Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge

Item details


Name of item:	Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge
Other name/s:	RMS Bridge No 3247
Type of item:	Built
Group/Collection:	Transport - Land
Category:	Road Bridge
Location:	Lat: -35.91588 Long: 145.66857
Primary address:	Vermont Street, Barooga, NSW 3644
Parish:	Barooga
County:	Denison
Local govt. area:	Berrigan
Local Aboriginal Land Council:	Cummeragunja

Property description

Lot/Volume Code	Lot/Volume Number	Section Number	Plan/Folio Code	Plan/Folio Number
CROWN LAND

Boundary:

Refer to Heritage Council Plan 2820. The curtilage of Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is an envelope that extends 5m each side of the bridge deck and behind the abutment wall to include the extent of the bridge itself, its approach spans and approach embankments.

All addresses

Street Address	Suburb/town	LGA	Parish	County	Type
Vermont Street	Barooga	Berrigan	Barooga	Denison	Primary Address

Owner/s

Organisation Name	Owner Category	Date Ownership Updated
Transport for NSW	State Government

Statement of significance:


	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state heritage significance because it is an excellent, intact and rare example of a Hinton-type vertical lift-span opening bridge with De Burgh Truss side spans and timber beam approaches. It is historically one of the significant crossings of the Murray River and the NSW/Victoria state border and the construction of this vertical lift-span opening bridge records the original use of the Murray River for commercial transport of wheat and wool produce. The establishment of the bridge reflects the historical development of the Riverina region of NSW and its relationship across the Murray River with railway transport to Melbourne, the history of which was also a significant element in the economic and agricultural development of northern Victoria. The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is directly associated with the Federation of the Australian states in 1901. Its construction was delayed until the outcomes of the Federation proposals were known and this association, in the context of the past and future use of the Murray River, illustrates the economic relationships between the states in the 1890s and the motivations for Federation.
	Date significance updated: 19 Oct 19
	Note: The State Heritage Inventory provides information about heritage items listed by local and State government agencies. The State Heritage Inventory is continually being updated by local and State agencies as new information becomes available. Read the Department of Premier and Cabinet copyright and disclaimer.

Description


Designer/Maker:	Ernest De Burgh, engineer, Department of Public Works, NSW
Construction years:	1900-1902
Physical description:	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is a timber truss, lift-span bridge that formerly carried two traffic lanes across the Murray River between Cobram (Victoria) and Barooga (NSW). It is now a pedestrian bridge having been superseded by a parallel bridge for vehicular traffic. The primary axis of the bridge is east-west. The bridge has a clearance over normal water level of 7.9m with the lift span closed and 14.3m with the lift span open. It is a large twelve-span bridge of timber, steel, iron and concrete and features a steel lift-span on an iron and concrete substructure with two large De Burgh composite timber-steel truss spans. The three main spans include a single, vertical-lift opening span supported on cast iron piers in the centre of the bridge, flanked by a single De Burgh Truss span on each side. The eastern (NSW) side has been truncated and retains only one timber beam approach span, which terminates in a steel fence and stair to ground level. All three timber beam approach spans survive on the western (Victorian) side. The outer ends of the truss spans and the approach spans are carried on timber trestles on timber piles. The outer ends of the lift span are carried on twin cylindrical cast iron piers with intermediate perforated steel plate braces. The lift span is formed by a roadway between riveted Pratt-Truss box-girders with a span of 18m. The road deck on the lift span is narrower than the approaches and reduces to one traffic lane. The lifting superstructure comprises four steel lattice towers, connected at their upper level by steel lattice girders. The two De Burgh truss spans, each 31.7m, are of composite timber and steel construction, with paired timber top chords and vertical struts with steel rods forming diagonals within each panel. The approach spans range from approximately 9.1m to 11m in length and are of timber beam construction, comprising five parallel timber logs spanning between timber and trestle piers. Each span has been strengthened by the addition of four steel RSJs, one each located in between the timber logs. There is a footway on the southern side with a timber guardrail but the majority of the timber decking of the footway has been removed. The footway is absent on the lifting span and the footways have an entrance to the road deck on either side of the opening span. Pedestrians were required to share the road deck with vehicles for the length of the opening span.
Physical condition and/or Archaeological potential:	Bridge fabric condition is generally good. The northern approach (NSW end) has been removed and replaced with a staircase that is considered to be unsympathetic and intrusive. Future remodelling of stairs or replacement would be recommended.
	Date condition updated:08 Sep 15
Modifications and dates:	January 2000: additions to lift span. c2000: Northern approach (NSW end) removed and replaced with a staircase that is considered to be unsympathetic and intrusive. Future remodelling of stairs or replacement would be recommended.
Further information:	A new bridge for road traffic was built in 2006, next to the Cobram-Barroga Bridge which then became a dedicated pedestrian foot bridge. The northern approach (NSW end) has been removed and replaced with a staircase that is considered to be unsympathetic and intrusive. Future remodelling of stairs or replacement would be recommended.


