Maryland and Birling · 11/23/2017 · Revised Policies November 2017 Introduction . HECTOR...

Maryland and Birling

Conservation Management Plan Grading of Significance and Policies

Prepared for

Camden Council

23 November 2017 Version 1.4 (Final Report)

This report was prepared for Camden Council

by Hector Abrahams Architects Pty Ltd

Studio 402, Reid House 75 King Street

Sydney NSW 2000

Version Control

Version Number Authors Issue Date

Version 1.0 (draft) Hector Abrahams Architects 9th June 2017

Version 1.1 (Final Draft) Hector Abrahams Architects 21st July 2017

Version 1.2 Final Report Hector Abrahams Architects 22nd September 2017

Version 1.3 Final Report Edited Hector Abrahams Architects 9th November 2017

Version 1.4 Final Report with minor edits

Hector Abrahams Architects 23 November 2017

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 Executive Summary

HECTOR ABRAHAMS ARCHITECTS 1

Executive Summary

This report concerns land traditionally held by clans belonging to the Darug and Tharawal nations,

the original inhabitants prior to European settlement.

The lands were taken and granted to Europeans as private holdings - Birling (10,000 acres) in 1812

and Nonorrah (3,000 acres) in 1816 as well as a standard small allotment of 40 acres to Michael

Dowdell in 1812 who appears to have never occupied it.

Birling was owned and developed as a private estate by Robert Lowe who resided there until his

death in 1832. The creek is named after him. Lowe had built a large homestead in a bungalow form

by 1815 when he was appointed a Justice of the Peace and magistrate for the district of Bringelly and

Cooke, using his residence for the functions of these roles as no courthouse existed in the area. The

estate had many subsequent owners, was remade in the about 1937 when the old homestead was

demolished and replaced by a colonial revival homestead and stables block erected for the horse

trainer, Howard Horace Young.

The division of the large land grant given to John Dickson in 1816 created a holding which he named

Nonorrah that was eventually sold to the prominent colonial engineer and mill owner Thomas

Barker in 1857. He planned and created a complete and extensive gentleman’s estate, renaming it

Maryland and also acquiring the holding originally granted to Dowdell. His son Thomas Charles

Barker continued the enterprise, and only in 1940 did the estate pass out of that family to the

Thomson family, who farm it to this day.

This heritage report has been commissioned to inform the preparation of a Precinct Planning

Package (PPP), which follows the release for rezoning of agricultural land as urban development by

the New South Wales Department of Planning and Environment in October 2015.

The aim of this report is to arrive at policies to conserve the heritage significance of Maryland and

Birling

This study is the second half of a complete CMP process. The methodology follows the template and

numbering of the New South Wales Heritage Office publication A Suggested Table of Contents for a

Conservation Management Plan That can be Endorsed by the NSW Heritage Council (July 2002). It

rests on separate studies by others of the documentary evidence, physical evidence and assessment

of Significance (Sections 3 and 4 of the Suggested Table). It makes recommendations for further

research, detailed analysis of many areas of the site, and how future governance should address

heritage conservation.

The flow of this study is as follows:

Section 5, examines the several existing Statements of Significance, and prepares a summary

Statement of Significance (section 5.1). This is followed by an assessment of gradings of

significance of all fabric, landscape spaces, and visual relationships of Maryland and Birling (section

5.2). Examples of how the gradings are arrived at are given in this section, commencing on page 22,

and a complete inventory is given in Appendix 9.1.

Section 6 considers a range of constraints and opportunities for the conservation of the significance.

These begin with obligations that arise from significance itself, followed by the planning and

regulatory environment. Following this is perhaps the key factor in policy making for this site, being

its recent rezoning for urban development. The implications of the rezoning are studied with

reference to the likely character of different developments that will come about.

Section 7 approaches development of policies to conserve heritage significance by comparing the

external constraints and opportunities with significance. In part, it is an identification of potential

impact, and how policy can minimise it. The section examines how the implications of the rezoning

can be minimised in policy.

Section 8 presents a suite of policies to conserve the heritage significance of the place. They bear

on: treatment of the fabric of the place, uses, interpretation, management, control of intervention

and development.

The key policy findings for development are shown in Figure 24: Summary of areas capable of

different types of development may be found in Appendix 9.4 on page 118.

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 Table of Contents


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 1

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 6

Outline of tasks ............................................................................................................. 6

Definition of the study area ........................................................................................... 6

Methodology ................................................................................................................. 6

Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 7

Identification of authors ................................................................................................. 7

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... 8

5 Assessment of Cultural Significance ................................................................ 9

5.1 Existing Statements of Significance ................................................................. 9

5.1.1 Maryland ............................................................................................................. 9

5.2 Existing Statements of Significance ................................................................ 16

5.3 Gradings of Significance .................................................................................22

5.3.1 Level of Significance and Principles for Grading ................................................... 22

5.3.2 Grading of Significance for Components .............................................................. 25

6 Opportunities and Constraints ...................................................................... 29

6.1 Obligations Arising from Significance ............................................................ 29

6.2 Statutory heritage listings ............................................................................. 29

6.2.1 NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) ................................... 29

6.2.2 NSW Heritage Act (1977) ..................................................................................... 29

6.2.3 Non-statutory heritage listings ............................................................................ 34

6.2.4 NSW Government requirements to make urban development .............................. 34

6.3 Building Regulations for Construction ............................................................ 41

6.4 Other Legislation that affects Conservation of Significance ........................... 41

6.4.1 Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1992 ................................... 41

6.4.2 Environment Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000- BASIX ......................... 41

6.4.3 State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 42

7 Development of Conservation Policy .............................................................. 52

7.1 Burra Charter Framework ............................................................................... 52

7.2 Constraints and Opportunity interaction with Statement of Significance ...... 52

8. Conservation Policies & Guidelines ................................................................ 61

8.1 Fabric, Landscape Spaces, and Visual Relationships ....................................... 61


8.1.1 The site defined .................................................................................................. 61

8.1.2 The historic site defined ...................................................................................... 61

8.1.3 Visual setting defined .......................................................................................... 62

8.1.4 Components to be conserved ............................................................................... 62

8.2 Use ................................................................................................................. 62

8.2.1 Culturally significant use of the site to be conserved ............................................. 62

8.3 Interpretation ................................................................................................. 63

8.4 Management ................................................................................................. 64

8.4.1 Active management of Significance .................................................................... 64

8.4.2 Records of Maintenance and Change................................................................... 64

8.5 Control of Physical Intervention in the site ..................................................... 65

These policies define how to manage change that is unavoidable. ........................... 65

8.5.1 Archaeological Deposits ...................................................................................... 65

8.5.2 Upgrade Works for Compliance to fire safety, equitable access & essential services 65

8.6 Control of Future Developments on the Site .................................................. 66

8.6.1 Locations of development ................................................................................... 66

8.6.2 Design principles to limit negative impact of anticipated development ................. 67

8.6.3 Maximise opportunities to interpret significance of the place ................................ 69

8.7 Adoption, Public Access to this Report and Review ....................................... 69

9 Appendices................................................................................................... 70

9.1 Inventory of Components of the site and Gradings of Significance ................. 71

9.1.1 Inventory key ...................................................................................................... 71

9.1.2 Inventory ............................................................................................................ 71

9.2 Maps referred to in the report ........................................................................ 90

9.3 Listings ......................................................................................................... 115

9.3.1 NSW State Heritage Register Maryland (under consideration) ........................... 115

9.3.2 Camden LEP Listing for Maryland (from Camden LEP 2010) .............................. 116

9.3.3 National Trust of Australia (NSW) ..................................................................... 117

9.4 Map summarising areas capable of different types of development ............. 118


Abbreviations used in this report CMP Conservation Management Plan HAA Hector Abrahams Architects PPP Precinct Planning Package SLNSW State Library of NSW

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 Introduction


Introduction

Outline of tasks

This part of a Conservation Management Plan (CMP) has been commissioned to inform a Precinct

Planning Package (PPP). It prepares gradings of significance and policies to conserve the heritage

significance of the site. It relies on existing assessments of cultural significance.

The brief of tasks written by Camden Council is entitled CONSULTANT BRIEF FOR: European

Heritage Work for Lowes Creek Maryland(sic) Precinct Quote No: 165/2017.

The brief contained the following specific tasks

1. Reviewing the Tropman & Tropman Architects draft Conservation Management Plan.

2. Providing an overall assessment of the study area to identify items, views and settings of

significance.

3. Provide an assessment of significance for all identified elements.

4. Provide a grading of significant elements.

5. Draft a set of policies for conservation of the cultural significance of the place.

The brief also directed this study to integrate the findings of Casey and Lowe Pty Ltd in their report,

Lowes Creek Maryland Part Precinct Rezoning. Non-Indigenous Archaeological Assessment, prepared

in September 2016 for the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

Definition of the study area

The study area of 517 hectares covers most of two homestead estates- Maryland and Birling. This

area of land is known to the New South Wales Department of Planning and Environment as Lowes

Creek Maryland Precinct within the South West Growth Area.

The site area and features of the site are shown in Figure 1, located in Appendix 9.2.

Methodology

The methodology of conservation planning followed in this study is that framed in James Semple

Kerr’s The Conservation Plan 6th Edition (2004).

The layout and numbering of this report follows the Model of the New South Wales Heritage office

in their publication A Suggested Table of Contents for a Conservation Management Plan that can be

endorsed by the NSW Heritage Council (July 2002).

Conservation terminology used in this report is as defined in the Australia ICOMOS Charter for

Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter). However, the term Heritage Significance is used

in this report, in line with its definition in the New South Wales Heritage Act (1977) and publications

from the Heritage Office. It is held to be commensurate with the term Cultural Significance, as

defined in the Burra Charter.



Limitations

The preparation of this study is to form part of a PPP. It recognises the following information and

time limitations, which in the view of the authors do not limit the particular findings to this end.

However, there are serious limitations to the information available to this study, and policies have

been included to ensure that the information is sought in the future.

Due to the short period for the study, this review of the site was limited to the exterior of buildings

and none of the remote areas of the estates were accessed.

During this time, when only a small amount of historical research could be done, the authors

undertook a review of documentary sources that should be investigated when this report is next

reviewed.

Sources for further historical research that should be investigated are

Papers of Thomas Barker, National Library of Australia, MS 3603. There is a potentially large

body of documentary information about the Barker period of the estate.

Archives of the University of Sydney. Barker was a founding benefactor of the university, and

Broadbent cites material is held in its archive.

Collection of the Royal Australian Historical Society. The RAHS members visited Birling in the

1950s.

Newspaper records for evidence of the construction of Birling in the 1930s.

Aerial photographs of the 1920s and 1930s for information about the state of the landscape

and garden of the estates.

Road survey maps of The Northern Road. Nineteenth century surveys are likely to locate

buildings and the entry gates.

Archives Office of New South Wales special bundle roads. Since the Northern Road is so early

a road in the colony, it is quite possible the subject in this important collection of

correspondence from the 1820s.

Private collections of descendants of people who lived and worked on the estates.

Genealogical research should be done to locate descendants. This is a common source of

information about estates.

Macarthur Papers. Thomas Barker was closely associated with the Macarthur Family, whose

records are publicly accessible and very extensive.

This study is limited to the grading of European cultural heritage of the site. Aboriginal cultural

heritage has not been reviewed.

This study is limited to the framing of policies that apply to the main values of the estate. This does

not include the interiors of buildings, nor the substantial detail of the historic garden of Maryland.

The policies therefore include the requirement for further conservation planning of these items.

Identification of authors

This report was written by Hector Abrahams. The plans, diagrams and photographs in the report

have been prepared and taken by Georgina Kreutzer and Yuan Lu Nee. The review of potential

sources of documentary information was made by the historian Meg Quinlisk.



Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge gratefully the assistance of

Ms Penny Thomson of Maryland for access to the homestead, and

Mr Stephen McMahon of Macarthur Developments for extensive access to the study area.

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 5. Assessment of Cultural Significance


5 Assessment of Cultural Significance

This section begins with examines the several Statements of Significance that have been prepared in

the last two years for the site. They are compared by examining how they address the State Heritage

Criteria. Out of this is made a synoptic Summary Statement of Significance (section 5.1).

This is followed by an assessment of gradings of significance of all components of Maryland and Birling

(section 5.2). Different components of the place site are described, there being building fabric, landscape

spaces, and views. An explanation of how gradings are arrived at is given, along with examples for

each. An inventory of components of the site and Gradings of Significance, is given in Appendix 9.1.

5.1 Existing Statements of Significance

5.1.1 Maryland

Four assessments of heritage significance that have been prepared against State Heritage Listing

Criteria, which are given below in chronological order:

1. LEP Listing 2010

Maryland is an outstanding complex of early homestead and farm buildings, especially

significant for its completeness as a group, its excellent state of preservation, and the

integration of the buildings, garden and magnificent setting. Includes many early buildings in

good repair as well as buildings of special architectural interest. The winery and store may be

the oldest winery buildings in Australia. Property has been in continuous occupation by only

two families for over 130 years. Long associations with the surrounding district.

The Main Building is an important historic grouping, set in magnificent garden and landscape

and retaining most original fabric. The outbuildings form a substantial group which are of state

significance because they are an important historic grouping and some of the earliest on the

buildings on site. They illustrate the diversity of functions associated with early agricultural

activity in this area. All are virtually intact. Local Environmental Plan listing (state heritage

inventory 2010)

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=12800

29

2. SHI listing 2015

Maryland is State significant as an intact example of a major surviving mid-19th century rural

estate, - the core of the original 1815 grant of 300 acres - within the Cumberland Plain which

continues as a working dairy farm. It occupies a prominent hilltop location forming an

important reference point in the local area, further emphasised by the conspicuous old

Araucaria pine plantings - and gate lodges along the Northern Road. The homestead and

associated buildings, gardens and plantings have characteristics of the Summit Model of

homestead siting within an intact rural landscape setting fundamental to its interpretation. The

traditional rural landscape character and its setting is largely uncompromised.

Maryland retains substantial evidence of earlier estate layout and design by engineer Thomas

Barker with an outstanding group of dairy and winery outbuildings and gate house.

Maryland is a rare example of mid-19th century gardening design and remains an historical

resource in its remnant gardens and vineyards. Other historically related rural landscape

elements beyond the homestead may still be appreciated in relation to it - old farms, creek

lines, fence lines, the dairy group and outlying gatehouse. It retains important traditional

historic views to and from The Northern Road.





