July 17 1848. There are twelve members of the Antill family that are buried upon Vault Hill.37

The Antills lived on the estate for 120 years, the holding is one of the few old-time grants remained in the possession of people bearing the same name as the original grantee.38 In 1921, the Jarvisfield Estate was subdivided into 25 dairy farms and homestead allotments. This saw the sale of Lots 1,7,10,12,13,14 and 17.39 A deed dated 19 November 1962 states that a different deed dated 23 March 1922 was made between Robert Henry Antill and the Trustee Company that Lots 2,3 and 4, the study area, were on Registered Plan No. 3, were settled upon for Guy Forest Antill. However, Guy Forest Antill died on the 16 June 1960 without ever having exercised his power to appointment. The property was left to his surviving widow, Ida Wren Antill and his two children Sylvia Selina Macquarie Gerrard and Margaret Jessie Macquarie Antill. 40 It was then on 23 January 1974 that the property was bought by William Garfield Mallam and Ross Mallam. 41

Since 1974, the study area has undergone various developments with the construction of the main residence. Minor vegetation clearance has occurred and two man-made dams were constructed also. The 1980 (Plate 7) and 1990 (Plate 8) aerial photographs of the study area show that along with the construction of a dwelling, a swimming pool and tennis court had also been built. The study area has continued to be used for agricultural practices, such as cattle grazing.

36 “Jarvsifield, Picton”. Australian Town and Country Journal (Sydney, NSW: 1870-1907) Saturday 9 June, p. 21 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71098433?searchTerm=Jarvisfield%2C%20Picton&searchLimits= 37 Oehm, 2006 38 1837. The Antills of Jarvisfield: Death of Major- General J.M. Antill. Sydney Mail (NSW: 1912-1938) Wednesday 10 March. P. 12 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/160504662/17001898 Accessed 25 May 2018 39 1921. Jarvisfield Land Sale. Camden News (NSW: 1895-1954) Thursday 7 April. P. 3 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/136648272?searchTerm=Jarvisfield%2C%20Picton&searchLimits= Accessed 25 May 2018 40 NSW Department of Lands, Deed 645-2631 41 NSW Department of Lands, Primary Application 060210


https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/160504662/17001898



Plate 7 1980 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red within the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services)

Plate 8 1990 Aerial photo of the study area, outlined in red, witihin the Jarvisfield Estate (Source: Department of Land Services)


Chronology of the study area

Based upon the historical research presented it is possible to summarise the chronology of the study area, this is presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Chronological development of the study area

Date Historical event or development

1814 The township of Picton was first explored by two brothers, Hamilton Hume and John Kennedy Hume.

1818 Hamilton Hume joined Surveyor James Meehan and Charles Throsby on a journey to determine if an overland route between Sydney and Jervis Bay could be found.

1822 Major Henry Colden Antill was granted 2,000 acres.

1826 The Jarvisfield land grant was enlarged by an additional grant of 900 acres.

1841 Major Antill advertised in the Sydney papers that there would be an auction of his subdivision, to be called the village of Picton.

1847 The Government lays out a township on the southern side of Stonequarry Creek, and to distinguish the new from the older town, it was named Upper Picton.

1852 Major Henry Colden Antill, dies August 14.

1974 The study area is sold by the Antill family and is bought by William Garfield Mallam and Ross Mallam.

Research themes

Contextual analysis is undertaken to place the history of a particular site within relevant historical contexts in order to gauge how typical or unique the history of a particular site actually is. This is usually ascertained by gaining an understanding of the history of a site in relation to the broad historical themes characterising Australia at the time. Such themes have been established by the Australian Heritage Commission and the NSW Heritage Office and are outlined in synoptic form in New South Wales Historical Themes.42

There are 38 State Historical Themes, which have been developed for NSW, as well as nine National Historical Themes. These broader themes are usually referred to when developing sub-themes for a local area to ensure they complement the overall thematic framework for the broader region.

