Narrandera Shire Council rejected its own Development Application for the State-listed heritage lattice railway bridge project at the October Council meeting last week.

The DA provided for the conversion of the bridge to a pedestrian bridge as part of the State Government-funded Playground on the Murrumbidgee project.

Funding has been obtained with the council receiving a grant of $860,000, which is said to pay for two-thirds of the development cost. These include an access ramp and carpark on the northern side of the bridge.

The converted bridge was to have been added to the town’s bike and hike trail enabling locals and visitors to cycle and/or walk along the bridge from the northern side.

A motion to the council meeting moved by Cr Barbara Bryon and seconded by Cr David Fahey supporting the council’s recommendation to approve the DA – subject to the thumbs up from Heritage NSW – was defeated on a majority 5-2 vote.

A division was conducted to record the vote. Those against the motion were Cr Neville Kschenka (Mayor), Cr David Fahey, Cr Tracey Lewis, Cr Narelle Payne and Cr Kevin Morris. Those in favour were Cr Bryon and Cr Jenny Clarke.

The council business paper said the development complied with the Narrandera LEP 2013 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Submissions identifying potential impacts were raised and were said to have been mitigated by the inclusion of “appropriate conditions”.

Heritage impacts had been assessed and were subject to Heritage NSW approval.

A council report said submissions raised a number of issues with most being outside the scope of a planning consideration.

“However, both mention the potential effects of a loss of privacy, the need for the adaptive reuse of the bridge and the effects on the environment,” the report noted.

With the motion lost, Cr Fahey foreshadowed a motion, seconded by Cr Lewis calling on the Council to refuse the DA for the following reasons:

• The potential impacts (loss of privacy) on the adjoining properties unable to be adequately mitigated by the use of screening.

• The conditions identify an increased operational expense to Council which is not fully known and could cause undesired financial implications.

• The risks, costs and lack of tenure over the land and bridge.

Speaking to his motion, Cr Fahey said he understood the project had been identified a long time ago.

He stressed that the grant money would not be lost and would be put to good use with a similar project which could bring more benefits.

“ I know a lot of people are passionate about it but the bridge won’t go away,” he said.

“I have lots of concerns. For a start we have no tenure over the bridge. We have no tenure over Koori Beach. There are issues with the on-going maintenance and how Council would fund the works and the privacy of residents who live in the area was another concern,” he said.

He questioned the wisdom of approving the DA on something the Council did not own. As far as he was aware the Council had no permission to go on the bridge, let alone do works there.

He said the bridge project was fraught with danger and put Council at risk.

“People could climb on the bridge now, but it was not Council’s responsibility. As far as I’m concerned the funds can be used on a similar or parallel project with better outcomes,”Cr Fahey said.

He said he did not believe there had been a groundswell of support as stated and questioned whether the Aboriginal community had been consulted.

Clarifying the matter, General Manager George Cowan said Deputy General Manager Infrastructure Shane Wilson had held two meetings on site to present the plans to the Aboriginal community.

The local Aboriginal Land Council was invited to express their views. To his knowledge, there was no response.

Also clarifying the consultation issue Cr Payne said she did know that the Aboriginal community had been consulted and informal meetings were also held.

“There is no groundswell of support to develop the area,” Cr Payne said. “People could still go down there if they want to look at the bridge and treat the area with respect.

“Another thing that sways me is that the funds can be spent on opportunities with better out-comes. This one throws up as lot of difficulties,” she said.

Speaking to his motion, Cr Fahey put forward a suggestion.

“We are getting a new VIC ( Visitor Information Centre). If you want to look at the bridge get a drone to do a 360 degree flyover and have it displayed in the VIC, much safer, much cheaper and no on-going costs,” he said.

Closing the debate, Cr Bryon said diverting the bridge funds elsewhere was premature.

“We put in a grant application; the Council put in a grant application and the money was awarded for this project so it is rather premature to say let’s send it elsewhere ,” she said.

Cr Bryon said if Heritage NSW said no then the Council could look at other opportunities.

“This project is not dead,”she said. “There is a lot of feeling in the community in a positive form, not negative that’s for sure. The bridge is not only a national icon or a Narrandera icon. It is a bridge of history and I think Council is doing a good job to preserve it. It is certainly positive. Let’s go as far as we can.”

Cr Bryon said a lot of background work had gone into the project and to say there is not a groundswell of support was also incorrect.

Put to the meeting, Cr Fahey’s motion was passed on the same 5-2 majority which defeated the recommendation to approve the DA.

This article appeared in the Narrandera Argus, 28 October 2021.