This transcript and its speaker attributions were generated with AI assistance and may contain errors. Speaker names may be corrected in later releases. It is provided for search and accessibility; the official Council minutes remain authoritative.
Welcome everyone to the Heritage Committee meeting for November 2023. My name is Councillor Dani O'Wheeler. I'm the chairperson of the Heritage Committee. I'd like to acknowledge the Darug and Darkinjung people as the traditional custodians of the land of the Hawkesbury, and pay my respect to Elders past, present and emerging, and acknowledge all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of this country. I want to acknowledge that this land was never ceded, that it was, is and always will be Aboriginal land. And I also pay my respects to any Aboriginal people who are here today or watching the meeting online. Committee members and members of the public attending the meeting in council chambers are advised that in the event of an emergency, you'll be asked to proceed in an orderly manner to the nearest exit, following the guidance of our warden.
And I'd also like to advise that the meetings of the council committee are recorded. In the terms of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, this may involve the recordings of personal information provided at the time of the meeting. The recordings are made to assist staff in compiling the minutes of the meeting and to enable the podcasting of council committee meetings. The provision of any information that is recorded is voluntary. If any person does not wish to be recorded, they should not address or request to address the meeting. The recordings may be made available to other people where such access is in accordance with relevant regulations. The recordings are stored on council's records management system.
We have no speakers today, and so as a courtesy to others, it's requested that your mobile phone either be turned off or turned to silent. Do we have any apologies?
As required by the Code of Conduct, committee members are required to disclose any pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in relation to matters on today's agenda. Does anyone have an interest to disclose?
3.1.3, at I2 have a pecuniary interest in item 3.1.3. And so we'll deal further with that when we get to that item. So the first item on the table is the minutes of the previous meeting, which wasn't very long ago, and hopefully we can all remember them. Ah, we've got two. We've got August and October , thank you. So we'll deal with the August minutes first. Does anyone have any questions, comments or alterations to make on those minutes?
Item 3.1.1 Windsor Bridge Replacement Project Working Group October Meeting
Danielle Wheeler
First item, 3.1.1, which is the Windsor Bridge replacement project working group October meeting. Now, Thomas has joined us from the Manager of Cultural Services. Thomas has been chairing those meetings, and he's come along in case we have any questions or he's needed for any further discussion. So thank you for joining us, Thomas.
Through you, Madam Chair. Thank you, everyone, for having me here today. The Windsor Bridge Replacement Project Working Group met in October. It was our third meeting, and at that meeting, we finalised a set of recommendations. So there's 12 recommendations that have been sent to the Heritage Committee to review and to discuss and to put forward to Council to endorse. Those recommendations, those 12 recommendations, have been set out in a way in such that, in terms of from a priority, there are a few that are high, a few that are medium, and some that are low. And the idea would be that if these recommendations are endorsed by Council, we would move on those high priority items immediately so that we can start taking action on the recommendations.
Thank you, Thomas. Erin Wilkins has just contacted me to say that she's going to attempt to log in, Amy, and if not, I'll get her to contact you directly.
Okay, thanks, Thomas. Now, everyone was emailed a copy of these recommendations, so I'll open those up for discussion now. Not all of you are part of the working group, so if you'd like to ask questions of the people who were there, or... or of the staff, then this is the time to do so.
So as you can see from the recommendations, the priority really is to get the artefacts protected , but also to start planning what we do with them. And I think it's a reasonable concern that if we spend all the money on protection, we won't get to interpretation. And the longer we spend protecting, the further out we are from interpretation. Of course, if the interpretation plan is big and expensive, we may not get to that either, and then protection will become more necessary. So we're really looking at a balancing act at this point.
Madam Chair, I would have thought that protection is the absolute, because if we haven't got anything at the end of the day, if they're not properly protected, then we haven't got anything to show as far as and interpret. So I guess I would have thought that, yes, if we need to spend some money on protection , then so be it.
Got a couple of options here. We can send these recommendations through the minutes of this meeting. To Council, the minutes of this meeting will probably come to the Council meeting. We're already up with them in December. Is that likely? Which means, or we can put these recommendations to Council via a notice of motion, or try to attach them to the minutes that will come to the next Council meeting for discussion. So either way, we can try to—we can use one of those mechanisms to expedite them to the November Council meeting, or we can wait until they come through in the normal course of action. What would people prefer?
Madam Chair, I'm not sure if this doesn't really address your question. That's okay. I just have—and through you, Thomas, thank you for your work on this document. It really addresses issues that were raised in the working group meeting well, so thank you. I just have a small question about one of the recommendations that I wanted to raise before we kind of decide what the next step is, if that's okay. That's fine. Go ahead. Yes,
And it's just there's a slight kind of disconnect between—and it's number 18 about the rope ladder. So the previous iteration of the recommendations document had that the potential uses include a reproduction of the ladder to be, or disconnected pieces to be displayed, and the interpretation of the ladder. Sorry, Cheryl
So that everyone's on the— Yeah, I'm getting to that. Yeah, okay. However, with the revised document that Thomas circulated, yes, it is number nine, but it has been kind of upgraded to a recommendation that Hawkesbury Regional Museum investigate if a reproduction of the ladder or disconnected pieces and so on. Now, whilst I don't necessarily disagree with that, I don't believe that in our working group meeting, or in my kind of understanding of the discussion in the meeting, was that we didn't really reach that point of recommendation. I think there's a general feeling there needs to be much more discussion about the ladder and exploration about possible uses. So that was just really my feeling about that particular point. There seems to have been a kind of, in the revision, there's been— the revision didn't, to me, reflect where we landed in terms of the working group meeting.