It offers an outstanding landscape archaeological resource with its extensive remnant vineyard

fields and other remnant functional and ornamental plantings. The significance of Maryland is

considerably enhanced by the extent to which it has retained its form, character, fabric and

rural setting. State Heritage Listing (under consideration) 2015 (updated) (state heritage

inventory)


39

3. Casey and Lowe 2016

Maryland is a highly intact and legible complex of an 1850s homestead, workers’

housing, farm buildings, winery and rural landscape. It is closely associated with the

two families, that of prominent 19th-century engineer, businessman and

philanthropist Thomas Barker who established the estate, as well as his son and

local identity, Thomas Charles Barker. The estate was then occupied by Annie and

Elizabeth Thomson, who were prominent in the local community and the dairy

industry. The Barker and Thomson families owned Maryland until 2012, while

members of the Thomson family continue to live in the homestead, a total of c.160

years of continuous occupation by two families. This long-term residence at

Maryland adds to the values and expressions as being associated with two

prominent families who successfully managed and held onto this property

throughout the economic vicissitudes of 19th and 20th-century New South Wales.

The potential archaeological remains at Maryland are likely to include material

associated with domestic occupation of the Barker and Thomson families, their

household staff/servants, the archaeology of the workers and their families, notably

those of German heritage, the nature and use of the winery and farm buildings, and

the landscaping of the garden and vineyard. This has created a complex and layered

landscape; much of which is visible but there are also buried and disused aspects to

the place which archaeological analytical and spatial approaches could allow for

further definition and understanding.

The potential archaeological remains have historic significance through their

association with larger themes including the development of wine growing and dairy

farming in the local area, German migration to NSW and everyday life on a large

farm and ‘gentleman’s estate’. They also have archaeological research significance

through their ability to address various research questions related to rural domestic

life, farm and winery practices and technology, and the rural landscape. The

potential archaeological remains could provide material for comparisons both within

different houses on the site, and with other sites.

Possible research questions/themes relate to the material expressions of: class and

hierarchy; the nature and construction of women, children and men’s lives on the

estate; evidence of ethnic diversity and heritage and what this tells us about their

lives; as well as the evidence for the archaeological and cultural landscape and

associated spatial information on how the estate operated.

This significance relates to the integrity of the site as a whole, its long-term

occupation by two families – over 80 years by Thomas Barker and his family and

then the Thomson family, its association with German workers and families and the





likely legibility of many elements of the historical evolution of the place which can

still be read in the landscape. The potential archaeological remains on the site are

assessed as being of State heritage significance.

Archaeological assessment (Casey and Lowe 2016)

4. Tropman and Tropman 2017

Maryland is an outstanding complex planned and built by Thomas Barker comprised

of an early homestead villa, cottages and farm buildings, especially significant for its

completeness as a group, its excellent state of preservation, and the integration of

the buildings, garden and magnificent setting. Includes many early buildings in good

repair as well as buildings of special architectural interest. The winery and store may

be the oldest winery buildings in Australia. Property has been in continuous

occupation by only two families for over 160 years. There are long associations with

the surrounding district. The families who lived and worked on site created

Maryland Village and supported the hospitality of the owners.

The Main Building and Village atmosphere is an important historic grouping, set in

magnificent garden and landscape and retaining most original fabric. The

outbuildings form a substantial group which are of state significance because they

are an important historic grouping and some of the earliest of the buildings on site.

They illustrate the diversity of functions associated with early agricultural activity in

this area. All are virtually intact. State Heritage Inventory database number

1280029

We have made in the following table a comparison of the values ascribed in these four summary

statements.



Table showing comparison of values in four Statements of Significance

State Heritage Listing Criteria

LEP listing 2010 SHI listing 2015 Casey and Lowe 2016

Tropman and Tropman 2017

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

Outstanding complex of early homestead and farm buildings, especially complete

A major surviving mid-19th century rural estate of the Cumberland Plain on the Summit top model

Complex of 1850s homestead, housing, farm buildings, winery and rural landscape

Outstanding complex comprising homestead villa, cottages and farm buildings that are complete

The Main Building is an important historic grouping

The winery and store may be the oldest winery buildings in Australia

Association with history of dairy farming, wine growing, German migration, and everyday life on a gentleman’s estate

Winery and store may be oldest in Australia

The outbuildings form an important historic grouping, diverse uses and intact

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)

Close association with Thomas Barker, Thomas Charles Barker, and Annie and Elizabeth Thomson

Built by Thomas Barker

Continuous occupation by only two families for over 130 years and long association with district

Continuous long occupation and association with only two families to the present day

Continuous long occupation by only two families with long associations with district







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

Outstanding complex of early homestead and farm buildings, especially complete and integrated

Substantial evidence of earlier estate layout and design by engineer Thomas Barker


Outstanding complex comprising homestead villa, cottages and farm buildings that are complete

Excellent state of preservation of buildings (intactness)

Enhanced by the extent to which it has retained its form, character, fabric and rural setting (intactness)

Highly intact and legible as a whole estate

Excellent state of preservation of buildings (intactness)

Buildings of special architectural interest.

Outstanding group of dairy and winery outbuildings and gate house

See above whole of landscape ascribed value

Buildings of special architectural interest

Integration of the buildings, garden and magnificent setting

Retains important traditional historic views to and from The Northern Road.

Relationship to a magnificent setting

It occupies a prominent hilltop location forming an important reference point in the local area, further emphasised by the conspicuous old Araucaria pine plantings - and gate lodges along the Northern Road. The homestead and associated buildings, gardens and plantings have characteristics of the Summit Model of homestead siting within an







intact rural landscape setting fundamental to its interpretation. The traditional rural landscape character and its setting is largely uncompromised

A rare example of mid 19th century gardening design and remains an historical resource in its remnant gardens and vineyards

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

Long association of families with the district

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)

Outstanding landscape archaeological resource

Archaeological research significance in relation to rural domestic life, farm and winery practices and technology, and the rural landscape.

Buildings of special architectural interest (technological and historical)







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)


A rare example of mid-19th century gardening design


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

An outstanding and complete grouping of buildings and garden unusually intact

An intact example of a major surviving mid-19th century rural estate,

A highly intact and legible complex of an 1850s homestead, workers’ housing, farm buildings, winery and rural landscape

An outstanding complex planned and built by Thomas Barker comprised of an early homestead villa, cottages and farm buildings, especially significant for its completeness as a group, its excellent state of preservation, and the integration of the buildings, garden and magnificent setting.

This comparison shows the statements to be much alike. Four authors have been in agreement

about the heritage significance ascribed for Maryland. As to be expected, the more recent

statements have some detail not found in the earlier ones. All assessments agree on the important

values of intactness and integrity across the entire estate as they identify its historic themes

(criterion (a)). The landscape values in the context of estates of the Cumberland Plain are most

developed in the 2015 LEP statement. Casey and Lowe articulate archaeological research potential

to archaeological resources, and based on their genealogical research, bring out an association with

history of dairy farming, wine growing, German migration, and everyday life on a gentleman’s

estate. Tropman and Tropman bring an appreciation of the outbuildings are examples of

architectural type.



Whilst recognising that the large amount of historic documentation that is yet to be accessed could

yet enlarge these values, the current statements of significance are sufficiently articulated and

agreed, in our view, to enable a confident grading of significance to be undertaken relying on these

values as they stand.

5.2 Existing Statements of Significance

As a synopsis of the above, a summary reckoning of the significance of Maryland against State

Heritage Listing Criteria is given in the following table:

Table summarising the values of for Maryland against the State Heritage Listing Criteria

State Heritage Listing Criteria Value ascribed to Maryland



Association with history of dairy farming, wine growing, German migration, and everyday life on a gentleman’s estate

Winery and store may be oldest in Australia

Long association of the families with the district

A major surviving mid-19th century rural estate of the Cumberland Plain on the Summit top model


Close association with Thomas Barker, Thomas Charles Barker, and Annie and Elizabeth Thomson

Continuous long occupation and association with only two families to the present day



Highly intact and legible as a whole estate

Buildings of special architectural interest

Outstanding group of outbuildings

Uncompromised rural landscape setting and integration of buildings and landscape

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



State Heritage Listing Criteria Value ascribed to Maryland


Archaeological research significance in relation to rural domestic life, farm and winery practices and technology, and the rural landscape.

Buildings of special architectural interest (technological and historical)

Outstanding landscape and garden design resource

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)

Containing a winery and store which may be the oldest winery buildings in Australia

A rare example of mid-19th century gardening design

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

An outstanding example of an estate comprised of an early homestead villa, cottages and farm buildings, especially complete as a group, showing the integration of the buildings, garden and magnificent setting and intact

A synoptic Summary Statement of Significance is as follows:

Maryland is State significant as a highly intact major mid-19th century rural estate, built on an 1815

grant of 300 acres within the Cumberland Plain which continues as a working estate.

It is closely associated with the two families, that of prominent 19th-century engineer, businessman and

philanthropist Thomas Barker who established the estate, as well as his son and local identity, Thomas

Charles Barker. The estate was then occupied Annie and Elizabeth Thomson, who were prominent in

the local community and the dairy industry. The Barker and Thomson families owned Maryland until

2012, while members of the Thomson family continue to live in the homestead, a total of c.160 years of

continuous occupation by two families.

It occupies a prominent hilltop location forming an important reference point in the local area, further

emphasised by the conspicuous old Araucaria pine plantings and gate lodge along the Northern Road.

The homestead and associated estate layout, gardens and plantings have characteristics of the Summit

Model of homestead siting within an intact rural landscape setting fundamental to its interpretation.

The traditional rural landscape character and its setting is largely uncompromised.



Maryland retains the nineteenth century estate layout and design by engineer Thomas Barker and his

son Thomas Charles Barker. It contains an outstanding group of estate buildings including homestead,

two gatehouses, winery buildings, a home farmhouse and associated stables and coach house, store

building, several dairy buildings, a hay barn and many minor structures. The winery and store may be

the oldest winery buildings in Australia.

Maryland is a rare example of mid-19th century gardening design and remains an historical resource in

its remnant gardens and vineyards. Other historically related rural landscape elements beyond the

homestead may still be appreciated in relation to it, including the driveways, home farm, creek lines,

fence lines, in a considered arrangement. It retains important traditional historic views to and from The

Northern Road.

The potential archaeological remains at Maryland are likely to include material associated with

domestic occupation of the Barker and Thomson families, their household staff/servants, the

archaeology of the workers and their families, notably those of German heritage, the nature and use of

the winery and farm buildings, and the landscaping of the garden and vineyard. This has created a

complex and layered landscape; much of which is visible but there are also buried and disused aspects

to the place which archaeological analytical and spatial approaches could allow for further definition

and understanding.

The potential archaeological remains have historic significance through their association with larger

themes including the development of wine growing and dairy farming in the local area, German

migration to NSW and everyday life on a large farm and ‘gentleman’s estate’. They also have

archaeological research significance through their ability to address various research questions related

to rural domestic life, farm and winery practices and technology, and the rural landscape. The potential

archaeological remains could provide material for comparisons both within different houses on the site,

and with other sites.

It offers an outstanding landscape archaeological resource with its extensive remnant vineyard fields

and other remnant functional and ornamental plantings:

It has a high potential to yield information about the technology of nineteenth century building

construction and the function of farm buildings.

The estate is highly representative of a nineteenth century estate, being complete, integrated in design

and intact.

(This synopsis has used the text of the existing assessments as far as possible. The term estate has been

inserted for historic accuracy).



5.2.1 Birling

There is one existing Statement of Significance for Birling, being the following archaeological

assessment made by Casey and Lowe in 2016,

The potential archaeological remains at Birling cover a period ranging from 1812 to

the mid-1930s. Although their location is only approximately known, they are

expected to be reasonably intact and legible. These remains are closely associated

with Robert Lowe, who was a magistrate from 1815 up to his death in 1832. As a

magistrate, Robert Lowe used his house and other associated buildings as an

administrative centre, providing legal decisions, managing the convict system and

interacting with local Aboriginal people as a government official. Other government

officers lived on the site, including constables and, for a time, several soldiers during

the frontier conflict of 1816. The archaeological remains of this period of the site are

particularly unusual and closely associated with major themes in the history of

NSW, in particular the administration of the convict system. Not only could the site

provide information regarding day to day life during a formative period of British

colonial expansion into the area, but it could also provide insights into the day to

day administration of the area during this time.

After Robert Lowe’s death, the site continued to have a close connection with the

Lowe family, until it was sold in 1881. In the early 20th century, the site was

occupied by the dairy farmer D J Morrow and his family, as long-term tenants. The

potential archaeological remains on the site include material associated with these

extended periods of domestic occupation.

The potential archaeological remains at Birling are expected to be able to expand

the archaeological knowledge of NSW. Those associated with the hybrid

administrative/domestic phase (1815-1832), are particularly rare, as there were only

a limited number of magistrates involved in the administration of the convict system

in NSW at the time. The remains associated with the long term domestic occupation

of the site are more common but the site is still notable as a non-Aboriginal domestic

centre from 1812, shortly after large-scale, private colonial occupation of the area

began. The potential archaeological remains have been assessed as being of State

Heritage significance.

This assessment is limited to the historical value of potential archaeological deposits, and the value

of their research potential.

In making their archaeological assessment Casey and Lowe undertook a detailed historical study of

Birling. From that research, it is possible to assess Birling against the other State Heritage Listing

Criteria, as given in the following table.



Table showing Significance Values for Birling


Value ascribed to Birling by Casey and Lowe

Value ascribed by Hector Abrahams Architects

Level of Significance


A site of the administration of the convict system in New South Wales during a formative period of British colonial expansion

STATE

A complex of homestead and stables building and their landscape setting built by HH Young and associated with the horse breeding industry in Bringelly in the 1930s.

LOCAL


A site associated with Robert Lowe and his family

STATE


An architect designed homestead in the conservative Georgian revival style, attributed to the architect Mould and Mould, who were notable exponents of the colonial revival in the 1930s. (attribution based on tender notice 1939)

LOCAL

Criterion (d) An item has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in NSW (or local area) for social,

As the site is associated with the frontier conflict of 1816 is has a special association with the local aboriginal peoples

LOCAL?




