69 Redmyre Road - Strathfield Council · 69 Redmyre Road NSW Ref: 1742: HIS Heritage Impact Statement October 2017 Page 2 of 37 Report Register The following table is a report register

Tropman & Tropman Architects Architecture Conservation Landscape Interiors Urban Design Interpretation

55 Lower Fort Street Sydney NSW 2000 Phone: (02) 9251 3250 Fax: (02) 9251 6109 Website: www.tropmanarchitects.com.au Email: [email protected]

TROPMAN AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ABN 71 088 542 885 INCORPORATED IN NEW SOUTH WALES

Lester Tropman Architects Registration: 3786 John Tropman Architects Registration: 5152

69 Redmyre Road Strathfield, NSW

Heritage Impact Statement (HIS)

Prepared for Figgis + Jefferson Tepa

To accompany

Development Application

October 2017 REF: 1742: HIS

Issue 02

Tropman & Tropman Architects 69 Redmyre Road NSW Ref: 1742: HIS Heritage Impact Statement October 2017

Page 2 of 37

Report Register The following table is a report register tracking the issues of the Heritage Impact Statement for 69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield prepared by Tropman & Tropman Architects. Tropman & Tropman Architects operate under a quality management system, and this register is in compliance with this system.

TTA Project Ref

No.

Issue No.

Description Issue Date Prepared By

Checked By

Issued To

1742:HIS

01 DRAFT

Heritage Impact Statement

29.09.2017 Lester Tropman,

Nica Javadi Krystal

Pua

Lester Tropman

Figgis + Jefferson Tepa

Via email [email protected].

au

1742:HIS

02 FINAL

Heritage Impact Statement

03.10.2017 Lester Tropman,

Nica Javadi Krystal

Pua

Lester Tropman

Figgis + Jefferson Tepa

Via email [email protected].

au

mailto:[email protected]





Page 3 of 37

Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Brief ....................................................................................................................................... 4

1.2 Study Area ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.3 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 4

1.4 Limitations ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.5 Author Identification .............................................................................................................. 4

2.0 CONTEXT AND HISTORY ............................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Heritage Mapping .................................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Strathfield History ....................................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Halloween – Victorian House ................................................................................................ 8

3.0 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ..................................................................................................................... 9

3.1 Streetscape ........................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Subject Site ......................................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Existing photographs ........................................................................................................... 12

3.4 Significance of Components ............................................................................................... 20

4.0 PROPOSED DESIGN ..................................................................................................................... 21

5.0 HERITAGE LISTINGS AND SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................. 25

5.1 Heritage Listings.................................................................................................................. 25

5.2 Statement of Significance 69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield ................................................... 25

6.0 ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................ 31

6.1 Assessment against policies in the heritage assessment by Tropman & Tropman Architects. ....................................................................................................................................... 31

6.2 Burra Charter ....................................................................................................................... 36

7.0 IMPACT ON HERITAGE VALUES.................................................................................................. 36

7.1 Assessment ......................................................................................................................... 36

7.3 Positive and Negative effects .............................................................................................. 36

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................... 37

9.0 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................ 37


Page 4 of 37

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Brief

The aim of this report is to assess the heritage of the subject site, review the works proposed and to produce a statement of heritage impact relating to heritage issues for the existing building and proposed works and the streetscape.

1.2 Study Area For the purposes of this report the place, as defined in the Burra Charter is to be known as the subject site or study area. 69 Redmyre Road, listed as Halloween – Victorian House in the Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory is located within a heritage conservation zone registered as Lot 2, DP 208343. Information from Strathfield LEP State Heritage Inventory. The building can be described as one building in a modest row of single storey houses. Built in 1890 as the residence for the Town Clerk until 1960s, the building “retains much of its Victorian Italianate form detailing and contributes to the significance of the Redmyre Road Precinct.” Information from Strathfield LEP State Heritage Inventory.

1.3 Methodology The method follows the New South Wales Department of Planning Heritage Office publication Assessing Heritage Significance July 2001 and revisions.

1.4 Limitations This report is limited to a heritage impact statement of the proposed works by Figgis & Jefferson and its relationship to the streetscape of Redmyre Road and Homebush Road. An analysis of condition of the fabric of the subject property and the streetscape was limited to visual inspection undertaken by the author during one site visit. No intervention to fabric was undertaken.

1.5 Author Identification This report has been prepared by: Lester Tropman Director, Heritage Conservation Architect Nica Javadi Project Officer Krystal Pua Project Officer Note: Unless otherwise stated, all images are by the authors and were taken during the course of this study.