Madam Chair, I do have a recollection of that as well, that we didn't really come to the recommendation on that particular item only. I'm quite comfortable with the rest of them, and I just wanted to add that I'd actually tried to contact International Conservation Services, who are— Who I'm familiar with, just to see exactly what conservation work they did on the rope and the timber, and as to how that could actually be displayed or interpreted in situ, rather than to actually have to have another one made to replicate. So I guess we're, on that particular item, still in limbo as far as knowing exactly what should be done with it. So it would be, to my mind, disappointing if we have to stick it in a box and leave it there and not actually have it viewed.
Conservation process and potential display. Is that more reflective? Are people happy with that? Okay. Now, so the next question becomes, are you happy for these recommendations to be forwarded to Council in that format, and what timing would you prefer, November or December? Do you want to come back to the working group again before it goes to Council? Do you want to have it come to us in the third Tuesday of November, which would be the next Council meeting? Jill?
Madam Chair, I think there's a few issues here. Yes, I'd certainly agree that I'd like it to go as soon as possible to a council meeting. But yes, there is a few items that obviously there's some more discussions still to be done in regard. But I think Thomas has done a great idea to— sorry, a great job, I should say— pulling it all together from that meeting. And I'm generally in agreement with all of those 12 points that have been brought forward. I guess the other thing I was going to say was that Thomas did actually send a copy by email of all of those recommendations to the working group, and I'm not aware that anyone's actually contacted Thomas and said, no, they're wrong, or anything else. So I guess on that basis, I'm quite happy to run with it as it is.
That says that the Heritage Committee endorse the recommendations as amended and refer those recommendations to the November meeting of Council, and then the — thanks, Jill— and then, so the four councillors here will work out the best way of doing that. Is everyone happy with that? All right, we'll call that— can I have someone move that first that isn't me? Jill, and seconded by Michael. Thank you.
Okay, so shall we move on from item 3.1.1? Thank you very much for attending, Thomas. That was an easy gig. You can go home. Well, you can go wherever you're going. You don't have to go home, but you don't have to stay here. Thank you.
Well, it was fine before. I've looked at it before. I don't know. That's one thing. Just while I'm on there, can I ask something else just around that? I'd like to apologise to Jan for being late, but if we've got something on earlier and we're sent, because I operate robots in my calendar, and this is my third meeting today, so I just saw the five o'clock, and even though I knew it was on, if we've got something earlier, can we have it logged as earlier so we know to turn up earlier? Thanks.
Andrew Kearnes(staff - Manager, Strategic Planning)
Thank you, Madam Chair. So in terms of the information sheets, the Heritage Committee previously provided comments on the previous version of these information sheets. The sheets have been updated to reflect the Heritage Committee, particularly for roofs and for rising damp. Both of those are attached to the report for further feedback and comment. But I guess the idea of the sheets, stemming from the previous Heritage Committee, was to really use the knowledge and the experience of our heritage advisor, Otto Shahami, in obviously his lot of experiences in providing advice to people in this area about common issues that do arise. So putting that into a sheet that's able to be readily utilised by heritage property owners to provide that advice. So provided again to the committee for further feedback and comment.
Thanks, Madam Chair. I understand the amount of work that goes into these, and as a fellow practitioner, similar to Otto, I guess I've got a few things to say about both of them. If I can start with roofs, there's a couple of pictorial examples there that aren't even in this council area, and I guess that disturbs me a little bit. Can't we sort of find something that is actually in our area to put there in front of the public? And I guess I'm referring to on page 7, which is the example of a timber shingled roof. Now, I'm not aware that there's many examples of that out in the air, out in this area, but maybe that does need to be shown as such. Similarly, on the next page, page 8, you've got the Morwood and Rogers tiling at Woodford Academy, again in the Blue Mountains area, not Hawkesbury.
But I think what could be done within the corrugated metal roofing area, we could certainly find many examples of that from the Hawkesbury, and also from lead work, and also from slate. And if you actually look at the pictorial image from the Rising Damp information sheet, you've got all of those examples at Bowman's Cottage, which is actually highlighted there, which is a slate roof. It's actually got dormer windows, which is talked about. It's got lead cappings and things, which are also talked about. And I think— Yeah, if we could just sort of bring those sorts of examples in, then that would make it hang together as a valuable document.
That's in regard to roofs, and I guess I've got a similar comment about the Marseille tile one. I'm sure there's a roof example out there that could be shown on that one.
Let's do, let's start with roofs. Any other comments on roofs? I think that that's probably useful. I do think that there's a balancing act to be had, though, between
Learn visually, and also from a local perspective, and the issues with printout and downloading a lot of images, which does stymie people. It's possible that we could do a photo-free version if people want to do a printer, say a printer-friendly version, given that people tend to download these now rather than coming and getting a paper copy from Council, and that might fix that balance. Any other comments on the roofing?
I've got one, Chair. John? Something critical as a builder, for people to know I'm a builder, there's not much in the roofing about high racking metals and mixing metals together. And that's a very, that's something that should be in basic. People do everything right, then stick the wrong kind of screw or pop rivet or something in and ruin everything they've done. They do everything right and then ruin it with something like that. And maybe a simple hierarchy of, what's it called? It's the—
Zincalume and gal. Yeah, the metallosis between different metals. It's got a name. I think that's a— I think it's called— That's dissimilar metals, I think it's
Here is pretty good and pretty basic. But that's a really basic thing, and a mistake people make. They do everything right, then get that wrong, and it all falls apart five years later.
I think it's something, too, that people rely on their builder to know, and if the builder isn't experienced in heritage, then they're often—everything fails five years down the track, and they're really disappointed. That's a really, really useful point. Thank you. Any more on roofs? Roofs. Jan.