A review of the contextual history has identified eleven historical theme which relates to the occupational history of the study area.43 This is summarised in Table 3.

42 NSW Heritage Council 2001 43 Humphreys 2005


Table 3 Identified historical themes for the study area

Australian Theme NSW Theme Local Theme

3. Economy – Developing local, regional and natural economies

Agricultural- Activities relating to the cultivation and rearing of plant and animal species, usually for commercial purposes, can include aquaculture.

Clearing land for farming.

Pastoralism- Activities associated with breeding, raising, processing and distribution of livestock for human use.

Working for pastoralists.

Beef cattle breeding and raising

Sheep farming for lamb and mutton

Agisting and fattening stock for slaughter

4. Settlement – Building settlements, towns and cities

Accommodation – Activities associated with the provision of accommodation, and particular types of accommodation- does not include architectural styles – use the theme of Creative Endeavour for such activities.

Boarding houses

Farm Homestead

8. Culture – Developing cultural institutions and ways of life

Sport- Activities associated with organised recreation and health promotional activities.

Badminton

Golf

9. Phases of Life – Marking the phases of life

Persons Activities of, and assocations with identifiable individuals, families and communal groups.

Associations with Aaron Muron Bolot, architect

Associations with William weaver, Colonial Architect 1855-6, architect, engineer.


4 Physical inspection

A physical inspection of the study area was undertaken on 30 May 2018, attended by Amy Butcher (Archaeologist). The principal aims of the inspection were to identify heritage values associated with the study area; this included any heritage items or places. ‘Heritage items’ can be buildings, structures, places, relics or other works of historical, aesthetic, social, technical/research or natural heritage significance. ‘Places’ include conservation areas, sites, precincts, gardens, landscapes and areas of archaeological potential.

Site setting

The study area is currently utilised as a residential and farming property. There are a number of man-made dams and the area currently retains native vegetation prior to 1960. The study area contains one modern residential dwelling, tennis court and swimming pool. The area comprises of a gentle sloping landforms with the southern boundary adjoining the Hume Highway. The northern boundary is delineated by the Antill Park Country Club and Golf Course, with the former Antill residence forming the backdrop to the north. The eastern boundary is met by the Hume Highway as it travels north and the western boundary is met by the continuation of the golf course and further afar is Jarvisfield Road.

4.1.1 Views to and from the study area

It is important to analyse and describe views to and from components within a historical landscape to help understand how it is experienced and to understand the nature of an evolving landscape. This enables a greater understanding of what aspects of the landscape need to be conserved and protected. Significant views to, from and within the study area are described in this section.

The views associated with the study area are typical of a semi-rural landscape that has been historically used for farming practices. The Antill County Club is located to the north, views from the northern boundary of the study area encompass the golf course that is associated with the country club. The heritage listed Jarvisfield homestead and barn are located to the north of the study area, however these cannot be seen from the study area as they are hidden by the vegetation of the golf course. The southern section of the study area is met by a rise of the Old Hume Highway. Majority of the southern boundary is fenced by a range of large trees that form a barrier against the modern backdrop of residential housing and the Old Hume Highway. However, the barrier is lessened as the southern boundary forms its way into the eastern boundary. The eastern boundary is encompassed by the old Hume Highway and the backdrop of residential dwellings and the Picton Valley Motel.


Plate 9 Southern view from the study area, toward Vault hill

Plate 10 Eastern view of the study area toward the Old Hume Highway

Plate 11 View north toward the Antill Country and Golf Club from the study area

Plate 12 Western view of the study area toward main dwelling and Vault Hill

Built fabric assessment

There were several structures that made up the western portion of the study area, these consisted of one modern residential dwelling and granny flat, a tennis court and a swimming pool. The residential dwelling and associated structures appear on the 1980 and 1990 aerial images, therefore suggesting that the structures were built in this time. Prior aerial images do not show and historical information do not state or show any former structures that may have once been located within the study area. Adjacent to the residential dwelling, located to the west is a small tin shed that contains farming equipment. Historical resources state that a vast majority of the Jarvisfield estate was used primarily for farming and agricultural purposes.