Current use:	Pedestrian crossing over the Murray River
Former use:	Vehicular and pedestrian crossing over the Murray River

History

Historical notes:

Timber Truss Bridges in NSW:

The development of bridge technology and design was relatively static for thousands of years, with either simple, short bridges built of timber beams across a stream or substantial stone masonry arch bridges spanning rivers. In Australia, stone (and brick) arch bridges provided the major form of bridge until the middle of the nineteenth century, after which, local engineers turned to timber truss bridges to provide the majority of river crossings, with the (expensive) imported wrought iron bridges reserved for railways and the larger and more heavily trafficked roads. Although timber beam bridges are limited by the dimensions of available materials, timber offered the cheapest and quickest bridge solution. In NSW, the availability of excellent hardwoods provided Public Works engineers McDonald, Allan, Dare and De Burgh with a uniquely strong and durable material for timber truss bridges. Timber beam bridges served NSW well for 150 years as relatively inexpensive structures to aid the movement of goods and people.

The emergence of steel in the latter half of the nineteenth century provided a cheaper, stronger and more adaptable material for bridges than cast or wrought iron. It was rapidly adopted world-wide, its application limited only by its relative cost. In Australia, this meant that its use continued to be constrained until after local manufacture commenced in 1915. In response, the timber truss bridge designs in NSW evolved after 1899 to include steel members in critical locations such as bottom chords, whilst continuing to utilise timber for the majority of the bridge structure.

There were five main types of timber truss bridges erected in NSW, distinguished by the evolving arrangement of the primary truss members. The five types are:

1. Old Public Works Department Truss (PWD) - A basic truss bridge, based upon English models, in use from 1860 to 1886. It took advantage of the local hardwoods for its main members and was a solid and durable design

2. McDonald Truss - Built from 1886 to 1893, the McDonald truss improved upon the Old PWD type by addressing several of its particular shortcomings. These included the placement of cast-iron shoes at the junctions between timber beams, the end members were doubled and splayed for better lateral stability and wrought-iron rods were utilised for vertical tension members.

3. Allan Truss - Built from 1893 to 1929, the Allan type also used cast iron connection pieces and vertical iron rods but was a significant improvement on the McDonald type, with most main members doubled and spaced, a simplified tensioning system and using smaller individual pieces of timber.

4. De Burgh Truss - The De Burgh Truss was built from 1899 to 1905. This truss was a composite truss, utilising timber and steel in combination. It was distinguished by the use of pin-joints in the connections between the steel bottom chords and the steel diagonal rods.

5. Dare Truss - The Dare Truss is very similar to an Allan truss but used steel bottom chords. Designed by Harvey Dare and built from 1905 to 1936, the Dare Truss incorporates the best features of both the Allan Truss and the De Burgh Truss, whilst eliminating the pin-joints of the latter that proved problematic in maintenance. The Dare Truss was the most successful of the timber/steel composite trusses.

Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge, uses De Burgh Trusses. The De Burgh Truss is unique amongst the five timber truss types in NSW, as it was the first to depart from the process of evolution from the previous 'standard type'. The defining features included the 'Pratt' truss arrangement, with timber vertical posts, timber top-chords and steel rods as inclined tension members, bottom chords formed by continuous parallel steel plates, steel plates and diagonal rods connected to the bottom chords by turned pins.

Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge was also a movable lift-span bridge. Opening bridges were required in order to provide clearance for masted vessels. For the inland river system of the Darling, Murray and Murrumbidgee, the majority of craft were paddle-steamers and loaded barges. These craft were typically not tall and could pass under most bridges when water levels were low. However, during high water level periods, particularly floods, additional headroom was required and this was provided by an opening span over the main channel. These telescopic bridges were only suitable for small openings and, where larger ships were operating, swing-span bridges were used. Opening-span bridges were built from 1890 until 1941, after which no new opening bridges were erected on the Murray River.

Agriculture, Navigation and the Commonwealth:

The context for the design and construction of the Old Cobram Bridge was the historical transition of the Murray River from being used primarily for navigation to being used primarily for irrigation water supply. During the 1870s, the closer settlement of the Riverina region for agriculture was struggling with the vagaries of climate and water in western NSW. Selectors obtained land and, in optimal conditions, produced excellent yields, with wheat predominating over other crops. However, rainfall was irregular and tended towards periods of oversupply (flood) followed by long periods of undersupply (drought). Farmers quickly realised that, without some regularity of water supply, their future was doubtful. Consequently, from the mid 1880s, the possibilities of land irrigation were closely investigated.

George Chaffey, an engineer brought out from California, commenced designing a massive irrigation scheme at Mildura in 1887. Whilst this scheme had its own story of success and failure, it represented a concerted state investment to create a permanent agricultural settlement along the Murray River and to institute a means of exploiting the Murray River for agriculture. In 1893, representatives of the three states met in Melbourne and considered the matter of installing locks on the Murray River to preserve supplies for irrigation, whilst permitting ongoing navigation. The prospect of this damming of the river caused considerable concern in South Australia but, when the matter was raised, NSW denied that South Australia had any claim to the waters of the Murray; since no tributaries entered within its territory, South Australia had no rights to water beyond that which flowed across the border. These conflicts of interests tended to stymie any co-ordinated action and the matter of apportioning the Murray's waters between the states remained unresolved. As independent states in economic competition with each other, the idea of co-operative action for mutual benefit was rife with complications and arguments.

Federation in 1901, however, meant that the three states in which the Murray flowed were no longer in competition and, as this coincided with extremely dry conditions in the Murray River regions, there was considerable impetus to address the matter. The government leaders decided that a tri-state Royal Commission should be set up to investigate the 'conservation and distribution of the Murray and it's tributaries for the purposes of irrigation, navigation and water supply'. The Royal Commission's subsequent report of 1902 recommended joint control of the Murray by the three states and a joint funding arrangement for water conservation infrastructure, such as dams and weirs. By the beginning of the twentieth century, this transition was well underway, with river navigation trade almost completely moribund by the 1930s. However, during the early twentieth century, the option for river transport was preserved by, amongst other measures, the continued construction of opening bridges across the Murray River.

Erection and Operation of the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge:

Public meetings were held in the district almost every year from 1894, urging the local members of Parliament to persuade the NSW and Victorian Government to approve the construction of the bridge. By November 1899, Government Ministers in both states were able to report that decisions had been taken to proceed with the bridge and that specifications were being prepared. In 1900, after question as to the erection of a bridge over the Murray River at Cobram had been under considerable consideration, it was decided that the bridge would be financed and built by the Victorian government. Once completed, it appears that the Victorian Country Roads Board was responsible for maintenance of the Bridge as well.

The construction of the bridge across the Murray River at Cobram-Barooga became evidence for the value of the wool industry in the vicinity and of the economic flows of goods between NSW and Victoria in the late nineteenth century. The story of Cobram-Barooga is representative of the story of the development of the Murray River generally and illustrates the competition between townships for a bridge as a formal border crossing and as a guarantee of ongoing economic development.