Madam Chair, there was a Morewood and Rogers roofed house in Richmond, which was pulled down some years ago. I don't know of any other example, but we have got photos of that house that was in Richmond. And a lot of the Australian Pine Village have got new shingles on their roofs, so there would be a couple of examples that we could use from Hawkesbury if we wished to.
Terrific. And if people do have good examples, could you forward those to Christopher for inclusion? The other option, of course, is the local studies collection, and so we may have to pay a visit to the library.
I can't see Gay on my screen either. Sorry? I'm here. Oh, okay, I still can't. Gay, I can't see you on my screen and I can't see your hand. So if you want to speak, could you— oh, terrific, someone's just sorted that. Now I can see you. So if you want to speak, and I'm ignoring either of you, Michelle and Gay, please let me know.
Unfortunately, poor old Bowman Cottage has had more than its fair share of rising damp as well, I think. So a worthy photo. Graeme, you said you had some stuff on this one.
I get the impression that what's been written sort of oversimplifies the complex activities that That occur between rising damp and salt attack, and they really should be lumped together.
You know, moisture going in and out of masonry is fine, and it doesn't necessarily cause deterioration. But when it's dealing with the transfer of salts from the ground or from the air into the fabric, it's then that it becomes an aggressive agency and causes decay. And so, I guess the other thing that I think is not within this document is any professional that's actually looking at rising damp in a serious way within buildings looks at getting some samples actually tested in the laboratory to actually determine what type of salts they are, whether they're sulfates or whether they're nitrates. And each needs to be handled very differently. Like, for instance, if you put a cocoon poltus on brickwork which has sulfates, then it can go through its two-week process, which is a normal case to dry out, and then remove the salts which have migrated into the poltus .
But when you're dealing with nitrates, they actually come and go with moisture, so that when you actually put a poltus on material that actually is of nitrate base, then you'll find that they will reconverge back into the fabric when the poltus dries. And this all becomes quite technical, and this is where you really need the knowledge of someone else to actually steer you. And it's not just a Joe Bloggs, a landowner, that can actually take it on themselves, I believe, to do this work without some sort of oversight or some sort of report to actually give them that sort of indication. So that's really the main thing. The other one is that— Within the document, I don't think it stresses enough that moisture doesn't only come from the ground, it actually comes from the air.
And that can actually activate those salts within the fabric. And so, again, it becomes quite a complex issue. And I think there's other things which have been handled within the document very well.
But the thing that I guess I was disappointed with, with some of the things, is that the drawings don't seem to be clear enough to me. It's hard to read some of the notations. There's very small print, and they seem to be blurry on the copy that I have , that I got from Council. So I guess there's just a few things there that really need to
Technical detail here. It's almost to the point that it's giving a novice the step-by-step guide of how to do it themselves. And there is the risk of people who intend to do the best by the building but don't have the experience, but armed with this information may feel that they can do it and not need to get suitably qualified experts or practitioners involved to do the work. Certainly Part Four with good housekeeping practice I think is really helpful, and this is the intent of the fact sheet is to arm property owners with basic knowledge on good practices for maintenance, cyclical and preventative maintenance, rather than a recipe for remedy as such. And I'm wondering if this is, I mean, it's all good stuff, but I'm wondering if this is too detailed and we're arming people with too much information, that we're running the risk of people then going ahead and doing the works in the absence of expertise.
That? Yes, I think that that would be a preferable approach because, as Graham was suggesting, there are many different things that need to be factored and there's no one-size-fits-all approach to correcting rising damp, and it does require very careful diagnosis. And I think if we give this level of information, it does present an almost one-size-fits-all approach.
And what about the diagnosis section? Does that fall into the same trap? Could that be simplified as a bit of a, almost a flowchart, if this , you might be able to do X, Y and Z yourself. If these, you really need professional support.
Yes, that's right, ma'am Chair. I think the diagnosis with the illustrations there to confirm or explain what rising damp is, what— The necessity for the breathability of walls, what a damp-proof course is, the telltale signs with efflorescence and salts forming on the external face of bricks. I think that's helpful information to inform property owners so that they can diagnose and know, I need to speak to someone with expertise because I think I've got those symptoms in my building. But then leaving it there and then going on to good housekeeping practice about keeping vents clear and vegetation away and so on and so forth, and then seeking further advice from appropriately qualified specialists should you have these symptoms present in your building.
The other thing that's missing from here, particularly if we take out that section, I think section four probably needs to be quite emphatic about keeping material away from the building, particularly garden beds and paving and concrete pathways, and also the use of concrete to replace missing joints needs to be written maybe in quite large letters across the top of the pamphlet so that people stop doing it. I'll go to Mary and then John and then Graham.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm just wondering, do we know how extensive the issues around damp are in the Hawkesbury? And is it ever looked at by council? I know this isn't only an issue specific to heritage buildings. There's a lot of later buildings in particular that would have the similar issues happening around them. I'm just working towards how much of this information is going generally within the planning system, or is it being confined in a heritage context? Christopher first and then possibly Andrew.
I can't speak for the other sections of Council. I only can speak to the area that I'm exposed to. I would say, and this is, I'm just pulling a figure out of my ear, close to possibly 50%, or say 30 to 50% of our inquiries through our free heritage advisory service relate to damp issues. And Council itself has asked for help from our heritage advisory service for its own buildings regarding damp issues. So it is a high proportion , a fairly significant proportion of our free heritage advisory service relating to damp issues. And as Graham indicated, that can be not just rising damp, but other damp issues.
Okay, so when people call in asking about that, they're given some sort of advice along these lines or referred to somebody who can assist them with it. Is that how the system works?