Page 5 of 37

2.0 CONTEXT AND HISTORY 2.1 Heritage Mapping 69 Redmyre Road, listed as Halloween – Victorian House in the Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory is located within a heritage conservation zone registered as Lot 2, DP 208343. Information from Strathfield LEP State Heritage Inventory. The subject site also adjoins the Heritage listed local items:

“Ravenswood”—Federation house and garden, 61 Homebush Road Lot 2, DP 921090 Local I148

Strathfield Council Chambers and Town Hall—Council Chambers and memorial, 65 Homebush Road Lot 1, DP 208343 Local I149

Letter receiver (post box), Redmyre Road Local I186 The building can be described as one building in a modest row of single storey houses. Built in 1890

as the residence for the Town Clerk until 1960s, the building “retains much of its Victorian Italianate

form detailing and contributes to the significance of the Redmyre Road Precinct.” Information from

Strathfield LEP State Heritage Inventory.

Figure 1 the Strathfield Council LEP mapping for heritage Map 05

69 Redmyre Street, Strathfield


Page 6 of 37

2.2 Strathfield History “Halloween, 69 Redmyre Road Strathfield was built in 1887 as a residence for the Town Clerk of Strathfield Council.

Strathfield Council was incorporated in June 1885 and declared a Municipality. In August 1886, the Council acquired land from James. R. Powell (owner of Terry-Hi-Hi Homebush Rd and descendent of one of the original LibertyPlains land grantees Edward Powell) at the cost of £600 on the corner of Homebush and Redmyre Roads in order to build the Council Chambers and a residence for the Town Clerk.

The successful tenderer was John Sulman (1849-1934), of the architectural firm Sulman and Blackmann. Sulman had recently arrived from England and was residing in Strathfield, when he submitted the tender. The builder was John Morrison and the total cost of the Chambers and Town Clerk’s residence was £1635.13.0.

The building of the Council Chambers and Town Clerk’s residence were completed in 1877. The Strathfield Council Chambers were officially opened on 31

st October 1877.

The Town Clerk’s residence was named Halloween and was first occupied by Strathfield Council Town Clerk John Hope Balmain from 1887 to 1906 (his death). The next occupant was Albert Thew who served as Town Clerk of Strathfield from 1907 to 1938. James Sandry Matthews served as Town Clerk from 1938 to 1966 and occupied the house for part of his term. Council sold the house in 1960 to Maraenit Pty Ltd. The house is currently vacant and owned by Strathfield Council.” - Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory

Figure 2 1943 Aerial Image of subject site. Source: SIX NSW Planning N

Subject site


Page 7 of 37

Figure 3 Location of 69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield - Lot 2, DP 208343. Image from Google Map

Figure 4 Location of 69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield. Image from Google Map

69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield

69 Redmyre Road


Page 8 of 37

2.3 Halloween – Victorian House

“Halloween . 69 Redmyre Road Strathfield was built in 1887 as a residence for the Town Clerk of Strathfield Council. Strathfield Council was incorporated in June 1885 and declared a Municipality. In August 1886, the Council acquired land from James. R. Powell (oener of Terry-Hi-Hi Homebush Rd and descendent of one of the original LibertyPlains land grantees Edward Powell) at the cost of £600 on the corner of Homebush and Redmyre Roads in order to build the Council Chambers and a residence for the Town Clerk. The successful tenderer was John Sulman (1849-1934), of the architectural firm Sulman and Blackmann. Sulman had recently arrived from England and was residing Strathfield, when he submitted the tender. The builder was John Morrison and the total cost of the Chambers and Town Clerk’s residence was £1635.13.0. The building of the Council Chambers and Town Clerk’s residence were completed in 1877. The Strathfield Council Chambers were officially opened on 31

st October 1877.

The Town Clerk’s residence was named Halloween and was first occupied by Strathfield Council TownClerk John Hope Balmain from 1887 to 1906 (his death). The next occupant was Albert Thew who served as Town Clerk of Strahfield from 1907 to 1938. James Sandry Matthews served as Town Clerk from 1938 to 1966 and occupied the house for part of his term. Council sold the house in 1960 to Maraenit Pty Ltd. The house is currently vacant and owned by Strathfield Council.” - Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory


Page 9 of 37

3.0 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

The following photographs give a brief inventory of the site’s physical features. The physical evidence of the subject site was investigated through non-intrusive observation of the fabric. 3.1 Streetscape “A single storey Victorian Italianate house of rendered masonry with a hipped roof of slate shingles and galvanised (rusting) mild steel ridge and hip cappings. The house has a projecting room on one side of the front elevation terminating a verandah. Double hung windows open to the front elevation and have rendered architraves, mullion and entablature. The front door has a toplight. Chimneys are rendered with decorative cornices.” -Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory

Figure 5 Streetscape Redmyre Road, Strathfield. Image from Google Map


Subject site

Subject site

Letter receiver (post box), Redmyre Road Local I186

Strathfield Council Chambers and Town Hall—Council Chambers and memorial, 65 Homebush Road Lot 1, DP 208343 Local I149


Page 10 of 37


3.2 Subject Site The building and its surrounds was inspected by Tropman & Tropman and Strathfield Council in August 2014 and May 2016. The existing cottage is located within the Redmyre Conservation Area Context and on the

East side Strathfield Town Hall complex

West side Single storey Victorian period cottage

North side Strathfield Council offices

South side Redmyre Road Conservation area and Federation period cottages Currently the cottage surrounds are concrete paving to the frontage and rear areas and to the southern side a vacant gravel and earth hardstand area. In 1885 Strathfield was declared a Municipality and in 1886 the Council acquired land on the corner of Homebush and Redmyre Roads. John Sulman, a noted architect who lived locally designed the Council Chambers and a Cottage for the Town Clerk (69 Redmyre Road). The Cottage is a fine example of late Victorian period architecture constructed in c1887. Detailing as shown in the accompanying photos show the similarities of window design and detailing between the Cottage and the original parts of the Council Chambers. Currently the Cottage has been modified into 2 separate flats. Behind the adaptive works, original details are available to reconstruct the modified front façade. Two chimneys remain and are intact. Externally the slate roofed, rendered masonry walls are in poor to fair condition and internally the walls, floors and plaster ceilings are in poor to reasonable condition. Past falling damp issues have caused some fabric decay and the roof ridge and hip cappings need replacement. The flat roof and roof framing needed investigation and has been replaced to match existing. The building surrounds and urban setting are supportive for the retention and reconstruction of this cottage. The Cottage is a significant component of the Strathfield Council Chambers ensemble of buildings. This Cottage is individually significant and its heritage values include the design by John Sulman as an early building in Strathfield and part of the original Council building complex, and it is part of the Redmyre Road Conservation Area.

Subject site


Page 11 of 37

Future use of the building should include being integrated with the Strathfield Council Offices and Chambers. The Cottage and land surrounding is capable of adaptive development. Careful master planning should be undertaken to assess how the Cottage is conserved and adapted into its new use as a component of the Council’s ensemble of built development. The Cottage has individual heritage significance as an item of environmental heritage of Strathfield’s urban development.

Figure 8 Aerial Image of subject site. Source: SIX NSW Planning N

Subject Site


Page 12 of 37

3.3 Existing photographs

Figure 9 69 Redmyre road frontage.

Figure 10 Front verandah of subject site.


Page 13 of 37

Figure 11 Western side of building.

Figure 12 Rear of building and main driveway


Page 14 of 37

Figure 13 Eastern side of the building.

Figure 14 Front door to 69 Redmyre Road.


Page 15 of 37

Figure 15 Dining Room Figure 16 Dining Room

Figure 17 Hall 1 detail Figure 18 Dining Room ceiling and cornice.

Figure 19 Sitting Room Figure 20 Hall 1 joinery


Page 16 of 37

Figure 21 Hall 1 Figure 22 Hall 1 ceiling, cornice and frieze detail

Figure 23 Hall 1 skirting Figure 24 Bed 1 walls

Figure 25 Bed 1 ceiling and cornices Figure 26 Bed 1 door highlight


Page 17 of 37

Figure 27 Dressing Room Figure 28 Dressing Room

Figure 29 Hall 1 at doors to Kitchen Figure 30 Hall 1

Figure 31 Kitchen Figure 32 Kitchen door


Page 18 of 37

Figure 33 Hall 1 northern end Figure 34 Hall 1

Figure 35 Dining Figure 36 Kitchen

Figure 37 Sunroom Figure 38 Laundry


Page 19 of 37

Figure 39 Sunroom to Bathroom Figure 40 Bathroom

Figure 41 Bed 2 Figure 42 Bed 3

Figure 43 Kitchen Figure 44 Roof space


Page 20 of 37

3.4 Significance of Components

HIGH HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

MODERATE HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

LITTLE HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

Figure 45 Ground Floor Plan of 69 Redmyre, Strathfield – Levels of Significance N


Page 21 of 37

4.0 PROPOSED DESIGN Figgis & Jefferson has proposed the follow scope of works:

New façade, steel frame windows and doors

New steel columns,

Make good existing paving and timber floorboards

New downpipe

New glass roof with steel support framing

New internal blinds

Covered ventilation outlet with mesh front

New gutter

Figure 46 Proposed Ground Floor Plan


Page 22 of 37

Figure 47 Proposed Roof Plan


Page 23 of 37

Figure 48 Proposed Elevation

Figure 49 Proposed Section A


Page 24 of 37

Figure 50 Works in this application are proposed to this part of the building.



