Historical Archaeological Assessment - SMDA - NSW Government

Sydney Metropolitan Development 

Authority (SMDA) 

24 July 2012 

Historical Archaeological 

Assessment - The Grange 

North Eveleigh Affordable Housing Project, Wilson Street, 

Darlington, NSW

AECOM 

Historical Archaeological Assessment - The Grange - North Eveleigh Affordable 

Housing Project, Wilson Street, Darlington, NSW 

Historical Archaeological Assessment - The Grange 

North Eveleigh Affordable Housing Project, Wilson Street, Darlington, NSW 

Prepared for 

Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority (SMDA) 

Prepared by 

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd 

Level 21, 420 George Street, Sydney NSW 2000, PO Box Q410, QVB Post Office NSW 1230, Australia 

T +61 2 8934 0000 F +61 2 8934 0001 www.aecom.com 

ABN 20 093 846 925 

24 July 2012 

60238089 

AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to the latest version of ISO9001 and ISO14001. 

© AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM). All rights reserved. 

AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other 

party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any 

third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and 

AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional 

principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which 

may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



Quality Information 

Document 

Ref 

Historical Archaeological Assessment - The Grange 

60238089 

g:\!env\team_iap\archaeology & heritage\proposals\eveleigh\aecom 

reporting\eveleigh_historical archaeological assessment_17july12.docx 

Date 24 July 2012 

Prepared by 

Reviewed by 

Dr Susan Lampard 

Luke Kirkwood 

Revision History 

Revision 

Revision 

Date 

Details 

Name/Position 

Authorised 

Signature 

1. 4 July 2012 Draft Susan Lampard 

Archaeologist 

2. 12 July 2012 Final Susan Lampard 

Archaeologist 

3. 17 July 2012 Revised Final Susan Lampard 

Archaeologist 

4. 24 July 2012 Amended Final Susan Lampard 

Archaeologist 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



Table of Contents 

1.0 Introduction 1 

1.1 Project Team 1 

1.2 Limitations 2 

1.3 Project Description 2 

2.0 Statutory Controls 4 

2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 4 

2.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 4 

2.3 The Heritage Act 1977 5 

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 5 

2.5 State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 5 

2.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 5 

2.7 State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land 5 

2.8 South Sydney Local Environmental Plan (1998) 5 

3.0 Methodology 6 

3.1 Site Inspection Methodology 6 

3.2 Significance Assessment Criteria 6 

4.0 Desktop Assessment 8 


4.2 Heritage Inventories 8 

4.3 Archaeological Zoning Plan (AZP) 9 

5.0 Historical Context 11 

5.1 Early European Land Settlement and the Development of Newtown 11 

5.2 The Grange 12 

5.2.1 Physical Description and Architecture of The Grange 14 

5.3 Eveleigh Railway Workshops 17 

6.0 Site Inspection Results and Significance Assessment 19 

6.1 Site Description 19 

6.2 Cistern 20 

6.3 Archaeological Potential 21 

7.0 Significance Assessment 24 

7.1 Cistern 24 

7.1.1 Historical Context 24 

7.1.2 Significance Assessment 24 

7.1.3 Statement of Significance 24 

7.2 Structures 25 

7.2.1 Historical Context 25 

7.2.2 Significance Assessment 25 

7.2.3 Statement of Significance 25 

8.0 Impacts and Recommendations 26 


8.2 Impacts 26 

8.3 General 26 

Cistern 27 

9.0 Conclusion 29 

10.0 References 30 

Appendix A 

Sands Directory Listings 

Appendix B 

Rate Assessment Records 

A 

B 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



List of Plates 

Plate 1 

The Grange, New Town, Sydney. By John Vine Hall. Dated July 1865. Held by Mitchell 

Library (PXA 4460) 15 

Plate 2 

The Grange. Date unknown. View north-north west. Held by the NSW Branch of the 

National Trust 16 

Plate 3 

Pre 1916 Spring Store with embankment brick wall evident at right of image. Wilson 

Street level is above the Spring Store roof. View west towards Iverys Lane. 19 

Plate 4 Pre 1967 Advertising Depot foundations. View north towards Wilson Street. 20 

Plate 5 Opening in roof of cistern. View north towards Wilson Street. 21 

Plate 6 

Eastern end of water cistern showing section of collapse. View west towards Wilson 

Street. 21 

List of Tables 

Table 1 Heritage Items Identified on Heritage Inventories 8 

Table 2 Sands Directory entries for The Grange between 1858 and 1909 A-1 

Table 3 

Owner, Occupier and description of The Grange from Newtown Rate Assessment 

Records B-1 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 Proposed works 3 

Figure 2 Project Boundary indicating location of heritage items within the Project Boundary 10 

Figure 3 

Plan of The Grange, prepared on the conversion to Torrens Title, 1900 (Certificate of 

Title 1674-19, Primary Application 11531). Date of survey: 1 January 1900 13 

Figure 4 

Buildings indicated at the Eveleigh Railway Workshops site in 1916. From AHMS 

(2008:24) 18 

Figure 5 Archaeological potential of the North Eveleigh site 23 

Figure 6 

Cross-section in the vicinity of the cistern indicating the final land surface in relation to 

the existing land surface 28 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



1 

1.0 Introduction 

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM) was commissioned by the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority 

(SMDA) to undertake an archaeological assessment of the North Eveleigh Affordable Housing Project site, 

located on Wilson Street, Darlington, NSW (the Project). SMDA is proposing to construct a road, associated 

services and undertake land remediation at the Project site, in advance of a mixed residential, commercial, retail 

and cultural development, which has concept approval (MP 08_0015) from the Department of Planning and 

Infrastructure (DP&I). The site is located within the Eveleigh Railway Workshops, listed on the State Heritage 

Register (SHR No. 01140). 

An Environmental Assessment was prepared in relation to the Concept Plan in January 2008. During public 

submissions, the potential for archaeological features associated with The Grange, a former house on the site, 

was identified, together with an extant cistern. The archaeological potential of the area and the extant cistern had 

not been identified in an Archaeological Zoning Plan (AZP) prepared by AHMS (2008). AHMS provided further 

advice regarding the cistern in a letter dated 25 August 2008, which recommended a suitably qualified 

archaeologist should inspect the site to identify and assess the significance and research potential of the remains. 

This report undertakes the inspection and assessment recommended by AHMS. It also addresses Condition 3 of 

the recommended Conditions of Consent issued by the NSW Heritage Council (10 May 2012), which states: 

“All affected areas identified as having archaeological potential are to be subject to professional archaeological 

monitoring and recording during the project works. A Research Design including an Archaeological Excavation 

Methodology must be prepared in accordance with Heritage Council guidelines for each site which is to be 

excavated. Those documents should be prepared for the approval of the Heritage Council of NSW or its 

Delegate…” 

As the archaeological resource related to The Grange is not well understood, AECOM is undertaking the Project 

in two stages: 

1. Stage 1 – Archaeological Assessment; and 

2. Stage 2 - Research Design and Archaeological Excavation Methodology, if required. 

This report comprises Stage 1 – Archaeological Assessment - of the Project. The purpose of this assessment is to 

satisfy the requirements of the AZP in relation to the previously unidentified archaeological potential of The 

Grange, and to determine the nature and extent of the potential archaeological resource. To achieve this, the 

scope of works completed by AECOM for this archaeological assessment included: 

 

 

 

 

Completion of a detailed history of The Grange, aided by the public submission to the REF relating to 

The Grange; 

A half day site inspection locating, recording and assessing the features identified in the public 

submission, as well assessing the archaeological potential of the Project site in light of subsequent land 

uses; 

Assessment of the significance of the potential archaeological deposits associated with The Grange Villa 

according to Heritage Branch guidelines Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and 

‘Relics’ (NSW Heritage Branch, 2009); 

Preparation of an archaeological assessment report, including recommendations regarding the 

requirement for, and scope of, a Research Design and Methodology; 

1.1 Project Team 

The Project was managed by Robert Mason (Principal Engineer) and the assessment was carried out by Dr 

Susan Lampard (AECOM Archaeologist). Susan co-ordinated project logistics, conducted the heritage 

assessment, undertook fieldwork, and authored this report. Rochelle Coxon (AECOM archaeologist) assisted with 

the preparation of the report. Luke Kirkwood (AECOM Senior Archaeologist) provided technical and QA review. 

Tim Osborne (AECOM Designer) provided mapping and graphics support, and Jodie Glennan (AECOM IAP 

Team, Senior Team Secretary) provided administrative assistance. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



2 

1.2 Limitations 

Within this report predictions have been made regarding the probability of subsurface archaeological deposits 

occurring within the Project Site. These predictions are based on historical evidence, surface indications, and 

environmental context. It is, however, possible that archaeological materials may occur in areas without surface 

indications and in any environmental context. 