Plate 13 Front view of modern dwelling located in the western portion of the study area

Plate 14 Shed located infront of the modern dwelling, within the western portion of the study area

Plate 15 Additional dwelling associated with the main dwelling

Plate 16 Fencing associated with farming located throughout the study area

Archaeological assessment

The potential archaeological resource relates to the predicted level of preservation of archaeological resources within the study area. Archaeological potential is influenced by the geographical and topographical location, the level of development, subsequent impacts, levels of onsite fill and the factors influencing preservation such as soil type. An assessment of archaeological potential has been derived from the historical analysis undertaken during the preparation of this report.

4.3.1 Archaeological resource

This section discusses the archaeological resource within the study area. The purpose of the analysis is to outline what archaeological deposits or structures are likely to be present within the study area and how these relate to the history of land use associated with the study area.

The historical context presented in this assessment indicated that there is little documented resources that describe the occupation of the study area. Through these limited resources the study area has undergone large amounts of development and disturbance. Since 1980 and 1990 the entire western portion of the study area has been used for residential purposes. No formal structures have been identified on Crown plan or plans contained within Certificates of Title. There could potentially be archaeological resources related to this


land use, such as historical ploughing in the form of ridges and furrows within the soil profile. The eastern portion of the study area currently contains paddock and stockyard fencing.

4.3.2 Integrity of sub-surface deposits

There is evidence of historical ploughing throughout the study area, which may have disturbed subsurface deposits in these areas. The establishment of the residential complex, including construction of buildings, driveway, swimming pool and tennis court in the western portion of the study area, with man-made dams in the western and eastern portions of the study area, would have impacted the integrity of any sub-surface archaeological remains, as would the installation of services to the property.

4.3.3 Research potential

Archaeological research potential refers to the ability of archaeological evidence to provide information about a site that could not be derived from any other source and which contributes to the archaeological significance of that site. Archaeological research potential differs from archaeological potential in that the presence of an archaeological resource (i.e. archaeological potential) does not mean that it can provide any additional information that increases our understanding of a site or the past (i.e. archaeological research potential).

The research potential of a site is also affected by the integrity of the archaeological resource within a study area. If a site is disturbed, then vital contextual information that links material evidence to a stratigraphic sequence may be missing and it may be impossible to relate material evidence to activities on a site. This is generally held to reduce the ability of an archaeological site to answer research questions.

Assessment of the research potential of a site also relates to the level of existing documentation of a site and of the nature of the research done so far (the research framework), to produce a ‘knowledge’ pool to which research into archaeological remains can add.

Developing local, regional and national economies: Agriculture and Pastoralism

The study area was likely utilised for both agricultural and pastoral practices since the land was granted to Major Henry Colden Antill in 1822. However, while there may be both disturbed and undisturbed archaeological material associated with these activities within the study area, it is unlikely that any remains would provide further information regarding agriculture and pastoralism that cannot be ascertained from historical documentation.

4.3.4 Summary of archaeological potential

Through an analysis of the above factors a number of assumptions have been made relating to the archaeological potential of the study area, these are presented in Table 4 and Figure 5.

The assessment of archaeological potential has been divided into three categories:

• High archaeological potential – based upon the historical context and documentary evidence presented within this report there is a high degree of certainty that archaeologically significant remains relating to this period, theme or event will occur within the study area.

• Moderate archaeological potential – based upon the historical context and documentary evidence presented within this assessment it is probable that archaeological significant remains relating to this period, theme or event could be present within the study area.

• Low archaeological potential – based upon the historical context and documentary evidence presented within this assessment it is unlikely that archaeological significant remains relating to this period, theme or event will occur within the study area.