Page 25 of 37


5.0 HERITAGE LISTINGS AND SIGNIFICANCE 5.1 Heritage Listings

Municipal Council Local Heritage Listing

Is listed in a conservation zone. National Trust of Australia NSW

is not included in any listing of the National trust of Australia NSW State Heritage Register

is not included in the NSW State Heritage Register. Register of the National Estate

is not included in the Register of the National Estate

5.2 Statement of Significance 69 Redmyre Road, Strathfield

“Halloween retains much of its Victorian Italianate form and detailing and contributes to the significance of the Redmyre Road Precinct. Built in 1890 as the residence for the Town Clerk and serving that purpose until the 1960s, Halloween is important in the municipal development of Strathfield.” -Extracted from Strathfield LEP Heritage Inventory


Page 26 of 37

5.3 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY The method for the Heritage Impact Statement follows that set out in the “NSW Heritage Manual” Update August 2000 produced by the NSW Heritage Office. The method is outlined below: Heritage Impact Statement The statement of heritage impact should identify what impact the proposed works will have on the significance of the item/site and the measures that are proposed to mitigate negative impacts. The statement of heritage impact will also look into identifying why more sympathetic solutions are not viable. Recommendations are developed in order to maintain the heritage significance of the site.

a) Address “Some Questions to be Answered in a Statement of Heritage Impact” in the Heritage Office Publication Table 1. b) Assessment against polices in CMP

5.4 Heritage Impact Assessment

a) Assessment against “Some Questions to be Answered in a Statement of Heritage Impact” in the Heritage Office Publication Table 1.

Proposed Change to Heritage Item

Some Questions to be Answered

in a Statement of Heritage Impact

Minimum Supporting

Information Required

Demolition of a building or structure

• Have all options for retention and adaptive re-use been explored? • Can all of the significant elements of the heritage item be kept and any new

development be located elsewhere on the site? • Is demolition essential at this time or can it be postponed in case future

circumstances make its retention and conservation more feasible? • Has the advice of a heritage consultant been sought? Have the consultant’s

recommendations been implemented? If not, why not?

Not Applicable.

Minor partial demolition

(including internal elements)

•Is the demolition essential for the heritage item to function? •Are important features of the item affected by the demolition (e.g. fireplaces in buildings)? •Is the resolution to partially demolish sympathetic to the heritage significance of the item? •If the partial demolition is a result of the condition of the fabric, is it certain that the fabric cannot be repaired?

Not Applicable.


Page 27 of 37




Minimum Supporting


Major partial demolition

(including internal elements)

• Is the demolition essential for the heritage item to function? • Are important features of the item affected by the demolition (e.g. fireplaces in

buildings)? • Is the resolution to partially demolish sympathetic to the heritage significance of

the item? •If the partial demolition is a result of the condition of the fabric, is it certain that

the fabric cannot be repaired?

Not Applicable

Change of use

• Has the advice of a heritage consultant or structural engineer been sought?

Has the consultant’s advice been implemented? If not, why not? • Does the existing use contribute to the significance of the heritage item? • Why does the use need to be changed? • What changes to the fabric are required as a result of the change of use? • What changes to the site are required as a result of the change of use?

Not Applicable

Minor additions

(see also minor

partial demolition)

• How is the impact of the addition on the heritage

significance of the item to be minimised? • Can the additional area be located within an existing

structure? If no, why not? • Will the additions visually dominate the heritage item? • Is the addition sited on any known or potentially significant

archaeological deposits? If so, have alternative positions for the additions been considered?

• Are the additions sympathetic to the heritage item? In what way (e.g. form, proportions, design)?

The building envelope and scale of the dwelling to the street will be maintained. The location of the proposal will be in the same location as the recent existing item. Therefore minimising further impact to the building. The proposed works aim to bring the building up to contemporary standards and will have minimal impact on significant heritage fabric of the building.