A summary of the statutory requirements regarding historic heritage is provided in Section 2.0. This is provided 

based on experience within the heritage system in New South Wales (NSW) and does not purport to be legal 

advice. It should be noted that legislation, regulations and guidelines change over time and users of this report 

should satisfy themselves that the statutory requirements have not changed since the report was written. 

1.3 Project Description 

A Concept Plan for the redevelopment of the North Eveleigh site has been approved by the Department of 

Planning and Infrastructure under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The Concept 

Plan (Application No. 08_0015, approved 16 December 2008) allows for the construction of commercial, retail and 

residential development. In the western part of the site, the subject of this archaeological assessment, the 

Concept Plan has set aside land for affordable housing. This assessment relates to a Review of Environmental 

Factors (REF) prepared to undertake initial works necessary to provide the infrastructure required to allow for the 

future development, including: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the construction of a two way vehicle site entry in the location of the existing entry; 

the construction of a two way road parallel to Wilson Street, between the site entry and the Carriage 

Workshop building; 

associated car parking, footpaths and landscaping; 

telecommunications, electricity distribution, sewage works, stormwater management and gas and water 

reticulation works; 

demolition of the Timber Shed extension, to allow for the construction of the road and water; and 

remediation of land (as required) in the path of the infrastructure works and the land to be developed for 

affordable housing. 

The proposed works are depicted in Figure 1. 

The Concept Plan approved the demolition of the Timber Shed extension, Reclamation Shed and Air Raid Sheds. 

A Heritage Impact Statement (HIS) has been prepared by Weir Philips (2012) in relation to the demolition of these 

items and this archaeological assessment does not address this aspect of the Project. 

The development of the affordable housing will be subject to a separate application and approval process. 

24 July 2012

North Eveleigh Rail Yard Site 

Redfern Waterloo Authority 

October 2008 S10914 

Land Use Plan 

Central and Western Sites 

Scale 1:1250 

Legend 

Residential 

Office/ Retail 

Heritage - adaptive reuse 

Public Open Space

AECOM 



4 

2.0 Statutory Controls 

A number of planning and legislative documents govern how heritage is managed in NSW and Australia. The 

following section provides an overview of the requirements under each as they apply to the Project. 

2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 

The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) took effect on 16 

July 2000. 

Under Part 9 of the EPBC Act, any action that is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of National 

Environmental Significance (known as a controlled action under the Act), may only progress with approval of the 

Commonwealth Minister for the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 

(SEWPaC). An action is defined as a project, development, undertaking, activity (or series of activities), or 

alteration. An action will also require approval if: 

 

It is undertaken on Commonwealth land and will have or is likely to have a significant impact on the 

environment on Commonwealth land; and, 

 

It is undertaken by the Commonwealth and will have or is likely to have a significant impact. 

The EPBC Act defines ‘environment’ as both natural and cultural environments and therefore includes Aboriginal 

and non-Aboriginal historic cultural heritage items. Under the Act protected heritage items are listed on the 

National Heritage List (items of significance to the nation) or the Commonwealth Heritage List (items belonging to 

the Commonwealth or its agencies). These two lists replaced the Register of the National Estate (RNE). The RNE 

has been suspended and is no longer a statutory list, however, it remains as an archive. 

The heritage registers mandated by the EPBC Act have been consulted and there are no items within the Project 

Boundary on these registers. In relation to heritage, the EPBC Act is not of further relevance to the Project site. 

2.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) allows for the preparation of planning 

instruments to direct development within NSW. The North Eveleigh site’s planning controls, including land use 

and heritage controls, are within Part 5, Schedule 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 

2005 (Major Development SEPP). 

The EP&A Act and the EP&A Regulation provide the statutory planning context for environmental assessment 

and approval of the proposed works. Due to the application of the State Environmental Planning Policy 

(Infrastructure) 2007 (Infrastructure SEPP), the activity does not require development consent and is therefore to 

be assessed under Part 5 of the EP&A Act. As per Section 4(e) of the EP&A Act, SMDA is defined as a ‘public 

authority’ by virtue of its being a NSW Government agency under the Growth Centres (Development 

Corporations) Act 1974. 

As a determining authority, SMDA is required under section 111(1) of the EP&A Act to “take into account to the 

fullest extent possible all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment”. In order to ensure that likely 

environmental effects are considered, SMDA have prepared a REF. 

Under Part 5, the Heritage Branch (now within the Office of Environment and Heritage), does not have specific 

guidelines regarding heritage assessments. As such the following guidelines have been adopted for the Project as 

an indication of methods and principles required by the Heritage Branch, together with the International Council 

on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Burra Charter (1999): 

 

Heritage Manual (NSW Heritage Office & NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, 1996a); 

Assessing Heritage Significance (NSW Heritage Office, 2001); 

 

 

Heritage Curtilages (NSW Heritage Office & NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, 1996b); 

Levels of Heritage Significance (NSW Heritage Office, 2008); and 

Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and ‘Relics’ (NSW Heritage Branch, 2009). 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



5 

2.3 The Heritage Act 1977 

The Heritage Act 1977 was enacted to conserve the environmental heritage of NSW. Under section 32, places, 

buildings, works, relics, moveable objects or precincts of heritage significance are protected by means of either 

Interim Heritage Orders (IHO) or by listing on the State Heritage Register (SHR). Items that are assessed as 

having State heritage significance can be listed on the SHR by the Minister on the recommendation of the 

Heritage Council. 

Archaeological relics (any relics that are buried) are protected by the provisions of section 139. Under this section 

it is illegal to disturb or excavate any land knowing or suspecting that the disturbance or excavation will or is likely 

to result in a relic being discovered, exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed. In such cases, an excavation permit 

under section 140 is required. Note that no formal listing is required for archaeological relics; they are 

automatically protected if they are of local significance or higher. 

Proposals to alter, damage, move or destroy places, buildings, works, relics, moveable objects or precincts 

protected by an IHO or listed on the SHR require an approval under section 60. Demolition of whole buildings will 

not normally be approved except under certain conditions (section 63). Some of the sites listed on the SHR or on 

LEPs may either be ‘relics’ or have relics associated with them. In such cases, a section 60 approval or an 

exemption is also required for any disturbance to relics associated with a listed item. The project area is within the 

SHR listed Eveleigh Railway Workshops (SHR No. 01140). 

Under Section 170 of the Heritage Act NSW government agencies are required to maintain a register of heritage 

assets. The register places obligations on the agencies, but not on non-government proponents, beyond their 

responsibility to assess the impact on surrounding heritage items. AECOM has searched s.170 registers to 

determine whether there are listed items within the Project area. 

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 (Major Development SEPP) identifies the 

site as forming a part of the ‘Redfern-Waterloo Authority Sites’ under Part 5 of Schedule 3. Under this listing, all 

other environmental planning instruments do not apply to the site except for other SEPPs. 

2.5 State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional 

Development) 2011 

Development that has a capital investment value of more than $10 million on the site is considered to be State 

Significant Development as the Redfern-Waterloo Site is identified in Schedule 2 of the State Environmental 

Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011. 

2.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 

With the exception of the remediation works, the proposed works can be carried out as Development without 

Consent under clauses contained within the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. 

2.7 State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land 

The remediation works do not require development consent in accordance with Clause 14 of the State 

Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land. It should be noted that the project area is not classified 

by an environmental planning instrument for conservation or heritage conservation. 

2.8 South Sydney Local Environmental Plan (1998) 

The South Sydney LEP 1998 controls development in relation to heritage items within the South Sydney area. 

Schedules 2, 2A and 2B of the LEP provides a list of identified heritage items, conservation areas and 

streetscapes, which has been examined to determine whether the items could potentially be directly impacted by 

the Project. No listed heritage items were identified in these schedules as being within the project area. 

City of Sydney has exhibited a Draft Sydney LEP (2011) to replace the multiple LEPs that cover the LGA. The 

heritage schedule was also consulted and no heritage items are identified within the project area. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



6 

3.0 Methodology 

A site inspection was undertaken by Dr Susan Lampard of AECOM on the 13 June 2012. The following sections 

describe the methodology used. 

Numerous attempts were made throughout a three week period to contact the authors of the public submission to 

ascertain if they held further information that may provide further insight into the archaeological potential of the 

site. No contact could be made. 

3.1 Site Inspection Methodology 

A site inspection was undertaken over a two hour period on the morning on 13 June 2012. Dr Susan Lampard 

was met on site by Kerrie Symonds (Planning and Urban Renewal) and Juliet Suich (Strategic and Heritage 

Planner) of Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority. 

The objective of the field survey was to assess the water cistern identified in the public submission and the 

likelihood that archaeological features and/or deposits associated with The Grange Villa remained within the site. 

To this end, the water cistern was inspected and photographs taken. 