Quite often we'll be asked to attend a site to provide advice, and the damp issues will rear their ugly head at those sessions. It may come from our heritage advisor seeing that there's a rising damp issue and then talking about it and then recommending that they get help. That's quite often the case that happens. We'll go there for a different matter and it will expose itself to our heritage advisor. So we will then provide that advice. That's probably the most common way that it happens. Other than that, there'll be times where people have a problem and they specifically ask for advice on that particular issue. And they've diagnosed their problems themselves. They've seen that they've got a problem and they've asked for expert advice on that issue. Okay,
Thank you for that. I was just, yeah, hoping, I mean, obviously in the wider community, it's also an issue with older houses, and I'm just thinking, obviously it's up to people to follow up and get the proper advice. But I think it's good to have documents like this that are reasonably—I agree with the comments that have been made about the technical sections of it, but it is good, particularly around people being urged to look for the signs and the symptoms of these sorts of things generally, not just heritage-based, because a lot of the terrace houses, of course, in Sydney have these issues, and I think a lot of them aren't listed. But also, I just think, I don't know if you know, do many people do the damp-proof course options of injecting and things like that? I'm just asking out of interest.
Yep, through the—through you, Madam Chair, yes, they do. To also respond to Michael's comment earlier, I have never seen, in all my time here in the two years that I've been in the Hawkesbury, anyone attempt a do-it-yourself approach. I've always seen, and I know that it's always been advised to these people, seek professional help from people who know what they're doing, and that's generally our approach.
To start with. Thank you for that. That's very interesting. I did see a thing in Venice where they were doing it, where they were injecting the brickwork, and it was fascinating.
And I think that probably the most prominent local example of the salt poulticing would have been the rectory at St Matthew's, which had the salt poultice— Around it for, it was several weeks from, I think, John and then Graham.
Chair, just following on from the comments about the technicality of the book, as a builder, if I was going to a job to look at a damp , rising damp problem, and if my client had read this first, that'd be fantastic. One, I wouldn't have to educate them on half the stuff in the book, even though, you know, some of the diagrams are a bit... But all you need is a few disclaimers saying, look, it's a really good set of documents to identify issues. Just take it away more, make it more of an identifying, a document to identify the issues, and a disclaimer: seek a professional. But most people advertise as contractors to fix damp just want to sell you their system, and they don't take, as Graham said, it's usually very complex.
There's a whole range of solutions, and everyone wants to just sell you their solution. And they won't. If a client knows that they have, you know, sorry, if a heritage building owner has this problem, it's good that they're educated. So I wouldn't take too much of the technical stuff out. Just don't make it a do-it-yourself book. Just here's things to look for, you know, seek professional advice on this sort of stuff, identify it, and then ask the questions.
Thanks, Madam Chair. Look, I wanted to go back to the background to this. It's 3.1.2, and there's four dot points there, and I think these are really important. Michael touched on this, and it really says what we have indicated just a minute ago. Graham,
In the background, there's four dot points. The first one is focus on getting specialist advice. The next one is plan language summary up to one page at the beginning of each document. Now, that's something that Michael brought up just a minute ago as well, and I think that's something that we already ascertained probably should happen, but it hasn't come forward in this document. And information on approvals process, that's fine, that's there. And the information on materials that should not be used and things people should not do, well, that's there as well to an extent. So I guess I go back to that and say, you know, let's not make it too technical for these owners. Let's give them the one-page summary, and if council is eager to provide them with more stuff, then they can read further on.
There's certainly a lot of information out there from Heritage New South Wales and other repositories that have very good advice. I guess the other thing I wanted to bring up at this point was good housekeeping is a really important thing to do, and that goes not only for historic buildings but also for very modern buildings. Like to actually increase the level of the garden around the building and cover the damp-proof course, then you've got rising damp. You know, so it's not only—and I guess to answer a previous question—it's not only historic buildings, but it's also other buildings that this comes into play with. Similarly, putting concrete slabs around buildings, you know, above the damp-proof course.
Those sorts of things you might think are fairly fundamental, but people do it all the time, and they cover up their ventilation, underfloor ventilation in areas where they've got timber floors. So. I guess that's the sort of comment that I would make there. And as far as the do-it-yourself thing, I have seen some really dodgy work being done by people, by owners who've tried to do it themselves, have been given a UV system, but they really don't understand either how to use it, or it's a system that's not really well tried and true. So it is out there. It has happened in the Hawkesbury. I've seen it, but yes, it needs to be avoided.
Yes, and I think it's probably worth noting that some of these do-nots figure really prominently in television renovation and restoration shows. I can think of one in particular where the concrete floor replacing timber or earth with no drainage at all. Figures large, Restoration Australia, not naming any names. So I think we'll leave—we could, I think we're probably content with the roof one with some changes to the photos. Is that fair to say? Would we like to see a revision of the damp course one come back, or we're happy to leave it in the hands of the staff? I think your points about changes have all been noted, and can probably—I'm keen to get these out because the longer we don't get them out, the more people either don't do anything or do the wrong thing. Jan?
This is another aspect that is dear to my heart, having spent time in a building with rising damp and spent ten years of my life in bed and in a wheelchair. I'm one of the few people in the world that get really badly affected by mould, but it's widely understood now that mould and the rising damp cause— Even mild health problems and can cause in some people very serious problems. And I just think that even if it's just a very short rider, that somewhere in this document it should actually indicate that it can cause mould and it can cause health problems, and that's why it must get fixed immediately. There's that other side to it.
So where would you like to go with this one? Are we happy to have those changes that you've listed and for this to go out to the public, or do you want to see it again?