It is anticipated that there are no archaeological deposits within the areas of the proposed works. An archaeological director will be engaged if any archaeological deposits are to be found and appropriate action taken.


Page 28 of 37

Minor additions… Continued

(see also minor

partial demolition)




Minimum Supporting


Major additions

(see also major

partial demolition)

• How is the impact of the addition on the heritage significance of the item to be

minimised? • Can the additional area be located within an existing structure? If not, why

not? • Will the additions tend to visually dominate the heritage item? • Are the additions sited on any known, or potentially significant archaeological

deposits? If so, have alternative positions for the additions been considered? • Are the additions sympathetic to the heritage item? In what way (e.g. form,

proportions, design)?

Not Applicable.

New development

adjacent to a heritage item (including additional buildings and dual occupancies)

Note: Most planning instruments (such as local and regional environmental plans) require the approval authority to take into account the impact of new development on adjacent heritage items or conservation areas.

• How is the impact of the new development on the heritage significance of the

item or area to be minimised? • Why is the new development required to be adjacent to a heritage item? • How does the curtilage allowed around the heritage item contribute to the

retention of its heritage significance? • How does the new development affect views to, and from, the heritage item?

What has been done to minimise negative effects? • Is the development sited on any known, or potentially significant

archaeological deposits? If so, have alternative sites been considered? Why were they rejected?

• Is the new development sympathetic to the heritage item? In what way (e.g. form, siting, proportions, design)?

• Will the additions visually dominate the heritage item? How has this been minimised?

• Will the public, and users of the item, still be able to view and appreciate its significance?

Not Applicable.


Page 29 of 37




Minimum Supporting


Subdivision Note: Impacts on heritage values related to new subdivision can often be minimised through development control plans (DCPs). Refer to the Best Practice Guideline on preparing DCPs published by the Department of Planning.

• How is the proposed curtilage allowed around the heritage item appropriate? • Could future development that results from this subdivision compromise the significance of the heritage item? How has this been minimised? • Could future development that results from this subdivision affect views to, and from, the heritage item? How are negative impacts to be minimised?

Not Applicable.

Repainting

using new colour schemes

• Have previous (including original) colour schemes been

investigated? Are previous schemes being reinstated? • Will the repainting effect the conservation of the fabric of the

heritage item?

The proposed repainting is to match existing colours, as per the CMP maintenance policies. The repainting will not have an adverse effect on the fabric of the heritage fabric. The repainting will protect the heritage fabric.

Re-roofing/re-cladding

•Have previous (including original) roofing/cladding materials been investigated (through archival and physical research)?

• Is a previous material being reinstated? • Will the re-cladding effect the conservation of the fabric of the heritage item? • Are all details in keeping with the heritage significance of the item (e.g.

guttering, cladding profiles)? • Has the advice of a heritage consultant or skilled tradesperson (e.g. slate

roofer) been sought?

Not Applicable.

New services

(e.g. air conditioning, plumbing)

• How has the impact of the new services on the heritage significance of the item been minimised? • Are any of the existing services of heritage significance? In what way? Are they affected by the new work? • Has the advice of a conservation consultant (e.g. architect) been sought? Has the consultant’s advice been implemented? • Are any known or potential archaeological deposits (underground and under floor) affected by the proposed new services?

Not Applicable.


Page 30 of 37




Minimum Supporting


Fire upgrading Note: Where agreement cannot be reached between the local council and your consultants on suitable fire-upgrading you may seek the advice of the Fire, Access & Services Panel, a subcommittee of the Heritage Council of NSW. Contact the Heritage Office for further information on (02) 9391 2115.

• How has the impact of the upgrading on the heritage significance of the item been minimised?

• Are any of the existing services of heritage significance? In what way? Are they affected by the new work?

• Has the advice of a conservation consultant (e.g. architect) been sought? Has their advice been implemented?

• Are any known or potential archaeological deposits(underground or under floor) affected by the proposed new services?

• Has the advice of a fire consultant been sought to look for options that would have less impact on the heritage item? Will this advice be implemented? How?

Not Applicable

New landscape works and features (including carparks and fences)

• How has the impact of the new work on the heritage significance of the

existing landscape been minimised? • Has evidence (archival and physical) of previous landscape work been

investigated? Are previous works being reinstated? • Has the advice of a consultant skilled in the conservation of heritage landscapes been sought? If so, have their

recommendations been implemented? • Are any known or potential archaeological deposits affected by the

landscape works? If so, what alternatives have been considered? • How does the work impact on views to, and from, adjacent heritage items?