To assess the likelihood of archaeological remnants relating to The Grange Villa being preserved onsite, a 

walkover of the remainder of the site was undertaken. To relocate the approximate location of The Grange, the 

Land Title Office survey plan of 15 January 1900 (CT Vol. 1674. Folio 19, No. 11531) was oriented using Wilson, 

Queen and Forbes Streets as markers. Photographs of general area were taken. 

3.2 Significance Assessment Criteria 

In order to understand how development will impact on a heritage item, it is essential to understand why an item is 

significant. An assessment of significance is undertaken to explain why a particular site is important and to enable 

the appropriate site management and curtilage to be determined. Cultural significance is defined in the Australia 

ICOMOS Charter for the conservation of places of cultural significance (the Burra Charter) as meaning "aesthetic, 

historic, scientific or social value for past, present or future generations" (Article 1.1). Cultural significance may be 

derived from a place’s fabric, association with a person or event, or for its research potential. The significance of a 

place is not fixed for all time, and what is of significance to us now may change as similar items are located, more 

historical research is undertaken and community tastes change. 

The process of linking this assessment with a site's historical context has been developed through the NSW 

Heritage Management System and is outlined in the guideline Assessing Heritage Significance (2001), part of the 

NSW Heritage Manual (Heritage Branch 1996). The Assessing Heritage Significance guidelines establish seven 

evaluation criteria (which reflect four categories of significance and whether a place is rare or representative) 

under which a place can be evaluated in the context of State or local historical themes. Similarly, a heritage item 

can be significant at a local level (i.e. to the people living in the vicinity of the item), at a State level (i.e. to all 

people living within NSW) or be significant to the country as a whole and be of National or Commonwealth 

significance. 

In accordance with in the guideline Assessing Heritage Significance, an item will be considered to be of State or 

local heritage significance if it meets one or more of the following criteria: 

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). 

The site must show evidence of significant human activity or maintains or shows the continuity of historical 

process or activity. An item is excluded if it has been so altered that it can no longer provide evidence of 

association. 

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 to area). 

The site must show evidence of significant human occupation. An item is excluded if it has been so altered that it 

can no longer provide evidence of association. 

Criterion (c) – an item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or 

technical achievement in NSW (or the local area). 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



7 

An item can be excluded on the grounds that it has lost its design or technical integrity or its landmark qualities 

have been more than temporarily degraded. 

Criterion (d) – an item has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in NSW (or 

the local area) for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. 

This criterion does not cover importance for reasons of amenity or retention in preference to proposed alternative. 

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). Significance under this criterion must have 

the potential to yield new or further substantial information. 

Guidelines for exclusion include the information would be irrelevant or only contains information available in other 

sources. 

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). The site must show evidence of the element/function etc 

proposed to be rare. 

Criterion (g) – an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of NSW’s: 

 

 

cultural or natural places; or 

cultural or natural environments. 

An item is excluded under this criterion if it is a poor example or has lost the range of characteristics of a type. 

The Heritage Branch require the summation of the significance assessment into a succinct paragraph, known as a 

Statement of Significance. The Statement of Significance is the foundation for future management and impact 

assessment. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



8 

4.0 Desktop Assessment 


Prior to undertaking the site inspection a number of secondary sources were consulted regarding the 

archaeological potential of the Project Boundary. These include: 

Heritage Inventories; 

 

 

North Eveleigh Railway Carriage Workshops Historical Archaeological Impact Assessment, 

Archaeological Zoning Plan and Impact Mitigation Strategy (AHMS, 2008); and 

Preferred Project AHIMS letter dated 25 August 2008 etc 

Conservation Management Plan (Otto Cserhalmi & Partners, 2002). 

4.2 Heritage Inventories 

As discussed in Section 2.0, Commonwealth, State and local governments maintain inventories of items of 

historical significance within each jurisdiction. The following section discusses listed heritage items within the 

Project Site and its immediate surrounds. 

AECOM undertook a search of relevant heritage inventories on 8 June 2012. The inventories searched were: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

World Heritage List; 

Commonwealth Heritage List; 

National Heritage List; 

Register of the National Estate 

State Heritage Register 

Section 170, Registers of relevant Government Agencies; 

Major Development SEPP 2005 and SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011; and 

South Sydney LEP/ Draft City of Sydney LEP. 

Table 1 summarises the heritage resource as currently listed on statutory registers within the Project Boundary. 

Table 1 

Heritage Items Identified on Heritage Inventories 

Register 

World Heritage List 

Commonwealth Heritage List 

National Heritage List 

Register of the National Estate 

Items within the Project 

Boundary 

Nil 

Nil 

Nil 

Nil 

State Heritage Register 1 

Section 170 Registers 

South Sydney LEP 1998/Draft 

City of Sydney LEP 

Major Development SEPP 

Nil 

Nil 

Nil 

The entire Eveleigh Railway Workshop Complex is listed on the State Heritage Register (SHR No. 01140), the 

curtilage is indicated in Figure 2. The RailCorp Section 170 Register contains approximately 55 items, mainly 

moveable cultural heritage, however, all of these items are stored outside of the Project Boundary and are 

therefore not considered in this assessment. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



9 

4.3 Archaeological Zoning Plan (AZP) 

In 2008 Archaeological & Heritage Management Solutions (AHMS) prepared an Archaeological Impact 

Assessment and Archaeological Zoning Plan (AZP) for the Part 3A Concept Plan approval. The AZP outlined the 

evolution of the site based on historical maps and assessed the potential for evidence of previous structures to be 

retained beneath the existing structures and in the open space. 

The AZP concludes that the majority of buildings on the site were the first and only buildings constructed on a 

particular location. An analysis of the historical plans indicates that this is particularly true of the land within the 

western half of the Project Boundary, which was sparsely developed towards the end of the construction and use 

phase of the Railway yards. 

The AZP identified the western end of the site was developed at a later date – intensive development beginning in 

the eastern portion and moving west as the space was consumed. The area within the Project Boundary appears 

to have been vacant until around 1916 when a Spring Store, Store and General Store were constructed in the 

vicinity of the south eastern corner of the project area. 

Three buildings were constructed in the north western corner of the Project Boundary some time before 1967, but 

after 1942. The buildings included an Advertising Depot and two unidentified structures. The two unidentified 

structures were demolished prior to 1991. The Advertising Depot has now also been demolished. AHMS 

assessed the remnants associated with these three buildings as having no heritage significance (AHMS, 2008:43- 

44). 

The Plan does not identify Grange Villa, the cistern or make predictions regarding the probability of features or 

deposits surviving. It does, however, surmise that the topography prior to the development of the Railway Yard 

was substantially different to the present. It is likely that Wilson Street represents the historical ground level, which 

sloped gently to the south. The original ground surface is thought to have been truncated during the creation of 

the railway level. As discussed in Section 6.0, the railway level now varies between 1.5 and five metres below 

Wilson Street. 

The AZP was publicly exhibited as an appendix to the Concept Plan for the redevelopment of the North Eveleigh 

site. A public submission was received, which detailed some history of The Grange and identified the extant 

cistern. In response, AHMS provided additional advice in the form of a letter, dated 25 August 2008, which was 

included in the Concept Plan Preferred Project Report. AHMS recommended that a site inspection be undertaken 

and management measures developed. This report fulfils this recommendation. 

24 July 2012

WILSON LANE 

GOLDEN GROVE STREET 

FORBES LANE 

FORBES STREET 

QUEEN STREET 

WILSON STREET 

HOLDSWORTH STREET 

WILSON LANE 

IVERYS LANE 

AECOM \\ausyd1fp001\Projects\60238089_North_Eveleigh\4. Tech work area\4.8 GIS\02_Maps\G001_Overview_120704.mxd Updated 4/07/2012 

Site boundary 

Cistern 

Cadastre 

NORTH EVELEIGH 

Project boundary 

0 10 20 40 

m 

JUL 2012 

60238089 

Source: LPMA, 2011 

¯ 

Fig. 2

AECOM 



11 

5.0 Historical Context 

The historical context of an area is important in understanding the type and nature of sites likely to be present and 

their potential distribution/location. The following section provides a brief overview of the history of the local 

Newtown area, before focusing specifically on the properties of the ‘Grange Villa’ within the Project Site. 

5.1 Early European Land Settlement and the Development of Newtown 

The Municipality of Newtown was incorporated in the year 1862, comprising a total of 480 acres within the present 

electorate of Newtown. The name ‘Newtown’ is believed to have originated from John and Eliza Webster’s ‘New 

Town’ store which existed in the early 1800s (Cashman & Meader, 1990). This store was located on the site of 

what is now the Zanzibar Hotel, at 323 King Street Newtown. By 1892, Newtown had become Sydney’s most 

populous suburb (Sands Directory 1857-1904), however, even prior to this, the suburb had been a hive of activity 

in the colony, with considerable activity in the area since the earliest days of the settlement. The area which 

became the Municipality of Newtown comprised a number of land grants, most of which had been issued in the 

eighteenth century. In the years 1793-1794, the land which comprised what would become almost the entire 

Municipality of Newtown was granted to Lieutenant Thomas Rowley (Kingston Farm) and Superintendent 

Nicholas Devine (Burren or Burrin Farm). Seven other smaller lots (of approximately 20-30 acres) were also 

granted during this period to lower-ranking army personnel and emancipists. The current Study Area falls within 

the original grant of Nicholas Devine. 