Madam Chair, I think it would be good to have this one come back. Okay Given the extent of changes that we've been discussing, and I also echo Graham's comment about the clarity of the illustrations used there. It might be good to produce some firsthand rather than reproduce poor quality images because the detail, you can't read it.
So could I ask then that those of you who are keen on some reworking of this pamphlet to engage with the staff to facilitate that, because otherwise it will take quite some time to come back to us. We simply don't have the resources to spend a lot of time in that space. And if you've got some information that you think would be helpful, then that would be really useful. So the recommendation, I think, is probably, if I get onto the right item,
That the feedback provided by the Heritage Committee be taken into account prior to the publication of the Heritage Information Sheet on roofing and an amended guideline for... Damp for rising damp come to the next committee meeting. Is that fair? Could I have someone move that, Jill, and someone second?
Could I— sorry, I know we've moved and we've finished that discussion, but can I just comment on the term housekeeping, which I don't know means the same as building maintenance to everybody anymore. To me, housekeeping is a reflection of my poor dusting and vacuuming skills, which I will say, in my own defence, have uncovered several termite infestations, because the foss generated by the termites has been set there for everyone to watch, so it's not always bad to be a slack housewife. But I do take the point that poor building maintenance does lead to rising damp.
Andrew Kearnes(staff - Manager, Strategic Planning)
Applications under the Shire's Assistance Fund. We also highlighted that the formal consideration of those applications was to occur at Council's ordinary meeting in October. So that meeting has occurred, and as a result of that, Council did actually resolve to approve 30 applicants, which is a record number that we have been able to provide support for. Details of those are included in the report in terms of locations and the actual works. Obviously, a focus of, you know, in terms of locations in Richmond, Windsor, Pitt Town and the McDonald Valley, and then in terms of works, sort of a focus on ceilings, fencing, cladding, roofs, gutters and downpipes. Also worthwhile, we've highlighted as part of the report.
So when it did come to Council for consideration, there was a resolution passed by Council basically to look at significantly increasing the amount of funding for the Local Heritage Assistance Fund in next year's operational plan and also from State Government funding. So I guess there was recognition from Council of the success of the program and that it's, you know, year on year is generating further interest, and that as a consequence, further funding needs to be sought and obtained for that program.
So Council had got all overexcited and pledged some more money for shop improvements in South Windsor, and so I shamelessly leapt on that show of goodwill and hit them up for some more money for the Heritage Assistance Fund. And so a tactic that I may repeat, given that it was so successful. Questions or comments?
But at least it's been flagged. Well, I suggest that this committee give some idea of what sort of magnitude would be, given that people who work in this and know the costs around this sort of thing, that they give some sort of idea of what a more meaningful contribution would be , because I gather the maximum here is 2,000, isn't it? It is here, yes. So I
Did a rough comparison with some of the other council areas before the last council meeting, and they range from $15,000 in one LGA down to $2,000. We're at the very low end of the assistance. $4,000 is far
More common. Yes, so I think we should have some idea before we go into the budget discussions to be able to say. I mean, I would think— I know we're constrained financially, council doesn't have a lot of money—but I think upping it to be a bit more meaningful for people is definitely a good move.
Madam Chair, if I can just answer to that. The reference to $15,000, I'm assuming, is the City of Ryde Council, and that was implemented while I was there as capacity heritage advisor. That was a specific motion of the council to butter up the nominations for new heritage listings, and that was a $500,000... Grant that had been put aside to fund that program, and that was going to be available and still is available until fully depleted. Whether that takes five years, one year, ten years, it will always be there. And the substantive grant was $5,000 a maximum per property per year, but that was increased to a one-off $15,000 payment, dollar payment.
That is, for a defined period, yes. Well, undefined period, but for a defined amount . Georges River Council that I'm also heritage advisor for, they have funds of up to $4,000. SESCNOT Council, which I also consult with, they have funds of $2,000, and they are a regional council that is always oversubscribed, but has problems with being able to get people to complete the work, so they end up having money left over.
Materials, let alone cover labour. It really is going to come down to what the works are that are being funded, and some projects will be more substantial in a financial sense than smaller jobs, but every dollar is going to help in the capacity of contributing to conservation practice and good maintenance and repairs to these buildings, which many have been neglected for many years. I don't think there's a magic number. The more we get, the better.
Madam Chair, I'll just make one quick comment. When I was the heritage advisor at Hornsby Shire Council, we had the ability to—where there was a special project—to actually have used, instead of just two for everybody, you could chunk it together, and we gave to one applicant $15,000, which was substantially more than the other applicants, but it was on the basis that the works were highly significant, and that's how we justified it. Because I know it eats into the fairness factor. Everyone should get a fair piece of the pie, but that was the approach we took over there, and it was quite successful as well.
I think there has been an instance of that that I can remember, which was to move a building from the floodplain building that was about to be demolished to the Pioneer Village, and I think that was an amount of $20,000 that came out of the Heritage Assistance Fund. That was by specific resolution of Council. Graham?
Madam Chair, I think I've probably said this before at other meetings when we've talked about these dollars, is that $2,000, a lot of people balk at because there's so much paperwork involved in writing the application, getting it approved, and then actually substantiating what you've done so the Council are giving the money. So a lot of people, to me, have said, We're not going to bother because it's not worth our while. So I really think that, at least doubling, if not more, per fund or per applicant would be far more beneficial. So
The balancing act then for everyone to consider, including Council, is particularly if we have a whole lot more heritage items come onto the LEP listing, is what's the balance between giving a group of individuals a larger sum of money or giving less money to a larger group of potential applicants? And that is the ongoing problem. I think one of the issues, of course, that we have is that the state government hands over such a tiny amount of money to an area that is so rich in heritage. And the other aspect of heritage that we're not considering at all is Aboriginal heritage. I don't think we've had a single item of Aboriginal heritage come to this assistance fund, certainly not in my memory. There's nothing that excludes Aboriginal heritage from it, but it hasn't happened yet.