Historic themes

Australian theme (abbrev)	New South Wales theme	Local theme
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Agriculture-Activities relating to the cultivation and rearing of plant and animal species, usually for commercial purposes, can include aquaculture	Transporting crops-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Commerce-Activities relating to buying, selling and exchanging goods and services	Trading amongst the Australian colonies-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Commerce-Activities relating to buying, selling and exchanging goods and services	Transport-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Pastoralism-Activities associated with the breeding, raising, processing and distribution of livestock for human use	Servicing the pastoral industry-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Technology-Activities and processes associated with the knowledge or use of mechanical arts and applied sciences	Technologies of bridge building-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Technology-Activities and processes associated with the knowledge or use of mechanical arts and applied sciences	Technologies of construction with reinforced concrete-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Transport-Activities associated with the moving of people and goods from one place to another, and systems for the provision of such movements	Bridge - road-
3. Economy-Developing local, regional and national economies	Transport-Activities associated with the moving of people and goods from one place to another, and systems for the provision of such movements	Bridging rivers-
4. Settlement-Building settlements, towns and cities	Utilities-Activities associated with the provision of services, especially on a communal basis	Building Bridges-
4. Settlement-Building settlements, towns and cities	Utilities-Activities associated with the provision of services, especially on a communal basis	Roadways to Inland Settlements-
9. Phases of Life-Marking the phases of life	Persons-Activities of, and associations with, identifiable individuals, families and communal groups	Associations with Ernest De Burgh, engineer, Public Works Department NSW, 1891- 1903-