The ‘Burren Farm’ land grant consisted of 120 acres. Devine had arrived in Sydney with the second fleet in 1790, 

and was the superintendent of convicts in the new colony (Murphy, 2009). Devine’s property continued to expand 

in the latter years of the eighteenth century, with additional grants made to him in 1794 and 1799. By 1800, 

Devine had cleared 68 acres of Burren Farm and he endeavored to cultivate wheat and maize on the property. 

The produce of his large garden, as well as an orchard and dairy on the property, augmented his income and he 

brought sheep and goats out from the Cape Town, South Africa (Ryan, 1979). Devine’s farm, like many other 

small farms in the area, was not, however, a success. 

In 1831-4, Following Devine’s death in 1830, his heir apparent, a convict servant whom Devine had signed over 

his land to named Bernard Rochford, subdivided and sold off ‘Burren Farm’. Large houses in pleasant, country 

surroundings were erected on the subdivide lots, including Lietrim (later The Pines Estate), Leichhardt Lodge, and 

the subject of this assessment, The Grange, to name but a few. The area which had once been ‘Burren Farm’ 

quickly became established, with approximately 30 residences belonging to some very prominent citizens 

including the Lord Mayor of Sydney, the attorney general, Parliamentarians, the editor of The Sydney Morning 

Herald, and barristers and solicitors, a retired naval admiral and some importers and merchants, being erected on 

the land (Murphy, 2009). 

In the year 1852, an heir of Nicholas Devine, John Devine, contested the will between Nicholas Devine and 

Bernard Rochford on three grounds –that Nicholas Devine was of unsound mind at the time he signed over his 

land to Rochford, that the will was a forgery, and that as Rochford was a convict he could not buy, own, sell or 

inherit property. This, along with subsequent legal proceedings, became known as the ‘Newtown Ejectment 

Case’. John Devine lost the case, but was granted a retrial upon appeal, which took place in August and 

September 1857. This was at the time, Australia’s largest civil court case. John Devine also lost this case, but 

following the threat of another appeal, an undisclosed, but allegedly sizable, settlement was reached between 

John and the defendants - the land-holders of the subdivided properties which had once comprised Nicholas 

Devine’s property. It is thought that the defendants agreed to this settlement as they knew that should a third 

retrial take place, it would do so in a London courthouse, where their status in New South Wales would be less 

persuasive. 

By 1862, when the Municipality of Newtown was incorporated, the area had developed significantly, changing 

from a rural, farming area to a small but prosperous town. The township had become centered on an area in the 

vicinity of the current Study Area, generally situated between City Road, Wilson Street and Australia Street. In the 

year 1862 there were approximately 200 houses in Newtown, very few of which were more than one-story high, 

and most of which were quite small is size, making residences such as The Grange and the Pines quite 

remarkable in the local area. Wilson Street, on which The Grange property was located, was at the time an 

important primary thoroughfare into Newtown, along which were located many of the more sizeable residences in 

the area. These residences were home to, and had housed, some of the colony’s most notable figures, including 

Sir Saul Samuel (at The Grange), Henry Copeland, Dr Badham (first lecturer at the University of Sydney), Felix 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



12 

Wilson (a notable local figure who resided at The Pines), Samuel Bennett of the “Evening News” in Willow Lodge, 

and many others (Chubb, 1912:117-121). 

5.2 The Grange 

The southern portion of the allotment on which The Grange was constructed was part of the grant to Nicholas 

Devine in 1794, discussed above. The plan created on the creation of a Torrens Title certificate (Certificate of Title 

1674-19) indicates the northern portion, being the frontage to Wilson Street, was a much later grant, given in 1843 

to David Chambers (see Figure 3). It seems more likely, however, given the evidence provided by the Parish 

maps, that Chambers probably purchased the land following the subdivision and sale of Devine’s estate. Although 

the Primary Application (no. 11531) to bring the property under the Torrens Title system states that Chambers 

was granted the land in 1843, he was in possession of the land prior to then. In 1840, David Chambers signed a 

lease agreement with William a’Beckett for the land and house at £197.12 per quarter. This was to increase by 

£7.18 on the issuing of a grant to Chambers over the land on which the house stood. This indicates that The 

Grange had been constructed prior to 1840. It remains unclear, however, whether it was constructed for David 

Chambers as a residence for himself or as speculative venture or by another. The lease gave a’Beckett the option 

to purchase the property, the price being fixed at £1823.10.5. a’Beckett took up the option in 1843, under several 

mortgages between then and when he sold the property in 1857 (Primary Application 11531). 

William and his wife Emily were in residence at The Grange in May 1840, as the newspaper of 2 May records in 

the ‘Births, Deaths and Marriages’ the birth of a son to the couple at the house on the previous day (Sydney 

Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser 2 May 1840:3b). A’Beckett remained at The Grange until at least June 

1841, when The Australian (3 June 1841:3c) records the death of Emily in the house at the age of 31. 

There is a gap in information regarding the occupancy of the house until July 1845, when The Sydney Morning 

Herald (30 July 1845:4a) announces the birth of a daughter to Mrs Robert Johnson of The Grange, Newtown. Mrs 

Robert Johnson had a son in 1849 (The Sydney Morning Herald 14 May 1849:3d). In November the paper 

records the birth of a still born daughter to Mrs John Thompson of The Grange (The Sydney Morning Herald 4 

November 1850:3e), indicating the Johnson’s had made way for the Thompson’s. 

The Thompson’s seem to have been in residence for little more than a year, as The Sydney Morning Herald of 16 

July 1851 announces the birth of a daughter to Mrs James Dawson of The Grange. The Dawson’s happiness was 

reasonably short-lived, their daughter, Eliza, died in November of 1852 (Empire 25 November 1852:2a). The 

couple remained at The Grange until 1856, when the Empire (8 January 1856:4d) advertises an auction of 

household furniture, a pianoforte, china, cut glass, platedware and saddelery at the House. 

In 1857 Felix Wilson, a prominent local and resident of the adjacent Pine Villa, purchased The Grange, apparently 

leasing it out. After Wilson’s death in 1865, the property was managed for a number of years by trustees, who 

continued to lease the premises. 

In May of that year the death of Mr A. Lyons 1 at the house of Louis and Saul Samuels (brothers) indicates the 

house was not vacant for long (The Sydney Morning Herald 8 May 1857:8c). Nor was it empty for long – Saul and 

his wife Henrietta Matilda had five children between 1858 and 1864 (The Sydney Morning Herald 4 October 

1858:1a; The Sydney Morning Herald 16 December 1859:1a; The Sydney Morning Herald 21 January 1861:7d; 

Empire 30 April 1862:1a; and The Sydney Morning Herald 31 May 1864:1a) Henrietta did not recover from the 

birth of her last child, a son, and she died at The Grange on 5 June 1864, aged only 26 (The Sydney Morning 

Herald 6 June 1864:1a). Saul Samuel held extensive pastoral property on the Macquarie River. He was the first 

Jew to become a magistrate (1846), NSW Member of Parliament (various years and seats in the Bathurst and 

Orange areas between 1854 and 1880) and Minister, becoming colonial treasurer in 1860 (Bergman, 1976). 

Samuel returned to England (having been born there in 1820) to take up the appointment of agent-general for 

NSW. He was knighted in 1882 and created a baronet in 1898 (Bergman, 1976). 

The occupation of The Grange becomes somewhat confused between 1865 and 1875. The Sands Directories 

(see Table 2) for various years are listed alphabetically by surname, rather than by street and it is therefore 

difficult to identify changing occupation patterns. For 1865, there is no listing that can be firmly attributed to The 

Grange. The Directory for 1866 lists Captain Elliot as occupying The Grange. The following year there is no entry 

that can be firmly tied to The Grange, as the name of the property was not always listed. In 1868 Saul Samuel is 

again listed as living in Wilson Street, although it is not clear if his residence was The Grange. 

1 

Louis (or Lewis) and Saul’s mother’s maiden name was Lyons, indicating the brothers were probably caring for their elderly 

uncle. 

24 July 2012

,ofpare or Lena comprise 

M7c1 a/So pare- or eY,4cfecea 

Parish: of Peters/ Lam 

. 1 

Ira I 

af • 

ii53 1 

in Dario Chambers grant' of lac. 31.-Nirre: 

hoyin& granr or t2Oac.re,4 Orel Oper 

COIL/Z.0 7 

TOWN ' 

of au nberland 

0.1. Vol.1674 Fo! 

cc-0 

‘14-' 

FEET /NDHES 

METRES. 