Not Applicable

Tree removal or replacement

Note: Always check the tree preservation provisions of your local council when proposing removal of trees

• Does the tree contribute to the heritage significance of the item or landscape? • Why is the tree being removed? • Has the advice of a tree surgeon or horticultural specialist been obtained? • Is the tree being replaced? Why? With the same or a different species?

Not Applicable

New signage

• How has the impact of the new signage on the heritage significance of the

item been minimised? • Have alternative signage forms been considered (e.g. free standing or

shingle signs). Why were they rejected? • Is the signage in accordance with section 6 , ‘Areas of Heritage

Significance’, in Outdoor Advertising: An Urban Design-Based Approach?(1) How?

• Will the signage visually dominate the heritage item/heritage conservation area or heritage streetscape?

• Can the sign be remotely illuminated rather than internally illuminated?

Not Applicable

(1) A joint publication by the Department of Planning (NSW) & Department of Planning and Housing (Victoria). Published by Department of Planning (NSW), Sydney, 1999


Page 31 of 37

6.0 ASSESSMENT 6.1 Assessment against policies in the heritage assessment by Tropman & Tropman Architects.

Policies Assessment/ Recommendations Compliance

Conservation procedures at the site

Policy 1.1: Treat the site as being of cultural heritage significance, and consequently guide works and activities at the site by the provisions of the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter.

The proposed works are minor in nature and will have minimal impact to the conservation area.

Complies

Policy 1.2: Manage the site in a way which allows the maximum of this policy to be implemented and followed. The policies outlined in this document should be adopted as the guide to future planning and work at the site.

The proposed works are minor in nature and will have minimal impact to the conservation area. Builder to ensure that the site and the existing building are protected during construction.

Complies

Policy 1.3: Engage personnel skilled in disciplines of conservation practice, including professionals, skilled building and engineering trades, etc as appropriate to advise or implement conservation works at the site. Record personnel involved in the documentation and implementation of works at the site for future reference.

A skilled builder and consultants preferably with experience in heritage work should be engaged.

Complies

Policy 1.4: Carry out, catalogue and archive systematic surveys of the site, before, during and after any works in accordance with current NSW Heritage Division guidelines. Any new information that comes to light during and after works at the site shall be recorded in a report, a copy of which shall be held at the archive of the site.

The proposed works are minor in nature and will have minimal impact to the conservation area. If any potential archaeological objects are found during construction, builder is advised to stop work and inform architect immediately.

Complies

Policy 1.5: Assemble, catalogue and make readily available for public inspection, copies of all known historical drawings, pictorial documents and written records relating to the site in a permanent archive of the site.

The proposed works are minor in nature and will have minimal impact to the conservation area. If any potential archaeological objects are found during construction, builder is advised to stop work and inform architect immediately.

Complies

Policy 1.6: This Heritage Assessment should be revised after major works have been carried out at the site and otherwise at regular intervals, firstly five (5) years from its adoption.

NA NA

Policy 1.7: Document any proposed works to heritage items in a way that allows scrutiny by others before they are executed and can be retained for posterity. The documentary or physical evidence upon

NA NA


Page 32 of 37

which conservation decisions are made for each part of the element should be cited. A copy of the documentation, including schedules and drawings, shall be held at the archive of the site.

Policy 1.8: Assemble, catalogue and safely house any archaeological finds that have been or are in the future uncovered on the site. These finds should be appropriately displayed and/or appropriately stored on the site.

If any potential archaeological objects are found during construction, builder is advised to stop work and inform architect immediately.

Complies

Policy 1.9: The subject site should be easily interpreted as being a rural estate. Any future uses should assist this interpretation.


Complies

Policy 1.10: The local community should be given the opportunity to participate in and contribute to decisions which are made about the use and management of the site.

NA NA

Policy 1.11: Avenues for funding and sponsorship should be explored.

NA NA

Archaeology

Policy 2.1: Generally, any new works on areas of the former and current holding of 69 Redmyre Road should consider areas of assessed archaeological potential within the broader curtilage as well as areas in direct association with the building.


Complies

Policy 2.2: Engage a suitable heritage consultant and archaeologist to assess record and monitor the works in the event of any disturbance having to take place. Archaeologists must meet the current Heritage Council requirements for an Excavation Director and obtain appropriate approvals, exemptions to or excavations permits required under Section 57(1) or sections 139-146 of the Heritage Act 1977 prior to any excavation of areas of identified archaeological potential.