Mary? I was just going to say that the pathetic amount from Heritage New South Wales, I think we should be lobbying to get more money than that, and increasing our overall commitment regardless of how it's going to be distributed, but for the next budget to increase that to beyond the 43,000, which is also very low considering what we should do. So we should be lifting that overall figure. I don't know if there's scope within that to have any categories of the work, so for example contributions to painting, for example, would be on the lower side, whereas something, as you've said, of more significance maybe would be eligible for more money. I'm not sure how it's administered. I haven't seen a specific protocol around the decision of it, but I definitely think if we can at first at least increase the overall pool from both of those sources, so either writing to Heritage New South Wales and requesting more on the basis that more properties will be listed and that we've got a focus to preserve all of our heritage regardless of its source, and that Council in its budget actually have an increase, an increased commitment with the amount of money it gives, and then before the next sort of—it's only annual, isn't it?
Yes, yes. So before the next one comes, we could perhaps, you know, work on firming up the actual categories of how it may be distributed.
Is the recommendation then, because what have we got now? Provide feedback and input. No, I'm on the wrong thing. It's just that it be received and noted. Right. Well, we won't have that because that, I would think, that's not very interesting, is it? Sorry, Andrew. So that counts, so that the Heritage Advisory Committee recommends that Council lobby the State Government for an increase in heritage assistance funds, increases the overall pool of heritage assistance funding by at least double. Yeah?
Including, and I think we will bring up the— I don't think it needs to be in the recommendation, but I think that idea of a defined fund, which perhaps may be able to attract its own interest and its own increases, might be beneficial. If we can carve out a fund for heritage, then maybe we might win in the long term. We'll tell that, we'll inform the financial department of that
Can I suggest just to make it all, because I know all these budget people like nice round figures and things. A hundred thousand? That we— well, I was thinking if we went to 80 from Council is— That's not double, though. Well, it's nearly double. Well, I think if you really want to recommend 100, and if they knock you back to 80, then we'll deal with that at the time. Mr Kearns is looking bemused at my suggestion. I'm not sure why. Because really, I mean, you would think that Heritage New South Wales could be giving 20 or something, less than five.
Seriously. Five. Five thousand is such a tiny , minuscule amount. It's pathetic. It's really— It is pathetic. I actually consider it insulting, to be quite honest.
Madam Chair, the argument about more heritage items coming onto the list shortly is a strong one for lobbying the state government for more funds. And I think that should be made very upfront in the application we make for extra funding.
Yes. We used to be dragging people in off the street. So it's really exciting. It really is a testimony to the hard work of the staff, and in particular Council's Heritage Advisory Service. And word has got around that that service is a fantastic free service, and that when someone comes out to your house, they give you a lot of information without wrapping you over the knuckles, without making you feel like your heritage property is a burden. This represents a real change in the attitude to heritage in the LGA from burden to bonus, I think, and that's certainly what we need to be doing to keep our heritage both safe and thriving. Any other comments?
Item 3.1.4 Update On The Hawkesbury Timber Barns Study 2023
Danielle Wheeler
We done with that one? Oh, sorry, do we have a mover for that recommendation? Jill and Jan. Thank you. All right, item 3.1.4, an update on the Hawkesbury Timber Slab Barn study. I have a pecuniary interest, and so I'm going to step down as chair. I also, unfortunately, have to leave by 20 past six, and so I will step down as the chair and stay stepped down as the chair for the remainder of the meeting. So, Mary, would you like to take over? Certainly. And then there's two other conflicts of interest. Do you want to come up here so that you can see the screen in case someone has their hand up?
Sure. Thanks, Michelle. All right, the update on the Hawkesbury Timber Barn study, we'll pass over to Andrew, giving us an update on that. Thanks, Andrew.
Andrew Kearnes(staff - Manager, Strategic Planning)
Thank you. So, we had this item obviously at the October meeting, and there were sort of a few queries from committee members in terms of some of the numbers contained in the report. So, basically following the meeting, officers have discussed those figures and those numbers with the lead consultant and have confirmed those numbers that we have in the report. So, in terms of the number of sites inspected, overall sites, and the progress in terms of preparation of sheets, they're basically confirmed there. So, just highlighting that to the committee that that's the case.
Thanks for that, Andrew. So does that satisfy those who were asking about those numbers? That's been confirmed. Are there any other discussions on that? I think the rest of the report is largely unchanged, but any further discussion around that?
Thank you. I just wanted to mention I was actually overseas a couple of weeks ago now, and on coming back, I noticed that the barn at Fremantle Reach Road, number 65, and potentially one of the oldest barns in the Hawkesbury, has actually lost its roof with the winds that we've had of late. And that sort of upsets me somewhat that we did get that letter that the chair asked for, or for me, rather, to send it on from the Heritage Office saying that they wouldn't give emergency funding for that building because, A, it wasn't locally listed and, B, wasn't of state significance, and that they thought that the current owners, even though this building goes back prior to 1816, could pick it up and move it somewhere into higher ground.
Well, of course, they don't own higher ground, and that's just a stupidity anyway when it comes to significance. So I guess I'm just disappointed that that one's now lost its roof. And I just wonder, I guess before I go on to that, it's potentially an item of state significance, of course, and possibly will remain that way even though it's lost its roof because it could actually be reconstructed. But it just shows that it's important for this council to actually recognise and properly recognise these historic buildings that we're the custodians of. I know it might seem boring to some people and maybe some councillors because they think it stifles development or whatever. But these things are important to the owners so that they can actually apply for particular funding that's comparable with the status of their heritage item.
