PLANS to install a number of relocatable homes on the grounds of an historic home on Daly Street have been knocked back by Bathurst Regional Council, citing heritage concerns.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The owners of The Grange at 10 Daly Street had originally sought council permission to erect five two-bedroom units at the rear of the property, but altered that number to four in response to community concerns about overcrowding.
The Grange, which was built in 1874 but has operated as a boarding house since 1951, is currently leased by the Western NSW Local Health District as accommodation for visiting medical professionals.
But plans to install the relocatable homes sparked a furious response by neighbours who said it would detract from the area’s heritage significance, lower home prices in the area and create traffic congestion.
Despite their concerns, environmental plann-ing and building services director David Shaw recommended the development be approved, but it was rejected by councillors.
Councillor Monica Morse said the application had been a complicated matter for councillors but she could not support it.
“I think we have all given this great consideration but all the way through we talked about these dwellings being relocatable,” she said.
“But the nearby Chifley cottages were built as relocatable homes in the 1940s and they’re still there and now have heritage protection.
“There’s nothing in this application to say these dwellings are to go after five years, or 10 years – what exactly does relocatable mean?”
Cr Morse said simply approving a development because it would be out of sight was a “travesty to our commitment to heritage as a council” and said she could not be satisfied that the relocatable homes would not have a significant impact on the heritage area.
Cr Greg Westman said council should be wary about going against Mr Shaw’s advice and said plenty of developments had been approved on the basis that they would not affect the streetscape.
“Very often we approve additions to heritage dwellings where we have the applicant keep the facade and make alterations at the back of the property as a way of sustaining our heritage,” he said.
“Pretty much all of this development is to the rear of the area of concern and will have little visual impact, which I think is a plus for it.”
Cr Bobby Bourke called it a bad development and said no-one he had spoken to would want it in their backyard or their neighbour’s backyard.