-ss 

• v, 

C. 

0 0 

C. 

1 - 

5 51/4 

5 6 

5 83/4 

7 31/8 

12 - 

15 

20 

22 

26 

42 

183 

165 

/90 

479 

453 

10 1/2 

9 

1 1/4 

6 

AO RD P 

0.305 

1,657 

1.676 

1.695 

2.213 

3.658 

4,640 

6.096 

6.706 

0.801 

22.802 

55.956 

56,617 

57.944 

146.152 

147.216 

SON 

2- 2 6144 

AC RD P 

4 3 26 

57 - 

/20 - 

HA 

• 

1.966 

23.07 

48.56 

...".t!.2'.'""1241rtargralikataFf 

tfia ' 

DECLARATION. 

4.....leff./..A•Arwe 4 S ar.0 7 

n.--401,14,14 vaer ek 1,7,4 A* .4= Aasky vAA.I.vcrriy Svr■YrY. Ash:, that 

kmatrier aurvorealto I. yr MI, ?Ica ere Nrltri ler Ur ar iAt rshl Art./114 Met rtc .aLl Pity 

nu! art.y, I ns, lera 

Yaer Slurarof e ■norrY1,44; dAd .rwts thir aylyrm 

m 4v,ryy, Rod ¼ eirest U1.14 

ny 4e-2 may ,md 

pm.sor I. Mr rtMli ,,or ./ IV Mpg J Ifop,wn .Voirrary, 40,44 4.. Art Or Ike were rircevat 

"r/ (1.4.7. a ..10.R11■11.1 tries eta .k 3, rsrletm DrimremevIr tr, 0yrrrament ei 1111. dovlh 

..fy masa,. Ei-d■rornyti fa 11. 

.4, lie /arils...MA .1 m.r.i.v o hrly1 Orcly 

Svair GO 1,,.1 in an fad, 

/ 7 

141 40- 7 

1 

A 

1 

AMENDMENTS AND/OR ADDITIONS MADE ON 

PLAN IN THE LAND TITLES OFFICE. 

irstfenvelt..}.MOrA14911:1= 

This negative is o photograph mode as a permanent 

record of a document in the custody of the 

00915tror Gencroi this day. 

12th February, 1487 

B:pas/ waqsAs AaTnErwa mou 

iO Tams/ rlay:a5d/ 522T 2IO2-8 L1P-T2:4ad/ NO'NO:g48/ z551-inr-4z:A021e a TE51900 8O:00O/ L62990211)08 

_

AECOM 



14 

In the following two years, again, no definitive evidence is provided in the Directories regarding who, if anyone, 

was living in the house. In 1871 the Directory lists Thomas M’Culloch as resident of The Grange. No directory was 

produced in 1872 and in 1873 Andrew McCulloch is listed at The Grange. The directory for 1874 has not been 

digitised, but The Sydney Morning Herald records the marriage of Thomas M’Culloch, of The Grange, eldest son 

in 1874 (The Sydney Morning Herald 10 July 1874:6b). 

The lack of stability in occupancy rates may have resulted from the death of Felix Wilson on 24 September 1865 

(The Sydney Morning Herald 25 September 1865:1a). On his death, the property was administered by a series of 

trustees. 

From 1875 until 1884 John Little is consistently listed as the resident of The Grange in the Sands Directories. In 

the later years his occupation is listed as auctioneer. Rate assessment records, available online for the period 

1863 to 1892 (see Table 3 for a summary), confirm the Little family’s occupation between 1878 and 1883. Rate 

assessment records prior to 1878 cannot be conclusively tied to the property. 

Directories indicate that between 1892 and 1895 The Grange is occupied by William Coker. The Primary 

Application for the property indicates that William Coker became a trustee of the property in 1883. Sometime 

thereafter he appears to have married Felix Wilson’s widow, Mary Caroline Stewart Wilson, as they are listed, 

together with Mary’s five children, in the Primary Application in 1872 under the surname Coker. In 1896 and 1897 

The Grange is listed as being the residence of Mrs W. Coker, possibly indicating that William had passed away. 

In 1898 Sands Directories indicate the house may have been used as “The Maternity Home” of which Miss 

Rachel Hill was the matron. It is not possible, however, to definitively tie the listing to The Grange. In the following 

year there is no listing and then between 1900 and 1902 the property is listed as a private school run by Mrs M. 

Best. The connection between The Grange and Mrs Best’s school is confirmed by the announcement of the 

marriage of Mrs Best’s youngest daughter from The Grange in 1902 (The Sydney Morning Herald 25 January 

1902:1a). The Primary Application suggests that the property was purchased by Augusta Sophia Quigley in 1900, 

although it does not appear that she resided at The Grange. 

Between 1903 and 1905 the Sands Directories indicate the school was taken over by Miss E.C. Gray and seems 

to indicate she shared The Grange with William Webb and his wife, Eliza (nee Fowler). It is unclear if there is any 

connection between Miss Gray and the Webb’s. William and his wife seem to have wholly occupied The Grange 

from 1906 until 1908. In 1906 The Sydney Morning Herald reports on the golden wedding anniversary 

celebrations of the couple: 

A pleasant evening was spent on Friday evening, August 17, at The Grange, Wilson street. Newtown, in 

celebration of the golden wedding of Mr. and Mrs. William Webb. Many friends and relatives assembled, 

including children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. The house and grounds were tastefully decorated 

for the occasion, and presented a gay and animated scene. It may be interesting to note that Mrs. Webb 

appeared in the same wedding dress in which she became a bride 50 years ago. During the evening an 

adjournment was made for supper, at which the health of Mr. and Mrs. Webb was proposed and honoured. 

Mr. and Mrs. Webb were the recipients of many costly and valuable presents. 

(The Sydney Morning Herald 25 Aug 1906:11d) 

There are no further references to The Grange in the Sands Directories or The Sydney Morning Herald past 1908, 

indicating it was demolished in that year or soon after. This fits with the Certificate of Title (CT1674-19), which 

records the purchase of the land by the Minister for Public works in June of 1908. It seems likely that the house 

was demolished and the site leveled shortly thereafter. 

5.2.1 Physical Description and Architecture of The Grange 

The public submission suggested that The Grange may have been designed by John Verge, one of the earliest 

and the most important architect of the Greek Revival in Australia (1782-1861). This was based on the external 

visual similarity between an 1865 sketch of The Grange (Plate 1) and the one known photo held by the National 

Trust (Plate 2), and John Verge’s Rose Bay Cottage. 

There is no definitive evidence to suggest that The Grange was designed or built by John Verge. A search of John 

Verge’s surviving ledger was undertaken for the present assessment and it reveals no references to The Grange 

or any residence in the area which could possibly have been The Grange (Verge, 1962). The house does, 

however, share stylistic similarities with many of his works, as evidenced by surviving photographic and pictorial 

evidence of the property. 

24 July 2012

ES/tUS- --71-1-G• 

HALL, JOHN VINE 

The Grange New Town "Sydney" .,.1i...L1dred. 

Zi),KA 446 1- 1 

18 ■ ';5. Pencil & wash heig -htened with white. 

14 5 crn x 23. lcal. 

PXA4461.- f 3 

f3i,rned I I.V.Nalll at lowe.c left. 

Dated 'July, 1865 1—;:nd titled at lower centre. 

(In his: :31tetches of Sydney ..., f.3) 

,

AECOM 



17 

From the available pictorial evidence it can be determined that The Grange, like other houses constructed in the 

Colonial Georgian style, was characterised by sophisticated symmetry, a simplicity of style, and a softness of 

scale (Verge, 1962). The house was a rectangular, symmetrical, one-storey structure, constructed from brick and 

stone. The photograph shows a centrally placed door flanked by a double set of windows. It is probable that it 

originally had a shingle roof, which was subsequently replaced by corrugated iron, as depicted in the undated 

photograph. Verandahs were also a common feature of Colonial Georgian houses, with some being ‘wraparound’, 

and others only across the front façade of the house. It appears that The Grange was probably 

constructed with a verandah, as indicated by the 1865 sketch, however, it had been removed, at least on the 

southern side, by the time the photograph was taken. 

The sketch and photograph seem to indicate that The Grange was oriented to the south, probably in order to 

address what originally would have been a bucolic landscape and to make the most of the natural fall of the land 

in that direction. The sketch hints that additional service structures may have been located along the Wilson 

Street frontage. This assessment is strengthened by the plan created upon the creation of the Torrens Title 

(Figure 3). The plan shows two conjoined structures placed on the property boundary. It also indicates that the 

property frontage was not resumed to widen Wilson Street, probably due to the existence of these structures. It is 

assumed that following the purchase of the property for railway purposes, and with the structures demolished, the 

land was resumed to remove the dog-leg from Wilson Street. Any archaeological deposits associated with the 

structures on the Wilson Street frontage are therefore likely to be under the footpath and possibly the road. 

