{"id":1445,"date":"2013-08-25T18:53:07","date_gmt":"2013-08-25T08:53:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/?p=1445"},"modified":"2013-08-30T00:25:04","modified_gmt":"2013-08-29T14:25:04","slug":"heritage-matters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/2013\/08\/heritage-matters\/","title":{"rendered":"Heritage Matters"},"content":{"rendered":"

With the interest in \u2018heritage\u2019 buildings in Bungendore at the moment, I thought it might be of interest to provide a brief overview of some of the whys and wherefores of heritage listing<\/a>.<\/p>\n

From the outset, it is worth noting that there are several levels of heritage listing, with assets being listed as national heritage<\/a> assets, for example, being considered of greater significance and being more tightly managed than those that might be either State listed<\/a> or simply locally listed<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Although parts of Braidwood are covered by State heritage listing, most of the 400-odd heritage assets in Palerang are being formally listed for the first time under the new Palerang LEP, and simply as assets of local significance. Sixty three of these are assets in or around Bungendore that are currently identified in the local Development Control Plan<\/a> (DCP) simply as \u201cbuildings that add to the historic and rural character of Bungendore\u201d. The rest of the new listings have been identified in various studies that have been undertaken over the last 20 years or so, and the extent of their assessment varies accordingly.<\/p>\n

It is a common misconception that any \u2018heritage listed\u2019 asset is protected to the extent that any modification to the asset is tightly controlled by council. This is not the case at all. As an example, items currently listed under the Village Zone DCP are only controlled to the extent that \u201cApplications for development in the vicinity of the listed buildings must demonstrate that any adverse impacts on the buildings or the streetscape of the area are minimised\u201d. Furthermore, a recent ministerial directive has sought to clarify the role of DCPs in assessing DAs, emphasising that DCP controls cannot be used to prohibit development that is otherwise permissible under an LEP\u2014any negative impact of the development must simply be minimised.<\/p>\n

The new PLEP, through Clause 5.10 of that document, will provide a greater degree of certainty over the process that must be followed to assess the importance of any particular asset, but it will still not prohibit significant modification, or even the demolition of an asset provided the appropriate process–the preparation of a formal DA<\/a>, with the necessary supporting documentation–has been followed.<\/p>\n

Part of the logic here is that few of the items in draft PLEP Heritage Schedule (Schedule 5) have been subject to rigorous heritage assessment. The requirement for development consent is a means by which individual items can be more completely assessed prior to alteration or removal. The alternative would be to only list assets that have been fully assessed, an approach that would be both costly and time consuming, with the risk that an asset could be lost before being fully assessed. By listing assets that have not been fully assessed, the need for more thorough assessment is flagged, should it be required, and the associated cost and effort would only be required if there was intent to significantly alter or remove the asset.<\/p>\n

It should also be appreciated that the heritage value of an asset is only one factor considered when assessing an associated development. It may be a significant, or even the dominant factor, but it may not be, and there will invariably be cases where the heritage value is not deemed to outweigh the inherent value of the proposed development.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

With the interest in \u2018heritage\u2019 buildings in Bungendore at the moment, I thought it might be of interest to provide a brief overview of some of the whys and wherefores of heritage listing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,3],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1445"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1445"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1445\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1462,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1445\/revisions\/1462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peteharrison.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}