The Braidwood Times asked the Council last Thursday night at the Braidwood meeting "how is it possible that after all the headway made in the Heritage Listing of Braidwood, the Council has allowed for a heritage listed 1850s building on the main street to be demolished?
Not only listed through the listing of Braidwood township, it was also listed on the Register of the National Estate in 1980."
The Director of Planning Ms Louise Menday replied that the Heritage Advisor had signed off on the demolition and that Heritage Office did not need to be informed as the weatherboard building at 50 Wallace Street was not listed.
This may surprise many who lived through the often acrimonious debates of the heritage listing. In explanation, Ms Menday claimed that particular building was not on the LEP (Local Environment Plan), and therefore was exempt from referral to the Heritage Office.
Yet in the DCP (Development Control Plan), the first objective of the Wallace St commercial area is "(a) to preserve the historical character of the precinct's townscape and the contributory and individual significance of the individual heritage items within it."
Ms Menday also claimed that the building was 'full of whiteants', however the Times found no evidence of this inspecting the remains dumped at the tip, and a previous tenant, a woodworker, said he did not recall any insect damage.
This case has brought to light the various interpretations of "listed" and discrepancies in the List of Heritage items on the LEP (and the same list reproduced on the recent DCP).
At the time of the State Heritage Listing of 'Braidwood and it's Setting', it was clearly stated by Minister Frank Sartor in correspondence and in the Gazettal that, "Exemptions will be granted from the need to obtain approval...for all development except 1. Demolition of heritage items on the LEP."
Residents however, looking for guidelines from the DCP would see in the section for demolitions, that "The demolition or partial demolition of a heritage listed item is classified as Integrated Development under section 91 of the Act and will also require the consent of the NSW Heritage Council." There is no mention of the LEP exemptions in that section of the DCP.
What then is the status of many of our precious town buildings?
On looking into the status of 50 Wallace Street, which incorporates a number of buildings, its Lot and Section number is included in the Description of Property under the State Heritage Register listing of 'Braidwood and its Setting' along with over 680 other Lots. This would appear to mean the Lot has the highest order of Listing.
On second inspection of the LEP list of around 100 Heritage Items, 50 Wallace Street does not appear, but its lot number clearly does (Lot 8 /Section 11), as do Lots 7 and 6 to the south along Wallace Street.
Lot 8 Section 11 is listed as 44-46 Wallace Street (shops and residence) and Section 7 is listed as just Wallace Street (premises and residence, barn structure). The lot in question was then listed on the LEP.
The LEP list also distinguishes between portion of lots and whole lots, and when listing Lot 8 Section 11 does not distinguish between the various buildings on the site.
A few further discrepancies in the demolition of this building have emerged. Although the Heritage Office were not consulted regarding its demolition, a spokesperson for the Department of Planning said "At the time of the SHR listing of the township of Braidwood, the NSW Government agreed to several exemptions from this listing for development applications which were already underway. One of these was a DA for 50 Wallace St. This means Council has the ability to process this DA (including the demolition)."
The list of exemptions was published along with the State Heritage Listing in 2006 and it did include a DA for 50 Wallace Street (2005. DEV-00437-demolition, erection of new dwelling and commercial premises). However, the current DA (DEV 2008.0173 rebuild existing shed) was lodged on 16th May 2008 and determined on 11th July 2008. This DA was not then exempt from Heritage Council consent.
In contrast, one has to wonder why the demolition of a totally dilapidated early 20th century cottage of no specific heritage value at 28 Monkittee Street, which was not listed on the LEP, was referred to the heritage office prior to demolition.
The manner in which the demolition took place also raised a few eyebrows. Council had not yet started advertising the DA s 'received', as it now does, and the work was only publicised in the DA 'determinations' published on Wednesday 13th August. The demolition was complete within hours of the publication hitting the street and there was no Construction Certificate issued to start work.
Then what actually does 'listed' mean?
Clearly, an item that is Listed on the State Heritage Register and Listed on the LEP/DCP, is not regarded as listed by Palerang Council and not regarded as significant by the Heritage Advisor.
As with many in the community, the Times was astounded to hear the Council view that only buildings listed on the 1991 Tallaganda LEP are actually listed. Has Braidwood been feeling a false sense of protection?
Perhaps when the town was Listed, residents were expecting that the new Palerang LEP would be completed sooner, and a proper audit of heritage items carried out, but the exemption of buildings not on the LEP leaves many heritage significant items at risk.
The General Manager of Palerang Council recalled that "Planning Minister Frank Sartor said at the time "I'm not having those latte sipping zealots from Parramatta telling you what to do".
One resident observed "frankly a few stiff lattes could focus the minds of the planners and advisors."
A lower Wallace Street resident commented after the demolition, "it's one of those things that you don't notice when it's there, but by gee you notice it when it's gone. God forbid that the rest of the world should look like Bungendore."
Email a friend