5.3 Eveleigh Railway Workshops 

Although The Grange was demolished, probably in 1908 or 1909, development of the land for railway purposes 

was reasonably light and concentrated towards the railway lines to the south. Building 52 on Figure 4, a Chemical 

laboratory was constructed in c.1910. This was followed by an Oil store in c.1911, General store (now Clothing 

Store) in 1913 and Traverser No. 3 and store (possibly for benzene), both pre 1916. The northern portion of the 

former Grange property, where the house was sited, remained undeveloped. It was not until sometime between 

1942 and 1967 that an advertising depot and a small, unidentified building were constructed over where The 

Grange had once stood. It is likely, however, that works to level the area had been undertaken prior to this time. 

With the exception of the Clothing Store, the remainder of buildings constructed on the former Grange property 

have been demolished. 

24 July 2012

________________North Eveleigh Railway Workshops NSW: Archaeological Development Impact Assessment & Zoning Plan 

Figure 4.3: Buildings indicated on the site in 1916 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Archaeological & Heritage Management Solutions PTY LTD: 349 Annandale Street, Annandale 2038 24

AECOM 



19 

6.0 Site Inspection Results and Significance Assessment 

6.1 Site Description 

The Project Area is bounded by Wilson Street in the north, Iverys Lane to the west, the train line between Redfern 

and Macdonaldtown to the south and Little Eveleigh Street to the east. The site is known as part Lot 4 and part 

Lot 5 of Deposited Plan 862514. 

Entry to the site is located at the western end of the site, where a gently sloping earthen ramp allows access from 

the Wilson Street level to the railway level. At the western end the difference between the Wilson Street and 

railway level is approximately 1.5 metres, however, this increases to the east, where the difference reaches 

approximately five metres. In the vicinity of the entrance, the embankment between Wilson Street and the site is 

formed by a makeshift retaining wall of rails and timber oddments. Approximately 75 m from the entrance, the 

retaining embankment wall becomes a formal brick wall behind the pre 1916 Spring Store (Plate 3). It is probable 

that this marks the boundary between the Railyard and the land formerly belonging to The Grange. 

Plate 3 

Pre 1916 Spring Store with embankment brick wall evident at right of image. Wilson Street level is above the Spring Store 

roof. View west towards Iverys Lane. 

Adjacent to the entrance is the foundations of the former pre 1967 Advertising Depot (Plate 4). A demountable 

office is situated on the north eastern corner of the foundation. The foundation is raised approximately 0.5 m 

above the railway level. The area is currently fenced. Based on consideration of the Torrens Title Plan (Figure 3), 

it is considered this is likely to have been the approximate former location of The Grange. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



20 

Plate 4 

Pre 1967 Advertising Depot foundations. View north towards Wilson Street. 

6.2 Cistern 

Located on the embankment between Wilson Street and the former Advertising Depot foundations, is the cistern 

identified in the public submission. The embankment at this point is densely vegetated and steep, making 

inspection of the cistern difficult. The southern portion of the cistern is exposed, following the slope, with the 

northern portion being buried within the embankment. It was therefore not possible to take exact measurements of 

the cistern. The cistern is constructed of double red brick and lined with fine-grained grey cement. No loose bricks 

were available to inspect for frogs (recess on the bed of a brick) or impressed names. The surfaces of the bricks 

that were exposed indicated they are not convict sandstock bricks and post-date the convict period and the initial 

construction of the house. It is likely that the bricks, and therefore the construction of the cistern, post-dates 

c.1860. 

The cistern is approximately 3.5 m in length (north-south) and 1.5 m wide (east-west) and has an arched brick 

roof. An opening of approximately 0.5 m square is located in the roof at the western end (Plate 5). The northern 

and southern faces of the opening have been created with dressed and pecked sandstone blocks. The eastern 

and western faces are of brick, like the remainder of the structure. At the eastern end, part of the roof and wall has 

collapsed into the cistern (Plate 6). Due to the unstable nature of the embankment and concerns regarding the 

stability of the cistern itself, it was not possible to determine how deep it is. Photos included in the public 

submission taken in 2007, when there was less debris inside the cistern, seem to indicate it is at least 1 m deep 

from the apex of the arched roof. It was not possible to identify the floor of the cistern or what material it was 

made of. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



21 

Plate 5 

Opening in roof of cistern. View north towards Wilson Street. 

Plate 6 

Eastern end of water cistern showing section of collapse. View west towards Wilson Street. 

6.3 Archaeological Potential 

It is considered unlikely that archaeological deposits, features or relics associated with The Grange house are 

extant. Images of The Grange indicate the house was constructed on a gentle slope. The slope has been cut and 

the site levelled and it is therefore highly likely that the house and associated features, were removed during 

these works. There is potential that remains of the structures formerly located on the Wilson Street frontage could 

be preserved under the footpath and/or road. There is also potential for archaeological deposits to be associated 

with the cistern as it would appear that this area has had only limited disturbance during its occupation by the 

Railway Yards. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



22 

The archaeological potential of the site has been divided into three categories, based upon the above 

assessment. The Railway Yard level is assessed as having limited to no archaeological potential. The 

embankment between Wilson Street and the Railway Yard is considered to have high potential to contain intact 

deposits, features or relics associated with The Grange. The footpath and possibly Wilson Street have moderate 

archaeological potential to contain features, deposits or relics associated with the structures formerly located 

along the Wilson Street frontage of The Grange. These archaeological zones are depicted in Figure 5. 

24 July 2012

WILSON LANE 

GOLDEN GROVE STREET 

FORBES LANE 

FORBES STREET 

QUEEN STREET 

WILSON STREET 

HOLDSWORTH STREET 

WILSON LANE 

IVERYS LANE 

AECOM \\ausyd1fp001\Projects\60238089_North_Eveleigh\4. Tech work area\4.8 GIS\02_Maps\G002_ ArchPotential_120704.mxd Updated 11/07/2012 

Site boundary 

Cadastre 

High archaeological potential 

Moderate archaeological potential 

Low archaeological potential 

NORTH EVELEIGH 

Archaeological potential 

0 10 20 40 

m 

JUL 2012 

60238089 

Source: LPMA, 2011 

¯ 

Fig. 5

AECOM 



24 

7.0 Significance Assessment 

The significance assessment has been undertaken in two parts, one for the cistern and a second for the potential 

archaeological deposits relating to the structures formerly located along the Wilson Street frontage and now 

resumed under the footpath and possibly Wilson Street itself. 

7.1 Cistern 

7.1.1 Historical Context 

It is probable that the Cistern is associated with The Grange for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Cistern remains 

within a reasonably undisturbed section of the embankment and could therefore have escaped demolition during 

site levelling works. Secondly, there is no indication on plans from the Railway Yard period indicating the 

construction of facilities in this area. 

The bricks, due to their well-formed nature, and cement lining indicate that the cistern was not part of the original 

c.1830s construction of The Grange, but if associated was a later insertion. 

7.1.2 Significance Assessment 

Historical significance 

SHR criteria (a) 

Historical association 

significance 

SHR criteria (b) 

Aesthetic significance 

SHR criteria (c) 

Social significance 

SHR criteria (d) 

Technical/Research 

significance 

SHR criteria (e) 

Rarity 

SHR criteria (f) 

Representativeness 

SHR criteria (g) 

APPLICATION OF CRITERIA 

The cistern is of historical significance at a local level as physical evidence of the 

changing use of the site. The cistern is likely to be associated with The Grange, which 

was constructed on the site prior to 1840 and demolished in 1908. During this time, The 

Grange was home to many prominent locals and was a well-known residence on Wilson 

Street. 

The cistern is of local associative significance as the last remaining piece of physical 

evidence relating to The Grange. The Grange was occupied by many prominent local 

families, including Felix Wilson and later his widow and her husband William Coker, and 

Lewis and Saul Samuels. Saul Samuels was a Member of Parliament, Colonial 

Treasurer and later Agent-General for the Colony in London, where he was knighted. 

The cistern does not meet this criterion as it does not demonstrate aesthetic 

characteristics or a high degree of creative or technical achievement. 

The cistern does not meet this criterion as it does not have strong or special 

associations with the community. 

The cistern is of local technical significance as the structure and potential associated 

archaeological deposits could yield information regarding the occupation of The 

Grange. 

The cistern does not meet this criterion as it is not rare. 

The cistern does not meet this criterion as it has lost some of the characteristics of its 

class. 