Value ascribed to Birling by Casey and Lowe

Value ascribed by Hector Abrahams Architects

Level of Significance

cultural or spiritual reasons


Archaeological research significance in relation to the domestic and magistrate roles of Robert Lowe, the administration of the convict system in New South Wales during a formative period of British colonial expansion

STATE



5.3 Gradings of Significance

As the site is large and complex, as well as the significance of the whole site, significance needs to be

assessed for its components. The grading of the significance of components is made by aligning the

contribution of the component to the significance of the whole. Grading also recognises that not all

components possess equal contribution and some may be intrusive.

The calibration of gradings of significance, as defined by the NSW Heritage Office, are given in the

table below.

Grading Justification Status

EXCEPTIONAL Rare or outstanding element directly

contributing to an item’s local and State

significance.

Fulfils criteria for local or State

listing

HIGH High degree of original fabric.

Demonstrates a key element of the

item’s significance. Alterations do not

detract from significance.


listing

MODERATE Altered or modified elements. Elements

with little heritage value but which

contribute to the overall significance of

the item.


listing

LITTLE Alterations detract from significance.

Difficult to interpret.

Does not fulfil criteria for local

or State listing.

INTRUSIVE Damaging to the item’s heritage

significance.

Does not fulfil criteria for local

or State listing.

NOT GRADED For the purpose of this analysis, fabric

built very recently has not been graded,

as it has no historic perspective.

5.3.1 Level of Significance and Principles for Grading

A step in the grading of significance is to recognise the different levels of significance. Some

significance is of State Level, and some at Local. The following table has been prepared to relate the

level of significance for each of the given assessment criteria. The significance is broken down into

historic periods, to identify the contribution of each clearly.



Table identifying level of significance for each assessment criteria

NSW Heritage

Assessment Criteria

Aspect of Significance and relevant Level of Significance

Barker’s

Maryland

Thomson’s

Maryland

Lowe’s

Birling

HH Young’s

Birling

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

STATE STATE

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)

STATE LOCAL STATE LOCAL

Criterion (c) An item

is important in

demonstrating aesthetic

characteristics and/or a

high degree of creative

or technical

achievement in NSW (or

in local area)

STATE LOCAL LOCAL

Criterion (d) An item

has strong or special

association with a

particular community or

cultural group in NSW

(or local area) for social,

cultural or spiritual

reasons

LOCAL

Criterion (e) An item

has potential to yield

information that will

contribute to an

understanding of NSW’s

STATE STATE STATE



NSW Heritage

Assessment Criteria

Aspect of Significance and relevant Level of Significance

Barker’s

Maryland

Thomson’s

Maryland

Lowe’s

Birling

HH Young’s

Birling

cultural or natural



local area)

Criterion (f) An item

possesses uncommon,

rare or endangered

aspects of NSW’s

cultural or natural



local area)

STATE STATE STATE LOCAL

Criterion (g) An item

is important in

demonstrating the

principal characteristics

of a class of NSW’s

cultural or natural places

or environments (or a

class of the local area’s

cultural or natural places

or environments)

STATE LOCAL STATE LOCAL

It follows from this analysis that the components of the site can be graded according to the

following principles:

Exceptional:

Rare or outstanding component that is intact to the estate of Maryland as developed by Thomas

Barker and Thomas Charles Barker

Rare or outstanding component that has archaeological potential or can demonstrate aspects of

Birling Estate as developed by Robert Lowe

Rare or outstanding component that is intact to the estate of Maryland as developed by the

Thomson Family

Rare or outstanding component that is intact to the estate of Birling as developed by HH Young



High:

High degree of original fabric, demonstrating a key element of and without detracting alterations of

Maryland as developed by Thomas Barker and Thomas Charles Barker

High degree of original fabric, demonstrating a key element of and without detracting alterations to

the estate of Maryland as developed by the Thomson Family

High degree of original fabric, demonstrating a key element of and without detracting alterations to

the estate of Birling as developed by HH Young

Moderate:

Altered or modified elements, with little heritage value but which contribute to the overall

significance of Maryland as developed by Thomas Barker and Thomas Charles Barker


significance of Maryland as developed by the Thomson Family


significance of Birling as developed by HH Young

Little:

Alterations which detract from significance, are difficult to interpret Maryland as developed by

Thomas Barker and Thomas Charles Barker

Alterations which detract from significance, are difficult to interpret Maryland as developed by the

Thomson Family

Alterations which detract from significance, are difficult to interpret Birling as developed by HH

Young

5.3.2 Grading of Significance for Components

Several types of components are referred to the statements of significance. The estates have

natural components of topography, natural creek lines. They have landscape components of overall

layout of spaces and buildings, road systems, divisions into paddocks, dams, layout of gardens and

plantings. They have buildings, which are arranged in relation to the landscape, and the buildings

have a great number of contents. The estates have identified areas of known archaeological

potential.

A full inventory of the components of the estate has been constructed and is found in Appendix 9.1.

For each component is given a description, a reference to the maps on which they are shown

located, and a date period of construction or formation.

Recognising the different types of components identified in the significance assessment, and

particularly the landscape nature of the estates, it has been necessary to identify large order

components as well as the more obvious discrete objects such as buildings and dams.

The gross order of the estate has been identified in its landscape spaces, which are defined

topographically and spatially. The landscape spaces also correspond to historic estate divisions,

which are the driveway routes including gatehouse, the homesteads and Birling 1812 site with their



surrounding gardens, the low-lying farm lands with farm buildings and dams, and the space of the

Lowes Creek.

Another aspect identified in the statements of significance are some key visual relationships across

the site. These comprise the views of the Maryland Homestead from the Northern Road, the

landscape prospects from the homesteads, and the visual edges of the estate formed by

topography. Accordingly, visual relationships are a component included in the inventory.

Considering the above assessment of significance, and level of significance, and principles of

grading, Gradings of Significance have been assessed for each item in the inventory.

The reasons for grading for different components are as follows:

Built item Exceptional Ranking

Reason 1: This ranking recognises this item was designed and built for the Maryland Estate by

Thomas Barker or Thomas Charles Barker Its significance is historical, aesthetic and technological.

Reason 2: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of the horse breeder HH

Young.

Built item High Ranking

Reason 3: This ranking recognises the that the architectural character and style of the addition

reflect the attitudes to the estate of Annie and Elizabeth Thomson.

Built item Little Ranking

Reason 4: Although built by the locally historically and socially significant Thomson Family, this

building has no little value in demonstrating that significance.

Reason 5: Although built by the locally historically and socially significant Thomson Family, this

common farm feature has no little value in demonstrating that significance.

Archaeological item - Exceptional

Reason 6: The grading recognises the exceptional potential of this site to yield information about

the administration of Magistrate Lowe.

Landscape Space - Exceptional

Reason 7: This grading of a landscape space recognises the space as described was formed or reveals

part of the layout and design of Maryland Estate of Thomas Barker.

Visual Relationships -Exceptional and High

Reason 8: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of this visual relationship

which was part of the layout and design of the Maryland estate of Thomas Barker.

Reason 9: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of this visual relationship

which was part of the layout and design of the 1937 Homestead of HH Young.

The Examples of how the gradings have been assessed for each of these aspects of the estates are

given in the table below. A full inventory of all such aspects and their grading of significance is given

in Appendix 9.1, and a mapping of the same, is given in Appendix 9.2.



Table showing examples of grading of significance for each type of component of the site

Item & Map #

Inventory Item

Short Description Period of Construction

Significance Grading

Buildings of different periods of construction

6 Workshop Storey and a half long

building to the west of

the kitchen wing. It has a

decorative porch facing

the entrance drive

Barker Exceptional

This ranking recognises this

item was designed and built

for the Maryland Estate by

Thomas Charles Barker Its

significance is historical,

aesthetic and technological

17 Poultry shed Large metal structured

and clad shed

Thomson Little

Although built by the locally

historically and socially

significant Thomson Family,

this building has no little

value in demonstrating that

significance.

27 Stables &

Coach House

Stone storey and a half

formal façade to the

south, containing rooms

for the carriage, stalls,

tack room

Barker Exceptional

This ranking recognises this

item was designed and built

for the Maryland Estate by

Thomas Barker Its

significance is historical,

aesthetic and technological

104 Northern

Gatehouse &

Out Building

Single storey stone

lodge, with semi

octagonal plan, built by

Barker, with large timber

brick and rubble stone

house added to the north

Barker Exceptional

The small section of the

gatehouse, which is

substantially but not

entirely intact, is ranked as

an important work of the

estate developed by

Thomas Barker

Thomson High

This ranking recognises the

that the architectural

character and style of the

addition reflect the

attitudes to the estate of

Annie and Elizabeth

Thomson

232 Birling 1937

Homestead

Single storeyed large

brick homestead with

verandahs to garden

front on south and east,

rear court formed by two

wings, colonnaded

Young Exceptional

This grading recognises the

historic and aesthetic

significance of the horse

breeder HH Young



Item & Map #

Inventory Item

Short Description Period of Construction

Significance Grading

Landscape items

211 Dam 5 A large surface dam in

the lower catchment of a

natural creek line on the

west of Maryland. Dated

by Tropman and

Tropman to the 1970s

Thomson Little

Although built by the locally

historically and socially

significant Thomson Family,

this dam has no little value

in demonstrating that

significance.

Archaeological item

247 Birling 1812

Site

Landform, surface and

subsurface

archaeological fabric

Lowe Exceptional

The grading recognises the

exceptional potential of this

site to yield information

about the administration of

Magistrate Lowe

Landscape Space

260 Home Farm The low-lying land

between The Northern

Road and Maryland knoll,

containing the home

farm cottage and

extensive complex of

farm buildings and coach

house. The largest

feature is one of the main

dams of Maryland

Barker Exceptional

This grading of a landscape

space recognises the space

as described was formed as

part of the Maryland Estate

of Thomas Barker. It is

significant historically,

aesthetically, for its

archaeological potential

Visual Relationships

248 Outlook

from

Maryland

Homestead

Outlook from Maryland

homestead to ridge on

Birling, over South Creek

Valley and to Mt Crear

Barker Exceptional

This grading recognises the

historic and aesthetic

significance of this visual

relationship in the Maryland

estate of Thomas Barker

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 6. Opportunities and Constraints


6 Opportunities and Constraints

The development of policies to conserve the significance, as now defined, begins with an examination of

the opportunities and constraints may bear on its conservation. Firstly, obligations that arise from

significance itself are identified as the primary aim. This is followed by the external constraints and

opportunities. The planning and regulatory environment is examined. Then, perhaps the key factor in

policy making for this site, being its recent rezoning for urban development. The implications of the

rezoning are studied with reference to the likely character of different developments that will come

about. Finally, other regulations and legislation that affect environmental heritage are examined.

6.1 Obligations Arising from Significance

• The high cultural significance of the Maryland and Birling identified in the statement of

significance obliges its conservation and good management (Burra Charter Article 2).

• The significance of Maryland and Birling is embodied in the place. Place means site, area, land,

landscape, building of other work, group of buildings or other works, and may include

components, contents, spaces and views. Place also includes fabric, setting, use, associations,

meanings, records, related places, and related objects. (Burra Charter Article 1).

6.2 Statutory heritage listings

6.2.1 NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979)

One of the objects of the act is to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage

conservation areas, archaeological sites, Aboriginal objects and places of significance. This is

effected through Local Environmental Planning Instruments (LEPs).

All of Maryland including named components of Maryland are listed as Items of Environmental

Heritage in the Camden LEP 2010.are as follows:1

Suburb: Bringelly

Item Name: “Maryland” (including the homestead, grounds, outbuildings, stone cottage, former

winery, stone store and gate keeper’s cottage)

Address: 773 The Northern Road

Property description: Lot 1, DP 218779; Lot 29, DP 872135

Significance: Local

Item No: I1

A copy of this listing is found in Appendices 9.3.1 and 9.3.2.

6.2.2 NSW Heritage Act (1977)

Listing

The act establishes the State Heritage Register for the protection of items of State Significance.

Maryland is currently under consideration to be listed on the NSW State Heritage Register.2

1 http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/~pdf/view/EPI/2010/514/sch5 accessed 25/05/2017 2 http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5051539 accessed 25/05/2017

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/~pdf/view/EPI/2010/514/sch5




Consent

For items on the State Heritage Register, under section 57 of the act consent from the Heritage

Council is required to

(a) demolish the building or work,

(b) damage or despoil the place, precinct or land, or any part of the place, precinct or land,

(c) move, damage or destroy the relic or moveable object,

(d) excavate any land for the purpose of exposing or moving the relic,

(e) carry out any development in relation to the land on which the building, work or relic situated,

the land that comprises the place, or land within the precinct,

(f) alter the building work, relic or moveable object,

(g) display any notice or advertisement on the place, building, work, relic, moveable object or land,

or in the precinct,

(h) damage or destroy any tree or other vegetation on or remove any tree or other vegetation from

the place, precinct or land.

The Heritage Council has the power to endorse Conservation Management Plans or enter into a

Heritage Agreement for items on the State Heritage Register. An endorsed CMP or Heritage

Agreement may exempt works from the above list of works that require consent of the Heritage

Council.

In 2009, under section 57(2), the Minister gazetted the following seventeen standard exemptions to

the above consent requirements, which apply to all items entered on the register. Specific

exemptions apply to certain listings as well.

Standard Exemption 1: Maintenance and Cleaning

Standard Exemption 2: Repairs

Standard Exemption 3: Painting

Standard Exemption 4: Excavation

Standard Exemption 5: Restoration

Standard Exemption 6: Development endorsed by the Heritage Council or Director General

Standard Exemption 7: Minor Activities with Little or No Adverse Impact on Heritage

Significance

Standard Exemption 8: Non-significant Fabric

Standard Exemption 9: Change of Use

Standard Exemption 10: New Buildings

Standard Exemption 11: Temporary Structures

Standard Exemption 12: Landscape Maintenance

Standard Exemption 13: Signage

Standard Exemption 14: Burial Sites and Cemeteries

Standard Exemption 15: Compliance with Minimum Standards and Orders



Standard Exemption 16: Safety and Security

Standard Exemption 17: Moveable Heritage Items

Relics

The act also establishes protection across New South Wales for relics. Relics are defined as

… any deposit, artefact, object or material evidence that:

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

Aboriginal settlement, and

(b) is of State or local heritage significance

Relics may not be disturbed except under the terms of an excavation permit, as issued by the

Heritage Council.