Assessment of significance


SHR Criteria a) [Historical significance]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state historical significance as the original road link over the Murray River in this location, which served this role for over a century and a significant crossing point over the boundary of the states of NSW and Victoria. The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance as a significant relic of the era when motor vehicles were still virtually unknown and the horse and bullock-drawn wagon was still the major form of heavy road transport. The importance of the bridge was to provide access for heavy goods vehicles to deliver agricultural produce from NSW to the railhead at Cobram for transport to the markets and wharves of Melbourne. In this regard, the bridge is a relic of the nineteenth century economy of Australia, which was focussed upon agricultural produce, particularly wool and wheat, much of which was created in the southwest of NSW and north-west of Victoria. The historical origins of the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge and the reasons for its construction are components in the story of the settlement, development and economic history of the Riverina region and the equivalent region in northern Victoria. The goldrushes, cattle droving, mobs of sheep and laden wool wagons are all key iconic images of Australian colonial history in which the Murray River has had a significant role or relationship. The crossings of the Murray River have influenced the locations of major road and railway routes on both sides of the NSW-Victorian border and the waters of the River have been a key factor in the commercial agricultural development of what has been some of the most productive land in modern Australia. The inclusion of a lift-span in the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge has historical significance as a relic of the commercial value of the shipping traffic using the Murray River in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Although with hindsight it is clear that this bridge was built at the latter end of the era of commercial shipping on the river, at the time it was built the value of this trade was still sufficient to warrant state investment in the provision of lift-span bridges. The importance of this trade over the previous four decades was such that it was key to the development of the state of Victoria and the nineteenth century prosperity of Melbourne, as evidenced by the investment in railway construction serving this area, and was influential in the early economic development of South Australia, as evidenced by the horse-drawn tramway from Goolwa to Port Eliot, serving the Murray River steamer trade, being completed two years prior to the establishment of railways in Adelaide. The lift-span in the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is also historical evidence of the economic and political relationships between the states of NSW, Victoria and South Australia in the decade before Federation of the states in 1901. The need to maintain shipping navigation in the waterway was as much a political necessity as a commercial requirement and reflected the ongoing debate of the time regarding the competition between the states regarding the use of natural resources for economic purposes. At the end of the nineteenth century, all three states desired access to the Murray River waters for agricultural irrigation. Conflict over the inequality of access to the resource was finally resolved through Federation. The story of the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge in this context represents a singular example of the myriad of similar issues that led to the federation of the states (rather than any other outcome) at the beginning of the twentieth century.
SHR Criteria b) [Associative significance]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance ss an important example of the work of engineer Ernest De Burgh, a significant engineer in the history of NSW, and of the work of the NSW Public Works Department. In 1891, De Burgh became Supervising Bridge Engineer and from 1901 to 1903 was Engineer for Bridges in the NSW Public Works Department, both significant roles. His most important works followed his appointment to the Water Supply department, where he was responsible for the construction of Cataract Dam for the Sydney water-supply and was associated with Leslie Wade in the design and construction of Burrinjuck Dam and the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Scheme. He went on to design and supervise construction of the Cordeaux, Avon and Nepean dams (Sydney's fourth water-supply), the Chichester scheme for Newcastle and the Umberumberka scheme for Broken Hill. In 1921-25, he was a member of the Federal Capital Advisory Committee and prepared the original plans for Canberra's water-supply.
SHR Criteria c) [Aesthetic significance]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance because it demonstrates the high level of technical achievement by the bridge engineers of the NSW Public Works Department in the late nineteenth century in NSW. The design of this type of vertical lift-span was largely developed in NSW with no practical overseas precedents and the efficacy and durability of the design is evidenced by the survival of this bridge and many of its peers for over a century of use. The timber truss spans represent a sophisticated application of standard designs over a wide range of applications and these De Burgh composite trusses were a significant improvement over the all-timber designs used previously. The development of timber truss designs based on the use of Australian hardwoods was unique to NSW and was a significant engineering and economic achievement that was key to the industrial and social development of Australia in the late nineteenth century. The lift span of the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge illustrates a stage in the historic development of opening bridge engineering design in Australia. The adoption of the vertical-lift type of opening bridge for river crossings in NSW in the late nineteenth century required creative and original engineering, as the existing precedents overseas had little direct application. The series of nineteenth century lift-span designs in NSW exhibit a engineering capability of international standard for the period and the Old Cobram Bridge is a key example in the set of surviving vertical-lift type bridges. The De Burgh timber truss spans of the Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge are relics of the progressive development of timber truss design in NSW and illustrate an important stage in the evolution of the design. The difference of the De Burgh truss from its predecessors illustrates both the historic need to embrace composite materials for bridges for practical and economic reasons and the ongoing adoption of new approaches and innovations in engineering by the engineers of the NSW Public Works department. The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge demonstrates local heritage significance for the aesthetic qualities of timber bridges that are typically valued by a significant part of the community, especially the natural materials, a human scale and familiar proportions and the combination of sounds and smells in addition to appearance.
SHR Criteria d) [Social significance]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge has local level significance to the communities of Cobram and Barooga as a traditional crossing, as a key icon of the locality and as a local amenity. It is featured prominently in local tourism brochures and websites and the story of the bridge is closely tied to the history and identity of the two townships. (Local Significance)
SHR Criteria e) [Research potential]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance for its research potential as a De Burgh truss bridge. De Burgh bridges illustrate an important stage in the evolution of timber truss bridge design, and Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is one of only four such bridges to be retained in the long term in NSW. Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is also of state significance for its research potential as a key example of the three surviving vertical lift-span bridges of the Hinton Bridge type designed by Ernest De Burgh, and one of only two that retain all of their lift-span operating mechanisms intact.
SHR Criteria f) [Rarity]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance because it is the one of three surviving vertical lift-span bridges of the Hinton Bridge type designed by Ernest De Burgh and is one of only two that retain all of their lift-span operating mechanisms intact. It is one of nineteen vertical lift-span bridges of all eras surviving in NSW. The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is one of nine surviving bridges in NSW which utilise De Burgh composite timber-truss spans and one of only four which are designated for retention in the long term.
SHR Criteria g) [Representativeness]	The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is of state significance because it encapsulates a representative example of a vertical lift-span of the Hinton Bridge type and two representative examples of De Burgh composite timber-truss spans. The Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge is broadly representative of an opening bridge dating from the turn of the twentieth century on an inland river in NSW, demonstrating the principal characteristics of a timber truss bridge with timber beam approach spans and a central steel opening span. Opening bridges have been built across the inland rivers of NSW from the 1870s to the 1970s, the majority of which were vertical lift-span bridges.
Integrity/Intactness:	Integrity spoilt by removal of northern approach spans but the remaining components are largely intact.
Assessment criteria:	Items are assessed against the State Heritage Register (SHR) Criteria to determine the level of significance. Refer to the Listings below for the level of statutory protection.