Table 4 Assessment of archaeological potential

Description Probable feature(s) Possible construction date

Archaeological potential

Areas of historical ploughing Ridge and furrow Mid-19th century

Low


Jarvisfield Road

Governors Lane

Colden

ham Ro

ad

0 10 20 30 40 50

Metres

LegendStudy area

Areas of archaeological potentialLow

±Ma tter: 26717Da te : 29 Jun e 2 018, Ch ecked by: A B, D raw n by: SSK, Last ed ited by: lha rleyLocation :\\bio -d ata-01\m atters$\2 6700s\26 717\M ap p in g\26717_H A _F5_Arch P oten tial



!(

!(

!(

Picton

Maldon

Scale: 1:1,800 @ A3

Figure 5: ArchaeologicalPotential




5 Significance assessment

An assessment of heritage significance encompasses a range of heritage criteria and values. The heritage values of a site or place are broadly defined as the ‘aesthetic, historic, scientific or social values for past, present or future generations’44. This means a place can have different levels of heritage value and significance to different groups of people.

The archaeological significance of a site is commonly assessed in terms of historical and scientific values, particularly by what a site can tell us about past lifestyles and people. There is an accepted procedure for determining the level of significance of an archaeological site.

A detailed set of criteria for assessing the State’s cultural heritage was published by the (then) NSW Heritage Office. These criteria are divided into two categories: nature of significance, and comparative significance.

Heritage assessment criteria in NSW fall broadly within the four significance values outlined in the Burra Charter. The Burra Charter has been adopted by State and Commonwealth heritage agencies as the recognised document for guiding best practice for heritage practitioners in Australia. The four significance values are:

• Historical significance (evolution and association).

• Aesthetic significance (scenic/architectural qualities and creative accomplishment).

• Scientific significance (archaeological, industrial, educational, research potential and scientific significance values).

• Social significance (contemporary community esteem).

The NSW Heritage Office issued a more detailed set of assessment criteria to provide consistency with heritage agencies in other States and to avoid ambiguity and misinterpretation. These criteria are based on the Burra Charter. The following SHR criteria were gazetted following amendments to the Heritage Act that came into effect in April 1999:

• Criterion (a) - an item is important in the course, or pattern, of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

• Criterion (b) - an item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

• Criterion (c) - an item is important in demonstrating the aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in NSW (or the local area).

• Criterion (d) - an item has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in NSW (or the local area) for social, cultural or spiritual reasons.

• Criterion (e) - an item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

• Criterion (f) - an item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

44 NSW Heritage Office, 2001


• Criterion (g) - an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of NSW’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments; or a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments.

Levels of heritage significance

Items, places, buildings, works, relics, movable objects or precincts can be of either local or State heritage significance, or have both local and State heritage significance. Places can have different values to different people or groups.

Local heritage items

Local heritage items are those of significance to the local government area. In other words, they contribute to the individuality and streetscape, townscape, landscape or natural character of an area and are irreplaceable parts of its environmental heritage. They may have greater value to members of the local community, who regularly engage with these places and/or consider them to be an important part of their day-to-day life and their identity. Collectively, such items reflect the socio-economic and natural history of a local area. Items of local heritage significance form an integral part of the State's environmental heritage.

State heritage items

State heritage items, places, buildings, works, relics, movable objects or precincts of State heritage significance include those items of special interest in the State context. They form an irreplaceable part of the environmental heritage of NSW and must have some connection or association with the State in its widest sense.

The following evaluation attempts to identify the cultural significance of the study area this significance is based on the assumption that the site contains intact or partially intact archaeological deposits.

Evaluation of significance of the study area

Criteria A: An item is important in the course, or pattern, of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

The study area demonstrated the early settlement of the Picton area as it formed part of the Jarvisfield Estate which once covered a vast portion of today’s village of Picton. The study area is strongly associated with the Antill family. In 1844, Henry subdivided part of his estate on the north of Stonequarry Creek, as the result he made possible the founding of the town of Picton.

The study area satisfies this criterion at local level.