The proposed works are minor in nature and will have minimal impact to the conservation area. If any potential archaeological objects are found during construction, builder is advised to stop work and inform architect immediately. An archaeologist will be engaged.

Complies

Policy 2.3: Archaeological remains assessed as having local significance should also be retained in situ wherever possible. In the event that harm cannot be avoided, appropriate archaeological mitigation needs to be conducted under a prior Heritage Council approval. This would need to be assessed on a case by case basis, usually within an s60 application and would depend on the proposal. Archaeological mitigation may include

If any potential archaeological objects are found during construction, builder is advised to stop work and inform architect immediately. An archaeologist will be engaged.

Complies


Page 33 of 37

detailed excavation and recording or archaeological monitoring, but only in accordance with an appropriate research design and excavation methodology.

Policy 2.4: It is appropriate that an excavation director for this site fulfil the requirements of the Heritage Council Excavation Director criteria as outlined in Policy 2.3 (i.e. for state-significant archaeology). Any proposed works should be guided by an appropriate research design and excavation methodology.

No excavation is proposed in this submission.

NA

Policy 2.5: Proposed excavations should be considered in relation to areas of archaeological significance and potential as outlined in the Archaeological Assessment. Depending on the proposal and impact, archaeological investigation may be warranted in accordance with an approval, where harm cannot be avoided. This work must be undertaken by a suitably qualified archaeologist and shall be guided by a research design and excavation methodology.

No excavation is proposed in this submission.

NA

Interpretation

Policy 3.1: Maintain the setting of 69 Redmyre Road so that the site can be easily interpreted as a former Town Clerk’s residence.

Majority of the original building is retained. The new alterations are proposed to the rear of the building and are of low significance.

Complies

Policy 3.2: Appropriately interpret the early primary driveway.

This is not included in this proposal NA

Policy 3.3: Reinstatement of significant views and vistas, where appropriate, where they have been obscured by active landscape management (removal, pruning or replacement of vegetation where appropriate) will assist in interpreting the significance of the estate, its arrival sequence and historic visual links to neighbouring properties and features. Refer to 7.7 below.

The new alterations are proposed to the rear of the building and are of low significance.

NA

Land adjoining 69 Redmyre Road

Policy 4.1: Maintain 69 Redmyre Road’s connection to Strathfield Council Chambers and Town Hall—Council Chambers and memorial, 65 Homebush Road by limiting development. Development in this zone should be discouraged and the area should be linked with community infrastructure.

The design is proposed to the rear of the building and is minor in nature. All connection to Strathfield Council Chambers and Town Hall – Council Chambers and memorial will be maintained

Complies

Policy 4.2: Should development occur in this zone, building placement on the lots

The design is proposed to the rear of the building and is minor in nature.

Complies.


Page 34 of 37

should be carefully designed so as to limit the visual impact on the setting of 69 Redmyre Road.

The proposal has no significant impact on the setting of the road

Policy 4.3: Carry out regular maintenance and weed removal works on the vegetation along the street front in accordance with accepted OEH guidelines.

The future occupant of the building will be responsible in carrying out maintenance in accordance with this policy

Complies

New work, future development and use

Policy 5.1: Carry out new works in accordance with the ICOMOS Burra Charter. Undertake new plantings in accordance with currently acceptable horticultural practices to have minimum impact on extant fabric and surrounding areas. All works involving sub-surface disturbance in identified archaeologically sensitive areas should be strictly supervised by a specialist archaeologist familiar with the site.

All works in this proposal are to be carried ou in accordance with the ICOMOS Burra Charter.

Complies

Policy 5.2: Maintain the existing driveway entry to 69 Redmyre Road in any new development.

The existing driveway entry is maintained. No changes are proposed.

Complies

Policy 5.3: Future housing development within and adjacent to the heritage curtilage zone is permitted but must be designed by integrated development to ensure minimal impact upon the heritage significance of 69 Redmyre Road.

Not included in this proposal. NA

Policy 5.4: Plant stock should be selected to enhance the setting.


Policy 5.5: Ensure species planted on the site are in keeping with those known to have existed in the past on the site or those appropriate to the period.


Policy 5.6: Significant views and vistas should be retained. Any new plantings or structures should not obscure the cultural, historic or aesthetic significance of the place in a physical or visual way.

The design is proposed to the rear of the building and is minor in nature. This will have no significant impact to the existing views and vistas.

Complies

Policy 5.7: Where new fence lines are required, these should be based on those known to have existed during a previous period and should be in keeping with the historical uses of the areas of the site.