Non- indigenous relics

A separate assessment of Non-indigenous heritage assessment has been prepared, Casey and Lowe:

Historical Archaeological Assessment Maryland & Birling, Bringelly Lowes Creek Maryland Part

(Precinct), Rezoning September 2016 in which the following recommendations have been made:

Birling

• A program of archaeological testing would clarify the nature and extent of the potential

archaeological remains within the area in this report as being of moderate to high potential

(Figure 3.109). Such testing would require a methodology and research design written by a

suitably qualified archaeologist, and approval from the Heritage Division, Office of Environment

and Heritage, in the form of either a S139 exception or a S140 permit.

• The area identified in this report as being of moderate to high potential (Figure 3.109) should not

be subjected to earthworks such as grading without further archaeological investigation.

• The future management of the potential remains should be determined following the results of

archaeological testing, in discussion with the Heritage Division, Office of Environment and

Heritage. Public interpretation as part of any new landscaping may also be required.

• Standard conditions attached to S140 approvals include the requirement for a final report on the

results of any archaeological program and the cataloguing and archiving of any archaeological

artefacts or relics recovered during the works.

Maryland

• Any proposed development within the Maryland curtilage site should consider how to minimise

impacts on the potential archaeological resource.

• Any impacts on archaeological sites listed in this report should be the subject of a S140

Archaeological Excavation application to the Heritage Division, Office of Environment and

Heritage.

• The S140 documentation will need to consider mitigation of impacts on potential archaeological

resources as well as methodologies to record and archaeological remains exposed during works.

Methodologies might include clarification of strategies to minimise impacts including testing



prior to the finalisation of impact design, which may lead to detailed archaeological recording

and investigation.

• This report should be lodged as part of any S140 application.

• A S140 application requires the writing of an Archaeological Research Design (ARD) outlining

the details of proposed design impacts and the excavation methodology and research questions.

The ARD requires the nomination of an Excavation Director and key members of the

archaeological team who will undertake the archaeological program.

• Demolition of existing structures at the site should be subject to archaeological input regarding

mitigation of impacts on potential archaeological remains.

• The archaeological program will need to be undertaken in accordance with the S140 Conditions

of Consent.

• Standard conditions attached to S140 approvals include the requirement for a final report on the

results of any archaeological program and the cataloguing and archiving of any archaeological

artefacts or relics recovered during the works.

• A repository, storage in perpetuity, for the artefacts recovered from the site will need to be

provided by the proponents. A suitable storage solution may be the construction of a storage

room within any new development.

Aboriginal relics

A separate Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment has been prepared.

Extent Heritage Pty Ltd: Lowes Creek Maryland Precinct Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

Assessment Report (draft 24th April 2017)

The assessment has identified and mapped archaeological sites and areas of medium and high

archaeological potential within the study area, mapped in figure below.



The assessment summarises the findings as

• 25 identified Aboriginal archaeological sites 21 of which are of low significance and four may

be of moderate significance

• Zones of medium and high Aboriginal archaeological potential

• Areas of high cultural value (not mapped above)

• Potential contact and post-contact Aboriginal archaeological remains.

The Assessment provides recommendations for the conservation of the resource as follows

Further investigation should be undertaken to confirm the nature, extent and significance of the

Aboriginal heritage resource identified within the study area. This investigation should include

archaeological test excavation, undertaken in accordance with the Code of practice for

archaeological investigation of Aboriginal objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010).

• The Aboriginal heritage sensitivity of the study area should be reviewed in light of the results of

the further investigation. Where possible, the detailed master plan and/or proposed

construction methods should be designed to avoid or minimise heritage impact.

• Any development proposed for the locations in which Aboriginal objects/sites or potential has

been identified will require an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit prior to any impact or

development.

• Any development proposed for locations in which areas of medium or high archaeological

potential are identified will first require further sub-surface investigations to characterise any

Aboriginal objects present, and determine their extent and significance. An Aboriginal Heritage



Impact Permit to harm any cultural materials may also be required from OEH depending on the

findings of these works.

• Consultation with the Registered Aboriginal Parties should be maintained if the study area is

likely to be affected by development in the future. Should consultation lapse for six months or

longer, then the consultation process as outlined by OEH would need to be re-started.

6.2.3 Non-statutory heritage listings

Maryland (including outbuildings and curtilage) is listed by the National Trust of Australia (NSW).

A copy of this listing can be found in Appendix 9.3.3.

6.2.4 NSW Government requirements to make urban development

Rezoning

In September 2014, an application was made by Macarthur Developments to the NSW

Government seeking the acceleration of land within the “Lowes Creek Maryland Precinct (LCM)”

within the South West Growth Area. This request was approved on 9 October 2015 and the land

has now been released for rezoning as urban development.

A Precinct Planning Package (PPP) is now being developed by the proponent, which is to be lodged

to the NSW Department of Planning & Environment (DP&E) for their approval.

Camden Council has a significant consent role in the development of the PPP. Since the rezoning

brings very significant issues to bear on the conservation of the significance of the site, this plan is

intended as a base line study to inform the development of the PPP.

Future Land Uses

Council has provided a general description of the developments that are to be permissible on the

site because of this zoning,

The primary land use will be residential consisting of low and medium density

housing consisting of detached dwellings, townhouses and possibly low scale ‘walk

up’ style residential flat buildings.

Other uses within the precinct include 2 schools, open space (local parks and playing

fields), community facilities, neighbourhood shopping centres, possible town centre,

highway service centre, homemaker retail and an electrical sub-station.

In terms of infrastructure, the main items are the significant upgrade of the

Northern Road to 6 lanes and the introduction of a sub-article road and collector

road both running north-south through the precinct.

All these uses bring about a loss of significance as the primary use as agricultural and pastoral use is

removed. Depending on the location of them, and character of the fabric that is introduced, there

will be an amount of loss of character to the site.



The development can provide significant resources for the conservation of buildings on the site, for

long term governance of the estate to best practice.

In its manner of its execution, the development has the opportunity to interpret the significance of

the estates in a substantial way.

Each of the uses has typical characteristics in current practice in the South Creek Valley on similar

land. From a description of these set out in the table below, opportunities and constraints for the

conservation of significance are identified.



Sub arterial and Collector Roads

Criteria Typical characteristics of this use Constraints and

Opportunities for

Conservation of Significance

Location Medium gradient to flat lands Will remove the historical rural

use of the site. Will alter the

historic character of quiet,

open pasture with obvious

farm use

Landscape Space Open character, with long views along road,

often following natural topography

Opportunity to interpret the

open bowl shape of the

western pasturelands

Opportunity to interpret the

historic prospect of Maryland

Knoll and garden from the

alignment of The Northern

Road by a parallel road

Built character Materially and spatially undifferentiated due

to common traffic design standards. Can be

differentiated by design of verges,

landscape views arranged, character of

natural topography where retained

Will introduce a character

other than the Will alter the



farm use of the site

Other

characteristics

Large scale signage

High levels of flood lighting at night

Noisy in operation

Will introduce a character

other than the Will alter the



farm use of the site

Low density detached housing


Opportunities for


Location Makes use of low gradient and flat land Will greatly alter the historic

character of quiet, open

pasture with obvious farm use

of the site

Landscape Space Creates streets of uniform suburban

character as a result common traffic design

standards, common setbacks and regular

size of houses

Will greatly alter the historic



of the site May significantly

obscure historic visual

relationships




Opportunities for


Built character Closed views between houses Will greatly alter the historic



of the site

Other

characteristics

Undifferentiated suburban character of

mass market housing (common roof

pitches, common side setbacks, dominant

use of face brick walls and cement tile roofs)

Will replace the historic



of the site

Medium density detached housing


Opportunities for


Location Makes use of low gradient and flat land

Located at a distance from more dense

development and community facilities

Will remove the rural use.

Will remove the historic



of the site

Landscape

Space

Creates streets of uniform suburban character

as a result common traffic design standards,

common setbacks and regular size of houses.




of the site

Built character Closed views between houses Could interrupt significant

visual relationships

Other

characteristics

Undifferentiated suburban character of mass

market housing (common roof pitches,

common side setbacks, dominant use of face

brick walls and cement tile roofs)




of the site

Townhouses and low scale walk up style of apartments


Opportunities for


Location Makes use of low gradient and flat land, and

land not sensitive to overshadowing







Opportunities for


Makes use of land adjacent to public open

space

Located near places of amenity and public

transport


of the site

Landscape

Space

Creates streets of uniform character due to

common traffic design standards, with

capacity for variations in character due to mix

of housing sizes and amalgamation of forms

to respond to urban design criteria




of the site May significantly

obscure historic visual

relationships

Opportunity to construct

urban relationships that reflect

historic principles of layout on

the estates

Built character Often a uniform character due to design led

by efficiency, speed construction techniques,

undifferentiated character of mass market

apartment design, regular floor plate design

and standard design of car parking modules

Could interrupt significant





of the site

Other

characteristics

More open views between buildings Usually

branded by one-word abstract names for

marketing period only

Will alter the historic character

of quiet, open pasture with

obvious farm use of the site

Schools Open Space, Community Facilities


Opportunities for


Location Makes use of low gradient and flat land to

accommodate accessibility requirements.

Located near main roads, and central to local

population

Located where large space is available for

carparking and playing fields

Will remove the rural use and

character of the estates

Landscape

Space

Open horizontal character due to on grade

carparking and playing fields and low rise one

or two storeyed buildings

May obscure historic visual

relationships

Opportunity to interpret open

spatial character of the estates




Opportunities for


Opportunity to construct road

and spatial relationships that

reflect historic principles of

layout on the estates

Built character If main form of access is by car, and where

sites are secured by perimeter fencing, these

sites are often inward looking. They are

usually low in character, as roofs are spanning

large internal spaces. They often have an

open character due to use of open spaces for

circulation, such as verandas, walkways,

covered ways.

Opportunity to interpret rural


Other

characteristics

Places are usually public in nature, and

develop social significance

Architecturally distinctive

Opportunity to interpret

significance of the estate

through activities identifying

with the estate

Town Centre Retail


Opportunities for


Location Makes use of low gradient and flat

land to accommodate accessibility

requirements.

Located near main roads, and central

to local population

Located where large space is available

for carparking





of the site

Landscape Space Built up urban character due to

commercial requirements for density,

inward looking due to preferment of

cars as mode of address and air-

conditioning of retail space

May significantly obscure

historic visual relationships

Built character As main form of access is by car to air-

conditioned internal space, these sites

are often inward looking. They are

usually medium scale and bulky, as

roofs are spanning large internal

spaces.




of the site




Opportunities for


Other characteristics Places are usually public in nature and

development social significance

High levels of lighting at night

Large amounts of signage and

graphics




of the site

Highway service Centre and other Road facilities


Opportunities for


Location Adjacent to main road intersections Will remove the rural use and


Landscape Space These facilities are part of the

landscape space of the road, and

intersection in particular. They are

low, and open in character as they

accommodate space for carparking on

grade

May obscure some historic


Built character Low rise buildings, in the case of

petrol stations, small: in the case of

warehouse style retail, tall and bulky

Buildings of a utilitarian nature

Other characteristics Large scale signage and graphics

High levels of flood lighting at night

Substations and other above ground infrastructure


Opportunities for


Location Depending on function, may be found

on all types of locations




of the site

Landscape Space In the case of small buildings, such as

pump stations for sewerage, they are

part of the landscape space.

May significantly obscure

historic visual relationships




Opportunities for


In the case of larger buildings, such as

major substations, this infrastructure

is a dominant landscape feature

In the case of overhead poles and

wires, satellite towers, this

infrastructure is a substantial element

in the broad landscape

Built character Usually utilitarian in character Opportunity to interpret rural

industrial character of parts of

the estates

Other characteristics Some infrastructure is noisy in

operation

6.3 Building Regulations for Construction

The National Construction code (NCC), which incorporates the Building Code of Australia (BCA)

establishes mandatory standards for compliance of building and landscape works.

The obligatory requirements for upgrading existing buildings and landscapes to these standards

generally applies to fire safety, essential services, equitable access and work safety and occupational

health standards.

For new work and obligatory upgrade works, the compliance with the NCC is framed in terms of

performance standards. Satisfaction of the standard can be achieved by meeting ‘deemed to satisfy’

requirements which are prescribed. It is common practice in buildings of complexity for specific

solutions to be engineered to meet fire egress requirements.

Works undertaken must also comply with the current NSW Work Health and Safety Act and the

current NSW Work Safety Regulation. These include provisions for dealing with hazardous

materials, which may be required to be removed notwithstanding heritage significance.

6.4 Other Legislation that affects Conservation of Significance

6.4.1 Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1992

The act establishes qualitative standards for equitable access. In 2010 the Commonwealth published

the Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards. These are intended to ensure that the

requirements of the Act are met.

Compliance with the BCA does not signify compliance with the DDA.

6.4.2 Environment Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000- BASIX

The regulation requires all works to alter or add to dwellings of any kind in NSW to comply with the

environmental planning tool BASIX. This regulation does not apply to the making of alterations,

enlargements or extensions to buildings that are listed on the NSW State Heritage Register created

under section 31 of the NSW Heritage Act (1977).



Items of Environmental Heritage in LEPs are required to meet the requirements of BASIX. However,

items may be granted exemption from certain specific requirements by the operation of the

Heritage Alternative Assessment Form https://www.basix.nsw.gov.au/iframe/about-basix/basix-

assessment/alternative-assessments/heritage.html

6.4.3 State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008

By the operation of this SEPP, certain works have the status of being exempt from development

consent requirements under the EP&A (1979), and others are deemed approved if complying to

prescribed criteria. The two classes of consent for development are known as exempt and

complying. Notwithstanding the creation by SEPP of two types of developments that do not require

specific planning consent from a local authority, some local authorities require an application to be

made for them to confirm that the development is indeed exempt or complying development in the

case of heritage sites.

This policy is of importance to sites of cultural significance as it gives consent to works on heritage

items, without an assessment of impact, and which may lead to loss of significance. For items

included on the NSW State Heritage Register, exempt development is not allowed under Section 57

of the NSW Heritage Act.

The definitions of heritage item in this SEPP are as follows

Draft heritage conservation area means an area of land identified as a heritage conservation area or

place of Aboriginal heritage significance in a local environmental plan that has been subject to

community consultation, other than an area that was consulted on before 1 March 2006, but has not

been included in a plan before 27 February 2009.