Procedures /Exemptions

Section of act	Description	Title	Comments	Action date
CMP-Comment	Conservation Plan submitted for comment	Old Cobram Bridge, Murray River new crossing between Barooga NSW & Cobram VIC - 2 copies of the approved CMP		Apr 30 2009
57(2)	Exemption to allow work	Heritage Act - Site Specific Exemptions	HERITAGE ACT 1977 Order under Section 57 (2) to Grant Site Specific Exemptions from Approval Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge SHR No 1972 I, the Minister for Heritage, on the recommendation of the Heritage Council of New South Wales, in pursuance of section 57 (2) of the Heritage Act 1977, do, by this my order, grant an exemption from section 57 (1) of that Act in respect of the engaging in or carrying out of any activities described in Schedule 'C' by the owner described in Schedule 'B' on the item described in Schedule 'A'. Sydney, 23rd Day of March 2016 The Hon MARK SPEAKMAN SC, MP Minister for Heritage Schedule 'A' The item known as Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge, situated on the land described in Schedule 'B'. Schedule 'B' Crown Land-Crown Waterway and Road Reserve in Parish of Barooga, County of Denison shown on the plan catalogued HC 2820 in the office of the Heritage Council of New South Wales. Schedule 'C' 1. Restoration a) Restoration of the bridge by returning significant fabric to a known earlier location without the introduction of new material. b) Restoration of the bridge without the introduction of new material (except for fixings or fastenings) to reveal a known earlier configuration by removing accretions or reassembling existing components which does not adversely affect the heritage significance of the item. 2. Maintenance and Cleaning a) The maintenance of the bridge to retain its condition or operation without the removal of or damage to the existing fabric or the introduction of new materials. b) Cleaning including the removal of surface deposits, organic growths or graffiti by the use of low pressure water (less than 100 psi at the surface being cleaned), neutral detergents and mild brushing, scrubbing or abrasives. c) Maintenance and minor repairs necessary to preserve and maintain the functioning of the bridge as a transport corridor, including pavement resurfacing; maintenance and repair of roadside kerbing; maintenance and replacement of deck joints; concrete coring and testing; traffic management; relocation and maintenance of signage. d) Use of anti-graffiti treatments including sacrificial coatings, where it is known that this activity would not harm the heritage values of the structure. 3. Repairs a) Repair of structural components of the bridge to include pavement resurfacing, painting, traffic management and navigational infrastructure on the bridge. b) Repairs and activities associated with the maintenance and repair of services and utilities including communications and electricity. c) The repair (such as refixing and patching) or the replacement of missing, damaged or deteriorated fabric that is beyond further maintenance, which matches the existing fabric in appearance, material and method of affixing and does not involve damage to or the removal of significant fabric. 4. Works a) Works and activities associated with the maintenance and repair of the pedestrian walkway; maintenance and repair of pedestrian signage and plaques; and maintenance and repair of the pedestrian footpath. b) Temporary works, not exceeding 12 months, including containment areas, deck support or inspection systems, scaffolding and enclosures necessary for the carrying out of maintenance, enhancement or upgrading works. c) Minor works that do not alter the structure's overall form or shape or significantly change the appearance of bridge elements. d) Minor works necessary to preserve and maintain bridge lighting including the upgrade of existing lighting fixtures. e) Temporary and reversible works, not exceeding 6 weeks, for the operation of special events including the use of temporary event lighting. 5. Minor Development endorsed by the Heritage Council a) Minor development specifically identified as exempt development by a conservation policy or strategy within a conservation management plan or a conservation management strategy which has been endorsed by the Heritage Council of NSW, which does not materially impact on heritage significance. 6. Painting a) Painting which does not involve the disturbance or removal of earlier paint layers other than that which has failed by chalking, flaking, peeling or blistering. b) Painting which involves over-coating with an appropriate surface as an isolating layer to provide a means of protection for significant earlier layers or to provide a stable basis for repainting. c) Painting which employs the same colour scheme and paint type as an earlier scheme if they are appropriate to the substrate and do not endanger the survival of earlier paint layers. d) Removal of lead paint or other hazardous coatings using methods that are verified to not affect original fabric, where followed immediately by recoating to protect the exposed surface. 7. Signage a) Installation of new signage or relocation of signs, except where these are commercial signs, modular sign structures, cantilever sign structures, or signage over 2 square metres in size. b) Replacement of signage (up to a 50% increase in size) in the original sign area. 8. Excavation a) The excavation or disturbance of land that will have a nil or minor impact on archaeological relics including the testing of land to verify the existence of relics without destroying or removing them, where: i. an archaeological assessment, zoning plan or management plan has been prepared in accordance with Guidelines endorsed by the Heritage Council of NSW which indicates that any relics in the land are unlikely to have State or local heritage significance; and/or ii. evidence relating to the history or nature of the site, such as its level of disturbance, indicates that the site has little or no archaeological research potential. b) The excavation or disturbance of land is for the purpose of exposing underground utility services infrastructure which occurs within an existing service trench and will not affect any relics. c) The excavation or disturbance of land is to maintain or repair the foundations of the existing bridge which will not affect any associated relics. d) The excavation or disturbance of land is to expose survey marks for use in conducting a land survey. 9. Landscape Maintenance (Approaches) a) Weeding, watering, mowing, top-dressing, pest control and fertilizing necessary for the continued health of plants, without damage or major alterations to layout, contours, plant species or other significant landscape features. b) Pruning (to control size, improve shape, flowering or fruiting and the removal of diseased, dead or dangerous material), not exceeding 10% of the canopy of a tree within a period of 2 years. c) Pruning (to control size, improve shape, flowering or fruiting and the removal of diseased, dead or dangerous material) between 10% and 30% of the canopy of a tree within a period of 2 years. d) Removal of dead or dying trees which are to be replaced by trees of the same species in the same location. e) Tree surgery by a qualified arborist, horticulturist or tree surgeon necessary for the health of those plants.	Apr 1 2016
57(2)	Exemption to allow work	Standard Exemptions	HERITAGE ACT 1977 ORDER UNDER SECTION 57(2) TO GRANT STANDARD EXEMPTIONS FROM APPROVAL I, Penny Sharpe, the Minister for Heritage, on the recommendation of the Heritage Council of New South Wales and under section 57(2) of the Heritage Act 1977: revoke the order made on 2 June 2022 and published in the Government Gazette Number 262 of 17 June 2022; and grant an exemption from section 57(1) of the Act in respect of the engaging in or carrying out the class of activities described in clause 2 Schedule A in such circumstances specified by the relevant standards in clause 2 Schedule A and General Conditions in clause 3 Schedule A. This Order takes effect on the date it is published in the NSW Government Gazette. Dated this 29th day of October 2025 The Hon Penny Sharpe MLC Minister for Heritage For more information on standard exemptions click on the link below.	Nov 7 2025