7.1.3 Statement of Significance 

The cistern is of significance at a local level for its contribution to the historical, associative and technical heritage 

of the Newtown area. The cistern is thought to be associated with The Grange, a pre-1840s house and one of the 

earliest in the area. The property is associated with Felix Wilson (ironmonger, and an inaugural Sydney City 

Councillor in 1842, and director of the Bank of NSW, 1843-50) and Sir Saul Samuels (Member of Parliament, 

Colonial Treasurer and later Agent-General of the Colony in London and knight). The cistern itself and 

archaeological deposits, that may be associated with it, have the potential to confirm the date of construction and 

the use of the cistern and general area during the occupation of The Grange. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



25 

7.2 Structures 

7.2.1 Historical Context 

The Certificate of Title Plan prepared in 1900 indicates that two conjoining structures relating to The Grange were 

extant on the Wilson Street frontage. Due to the existence of these structures, the land was not resumed when 

Wilson Street was widened. It would appear that following the purchase of The Grange for railway purposes in 

1908 that the structures were demolished and Wilson Street widened to remove the dog-leg. There remains 

potential for archaeological features, deposits and/or relics associated with these structures to remain in the 

embankment or under the footpath and possibly in the street. 

7.2.2 Significance Assessment 

Historical significance 

SHR criteria (a) 

Historical association 

significance 

SHR criteria (b) 

Aesthetic significance 

SHR criteria (c) 

Social significance 

SHR criteria (d) 

Technical/Research 

significance 

SHR criteria (e) 

Rarity 

SHR criteria (f) 

Representativeness 

SHR criteria (g) 

APPLICATION OF CRITERIA 

The potential archaeological deposits, features and/or relics of the former structures are 

of historical significance at a local level as physical evidence of the changing use of the 

site. The cistern is likely to be associated with The Grange, which was constructed on 

the site prior to 1840 and demolished in 1908. During this time, The Grange was home 

to many prominent locals and was a well-known residence on Wilson Street. 


of local associative significance as the last remaining piece of physical evidence relating 

to The Grange. The Grange was occupied by many prominent local families, including 

William a’Beckett, Felix Wilson and later his widow and her husband William Coker, and 

Lewis and Saul Samuels. Saul Samuels was a Member of Parliament, Colonial 

Treasurer and later Agent-General for the Colony in London, where he was knighted. 

The potential archaeological deposits do not meet this criterion as it does not 

demonstrate aesthetic characteristics or a high degree of creative or technical 

achievement. 

The potential archaeological deposits do not meet this criterion as it does not have 

strong or special associations with the community. 


of local technical significance as they could yield information regarding the occupation 

of The Grange and the nature of the structures themselves. 

The potential archaeological deposits do not meet this criterion as it is not rare. 

The potential archaeological deposits do not meet this criterion as it has lost some of 

the characteristics of its class. 

7.2.3 Statement of Significance 

The potential archaeological deposits, features and/or relics of the former structures are of local historical, 

associative and technical significance. The archaeology of the former structures has the potential to yield 

information regarding their nature and associated artefacts could provide insight into life at The Grange. 

Historically, The Grange was a well-known house in the area and was inhabited by several locally and Colonially, 

prominent individuals, including William a’Beckett, Sir Saul Samuel and Felix Wilson. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



26 

8.0 Impacts and Recommendations 


It is considered unlikely that archaeological deposits, features or relics associated with The Grange house are 

extant within the Railway Yard section of the site. There remains potential within the embankment between Wilson 

Street and the railway level in association with the cistern. There is also potential for deposits, features and/or 

relics associated with the structures formerly located on the Wilson Street frontage of the property to be extant 

beneath the footpath and/or road. 

8.2 Impacts 

The proposed works on site have been outlined in Section 1.3 and are depicted in Figure 1. To stabilise the 

current embankment, between one and two metres of fill will be introduced and the resulting land surface 

landscaped to create a terraced pocket park. Based on the current land surface a cross-section has been 

produced at the location of the cistern. It indicates that the current land surface will not be disturbed within the 

embankment area (Figure 6). 

The proposal will see the construction of retaining walls and a set of stairs in fill placed on the embankment 

between Wilson Street and the Railway yard level, within the area identified has holding high archaeological 

potential (Figure 5). The area of high archaeological potential will therefore be protected and effectively preserved 

beneath the fill. It is therefore anticipated that the cistern will also be able to be retained within the embankment, 

underneath the fill. 

Trenches will be cut across the embankment fill to allow for the insertion of gas, water and telecommunications 

cables. It is not anticipated that service trenches will disturb the current land surface within the embankment and 

therefore, there is no anticipated impacts to the area of high archaeological potential. The service trenches, by 

necessity, will also cut the area identified as holding moderate archaeological potential for the structures along the 

frontage of The Grange. These trenches may possibly impact the potential archaeological deposits, relics and/or 

features relating to the structures along Wilson Street. However, the trenches will be less than 500 mm across 

and are likely to have minimal impact on the archaeology, should it be extant. 

There will be minimal excavation associated with the insertion of the proposed access road. No archaeological 

impacts are expected from these works. 

There is no archaeological potential within the existing Railway Yard level. No archaeological impacts are 

expected. 

8.3 General 

As impacts to areas of moderate archaeological potential have been identified, it is recommended that SMDA 

apply for an exemption from Section 60 of the Heritage Act for that portion of the works within the SHR curtilage 

and, if required by the NSW Heritage Council, an exception from Section 139 of the Heritage Act to undertake the 

proposed works outside of the SHR curtilage. Conditions for exemptions to be granted under Section 60 and 

exceptions under Section 139 of the Heritage Act were gazetted in the Government Gazette by order of the 

Minister for Planning on 5 September 2008. An exemption or exception may be granted if one of the following is 

met: 

 

 

 

1A – An archaeological assessment, zoning plan or management plan has been prepared in accordance 

with Guidelines published by the Heritage Council of NSW which indicates that any relics in the land are 

unlikely to have State or local heritage significance; OR 

1B – the excavation or disturbance of land will have a minor impact on archaeological relics including the 

testing of land to verify the existence of relics without destroying or removing them; OR 

1C – a statement describing the proposed excavation demonstrates that evidence relating to the history 

or nature of the site, such as its level of disturbance, indicates that the site has little or no archaeological 

research potential. 

The impact assessment in Section 8.2 concludes that the proposed works are likely to have a minor impact (type 

1B) on the potential archaeological deposits located within Wilson Street and the footpath and no impact on the 

cistern and potential deposits in the embankment. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



27 

It is recommended that the excavation works in the footpath and Wilson Street be monitored, by a suitably 

qualified archaeologist who meets the Heritage Council’s Excavation Director Criteria, in order to determine 

whether archaeological relics are present in order to enable future management of the area. The recommended 

Conditions of Consent issued by the Heritage Council require a Research Design and Archaeological Excavation 

Methodology be prepared in advance of the monitoring works. It is recommended these documents be prepared 

and submitted to the Heritage Council. 

Cistern 

It is anticipated that the cistern will be able to remain within the embankment and the area filled to protect the 

item. The placement of the retaining walls and services will need to be reviewed to minimise impact on the cistern. 

The following recommendations are made regarding the cistern and its burial: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Archival recording of cistern, following non-invasive vegetation clearance; 

Stabilisation of the structure to enable retention in situ and burial; 

Stabilisation works are to follow Burra Charter (Australia ICOMOS, 1999) principals and utilise the 

maintenance standards and materials recommended by the Heritage Branch, Office of Environment and 

Heritage, available at http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/03_index.htm#M-O 

Consider whether cistern needs to be filled prior to burial, if filled, material must be clean sand or similar 

with plaque containing the date of the works. A structural assessment may be required to inform this 

consideration; 

No heavy duty compaction equipment to be used within five metres that may damage the cistern; 

Once buried, no plantings of trees or shrubs within five metres of the cistern, no trees or shrubs with 

aggressive root systems to be planted within 10 metres of the cistern; and 

Site to be added to, and managed through, the Conservation Management Plan, Archaeological Zoning 

Plan and/or appropriate other heritage document for the Eveleigh Railway Yards. 

It is also proposed that this assessment be considered by the NSW Heritage Council as notification of 

identification of a relic, being the cistern and the potential associated archaeological relics, deposits and/or 

features, as required by Section 146 of the Heritage Act. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



29 

9.0 Conclusion 

The Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority intends to develop the North Eveleigh site for affordable 

housing. Initial works consisting of contamination remediation and the insertion of an access road and parking is 

subject to an REF. During public exhibition of the Concept Plan in 2008, a submission was received identifying an 

extant brick cistern in the embankment between Wilson Street and the Railway Yard level. The submission 

associated the cistern with the former house on the site, The Grange. The Heritage Council has recommended 

that all affected areas identified as having archaeological potential are to be subject to professional archaeological 

monitoring and recording during the project works. Prior to the development of a Research Design and 

Methodology it was necessary to determine the nature and significance of the cistern and potential associated 

deposits. 