Draft heritage item means a building, work, archaeological site, tree, place or aboriginal object

identified as a heritage item in a local environmental plan that has been subject to community

consultation, other than an item that was consulted on before 1 March 2006, but has not been included

in a plan before 27 February 2009.

Heritage conservation area means an area of land identified as a heritage conservation area or a place

of Aboriginal heritage significance, including any heritage items situated on or within that area, in an

environmental planning instrument.

Heritage item means a building, work, archaeological site, tree, place or Aboriginal object identified as

a heritage item in an environmental planning instrument.

The following table gives the status of Exempt Development in relation to heritage and draft

heritage items, heritage conservation areas and draft heritage conservation areas, as at the date of

the Current version of the SEPP (5 August 2016).

https://www.basix.nsw.gov.au/iframe/about-basix/basix-assessment/alternative-assessments/heritage.html

https://www.basix.nsw.gov.au/iframe/about-basix/basix-assessment/alternative-assessments/heritage.html



Exempt Development Exempt for heritage item or

draft heritage item

Exempt for heritage conservation area or

draft heritage conservation area

Part 2 Exempt Development Codes

Division 1 General Exempt Development Code

Subdivision 1 Access ramps Yes Yes

Subdivision 2 Aerials, antennae

and communication dishes

Yes Yes

Subdivision 3 Air-conditioning

units

Yes, but not to be fixed to a wall Yes, rear yard only

Subdivision 3A Animal shelters Yes Yes

Subdivision 3B Automatic teller

machines

Yes Yes

Subdivision 4 Aviaries Yes Yes

Subdivision 5 Awnings, blinds and

canopies

No Yes, rear yard only

Subdivision 6 Balconies, decks,

patios, pergolas, terraces and

verandahs

No

Yes, if located behind the

building line of any road

frontage

Subdivision 7 Barbecues and

other outdoor cooking structures

Yes Yes

Subdivision 8A Bollards Yes Yes

Subdivision 9 Cabanas, cubby

houses, ferneries, garden sheds,

gazebos and greenhouses

No

Yes, rear yard only

Subdivision 10 Carports No Yes, rear yard only

Subdivision 10A Change of use of

premises

Yes Yes

Subdivision 10B Change of use of

places of public worship

Yes Yes

Subdivision 10C Charity bins and

recycling bins

Yes Yes




draft heritage item



Subdivision 11 Clothes hoists and

clothes lines

Yes, rear yard only Yes, rear yard only

Subdivision 13 Demolition No No

Subdivision 14 Driveways and

hard stand spaces

No No

Subdivision 15 Earthworks,

retaining walls and structural

support


Subdivision 15AA Emergency

work and temporary repairs

Yes Yes

Subdivision 15A Evaporative

cooling units (roof mounted)

No Yes, rear yard only and

not visible from a public

road

Subdivision 16 Farm buildings No Yes

Subdivision 17 Fences (residential

zones)

No No

Subdivision 18 Fences (rural and

environment protection zones

and Zone R5)

No No

Subdivision 19 Fences (business

and industrial zones)

No Yes

Subdivision 20 Flagpoles Yes Yes

Subdivision 20A Footpaths—

outdoor dining

Yes Yes

Subdivision 21 Fowl and poultry

houses


Subdivision 21AA Fuel tanks and

gas storage

Yes Yes

Subdivision 21A Garbage bin

storage enclosure


Subdivision 22 Home businesses,

home industries and home

occupations

Yes Yes




draft heritage item



Subdivision 23 Home-based child

care

Yes Yes

Subdivision 23A Hot water

systems

Yes, must be in rear yard and

not on a roof

Yes, must be in rear yard

and not on a roof

Subdivision 24 Landscaping

structures


Subdivision 25 Letterboxes No Yes

Subdivision 25A Maintenance of

buildings in draft heritage

conservation areas

No Yes, in draft conservation

areas only. The

maintenance is specified

in the SEPP

Subdivision 26 Minor building

alterations (internal)

No Yes

Subdivision 27 Minor building

alterations (external)

No No

Subdivision 27A Mobile food and

drink outlets

Yes Yes

Subdivision 28 Pathways and

paving

Yes Yes

Subdivision 29 Playground

equipment

Yes Yes

Subdivision 30 Portable

swimming pools and spas and

child-resistant barriers

No Yes

Subdivision 31 Privacy screens Yes Yes

Subdivision 32 Rainwater tanks

(above ground)

Yes, rear yard only Yes

Subdivision 33 Rainwater tanks

(below ground)

Yes, rear yard only Yes

Subdivision 35 Screen enclosures

(of balconies, decks, patios,

pergolas, terraces and verandahs)

No Yes, not to face any road




draft heritage item



Subdivision 36 Shade structures

of canvas, fabric, mesh or the like


Subdivision 37 Skylights, roof

windows and ventilators

No Yes, not visible from any

road frontage

Subdivision 38 Subdivision No Yes

Subdivision 39B Tennis courts No No

Subdivision 39C Waste storage

containers

Yes Yes

Subdivision 40 Water features

and ponds


Subdivision 41 Windmills Yes Yes

Division 2 Advertising and Signage Exempt Development Code

Subdivision 1 General

requirements for advertising and

signage

Yes Yes

Subdivision 2 Building

identification signs

No No

Subdivision 3 Wall signs No No

Subdivision 4 Fascia signs Yes Yes

Subdivision 5 Under awning signs Yes Yes

Subdivision 6 Top hamper signs No Yes, in specified cases

Subdivision 7 Window signs Yes Yes

Subdivision 8 Replacement of

identification signs

Yes Yes

Subdivision 9 Internal signs Yes Yes

Subdivision 10 Community notice

and public information signs

Yes, if not attached to a building Yes




draft heritage item



Subdivision 11 Temporary event

signs

Yes Yes

Subdivision 12 Real estate signs Yes, if not attached to a building Yes

Subdivision 13 Election signs Yes Yes

Division 3 Temporary Uses and Structures Exempt Development Code

Subdivision 1 General

requirements for temporary uses

and structures

Yes Yes

Subdivision 2 Scaffolding,

hoardings and temporary

construction site fences

Yes Yes

Subdivision 3 Temporary builders’

structures

Yes Yes

Subdivision 4 Filming Yes, under certain conditions Yes, under certain

conditions

Subdivision 5 Temporary

structures and alterations or

additions to buildings for filming

purposes

Yes Yes

Subdivision 6 Tents or marquees

used for filming purposes and

private functions

Yes Yes

Subdivision 7 Tents, marquees or

booths for community events

Yes Yes

Subdivision 8 Stages or platforms

for private functions

Yes Yes


for community events

Yes Yes

Subdivision 10 Major events

sites—additional temporary

development

Yes Yes




draft heritage item



Subdivision 11 Sydney Cricket

Ground—additional temporary

development

Yes Yes

Subdivision 12 Trading hours—

temporary extensions for

Christmas

Yes Yes

Subdivision 13 Trading hours—

temporary extension for licensed

premises

Yes Yes

Part 3 General Housing Code

Division 1 Development that is

complying development under

this code

No in all cases except

Where the work is subject to an

exemption under section 57 of

the Heritage Act

The work is on a part of the land

that is not listed as a heritage

item

Yes

Division 1A Removal or pruning

of trees

Yes

Division 2 Development

standards for this code

Subdivision 1 Application Yes

Subdivision 2 Site requirements Yes

Subdivision 3 Building heights

and setbacks

Yes

Subdivision 4 Landscaping Yes

Subdivision 5 Car parking and

access

Yes

Subdivision 6 Earthworks and

drainage

Yes

Subdivision 7 Ancillary

development

No for Studios




draft heritage item



Yes for pools and fences

Subdivision 8 Outbuildings Yes

Subdivision 9 Development

standards for particular land

Yes

Part 3A Rural Housing Code

Division 1 Development that is

complying development under

this code

Yes

Division 1A Removal or pruning

of trees

Yes

Division 2 Development

standards for this code

Subdivision 1 Application Yes

Subdivision 2 Site requirements Yes

Subdivision 3 Building heights

and setbacks

Yes

Subdivision 4 Landscaping Yes

Subdivision 5 Car parking and

access

Yes

Subdivision 6 Earthworks and

drainage

Yes

Subdivision 7 Ancillary

development

No for Studios

Yes, for pools and fences

Subdivision 8 Outbuildings Yes



Yes

Part 4 Housing Alterations Code

Subdivision 1 Internal alterations Yes




draft heritage item



Subdivision 2 External alterations

to dwelling houses

Yes, to the one storey part

of a house

Subdivision 2A External

alterations to residential

accommodation other than

dwelling houses

No

Subdivision 3 Attic conversions Yes

Subdivision 3A Development


Yes

Part 4A General Development Code

Subdivision 1 Bed and breakfast

accommodation

Yes

Subdivision 2 Home businesses Yes

Subdivision 3 Tents, marquees or

booths for community events

Yes


for community events

Yes

Subdivision 5 Sydney Olympic

Park—major events

Yes

Subdivision 6 Waterways

structures

Yes

Part 5 Commercial and Industrial Alterations Code

Subdivision 1 Building alterations

(internal)

Yes

Subdivision 2 Change of use of

premises

Yes

Subdivision 3 First use of

premises

Yes

Subdivision 4 Mechanical

ventilation systems

No




draft heritage item



Subdivision 5 Shop fronts and

awnings

No

Subdivision 6 Skylights and roof

windows

Yes

Subdivision 7 Projecting wall

signs

No

Subdivision 8 Freestanding pylon

and directory board signs

No


ancillary to the use of land

Yes, if at rear

Subdivision 10 Earthworks,

retaining walls and structural

support

Yes

Subdivision 11 Driveways, hard

stand spaces, pathways and

paving

Yes

Subdivision 12 Fences Yes

Part 5A Commercial and

Industrial (New Buildings and

Additions) Code

Yes, except where below

noted

Subdivision 7 Projecting wall

signs

No

Subdivision 8 Freestanding pylon

and directory board signs

No

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 7. Development of Conservation Policy


7 Development of Conservation Policy

This section examines the relation of those external constraints and opportunities identified to the

cultural significance of Maryland and Birling. From this, an approach to forming policies for the

conservation of the place is developed

7.1 Burra Charter Framework

Two articles in the Burra Charter establish a principle and a process for change that together are a

useful framework for the development of conservation policy.

Article 2. Conservation and Management

2.1 Places of Cultural Significance should be conserved.

2.2The 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 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

15.2 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

emphasises or interpreted is of much greater cultural significance.

7.2 Constraints and Opportunity interaction with Statement of Significance

A discussion on the interaction between identified constraints and opportunities is set out in the

table below. The discussion extends to policy implications and suggests approaches to address the

conservation of the site for each aspect.



Summary of Constraint/Opportunity

Interaction with Statement of Significance

Implication and approach for policy

Cultural Significance

The cultural significance

should be conserved

Recognition of the

significance of the place

The Guidelines to the Burra Charter:

Conservation Policy outline the

scope for policy to conserve cultural

significance as follows

Fabric and Setting (2.2)

Policy should identify the most

appropriate way of caring for the

fabric and setting of the place

arising from the statement of

significance and other constraints.

Use (2.3)

Policy should identify what use,

combination of uses, or constraints

on use is compatible with retention

of the cultural significance of the

place and that are feasible.

Interpretation (2.4)

Policy should identify appropriate

ways of making the significance of

the place understood consistent

with the retention of that

significance.

Management (2.5)

Policy should identify a

management structure through

which the conservation policy is

capable of being implemented.

Control of physical intervention

(2.6)

Policy should include provisions for

the control of physical intervention.

Constraints on investigation (2.7)

Policy should identify social,

religious, legal or other cultural

constraints which might limit the

accessibility or investigation of the

place.






Future developments (2.8)

Policy should set guidelines for

future developments resulting from

changing needs.

Adoption and Review (2.9)

Policy should contain provision for

adoption and review.

Statutory listings

Maryland is nominated to be

listed as an item on the State

Heritage Register

The Birling 1812 Site is of

state significance

Recognition of the


Policy required to conserve

significant fabric, spaces, uses,

associations, visual relationships.

The approach should be to clearly

identify which fabric on the place is to

be conserved. The grading of

significance criteria suggest that all

fabric ranked Exceptional, High and

Moderate is to be conserved.

Policy required for the assessment

of significance in this CMP should be

added to/ bought to bear on the

citation in the register.

For Maryland, where a summary

statement of significance that

integrates several previous

assessments, the approach should be

to request the findings be

incorporated into an updated citation

on the register. The findings of this

CMP that defined and map the

curtilage of the place should also be

incorporated. Policy should include

steps to see that the place is listed.

Policy required to consider

Endorsement for this CMP from the

NSW Heritage Council.

Should Maryland be listed, the

approach in this case is to seek

endorsement. This will promote early

engagement with the consent






authority in the context of major

change to the place.

Policies required to address

management implication for

consent.

If Maryland is listed on the register,

the approach should be to seek site

specific exemptions be sought

considering the policy findings of this

CMP. This will make simple the

operation of the exempt and

complying paths of consent.

Policy required to seek listing for the

Birling 1812 site.

Maryland is listed as an item

of Environmental Heritage

on Camden Local

Environmental Plan 2010

Birling 1812 site have been

assessed as State Significant

Birling Homestead 1937 and

its setting have been

assessed as Locally

Significant

Recognition of the


Policy required to conserve

significant fabric, spaces, uses,

associations, visual relationships.

The approach should be to clearly

identify which fabric on the place is to

be conserved. The grading of

significance criteria suggest that all

fabric ranked Exceptional, High and

Moderate is to be conserved.

Policy required for the assessment

of significance in this CMP should be

added to/ bought to bear on the

citation in the register.

In this case, where a summary

statement of significance that

integrates several previous

assessments, the approach should be

to request the findings be

incorporated into an updated citation

on the register.

Policy required in respect of listing in

view of the level of significance of

the site.

In this case, where the study has

concluded it is significant, the Birling






homestead 1937 should be included in

the Camden LEP.

In this case, where the study has

concluded it is significant, the Birling

1812 site should be included in the

Camden LEP.

Policies required to address

management implication for

consent.

In this case, where it is expected that

consents are needed often in the

context of rezoning as urban

development, policy should establish

principles for integrating heritage

significance in all aspects of the

consent process.