Standard exemptions for engaging in or carrying out activities / works otherwise prohibited by section 57(1) of the Heritage Act 1977

Listings

Heritage Listing	Listing Title	Listing Number	Gazette Date	Gazette Number	Gazette Page
Heritage Act - State Heritage Register		01972	01 Apr 16	23	561-562
Local Environmental Plan	Old Cobram-Barooga Bridge	11	04 Oct 13

References, internet links & images

Type	Author	Year	Title	Internet Links
Written			Various entries	View detail
Written	Allen, P	1924	Highway Bridge Construction -- The Practice in NSW
Written	Archaeological Consulting Services (ACS)	2006	Cobram Bridge Conservation Management Plan	View detail
Written	Buxton, G	1967	The Riverina 1861-1891: an Australian regional study
Written	Cardno, MBK	2000	Study of Relative Heritage Significance of RTA controlled timber beam road bridges in NSW
Written	Dare, H	1896	The Opening Bridges of NSW
Written	Fraser, D	1995	Bridges Down Under
Written	GHD & RMS	2014	Movable Span Bridges Study: report for RMS	View detail
Written	Glenn, A	2012	Historic Iron and Steel Bridges in Main, New Hampshire and Vermont
Written	Pearson, B	2000	Timber Truss Bridges in NSW	View detail
Written	Roads & Maritime Services (RMS)	2011	Bridge Types in NSW -- Historical Overviews	View detail

Note: internet links may be to web pages, documents or images.

(Click on thumbnail for full size image and image details)

Data source


The information for this entry comes from the following source:
Name:	Heritage NSW
Database number:	5056594
File number:	EF15/12790

Every effort has been made to ensure that information contained in the State Heritage Inventory is correct. If you find any errors or omissions please send your comments to the Database Manager.

All information and pictures on this page are the copyright of Heritage NSW or respective copyright owners.