So I guess, although it's disappointing, it really highlights the case that we're dealing with recognition.
Thanks, Graham. It really does. That is very disappointing indeed, and that letter has elements of disappointment around it too. Did anyone else have anything to comment? First of all, specifically if the staff had any more knowledge around that barn and if there'd been any contact regarding the loss of the roof or anything around that. Thanks, Graham.
There was a call made about a week or so ago, I think, when the strong winds, and the matter was that there was bits of iron on a health issue were potentially going to damage persons or property. That's as far as I know what happened with that. It was given to compliance to address. I'll have to take it on notice and perhaps come back to the committee with what's occurred since then. I'll have to chase that up with the compliance people. But everything Graham said is correct, and that's why we're doing the timber slab barns update study. That's the importance of properties having access to emergency funding that's available from the state. It's critical that these places are heritage listed, and this is what happens when they're not.
Michael? Madam Chair, if I can, through you, if I can just add the concern that I've got with council's compliance acting on damage to the property, if they are going to serve orders under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, given that it is not a listed item, what is that going to look like, and are they going to take into consideration the significance of this structure, or are they going to serve orders to make good and make safe, or even worse, demolish?
Madam Chair, I'm called in as council's heritage officer to any property that's suspected of having heritage significance. It's not only properties that are heritage listed. So I'll chase this up because I haven't been called to attend the property with a compliance officer, so I'll follow this up for the committee and let you know.
Thank you. And would you attend that site and have a look at it then, if that's appropriate, if the compliance has not understood the significance of those specific buildings?
I've only done a drive past. I haven't actually been on site, but it looks to me as though parts of it are actually on top of the main beams that actually go across the width of the building, but others, I believe, have been blown off and did actually contact the road and elsewhere. So, yeah, it was a dangerous situation, I would think. But that particular building has been failing for some time, as you know.
I think that raises another issue, which is also just around general awareness of the significance of materials that may either come from a demolition or be something like blown off onto the road, like a lot of people would just see an old piece of iron, corrugated iron, as something they should just turf out, whereas it may actually be significant. But I don't know how you raise awareness around that. I guess if it's blown off, it's blown off the property and gone across the road or elsewhere. So
Could we ask that the heritage officer has chat to the owners and see if we can recover those bits of roofing and anything attached to them? If they're still on the property, if they can be at least salvaged, that would be something. If we're going to look towards funding some sort of reconstruction process down the track, better that we're not introducing a new bit of corrugated iron when the old one has been tossed in a skip.
I think the, through Madam Chair, I think the owners have shown themselves to be, and I think Graeme can attest to this, shown themselves to be responsible people in how they've sought through their own expense to stabilise the bank below the, quite extensively below the barn. So yes, I'd be happy to contact them and to offer any assistance that I could.
Madam Chair, this brings to mind what Danielle was suggesting in the previous item, where if we had some sort of dedicated fund , then there could be an emergency allocation to something as important as this from that fund. So I think it's another reason why we need to really press for some sort of dedicated fund to have in reserve. Yeah
Madam Chair, I think Danielle, although she mentioned the importance of keeping the corrugated metal, what I believe is what was underlying the corrugated metal is the most important bit, and that's the pole structure that was there and how it was actually fixed. So yes, those bits, when the flood, excuse me, did come through and cause the initial slumping and damage, a lot of those bits did actually end up down in the bank and down in the river and potentially were lost. I don't know whether they've been, some of them have been recovered when the owners did the riverbank stabilisation work, but certainly this latest episode with the wind , that's the important bits that really make it significant to the future.
Thank you. Any other comments on that? Okay, so we'll just leave Christopher to follow up on that and advise us. I don't think that needs to be in the motion necessarily. We'll just accept that update, and I gather we don't have any more detail on the timeline there, Andrew, do we, as opposed to last time? It's just still basically on the same time schedule.
I know the consultants are keen to do it before Christmas, to finalise it before Christmas, but time is short, so we'll have to wait and watch this space. Okay,
Thank you. So someone just to move to— As per the recommendation, if no one has any changes, someone to move that. Moved, Shane. Thank you, Shane. And seconder, Jill. Thanks, Jill. Okay, that was the last one of the reports in the business paper. General business. Does anyone have any general business items to raise?
And I guess part of my concern is having the document on Rising Dam come before us today and knowing the approach that Council is making in respect of putting concrete slabs adjacent to historic building wall really flies in the face of this information sheet and this document, and it clearly shows that there's a lack of understanding either by those that are guiding Council or by Council themselves in respect of what they're embarking on. They've already done it in Richmond , and they're now embarking on it or going to embark on it at Windsor. The other thing that really upset me was I got an email from an owner of a historic building along George Street, and he cc'd me in on the advice that he had actually got from someone in Council, and I won't mention any names, but the indication was that they wouldn't.
Or that Council wouldn't consider this particular building to actually have the remedial work against the wall, providing ventilation and the like to this building, because it actually had a veranda which was actually covering the street facade, and so the rising damp wouldn't be an issue. Well, what a stupidity that is. We all know that rising damp comes from the ground. It does come to some extent from moisture from the air, but it just shows to me that this particular project hasn't really been thought through sufficiently enough and wholesomely enough to actually not stop a potential class action in the future. I'm not really concerned.