Maryland and Birling

contains an aboriginal

heritage resource of varying

gradings of significance that

have been identified and

mapped

Recognition of the

aboriginal significance of

the place

Policy for the further investigation

and conservation of the resource are

required.

In this case the approach is to adopt

the recommendations of the

Aboriginal cultural heritage

assessment.

Non-statutory heritage listings

Maryland is on the Register

of the National Trust of

Australia (New South Wales)

Recognition of the


Policy for the statutory listings

above will address the implications

of the National Trust Listing.

In addition, listing by the National

Trust should be included in the

scope of interpretation of the place.

Rezoning of the site for urban development

Introduction urban uses to

the place

The potential positive and

negative impacts of the

various aspects of this

change that were

discussed in section 6 are

as follows:

Policy required to address impact of

major change.

Policy must focus on ways to

conserve significance considering the

very large change that is to be bought

to this site because of rezoning for

urban development. It is of






• Removal of the rural use

and character of the

estates

• Opportunity to interpret

the open bowl shape of

the western

pasturelands


the historic prospect of

Maryland Knoll and

garden from the

alignment of The

Northern Road by a

parallel road

• Loss of historic visual

relationships


significant visual

relationships

• Opportunity to construct

urban relationships that

reflect historic principles

of layout on the estates


open spatial character of

the estates

• Opportunity to construct

road and spatial

relationships that reflect

historic principles of

layout on the estates


significance of the estate

through activities

identifying with the

estate

considerable benefit that the change

is happening in a planned way. The

approach should be to adopt

principles that provide flexibility to

planning of the development. The

measure of the success of the policies

is the retention of significance and

extent and clarity of interpretation.

To conserve the significance of the

place the following approaches

should be considered, listed here from

most likely to least likely to conserve

significance.

• Arrange development to preserve

the integrity of the Maryland estate

as a whole.

• Arrange development to interpret

the significance of the Maryland

estate. This may include laying out

development to interpret the

historic spatial order and circulation

routes on the estate. It may involve

devoting resources from the

development to the conservation of

the fabric of the estate.

• Preserve the Birling 1812 site.

• Preserve the Birling 1937

homestead and its setting.

• Locate development in areas and

among elements of significance

graded intrusive or low with

minimal conditions on the manner

of development.

• Locate development in areas and among elements of significance graded moderate with general conditions on the character, form and size of development.

• Locate development in areas and among elements of significance graded high with general conditions






on the character, form and size of development.

• Locate development in areas and among elements of significance graded high with specific conditions on the character, form and size of development.

• Locate development in areas and among elements of significance graded exceptional with very specific conditions on the character, form and size of development.

Alterations and additions to

the place to support new

uses

It is certain that the farm

buildings and probable

that the homesteads on

the site will lose their

current historically

significant uses. The new

uses will require

adaptation of those

buildings.

This may provide

significant opportunity to

interpret the buildings,

and to retain viability of

use.

Policy required to address

alterations and additions to the

place.

The approach is to allow change in

accordance with the grading of

significance to each building.

The higher the grading, the less

change. Change is possible in all

areas provided the following are

addressed carefully: significance of

the building, the integrity of the

building, and opportunities for

interpretation.

In this case, where the buildings have

not been studied in detail, policy

should address the need to further

investigation and individual CMP

chapters for items graded high or

exceptional.

Adaptation to landscape

elements to support new

uses

The roads, gates,

topography of the site and

the garden of Maryland

Homestead will be

modified to allow new

uses.

This may provide

significant opportunity to

interpret the elements,

and to retain their historic

use.

Policy required to address

adaptation of landscape elements.

The approach is to allow change in

accordance with the grading of

significance to each element.

The higher the grading, the less

change. Change is possible in all

areas provided the following are

addressed carefully: significance of

the element, the integrity of the






element, and opportunities for

interpretation.

In the case of the garden of Maryland

Homestead, which has not been

studied in detail, policy should

address the need to further

investigation and conservation

planning as part of the homestead

CMP.

Building Regulations for Construction

Mandatory upgrade for fire,

health and safety,

compliance and equitable

access

May affect significant

fabric

Policy required to guide the location

and manner of mandatory upgrade.

An approach is to set out a principle

of interventions permissible that

aligns with significance.

Policy required to guide level of

technical input.

An approach is to require appropriate

level of technical skill.

An approach is to consider special

engineered solutions for areas of

greater significance.

An alternative approach is to lay

down simple principles, which can be

interpreted at the implementation

stage, rather than attempt to predict

the exact requirements of current or

future compliance.

Other Legislation

BASIX Significance may be

affected by the

requirement to conform to

standard environmental

measures

Policy required to guide level of

intervention to significant fabric to

meet environmental measures as

calibrated by BASIX.

Since the significant houses on the

site are not likely to have major

additions, the simplest approach is to

ameliorate any potential impact by






reliance on the Heritage Alternative

Assessment Form.

State Environmental

Planning Policy (Exempt and

Complying Development

Codes) 2008

Significance may be

affected by the giving of

consent to development

without assessment of

impact and works that

have impact.

Policy required to guide operation of

this form of consent on the site.

As Maryland is currently an item of

Environmental Heritage, the

operation of this SEPP will affect all

development on the site. New

housing will have restricted access to

use of exempt and complying

development.

An approach would be to modify the

LEP to exclude from the listing new

houses to be built on the place, or

change the listing boundary.

A simpler result would be the listing of

Maryland on the State Heritage

Register with a site specific exemption

to quarantine development from the

heritage exclusions of the SEPP for

heritage.

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 8. Conservation Policies and Guidelines


8. Conservation Policies & Guidelines

Following the examination of the relation of constraints and opportunities to significance, the following

policies are framed to meet the broad intention to conserve the cultural significance of Maryland and

Birling.

Each policy is preceded by a short description of the intention of the policy. The policies have been

numbered and presented to follow the scope of the conservation policy outlined in the Burra

Charter, and address the following issues:

8.1 Fabric and Setting

8.2 Use

8.3 Interpretation

8.4 Management

8.5 Control of physical intervention in the fabric

8.6 Future developments

8.7 Adoption and review

Summaries of the policies are presented as maps, located in Appendix 9.2.

8.1 Fabric, Landscape Spaces, and Visual Relationships

The policies apply to all of the components of the site, including spaces, fabric, visual relationships

and historical associations to the site.

8.1.1 The site defined

For clarity, it is desirable to define the area over which the policies for conserving the place directly

apply. It is logically the area which contains all the significant components that were developed in

the history of, and which are currently part of Maryland and Birling.

The site to be conserved under these policies is defined as the current land title

boundary of Maryland and Birling excepting the land on the south side of the unnamed private

road, currently the High-Quality Group Site.

8.1.2 The historic site defined

There are areas that have been historically part of the Maryland and Birling but have been excised

from it, being the land to the west and north of the site. Although they are not under the direct

control of these policies, for completeness they are defined for completeness as the historic site.

The historic sites of Maryland and Birling are defined as the land shown in Figure 12

being all the land originally part of Maryland and Birling and developed in its history.



8.1.3 Visual setting defined

The visual setting is that area which is important to the visual relationships of the site. Some of

these areas fall outside the site, they are separately defined for clarity.

The visual and spatial setting of Maryland and Birling is defined as the area of the

south Creek Valley visible in Visual Relationship items nos.270 Outlook from Maryland

Homestead and 276 Outlook from Birling Homestead.

8.1.4 Components to be conserved

All the significant components of the site should be conserved. However, in recognition of the

differing contribution of components to the significance of the site, a policy distinction must be

made between higher and lower gradings of significance. In principle, the components graded

higher have higher requirements for retention, repair, and interpretation than components graded

low. Intrusive components should be removed where practicable.

The grading of components is as given in Appendix 9.1 Inventory of components of the site, including

Gradings of Significance.

Retain and repair all components graded as of Exceptional and High significance.

Seek to retain and repair all components graded as of Moderate significance.

Components graded as of Low significance may be removed.

Components graded as of Intrusive significance should be removed wherever

practicable, and the part of the site reinstated to interpret the significance of the site as a

whole.

8.2 Use

8.2.1 Culturally significant use of the site to be conserved

The long historic use of the Maryland as a rural estate, and its homestead occupied continuously

have been identified as part of its significance.

Continue the original use of Maryland as a continuously worked rural estate if possible.

If this is not feasible, new uses that have less impact on the site as a whole are preferable to

uses that have more impact.

Continue the original use of Maryland homestead as a continuously occupied estate

house if possible. If this is not feasible, new uses that have less impact on the homestead, and

are viable in the long term are preferable to uses that have more impact and are not durable.



The long occupational use is also expressed in the naming of the two estates and Lowes Creek.

These names have been given by those most closely associated with the site, and are part of all

usage for many generations.

Continue the use of the names of Maryland, Birling and Lowes Creek.

8.3 Interpretation

Active interpretation is a powerful strategy for the long-term conservation of Maryland and the

Birling 1812 site. Their state level of significance should be interpreted to people in ways that

promote its appreciation. Interpretation takes many forms, but the common goal is to increase

understanding. Therefore, the theme of interpretation and the appropriate community to whom it is

to be interpreted is located in policy.

In the context of major change, it is not possible to define policy for how that interpretation is

affected. It is therefore a policy direction to prepare interpretation plans in the future.

Interpret the significance of Maryland as an intact and legible Historic Estate, and

Birling as a site of the Residence and Operation of the Magistrate Robert Lowe to future

residents of the estate, their visitors, and people who are educated and work on the estate, the

local community and the public of New South Wales.

An interpretation plan for the site should be prepared as part of the PPP. This plan will identify

• Themes of significance to be interpreted for the Maryland estate as a whole and the Birling

1812 site.

• Themes of significance to be interpreted for each landscape space of the estate.

• A strategy for interpreting the themes, including

o The identification of key missing elements of buildings and gardens, and landscape

features of Exceptional Significance to be interpreted by restoration.

o The identification of key missing elements of buildings and gardens, and landscape

features of Exceptional Significance to be interpreted by reconstruction.



8.4 Management

The effect of the rezoning of this site now will bring about a change in management of the site. The

following policies frame principles for management to conserve significance.

8.4.1 Active management of Significance

Future management of the place should be arranged to best facilitate its conservation. Conservation

of significance will be greatly benefitted if the management framework for the future is discussed

and decided upon as part of the PPP process. The following four policies are directed to that purpose

in the next phase of decision making.

Determine a management structure for the estate as part of the PPP that includes the

active management of significance of the place during the PPP phase.

This conservation plan has identified significant opportunities for further historic research, which

should be fully investigated as a priority in the next stage of decision-making about the site.

As part of the PPP fully investigate further research into the sources identified in this

report.

The archaeological report on the site has found significant archaeological potential on Birling. These

should also be given a priority in the next stage of decisions about the site.

As part of the PPP undertake a program of archaeological testing to clarify and nature

and extent of the potential archaeological remains graded moderate to high at the Birling 1812

site (fig. 3.109 of the Archaeological Assessment.

Detailed conservation planning is required for the Maryland Homestead and Garden, and for the

interiors of other structures of Exceptional and High Significance, and also for the moveable

contents of the site. These should also be given a priority.

As part of the PPP complete CMPs for Maryland Homestead and Garden, and

individually or in groups the interiors of all buildings graded to be of Exceptional and High

Significance.

As part of the PPP complete a CMP for the moveable contents of the site.

8.4.2 Records of Maintenance and Change

This is a policy for the short and long-term management of records of the place. It establishes a

principle of recording components graded high and exceptional.

All works to components graded Exceptional or High, including demolition and

unavoidable changes, should be recorded consistent with the following Heritage Branch, NSW

Department of Planning guidelines, and a copy of the recording should be lodged with the

Heritage Division:

- Photographic Recording of Heritage items using Digital Film Capture



- How to Prepare Archival Recordings of Heritage Items

- Maintenance Series 1.2: Documenting Maintenance and Repair.

8.5 Control of Physical Intervention in the site

These policies define how to manage change that is unavoidable.

8.5.1 Archaeological Deposits

The following policy refers to and integrates the conclusions of the Archaeological Assessment by

Casey and Lowe and the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report by Extent Heritage Pty

Ltd.

All works on the site are to be undertaken in accordance with the future Archaeological

works plans for the sites for aboriginal and European archaeology.

8.5.2 Upgrade Works for Compliance to fire safety, equitable access & essential services

Where changes will be required to undertake works for mandatory compliance the principle is to

minimise change to components graded of exceptional and high significance, and to allow more

change to components of lower significance.

Allow interventions in the components of the site for mandatory upgrade works for

compliance to Building and Access Codes in accordance with the table below.

MANDATORY COMPLIANCE TO FIRE SAFETY, EQUITABLE ACCESS & ESSENTIAL SERVICES

Significance Policy for upgrade works New works may include

Exceptional Minimal physical or visual intrusion

into fabric or space.

- new auxiliary door

hardware

- new handrails and

threshold ramps

- removable ramps

- EWIS and smoke detectors

on ceilings

- emergency lights and signs

- mandatory signage

High Minimal physical or visual intrusion

into fabric or space.

- adjustments to door

hardware

- removable ramps

- smoke detectors



MANDATORY COMPLIANCE TO FIRE SAFETY, EQUITABLE ACCESS & ESSENTIAL SERVICES

Significance Policy for upgrade works New works may include

- new auxiliary door

hardware

- new handrails and

threshold ramps

- EWIS and smoke detectors

on ceilings

- emergency lights and signs

- mandatory signage

Moderate In addition to works allowed in

policy for High significance, some

physical or visual intrusion into

fabric is allowed.

- permanent ramps

- handrails

- new stairs

- new lifts

- valve sets

- smoke exhaust systems

Little In addition to works allowed in

policy for Moderate significance,

new works include major adaption

of fabric if designed to harmonize

with significant fabric, spaces or

views, is allowed.

- reconfiguration of

staircases

- new internal planning

Table showing Mandatory compliance to fire safety, equitable access & essential services

8.6 Control of Future Developments on the Site

The very substantial future urban development of the site is addressed in the following policies,

beginning with principles to conserve specific important components. Then follows a design policy

delineates where development should best be located, giving high level requirements for limiting

negative impact on significance.