Research undertaken for this assessment has identified that The Grange was constructed sometime prior to 

1840. It was the home of a number of prominent local and Colonial figures, including William a’Beckett, Sir Saul 

Samuel and possibly Felix Wilson. The property included a home, situated within the northern third of the site, and 

two conjoined structures located on the property boundary. These structures are now likely to be under the 

footpath and/or road due to the widening of Wilson Street. The Grange continued to be occupied until it was 

purchased by the Department of Public Works in 1908 to expand the Eveleigh Railway Yards and it was probably 

demolished shortly thereafter. The area fronting Wilson Street appears to have been sparsely used for railway 

purposes, with development largely confined to the southern portion of the site, near the railway lines. 

A site inspection, undertaken on 13 June 2012 identified the cistern and assessed the archaeological potential of 

the site. It was determined that, due to the levelling of the site following the demolition of The Grange, there was 

no archaeological potential for features, deposits or relics of the house itself to remain. The embankment formed 

during the levelling of the site contained a brick cistern, which is probably associated with The Grange. It would 

appear that there has been minimal disturbance of the embankment and there remains high potential for 

archaeological features, deposits and/or relics, beyond the cistern, to remain in this area. There is also moderate 

potential for features, deposits and/or relics associated with the structures along Wilson Street to remain in situ 

beneath the road and/or footpath. These features and the cistern have been assessed as being of local 

significance. 

The proposed works include the introduction of fill to the embankment area and the construction of retaining walls 

and a set of stairs in the fill between Wilson Street and the Railway yard level, above the area identified has 

holding high archaeological potential (Figure 5). Trenches will also be cut through the fill to allow for the insertion 

of gas, water and telecommunications cables. These trenches will also pass through the area identified as holding 

moderate archaeological potential for the structures along the frontage of The Grange. These works have the 

potential to impact on the expected archaeological resource in this area. The cistern will be able to be retained 

within the embankment, underneath the fill. 

It is therefore recommended that the excavation works to insert services, particularly in Wilson Street and the 

footpath, be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. It is recommended this be undertaken through an 

exemption under Section 60 within the SHR listed portion and an exception under Section 139 for the area 

adjacent to the SHR listed area, if required by the NSW Heritage Council, as the impacts to the archaeology are 

anticipated to be minimal. Application for an exemption and/or exception requires the preparation of a brief 

methodology statement regarding the monitoring. It is recommended this be prepared and submitted, together 

with this report, to the Heritage Council for approval. It is also recommended that the cistern be buried and 

retained in situ. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



30 

10.0 References 

AHMS. (2008). North Eveleigh Railway Carriage Workshops, Redfern, NSW: Historical Archaeological Impact 

Assessment, Archaeological Zoning Plan and Impact Mitigation Strategy. Annandale, Sydney. 

Australia ICOMOS. (1999). The Burra Charter. Burwood, Victoria: Australia ICOMOS. Retrieved from 

http://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/BURRA_CHARTER.pdf 

Bergman, G. F. J. (1976). Samuel, Sir Saul (1829-1900). Australian Dictionary of Biography. National Centre of 

Biography, Australian National University. Retrieved from http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/samuel-sir-saul- 

4534 

Cashman, R., & Meader, C. (1990). Marrickville, Rural outpost to inner city. Petersham: Hale and Iremonger Pty. 

Ltd. 

Chubb, W. (1912). Jubilee Souvenir of the Municipality of Newtown, 1862-1912. Sydney: Published by Authority 

of the Mayor and Aldermen of the Municipal Council of Newtown. 

Murphy, M. (2009). Newtown Ejectment Case. Newtown Project. Retrieved July 21, 2012, from 

http://www.sydneyarchives.info/essays-a-histories/25-newtown-ejectment-case 

NSW Heritage Branch. (2009). Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and “ Relics .” 

Parramatta. Retrieved from http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/docs/Arch_Significance.pdf 

NSW Heritage Office. (2001). Assessing heritage significance. Parramatta. Retrieved from 

http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/docs/assessingheritagesignificance.pdf 

NSW Heritage Office. (2008). Levels of Heritage Significance (pp. 1-5). Parramatta: Heritage Office. Retrieved 

from http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/docs/levels_of_heritage_significance_2008.pdf 

NSW Heritage Office, & NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. (1996a). NSW Heritage Manual. 

Parramatta: Heritage Office & Department of Urban Affairs & Planning. Retrieved from 

http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/03_index.htm#M-O 

NSW Heritage Office, & NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. (1996b). Heritage Curtilages. 

Parramatta: Heritage Office & Department of Urban Affairs & Planning. 

Otto Cserhalmi & Partners. (2002). Eveleigh Carriageworks Conservation Management Plan. 

Ryan, M. (1979). Newtown Municipality 1862-1892: Subdivision, Land Use and Services. University of Sydney. 

Verge, W. G. (1962). John Verge, early Australian architect: his ledger and his clients. Sydney: Wentworth Books. 

Weir Phillips. (2012). Heritage Impact Statement: North Eveleigh Affordable Housing Project. Chippendale, 

Sydney, Australia. 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



Appendix A 


24 July 2012

AECOM 



A-1 

Appendix A 


Table 2 Sands Directory entries for The Grange between 1858 and 1909 

Year 

Occupier 

1858 Samuels, Louis (L. & S. Samuels), Grange, Newtown; Samuels, Saul (L. & 

S. Samuels), Grange, Newtown. 

1861 Samuels, Louis (L. & S. Samuels), Grange, Newtown; Samuels, Saul (L. & 

S. Samuels), Grange, Newtown. 

1862 No directory available 

1863 Samuels, Louis, Wilson-street; 

Samuels, Saul, Wilson-street 

1864 Samuels, Louis, Wilson-street; 

Samuels, Saul, Wilson-street 

1865 Alphabetical list 

1866 Elliott, Captain, The Grange, Wilson st 


1868 Samuel, Saul, J.P., M.L.A., Wilson st 



1871 M’Culloch, Thomas, The Grange 

1872 Directory not available 

1873 McCulloch, Andrew “The Grange” 

1874 Directory not available 

1875 Little, John, Wilson st 

1876 Little, John, Wilson st 

1877 Little, John (The Grange), Wilson st 

1878 No directory published 

1879 Little, J., auctioneer, The Grange 

1880 Little, John, The Grange 

1881 No directory published 

1882 Little, John, J.P., auctioneer, The Grange 

1883 Little, John, J.P. 

1884 Little, John, auctioneer, The Grange 

1885 Mulholland, John H., “The Grange” 

1886 Mulholland, John H., “The Grange” 

1887 No entry 

1888 No directory on line 

1889 Welch, G.C., Grazier and stock dealer 

1891 No entry 

1892 Coker, William, “The Grange” 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



A-2 

Year 

Occupier 




1896 Coker, Mrs. W., “The Grange” 

1897 Coker, Mrs. W., “The Grange” 

1898 The Maternity Home – Miss Rachel Hill, matron 

1899 No entry 

1900 Best, Mrs. M., private school 



1903 Gray, Miss E.C., private school; 

Webb, William 


Webb, William 


Webb, William 

1906 Webb, William 



1909 No listing 

Source: Sands Directories for Newtown available online at http://www.sydneyarchives.info/sands-directores 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



Appendix B 

Rate Assessment 

Records 

24 July 2012

AECOM 



B-1 

Appendix B 

Table 3 

Rate Assessment Records 

Owner, Occupier and description of The Grange from Newtown Rate Assessment Records 

Year Occupier Owner Description Value Comment 

1863 No description of property recorded. Property occupied by L S Samuels (identified from Sands 

Directories) valued at £160 





1866-1877 Rate Assessment Books not digitised or missing 

1878 John Little J Hardy – 

trustee 

1879 John Little John Hardy – 

trustee late F 

Wilson’s Estate 

1880 John Little John Hardy – 

trustee Estate F 

Wilson 

The Grange 9 

rooms & out 

buildings 

House and 

Grounds 

1881 John Little John Little House and 

Grounds 

1882 John Little House and 

Grounds 

£115 

£115 

House and land £115 

£117 

£180 

1883 John Little JW Little House £180 

1884 John Mulholand John Hardy House and 

Grounds 

1885 On-line link miss directed 

1886 Jason Mulholland Proctor WC – 

agent 

House and 

Grounds 

1887 George Welsh Wilson Estate House and 

Grounds 

£135 

£135 The Grange 

£117 “The Grange” 

1888 George Welsh Wilson Estate House £19 Northside. “The Grange” 

1889-1890 Assessment books not digitised 

1891 William Coker William Coker House £117 “The Grange” 

1892 William Coker William Coker House and 

Grounds 

End of digitised records 

£117 “Grange” 

24 July 2012

Historical Archaeological Assessment - SMDA - NSW Government

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?