I think they're really valid concerns, and thanks for raising them. I know, Graham, that you and some others were having some meetings—I wasn't involved in those—some meetings with council staff or some councillors around those sort of issues. I'm just wondering to what extent you , whether that came to anything in terms of commitments around what they —I know they did a list of buildings where they were going to consider that—but were they aware of it to the extent of having the information around? I know you would have told them, but did they have any documentation or anything? And on top of that, I think what you've just said is really important. I would appreciate, as a representative, having that information sent in an email to all councillors, as well as what comes through the official... Liveability project things, because that we're not getting the in-depth detail around that.
Well, Madam Chair, this document has actually been prepared, although we've actually asked for particular changes to it. But in essence, it's a good document, and it's actually been prepared by Council's heritage advisor. So you would have to ask, has Council sought advice from their own heritage advisor on this particular project, and if not, why not?
Well, that's a very, very valid question, and maybe we shall just follow that up as councillors. I'm just thinking of the best way to really capture those concerns, because we get a lot of concerns come up about these projects, and some of them are things that can be rectified easily. Some have really long-term consequences, such as these sort of things. And because there's been various changes around it and things, delays and changes, it will be coming back with another design thing . So, I mean, it will be up for discussion again. Maybe that's the time to raise them. Although I would consider this as something that should have already been considered, and has to a point been considered. But what I'm wondering is, do you consider it adequate what they are proposing? Then you're saying someone's contacted you and said their business isn't being considered. So something seems wrong here.
Yeah, well, I'd certainly agree that something is wrong, and I think I was hoping that we would actually get some sort of report back from the presentation that we received at the last meeting, because the livability project was discussed and we did air these sorts of issues, and I thought that... The presenter was going to come back with some further advice as to how they were going to tackle the heritage items where the concrete was coming to abut their walls. And I guess further to that , I don't believe what's proposed at the moment has a chance of working , because if you've got, let's say you've got one heritage building and then you've got a non-heritage building beside it, does it mean that the concrete slab goes up to the walls of those that are beside it and not to the heritage item?
And if you put an ag line or something to actually remove the moisture in front of the heritage item, where does that go? And what happens to the transfer of lateral damp from one side to the other that this document talks about? I don't really think it's been thought about sufficiently as a fabric conservation
Approach. So ideally, it would be the entire streetscape as the same approach, not building by building, as is suggested, which , I mean, I don't know the feasibility of it because I don't know how the costs and what is going on. But certainly it would seem that would be the only way to actually implement something that would be advantageous in terms of avoiding the pitfalls of that. So what we need, really, I guess the committee is able to ask or suggest or request more information, more clarity around that. We could maybe get some information and get back to—I'm not sure when the next heritage committee meeting is. Is that soon?
Yeah, I think we need some sort of official communication from this committee saying that we've got concerns around that. Various things have been raised. Can we have some clarity? Can we see how it fits with our proposed or draft rising damp thing and just get an answer back? And maybe we can carry that out via email, given the time structure around the various, you know, I don't know. I don't know the timelines of any of these things. I'm in the dark. The
The more sections up in the air, but it impacts the other buildings. There's other buildings in the other section of the street that are getting paving, and, yeah. February this should be commencing work on. Okay, well if they're commencing in February, this is a reasonably an urgent request. So I would suggest somebody move a motion requesting, expressing the concerns or requesting information about how it will be done and how it sits with our draft damp policy, and see if we can get a response to that and take it from there. And we can take it up as councillors as well, seeing that the committee has universally, I think, seen that there is a problem, that a deficiency in that, in what's proposed.
Madam Chair, can I go back one step and actually ask some advice from you as to a way forward? I hear what you say, but I would have thought that a roundtable discussion from those that are interested from this Heritage Committee and Council's Heritage Advisor, perhaps the consultants to Council, and also those within Council that are involved with this project, actually have a roundtable discussion and air these sorts of grievances. Otherwise, we're going to go backwards and forwards all of the time. I'm
Yes, I'll move a motion that this committee requests a roundtable discussion between those that have the technical expertise or are interested in the deliverability project and the effects on rising damp of what is being proposed, together with Council's advisors and also Council staff that are involved with this project, to actually come to an agreement on a professional way forward to actually meet the requirements of what Council's trying to achieve from the deliverability project, but also not to, I guess, diminish fabric or to cause deterioration of building fabric. It may abut.
I think we need to put a time in there, and the other thing is to clarify: when you said advisors, you meant the consultants, the people doing— Yes, consultants. Yeah
And also, Madam Chair, if we could be specific and include the council's heritage advisor in there, because with our last meeting, our presentation prior to the last meeting, when the involvement of our heritage advisor was actually—when we asked a question about it, we were told that no, there wasn't involvement. So in view of the rising damp document, and that is an issue particularly with the heritage buildings along George Street and in Windsor, that I think we need to be specific about that.
Yes, Madam Chair, I think probably as a preamble, we probably should say, considering the information that we have from the information sheet on rising damp, that this group is concerned about the effects of the livability project, and then we can go on to the particular motion if that's okay.
To say basically, so we want to do this request straight away, so if it goes just into the general run-of-the-mill going to council meetings and everything, so we actually—we can do that, can't we, Andrew? Go outside of getting this endorsed by council whole. We can make a request from this committee for a meeting outside of—
Okay. So if the minutes are there, that request can then be endorsed and hopefully actioned upon, supported, first of all, and hopefully actioned upon very quickly to set up that meeting, which I think would be really good. And given that that's the case and it will come, those of us who are here can transfer those concerns to the rest of the council to explain the reasoning, the urgency, and also what outcome is sought. Thank you. So Graham moved that, and somebody — and Shane seconded that. Thanks, Amy. Did you get all that? Yep. Good. Thank you. Any other general business to anyone to raise? No? All right. Well, thanks everybody. That was a good meeting. Erin — oh, sorry, people online, any general business?