8.6.1 Locations of development

Principles for locating future urban development to conserve components graded

exceptional and high are established as follows

• away from elevated lands of the estate boundary of Maryland and Birling as shown in Figure 13: Estate Boundary;



• away from land of the Lowes Creek Landscape Space as shown in Figure 14: Lowes Creek Landscape Space;

• so as to conserve the Prospect of Maryland as shown in Figure 16: Item 273 – Prospect of Maryland Homestead and Garden above farm;

• to conserve the driveway to Maryland as shown in Figure 17: Item 263 – Driveway to Maryland;

• away from land comprising the Maryland Homestead and Garden as shown in Figure 18: Item 261 – Maryland Homestead and Garden Space;

• away from land comprising the Maryland Vineyard Slopes as shown in Figure 19: Item 266 – Maryland Vineyard Slopes 69;

• so as to conserve the prospect of home farm as shown in Figure 20: Item 271 – Prospect of Home Farm;

• so as to conserve the open character of the Home Farm and Alluvium Space as shown in Figure 21: Item 262 – Home Farm & Alluvium Space;

• away from the Birling 1812 site as shown in Figure 22: Birling 1812 Site;

• so as to conserve the outlook from the 1937 Birling Homestead as shown in Figure 23: Item 266 – Outlook from 1937 Birling Homestead;

• so as to conserve historic visual relationships shown in Figure 25: Historic Visual Relationships.

Locate anticipated urban developments of different kinds in areas shown in Figure 24:

Summary of areas capable of different types of development.

8.6.2 Design principles to limit negative impact of anticipated development

Arrange anticipated urban development to limit negative impact by following the

design principles as given in the table below.

Type of Development Requirements to conserve and limit negative impact on

significance

Sub Arterial and Connector

Road

Preserve existing topography of landform. Preserve significant

proportion of existing trees.

Lay out roads in the zones shown, the eastern road to recreate

the prospect of Maryland from the Northern Road, the

western road to interpret the natural bowl topography of the

western pastures landscape space of Maryland

Tree Planting associated with the road is to be of a species

endemic to the Cumberland Plain. The character of space is to

be kept open, not converted to bushland.

Low density detached housing Preserve existing topography of landform. Preserve significant


Design of minor roads is to maximise visual links to the

Maryland knoll and Lowes Creek, 1812 Birling Site, Birling

homestead, and the estate boundaries




significance

Street Tree Planting is to be of a trees endemic to the

Cumberland Plain.

Medium density detached

housing




Maryland knoll and Lowes Creek, 1812 Birling Site, Birling

homestead, and the estate boundaries

Street Tree Planting is to be of trees endemic to the

Cumberland Plain

Townhouses and low scale walk

up style of apartments




Maryland Knoll and Lowes Creek.

Set out large building forms to be consistent with the

principles of planning existing in the estate.

Any major frontages of buildings are to address Maryland

Knoll

Street Tree Planting is to be trees endemic to the Cumberland

Plain.

Town Centre Retail Preserve existing topography of landform. Preserve significant



Maryland Knoll and Lowes Creek.

Large building forms are to be arranged to maximise open

space character of the estate, and be consistent with the

principles of planning existing in the estate where by buildings

are arranged orthogonally to each other

Schools Open Space,

Community Facilities



Design of minor roads is to be consistent with existing road

system on the home farm for the site identified adjacent to it.

Design of minor roads in the western pasturelands is to

maximise visual links to the Maryland Knoll and Lowes Creek.

Building forms are to be arranged to maximise open space

character of the estate, and be consistent with the principles

of planning existing in the estate whereby buildings are

arranged orthogonally to each other




significance

Highway service Centre and

other Road facilities

Building forms to be of utilitarian character and laid out

consistent in orthogonal alignment with adjacent homestead

outbuildings in the case of the Birling Homestead site.

Substations and other above

ground infrastructure

All building forms to be of utilitarian rural character.

8.6.3 Maximise opportunities to interpret significance of the place

Development is the most useful opportunity to undertake new interpretation, particularly where this

involves the restoration or reconstruction of fabric, uses and views.

In making developments on the site, maximise the opportunities for interpreting by

following the principles of the existing historic layout of the estates:

• Maryland homestead and its garden set on a knoll highly visible from Northern Road;

• Approached by a picturesque drive;

• Looking out over its farmlands to the South Creek;

• A home farm located and seen arranged to be seen on a separate drive from Northern Road with

a gatehouse. The outbuildings arranged to be seen from Maryland;

• The winery and its buildings spatially and functionally related to the Maryland homestead, its

drive and gatehouse, and view to the Blue Mountains;

• The Birling homestead sitting above its garden looking out to the South Creek;

• The 1812 Homestead located in clear space.

8.7 Adoption, Public Access to this Report and Review

These policies address what is to be done with this report. In this case the review of the conservation

plan is logically timed to coincide with other strategic planning.

This CMP should be adopted by the body that manages the estate in the PPP process.

Public access to the report should be provided in line with statutory requirements. The CMP

should be reviewed every five years or in step with the timing of review of the strategic plan.

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies September 2017 9. Appendices


9 Appendices

Appendix 9.1 Inventory of components of the site, including Gradings of Significance

Appendix 9.2 Maps referred to in the report

Appendix 9.3 Listings

Appendix 9.4 Map summarising areas capable of different types of development

Maryland & Lowe’s Birling CMP Revised Policies November 2017 9. Appendices


9.1 Inventory of Components of the site and Gradings of Significance

9.1.1 Inventory key

PERIOD GRADING

L Lowe – early 19th Century E Exceptional

B Barker – 19th Century 1854- 1940 H High

Y Young – mid 20th Century M Moderate

T Thomson – mid-late 20th Century L Little

I Intrusive

N Not Graded

9.1.2 Inventory

Gradings of Significant Fabric (majority of numbering is as given in Tropman & Tropman CMP)

Reasons for the allocated Significance Grading as described in the table refer to the descriptions given below

Built Item Exceptional Ranking

Reason 1: This ranking recognises this item was designed and built for the Maryland Estate by Thomas Barker or Thomas Charles Barker Its significance

is historical, aesthetic and technological.

Reason 2: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of the horse breeder HH Young.

Built Item High Ranking

Reason 3: This ranking recognises the that the architectural character and style of the addition reflect the attitudes to the estate of Annie and Elizabeth

Thomson.

Built Item Little Ranking

Reason 4: Although built by the locally historically and socially significant Thomson Family, this building has no little value in demonstrating that

significance.

Reason 5: Although built by the locally historically and socially significant Thomson Family, this common farm feature has no little value in

demonstrating that significance.



Archaeological item - Exceptional

Reason 6: The grading recognises the exceptional potential of this site to yield information about the administration of Magistrate Lowe.

Landscape Space - Exceptional

Reason 7: This grading of a landscape space recognises the space as described was formed or reveals part of the layout and design of Maryland Estate of

Thomas Barker.

Visual Relationships -Exceptional and High

Reason 8: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of this visual relationship which was part of the layout and design of the

Maryland estate of Thomas Barker.

Reason 9: This grading recognises the historic and aesthetic significance of this visual relationship which was part of the layout and design of the 1937

Homestead of HH Young.

Item, Figure &

Map Section #

Inventory Item Short Description Period of

construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 1

Fig. 3 Section 1

Maryland

Homestead

Substantial single storey country house laid out

with verandahed entrance front at to the north

and garden front to the east. The house has a

large entrance hall, drawing room, parlour, major

cross hall leading to the dining room and several

bedrooms. Apart from changes to decorative

schemes and adaptions to smaller rooms and the

roof covering, the house is in its original form and

appearance.

Barker & Thomson Exceptional Reason 1

No. 2

Fig. 3 Section 1

Kitchen Wing Located directly to the west of the house,

connected by a short link, it contains one major

kitchen room, a staff room and pantries. The two

staff rooms were interconnected in the Thomson

period.

Barker & Thomson Exceptional

High

Reason 1

Reason 3



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 3

Fig. 3 Section 1

Kitchen Store Single storey building connected to rear of

Laundry Building Barker Exceptional Reason 1

No. 4

Fig. 3 Section 1

Meat House Octagonal single storey freestanding building

from the 1890s Barker Exceptional Reason 1

No. 5

Fig. 3 Section 1

Laundry Hipped roof outbuilding connected by verandah to

the Kitchen Wing

Barker Exceptional Reason 1

No. 6

Fig. 3 Section 1

Workshop Storey and a half long building to the west of the

kitchen wing. It has a decorative porch facing the

entrance drive.


No. 7

Fig. 3 Section 1

Guest House A single storied stone outbuilding from the

nineteenth century, with eastern addition by the

Thomsons, presenting with a bay window to the

entrance front.

Barker finished c.

1860

&Thomson

Exceptional

Exceptional

High

Reason 1

Reason 3

No.8

Fig. 3 Section 1

Winery Two Storied Stone building with two gabled roofs,

open floors


No. 9

Fig. 3 Section 1

Winery Store Long single storied building with rubble walls and

gable roof, and two internal chambers. The store

was burnt down and rebuilt in 1899.


No. 10

Fig. 3 Section 1

Swimming pool In ground concrete pool with tiled apron, no fence Thomson Moderate Comparative

research is

needed to

establish if a

swimming pool

is a notable or

common

construction in



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

the district in

1960s. If it is

rare, then the

grading should

be revised to

high.

No. 11

Fig. 3 Section 1

Underground

Cistern

Cement covered cistern storing 10,000 gallons of

roof water


No. 12

Fig. 8 Section 6

Poultry (duck) shed Large poultry shed with single low pitch gabled

roof

Thomson Little Reason 4

No.13

Fig. 3 Section 1

Amenity Shed Low single storey red brick shed with low pitched

gable roof


No. 14

Fig. 3 Section 1

Upper Gate House Stone small Victorian Italianate cottage with

ornate porch

Barker Exceptional Reason 1:

No. 15

Fig. 8 Section 6

Poultry shed Large metal structured and clad shed Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 16

Fig. 8 Section 6


No. 17

Fig. 8 Section 6


No. 18

Fig. 5 Section 3

Modern cottage Single storied house Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 19

Fig. 5 Section 3

Metal shed Metal structured shed Thomson Little Reason 4



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 20

Fig. 5 Section 3

Former entry

cottage

Rendered Stone four roomed house, low pitched

hipped roof, set above the former driveway. This is

a nineteenth century structure, modified in the

late twentieth century.

Barker Thomson Exceptional

Intrusive

Reason 1

No. 21

Fig. 4 Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

#6.2)

Farm House A five-roomed single storeyed house, with front

verandah returning both sides. The front elevation

is formalised with quoins. Separate Kitchen wing

to the west is timber framed and vertically

boarded.


No. 22

Fig. 3 but located

in Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

#6.7)

Shed / Feed stalls Five bay timber posted shed, with large gable roof,

and skillion wings to the east and west, open to

the north

Barker Exceptional

Reason 1

Feed stalls Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 23

Fig. 4 Section 2

Cattle shelter Three bay timbers posted shed with gabled roof Barker? Exceptional? Reason 1

No. 24

Fig. 4 Section 2

Brick dairy building Gabled brick shed open to the north to the east of

the earlier milking shed Thomson Moderate Whilst these are

not uncommon

they are

becoming rare,

and have some

technological

significance. In

this case the

shed

demonstrates



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

the

technological

sequence of

dairying

structures on the

estate

No. 25

Fig. 4 Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

#6.6)

Early milking shed Timber posted shed, gabled, with timber

nineteenth century milking stalls and feed bays

intact significance


No.26

Fig. 4 Section 2

Timber dairy

building

Standard Mid Twentieth Century milking shed Thomson Moderate Whilst these are

not uncommon

they are

becoming rare,

and have some

technological

significance. In

this case the

shed

demonstrates

the

technological

sequence of

dairying

structures on the

estate



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 27

Fig. 3 but located

in

Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

#6.3)

Stables & Coach

House

Stone storey and a half formal façade to the south,

containing rooms for the carriage, stalls, tack

room


No. 28

Fig. 4 Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

#6.5)

Timber Slab Shed Long slab and post shed with gabled roof, open to

the north where vehicle doors have been on place


No. 29

Fig. 4 Section 2

Step Up Dairy and

Livestock Yards

Large milking shed and associated yards Thomson Moderate This is not a rare

type of

structure, but

demonstrates

the

technological

sequence of

dairying

structures on the

estate

No. 30

Fig. 4 Section 2

Stables/Splayed

Yards

Small metal shed Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 31

Fig. 4 Section 2

Tack Room A small freestanding shed Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 32 Hayshed Metal shed Thomson Little Reason 4



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

Fig. 4 Section 2

No. 33

Fig. 3 Section 1

Winery

Underground

Cistern

Barker Exceptional Reason 1:

No. 34

Fig. 3 Section 1

Gardener’s Shed A small shed Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 50

Fig. 3 Section 1

Missing from

map, but above

item 11.

Formal Lawn Raised on a stone curved retaining wall above the

formal drive, with steps leading to the ornamental

garden


No. 51

Fig. 3 Section 1

Arrival Lawn Elevated flat lawn Thomson Moderate Although carried

out by

Thomson’s, and

demonstrating

their taste, it

does obscure the

drama of the

original garden

setting of the

house at the

entrance

No. 52

Fig. 3 Section 1

Utility Court The courtyard space formed by the house, cellar

steps, meat house and Stores Building


No. 53

Fig. 3 Section 1

Recreational Court The court formed by hedges, the west front of the

house, and containing the pool

Thomson Moderate See item no.10



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 54

Fig. 8 Section 6

Industrial

Management

Space

The space to the west of the Winery Store,

elevated with views over the vineyard slopes to the

Blue Mountains

Thomson Moderate Reason 4

No. 60

Fig. 4 Section 2

Horse

Management

Space,

The southern end of the main set of farm buildings Thomson Little Reason 4

Tree 1 & Tree 2 Barker? Exceptional Reason 1

No. 61

Fig. 4 Section 2

Cattle

Management

Space

An open space between outbuildings in the home

farm, identified by Tropman and Tropman. No

associated fabric

- -

No. 101

Fig. 8 Section 6

Vineyard Slopes The lower slopes of the knoll, on which the

vineyard was planted, once hedged at the bottom

of the slope


No. 102

Fig. 5 Section 3

Line of Road A formation clearly visible running across the

contour


No.103

Fig. 5 Section 3

South of private

road

Quarries Site of stone quarry identified by Tropman and

Tropman

Barker? Exceptional? This needs more

research

No. 104

Fig. 4 Section 2

Northern

Gatehouse & Out

Building

Single storey stone lodge, with semi octagonal

plan, built by Barker, with large timber brick and

rubble stone house added to the north


Thomson High Reason 3



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 249

Fig. 4 Section 2

Shed Posted three bay timber shed with hipped roof, in

the style of the later Barker buildings, with steel

awning addition to the south by Thomson



No. 258

Fig. 4 Section 2

Laundry Brick single storey Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 259

Fig. 4 Section 2

Poultry Run Timber post and wire fence,

Ledged braced and beaded board gate salvaged

from elsewhere?