Criterion B: An item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

The study area is associated with the Antill family, who are locally significant to the village of Picton. The Jarvisfield Estate once covered vast portions of the Picton area. The Antill’s were a prominent family of the area and are a locally significant family who occupied the study area until 1874. Three generations of Antill’s lived at Jarvisfield and in 1844, Henry subdivided part of his estate on the north of Stonequarry Creek, as the result he made possible the founding of the town of Picton.

The study area does satisfy this criterion at local level.


Criteria C: An item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in NSW (or the local area).

The study area does not contain historic built elements that demonstrates aesthetic characteristics. The study area was predominantly used for agricultural purposes.

The study area does not satisfy this criterion at local or state level.

Criterion D: An item has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in NSW (or the local area) for social, cultural or spiritual reasons.

The study area does not hold strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in NSW for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. The study area was predominantly used for agricultural purposes.


Criterion E: An item has the potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

The study area is known to have contained ploughed paddocks and unlikely contained built structures as a result of background research. The Jarvisfield Estate is highly documented and any further assessment of the study area is unlikely to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of NSW’s cultural or natural history.


Criterion F: An item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of the area’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area).

The study area does not contain uncommon, rare or endangered aspect of the areas cultural or natural history. The study area was predominantly used for agricultural purposes, such as crops.


Criterion G: An item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of NSW’s cultural or natural places, or cultural or natural environments (or a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places, or cultural or natural environments).

The study area forms part of a historical landscape as it was associated with the agricultural endeavours of the Jarvisfield Estate. The study area once contained ploughed fields and was likely used as a grazing paddock.

The study area satisfies this criterion at a local level.

Statement of Significance

The following statement of significance has been formulated based upon the heritage inventory listing for the heritage items within the study area:

Jarvisfield's remaining estate is a rural cultural landscape containing the core of the original farm grant, the third Antill house constructed on it, a sandstone stable outbulding and extensive grounds containing considerable numbers of mature exotic and native trees planted by the Antills. These early plantings give a representative selection of common exotic and some locally native tree species often used on the Cumberland Plain's early farms. These also include some now very rare plants in NSW, and particularly locally rare in the Sydney Basin, such as


Chinese funeral cypress (Cupressus funebris) and American osage orange (Maclura pomifera). Osage oranges are now extremely rare in the Sydney basin - only two other examples are known, at Hambledon Cottage, Parramatta and Muogamarra Nature Reserve, Hornsby

This following statement of significance has been formulated based on background research and a field investigation of the study area:

The study area is significant through its direct association with the prominent Antill family. It once formed part of the original land grant of the Jarvisfield Estate. It was predominantly used for the growing of crops and the grazing of livestock. The study area is strongly associated with the family’s agricultural and pastoral endeavours and forms part of the rural cultural landscape.


6 Statement of heritage impact

This assessment has been prepared to address impacts resulting from the proposed works within the study area. The study area has been assessed as possessing local significant heritage values, this principally related to its association with the Jarvisfield Estate. This section aims to identify the level of impact arising from the proposed works and discussed mitigation measures which must be taken to avoid or reduce those impacts.

The planning proposal will seek to rezone a 100 hectare site at 2 Jarvisfield Road, Picton from Rural Landscape (RU2) to Residential. The future proposed land uses for this property include the construction of a Seniors Housing Development including a number of small buildings, pathways, gardens, large areas of greenspace and the retention of the two ponds on the property.

This assessment has identified that there may be archaeological material present within the study area related to the historical use for pastoral and agricultural purposes, such as historical ploughing. However, this archaeological material has been assessed as not holding heritage significance. The impacts to the study area for the rezoning planning proposal are considered acceptable. The impacts to the study area for the proposed works are considered acceptable, as the study area has been highly impacted and there are no items of heritage of significance within the study area that will be impacted by these activities, provided that an unexpected finds policy is implemented to identify and record any archaeological material that may be encountered during the proposed works.