No new fence lines are proposed. NA

Policy 5.8: Should extra car parking and toilet facilities be required in future, they must be carefully located and designed to have the least impact upon the significant 69 Redmyre Road. Locate these facilities in areas of lower significance.

No new car parking and toilet facilities are proposed.

NA

Policy 5.9: Screen any car parks or facilities added to the site by appropriate

No new car parking and other facilities are proposed.

NA


Page 35 of 37

plantings to prevent them becoming a visual intrusion to the site.

Views and Vistas

Policy 6.1: Maintain the views to “Halloween” 69 Redmyre Road from the various approaches and vantage points. Maintain the views and vistas from “Ravenswood”—Federation house and garden, 61 Homebush Road, Strathfield Council Chambers and Town Hall—Council Chambers and memorial, 65 Homebush Road and Letter receiver (post box), Redmyre Road.


Complies

Policy 6.2: Conserve and maintain views

and vistas when developing plans for the future use of the subject site, the significant external and internal fabric of the subject buildings and gardens, so that the significance of the site is maintained.


Complies

Policy 6.3: Reinstate significant views and vistas, where appropriate, where they have been obscured. This may involve active tree removals, pruning or replacements with lower growing species in some key view line locations to assist in interpreting the significance of the estate, its arrival sequence and historic visual links to neighbouring properties and features.


Complies

Policy 6.4: Carefully consider the placement of replacement trees so as not to obscure significant views and vistas.

No landscaping work proposed. NA

General

Policy 8.1: Conserve the strong individual character of “Halloween” 69 Redmyre Road and the original setting which relates to the topography and open space in the vicinity of the property.

The proposal is minor in nature and the works are subservient to the majority of the surrounding building. There are minimal impacts to the surrounding.

Complies

Policy 8.2: Maintain the relationship between the residence, gardens, and the main driveway to Redmyre Road.

The proposal is minor in nature and the works are subservient to the majority of the surrounding building. There are minimal impacts to the surrounding.

Complies

Policy 8.3: Any future development and/or use of the subject site should support and fund the conservation and on-going maintenance of the significant buildings and gardens, and should be aimed at keeping the remaining property intact.

The proposal has a very sympathetic approach and has no significant impact on the existing property and its surrounding.

Complies


Page 36 of 37

6.2 Burra Charter “Article 22. New work 22.1 New work such as additions to the place may be acceptable where it does not distort or obscure the cultural significance of the place, or detract from its interpretation and appreciation New work may be sympathetic if its sitting, bulk, form, scale, character, colour, texture and material are similar to the existing fabric, but imitation should be avoided. 22.2 New work should be readily identifiable as such” Reference Australian ICOMOS Burra Charter. The new proposed work is able to be defined as new in accordance with the ICOMOS Burra Charter and is low key and recessive in form.

7.0 IMPACT ON HERITAGE VALUES 7.1 Assessment

The works are of minor nature and seeks to improve access and amenities of the site. No works are proposed to the building and the proposed construction of the carpark will have no effect on the original building. 7.3 Positive and Negative effects

Design proposal Positive effects Negative effects

New courtyard at rear of building

Upgrade amenity to the dwelling and adjacent council building.

The proposal utilises the existing unused space at the rear of the building and converting it into usable thoroughf that connects to the existing council carpark areas adjacent and behind the building.

We consider there to be no negative effects


Page 37 of 37

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS i. All new works should be the most sustainable solution for the present and foreseeable future demands for the building.

ii. All original and early fabric must be appropriately protected during construction.

iii. The installation of new services should be designed in such a way as to provide minimal impact on the existing fabric, especially original and early fabric.

iv. The new work should be set back from the original works.

9.0 CONCLUSION i. The proposed works to 69 Redmyre Road are reasonable and positive with no impact to the street frontage.

ii. The works are in improving the amenity of the property and there will be no impact to the existing building on site..

iii. The works are subservient to the existing building and its surroundings.

iv. The proposed works are considered to be sympathetic and minor in nature. v. The proposal amendments are not conjectural and are identifiable as contemporary in accordance with the Burra Charter.

vi. The proposal generally complies with the Strathfield Council DCP and LEP. Tropman & Tropman Architects support this proposal and confirm that the approach is both logical and adheres to the Burra Charter principals. We recommend that the works described in this development application be approved.

Documents

69 Redmyre Road - Strathfield Council · 69 Redmyre Road NSW Ref: 1742: HIS Heritage Impact Statement October 2017 Page 2 of 37 Report Register The following table is a report register