Barker High Reason 1

Items below identified by Hector Abrahams Architects

No. 200

Fig. 8 Section 6

Laying Shed A metal framed shed with open sides Thomson Little Reason 4

No. 201

Fig. 4 Section 2

Road An unsealed road running from the current main

drive to the home farm


No. 202

Fig. 4 Section 2

Hay and machine

shed

Large posted four bay shed open sided, loft for

threshing, separate motor room with intact steam

pump, and drive shaft


No. 203

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam 1 A surface dam in the upper catchment of a natural

creek line. Dated by Tropman and Tropman to the

1860s, and modified later




Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 204

Fig. 5 Section 3

Road Unsealed drive from gates on The Northern Road

to Mary land Homestead. Existed 1947 (aerial

photo) may date from Thomson or Barker period

Barker? (existed 1947)

Not

determined

No. 205

Fig. 5 Section 3

Road An unsealed road linking the main drive to the

private road


No. 206

Fig. 5 Section 3

Bridge and

evidence of early

drive

Not seen, but described by Tropman and Tropman

as a formation


No. 207

Fig. 5 Section 3

Bridge A causeway Thomson Little Reason 5

No. 208

Fig. 5 Section 3

Gate Posts Timber Gate Posts and remnant picket fencing

Probably late nineteenth Century


No. 209

Fig. 9 Section 7

Dam 2. Broken earth wall of a surface dam, and chain of

ponds. According to Tropman and Tropman, built

c. 1930 and demolished c. 1956

Barker Little

No. 214

Fig. 8 Section 6

Dam 3 Small surface dam. According to Tropman and

Tropman, built c. 1956

Thomson Little

No. 212

Fig. 4 Section 2

Gate Posts Set of four large timber posts, moulded tops and

timber side rails.

Barker

Exceptional

Reason 1

Metal farm gates Thomson Little Reason 5

No. 213

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam 4 A large surface dam in the lower catchment of a

natural creek line. Dated by Tropman and

Tropman to the 1950s




Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 211

Fig. 9 Section 7

Dam 5 A large surface dam in the lower catchment of a

natural creek line on the west of Maryland. Dated

by Tropman and Tropman to the 1970s


No. 215

Fig. 4 Section 2

(Casey & Lowe

# A7)

Site of outbuilding To the north of the farm house, a formation in the

ground indicating the layout of a building

Barker High Reason 1

No. 216

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam Small surface dam and low earth wall Thomson Little Reason 5

No. 217

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam Small surface dam and low earth wall Little

No. 218

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam Small surface dam and low earth wall Little

No. 219

Fig. 11 Section 9

Dam Small surface dam or body of water, may be part

natural

Little

No. 220

Fig. 11

Section 9

Lowes Creek

Bridge crossing

A causeway

needs to be inspected

No. 221

Fig. 10

Section 8

Dam Medium size surface dam or body of water, may

be natural

Little

No. 222

Fig. 7 Section 5

Dam Small surface dam Little

No. 223

Fig. 7




Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

Section 5

No. 224

Fig. 7 Section 5


No. 225

Fig. 7 Section 5

Driveway Unsealed road running on crest of rising land from

Northern Road to the Birling homestead

Young Little

No. 226

Fig. 7 Section 5

Dam Medium size surface dam and low earth wall

arranged in the outlook of the homestead

Young High Reason 2

No. 227

Fig. 7 Section 5

Dam Small surface dam and low earth wall Young Little

No. 228

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Large surface dam and low earth wall Little

No. 229

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Small surface dam or body of water may be part

natural

Little

No. 230

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Small surface dam or body of water may be part

natural

Little

No. 231

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Large surface dam and low earth wall Little

No.232

Fig. 7 Section 5

Birling c.1937

Homestead

Single storeyed large brick homestead with

verandahs to garden front on south and east, rear

court formed by two wings, colonnaded

Young Exceptional Reason 2

No. 233

Fig. 7 Section 5

Building Metal shed associated with poultry raising ? Little

No. 234

Fig. 7 Section 5

Building Metal shed associated with poultry raising ? Little



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

No. 235

Fig. 7 Section 5

Building Large metal shed associated with poultry raising ? Little

No. 236

Fig. 10 Section 8

Buildings Four large metal sheds associated with poultry

raising

? Little

No. 237

Fig. 7 Section 5

Building Formal cottage to west of main homestead, in the

same style


No. 238

Fig. 7 Section 5

Birling c.1937 site Open grounds to the north of the homestead Young High? May be found to

have

significance to

the original

layout of the

garden of the

homestead

No. 239

Fig. 10 Section 8

Building Large metal shed associated with poultry raising ? Little

No. 240

Fig. 10 Section 8

Building Small shed ? Little

No. 241

Fig. 10 Section 8


No. 242

Fig. 10 Section 8


No. 243

Fig. 10 Section 8

Building Yard and shelter ? Little

No. 244 Building Small house ? Little



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

Fig. 6 Section 4

No. 245

Fig. 6 Section 4

Building Two small sheds ? Little

No. 246

Fig. 6 Section 4

Birling Stables Single Storey face brick Stables building with

central court and associated yard and tack room

Young Moderate The building is

of interest for its

siting on the

1812 site.

No. 247

Fig. 6 Section 4

(Casey & Lowe #

A9)

Birling 1812 Site Landform, surface and subsurface archaeological

fabric

Lowe Exceptional Reason 6:

No. 250

Fig. 4 Section 2

Pump shed Pump shed for Dam 4 Little

No. 251

Fig. 4 Section 2


No. 252

Fig. 4 Section 2


No. 253

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Very small surface body of water Little

No. 254

Fig. 4 Section 2

Dam Very small surface body of water Little

No. 256

Fig. 10 Section 8

Dam Small surface body of water Little

No. 257 Dam Small surface body of water Little



Item, Figure &

Map Section #


construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

Fig. 10 Section 8

No. 277

Fig. 4 Section 2

Fences Wire fencing line of hardwood and star pickets Thomson Little Reason 5

No. 278

Fig. 3 Section 1

Gate Posts Double set of entrance gates, hardwood Barker Exceptional Reason 1

No. 279

Fig. 3 Section 1

Gate Posts Single set of entrance gates Barker Exceptional Reason 1

No. 280

Fig. 8 Section 6

Trees Trees on vineyard slope Intrusive

No. 281

Fig. 5 Section 3

Vegetation Vegetation surrounding Thomson’s cottage and

metal shed

Little Reason 5

No. 282

Fig 7 Section 5

Buildings A group of buildings along Northern Road Intrusive

No. 283

Fig 5 Section 3

Buildings A group of buildings below southern driveway Intrusive

No. 284

Fig 5 Section 3

Driveway Original driveway (deduced from evidence of

bridge)


No. 285

Fig. 6 Section 4

Trees Trees within Birling 1812 site Not graded

No. 286

Fig. 10 Section 8

Yards Timber post and wire Little



List of Landscape Spaces

Item &

Map #


Construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

261

Fig. 3

Section 1

Maryland Homestead

and Garden

The homestead, gatehouse, gates,

associated buildings within in a

designed picturesque garden on the

knoll, including major trees,

remnant pleasure garden, formal

lawn and long drive.


262

Fig. 4

Section 2

Home Farm

and Alluvium of the

eastern creek

The low-lying alluvial land between

The Northern Road and Maryland

knoll, containing the home farm

cottage and extensive complex of

farm buildings and coach house. It

contains the lodge on the Northern

road, from which a drive once

connected to the farm. The largest

feature is one of the main dams of

Maryland.


263

Fig. 5

Section 3

Driveway to Maryland

The land rising from The Northern

Road to the knoll, the location of

the route of the original and current

driveways, overlooked by the

Entrance Cottage, and gates on the

Northern Road.


264

Fig 6

Section 4

Birling 1812 site

The known site of the homestead

built and occupied by the

Magistrate Robert Lowe in 1812,

and its driveway location.




Item &

Map #


Construct.

Significance

Grading

Notes

265

Fig 7

Section 5

Birling Homestead and

Setting

The c. 1937 Birling Homestead and

sloping pasture land formally

addressed and overlooked by its

verandahs and formal rooms.


266

Fig 8

Section 6

Maryland Vineyard

Slopes

The lower slopes of the knoll, falling

to Lowes Creek, the location of the

Barker Vineyards and Winery

buildings.


267

Fig 9

Section 7

Western pasture lands of

Maryland

Part of the bowl of sloped land,

falling from a rim of high land

northwards to Lowes Creek. The

major built feature is the large dam.

Barker &

Young

Moderate Although associated with Barker,

this land does not contribute to

the overall design of the estate

268

Fig 10

Section 8

Western pasture lands of

Birling

Part of the bowl of sloped land,

falling from a rim of high land

southwards to Lowes Creek. The

major built feature is the large dam

which is not significant to Lowe.

Lowe Little The lands are not thought to have

archaeological potential to

Magistrate Lowe.

269

Fig 11

Section 9

Lowes Creek

The watercourse of Lowes Creek

including its adjacent alluvium with

its canopy of Eucalyptus.

Barker and

Lowe

Exceptional Reason 7 and Reason 6 (as setting

to his homestead site)

List of Historic Visual Relationships

Item &

Map #

Location Item Description Period Grading Notes

270

Fig 24

Maryland Outlook from Maryland

Homestead

Outlook from Maryland

homestead to ridge on Birling,

over South Creek Valley and to

Mt Crear




Item &

Map #

Location Item Description Period Grading Notes

271

Fig 24

Maryland Prospect of Farm house

and buildings

Formal view of farmhouse and

out-buildings from Northern

Road near gatehouse


272

Fig 24

Maryland Maryland Homestead and

Coach house

Formal visual relationship

between stone coach house and

Maryland homestead


273

Fig 24

Maryland Maryland Homestead and

Garden

Intermittent prospects of knoll,

garden of Maryland set above

farmlands from along Northern

Road


274

Fig 24

Maryland View of Blue Mountains Prospect from near winery store

to Blue Mountains


275

Fig 24

Birling

(Lowe)

Visual setting of 1812

Birling

Prospect of site of 1812 Birling

from site of its original driveway

as photographed with backdrop

of Lowes Creek and knoll (site of

future Maryland)


276

Fig 24

Birling

(Young)

Outlook from Birling

Homestead

Outlook of homestead over

South Creek Valley to Mt Crear

Young High Reason 9. The area shown on

the map reference is shaped by

the line of view to Mt Crear, the

space between the homestead

and the dam, a space below the

dam to allow a foreground of

the view to South Creek Valley

and the line of trees on the

driveway.



9.2 Maps referred to in the report

Figure 1: Study Area ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 91

Figure 2: Map showing Section Maps ............................................................................................................................................................ 92

Figure 3: Section 1 .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 93

Figure 4: Section 2 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 94

Figure 5: Section 3 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 95

Figure 6: Section 4 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 96

Figure 7: Section 5.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 97

Figure 8: Section 6 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 98

Figure 9: Section 7 ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 99

Figure 10: Section 8 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 100

Figure 11: Section 9 ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 101

Figure 12: Map showing extent of historic site of Maryland & Birling (based on Figures 3.96 & 3.105, Casey & Lowe) ................................. 102

Figure 13: Estate Boundary ...........................................................................................................................................................................103

Figure 14: Lowes Creek Landscape Space .................................................................................................................................................... 104

Figure 15: Historic Names ............................................................................................................................................................................ 105

Figure 16: Item 273 – Prospect of Maryland Homestead and Garden above farm ........................................................................................ 106

Figure 17: Item 263 – Driveway to Maryland ................................................................................................................................................. 107

Figure 18: Item 261 – Maryland Homestead and Garden Space ................................................................................................................... 108

Figure 19: Item 266 – Maryland Vineyard Slopes ......................................................................................................................................... 109

Figure 20: Item 271 – Prospect of Home Farm .............................................................................................................................................. 110

Figure 21: Item 262 – Home Farm & Alluvium Space .................................................................................................................................... 111

Figure 22: Birling 1812 Site ........................................................................................................................................................................... 112

Figure 23: Item 266 – Outlook from 1937 Birling Homestead ........................................................................................................................ 113

Figure 24: Historic Visual Relationships ........................................................................................................................................................ 114

Figure 25: Summary of areas capable of different types of development ..................................................................................................... 118

Note: Figure 25 is located in Appendix 9.4



Figure 1: Study Area (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 2: Map showing Section Maps (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 3: Section 1 (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 4: Section 2

(Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 12: Map showing extent of historic site of Maryland & Birling (based on Figures 3.96 & 3.105, Casey & Lowe)



Figure 13: Estate Boundary (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 14: Lowes Creek Landscape Space (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 15: Historic Names (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 16: Item 273 – Prospect of Maryland Homestead and Garden above farm (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 17: Item 263 – Driveway to Maryland (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 18: Item 261 – Maryland Homestead and Garden Space (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 19: Item 266 – Maryland Vineyard Slopes (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 20: Item 271 – Prospect of Home Farm (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 21: Item 262 – Home Farm & Alluvium Space (Source: HAA)



Figure 22: Birling 1812 Site (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 23: Item 266 – Outlook from 1937 Birling Homestead (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



Figure 24: Historic Visual Relationships (Source: Map based on survey by Craig & Rhodes, with overlay by HAA)



9.3 Listings

9.3.1 NSW State Heritage Register Maryland (under consideration)

Item details, Boundary and Statement of significance only. Taken from website, 26/05/2017



9.3.2 Camden LEP Listing for Maryland (from Camden LEP 2010)

From website



9.3.3 National Trust of Australia (NSW)



9.4 Map summarising areas capable of different types of development

Figure 25: Summary of areas capable of different types of development

Maryland and Birling · 11/23/2017 · Revised Policies November 2017 Introduction . HECTOR...

Documents

Transcript of Maryland and Birling · 11/23/2017 · Revised Policies November 2017 Introduction . HECTOR...