7 Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions

This assessment has identified one item of heritage significance are located within the study area. This item has been previously assessed as containing significance at a local level. The impacts associated with the development will result in partial loss of significance for this item through loss of views and vistas associated with this item. However, these impacts are considered acceptable from a heritage standpoint as previous impacts have already occurred within the study area.

Recommendations

These recommendations have been formulated to respond to client requirements and the significance of the site. They are guided by the ICOMOS Burra Charter with the aim of doing as much as necessary to care for the place and make it useable and as little as possible to retain its cultural significance.45

Recommendation 1 No further assessment required for rezoning

For the purposes of rezoning this assessment fulfils the requirements for a Planning Proposal submission. Should the Planning Proposal be successful and the project proceed to Infrastructure Development Application or SSD stage, Biosis recommends mitigation measures be implemented, as outlined in Recommendation 2 below.

Recommendation 2 Development of an Unexpected Finds procedure

Relics are historical archaeological resources of local or State significance and are protected in NSW under the Heritage Act 1977. Relics cannot be disturbed except with a permit or exception/exemption notification. Should unanticipated relics be discovered during the course of the project, work in the vicinity must cease and an archaeologist contacted to make a preliminary assessment of the find. The Heritage Council will require notification if the find is assessed as a relic.

45 Australia ICOMOS, 2013


References

Attenbrow V. 2002. Sydney’s Aboriginal past: Investigating the archaeological and historical records. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.

Australia ICOMOS. 2013. The Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Burwood, VIC: Australia ICOMOS.

Bertie CH. 1932. Home: Pioneer Families of Australia. No.33- The Antills.

Clarkson C., Jacobs Z., Marwick B., Fullagar R., Wallis L., Smith M., Roberts RG., Hayes E., Lowe K., Carah X., Florin SA., McNeil J., Cox D., Arnold LJ., Hua Q., Huntley J., Brand HEA., Manne T., Fairbairn A., Schulmeister J., Lyle L., Salinas M., Page M., Connel K., Park G., Norman K., Murphy T., Pardoe C. 2017. Human occupation of northern Australia by 65,000 years ago. Nature, volume 547, pp.306–310.

Flood J. 1999. Archaeology of the Dreamtime. Pymble, NSW: Collins/Angus & Robertson.

Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs & Planning. 1996. Statements of Heritage Impact. Available at: https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/heritagebranch/heritage/hmstatementsofhi.pdf.

Jervis J. 1941. Royal Australian historical society. Journal and proceedings: Settlement in the Picton and The Oaks District.

Martin JB. 1883. Reminiscence: Camden Times. Camden.

NSW Heritage Branch, Department of Planning. 2009. Assessing significance for historical archaeological sites and ‘relics’. Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/heritagebranch/heritage/ArchSignificance.pdf.

NSW Heritage Council. 2001. New South Wales Historical Themes. Available at: https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/heritagebranch/heritage/themes2006.pdf.

NSW Heritage Office. 2001a. Assessing heritage significance. Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/heritagebranch/heritage/listings/assessingheritagesignificance.pdf [Accessed May 1, 2016].

NSW Heritage Office. 2001b. Photographic Recording Of Heritage Items Using Film or Digital Capture.

Oehm A. 2006. Thematic History of Wollondilly Shire Council Heritage Study Review.

RMS. 2013. The old Hume Highway: History begins with a road. Roads and Maritime Services.

Steel. 1904. The Australian historical society. Journal and Proceedings: Early days of Picton.

Tindale N. 1940. Distribution of Australian Aboriginal Tribes: A field survey. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 64(1): p.140–230.

Vincent L. 1996. A brief history of Picton. Liz Vincent, Sydney.

Wills Cooke TS. 1997. The Currency Lad: A Biography of Horatio Spencer Howe Wills.Digbys.

2 Jarvisfield Road , Picton: Historical Heritage Assessment

Documents

Transcript of 2 Jarvisfield Road , Picton: Historical Heritage Assessment