Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Block winners Dea and Darren Jolly demolish heritage house in Kew

Discussion in 'Development' started by Redwing, 12th Oct, 2015.

  1. Redwing

    Redwing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    839
    Location:
    WA
    Neighbours are upset


    Reigning champions of reality renovation TV show The Block, Deanne and Darren Jolly, are under fire from neighbours for demolishing a heritage-protected house without a permit in East Kew, in Melbourne's leafy eastern suburbs.

    A City of Boroondara spokesman said the council had immediately launched an investigation after a bulldozer mowed through the historic early-20th-century property in late September. The Jollys then applied for retrospective approval.


    Read more:

    UK article has more info and photos here
     
  2. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,579
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    Council should seek to impose the full extent of the law - lock the site up for 10+ years before they can build. Then enforcement of rebuilding a replica of the original facade.

    The excuse that the facade was unstable means that they failed to demolish with due care and didn't install any bracing to stabilise the remaining structure.
     
    Tufan Chakir, joel, spludgey and 3 others like this.
  3. hobo

    hobo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    425
    Location:
    FNQ
    There was very similar case in Cairns, but on a commercial site.

    I might not have the sequence of events 100% correct but IIRC, the purchasers (developers) started to demolish the building without any permits, then when works were forced to stop due to public outrage, they failed to adequately brace the remaining facade. During the ensuing court case, eventually the facade deteriorated so much that it became unsafe and had to be demolished as well. :(

    I believe the developers were fined but I can't recall how much (NOT ENOUGH). The then-vacant site was onsold and the building the new owners have subsequently constructed is an absolute disgrace. It's like a second kick in the teeth after the loss of the original facade - the new building is essentially a tilt-slab shed with no architectural design whatsoever; it's a rectangular box with these disgusting orange/yellow zigzag slats along the entire frontage.

    I will look and see if I can find before & after pics for full atrocious impact. :mad:
     
  4. Brian84

    Brian84 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    961
    Location:
    Sydney
    I agree. Unlucky it didn't fall on them, I can't stand those two people. They think the world revolves around them and the law doesn't apply to them.

    I hope they get slammed by council. I'm surprised it hasn't been on the news.
     
    skater likes this.
  5. skater

    skater Capitalist Premium Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,418
    Location:
    Sydney
    I'm not a fan either.

    Looking at the photo of the house, and how unkept it looks, I'm not surprised they demolished it. Not because there's anything wrong with the house, as it would come up a treat with a bit of love, but because I couldn't imagine Dea would ever accept living in anything that isn't sparkling new and glamourous.
     
    Brian84 likes this.
  6. Brian84

    Brian84 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    961
    Location:
    Sydney
    I agree 100%. Dee is just stuck up. It doesn't look as bad as what they make out, saying it would fall down because it is unstable.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 13th Oct, 2015
    skater likes this.
  7. Lisa Parker- Buyers Agent

    Lisa Parker- Buyers Agent Well-Known Member Business Member

    Joined:
    24th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    258
    Location:
    Melbourne
    That's really sad that they just took it upon themselves to make that decision without consultation with the heritage consultants.
    we could read what he's stated as the reason why and conclude that he as a builder is not competent if he lacks the ability to make the front and roof structurally sound. I've seen houses with facades way worse than this be retained. They are usually held up with all sorts of steel bars.
     
    Tufan Chakir likes this.
  8. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,579
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    Back in the 1980's there was the Rose's Emporium in Petersham which was demolished without consent. The building was subject to a Permanent Conservation Order.

    A ban on development for a period of 10 years was imposed.
     
  9. hobo

    hobo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    425
    Location:
    FNQ
    @Scott No Mates In those situations, is the ban also on them selling it, or can they freely sell it but the ban transfers onto the purchasers...?
     
  10. Jamie_

    Jamie_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    354
    Location:
    Perth
    Hope they get reamed by the council
     
    Brian84 and JoannaSimpson like this.
  11. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,579
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    @hobo - the ban travels with the title. As a heritage listed property it benefits from an exemption from land tax, having demolished the building, they shoot themselves in the foot for 10 years.
     
    PacMan and hobo like this.
  12. Random Username

    Random Username Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    239
    Location:
    NSW
    I'm surprised an old house like that didn't have an electrical fault.
     
    Brian84 and Perthguy like this.
  13. hobo

    hobo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    425
    Location:
    FNQ
  14. Graeme

    Graeme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    258
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Google Maps has a Street View photo of 14 Irymple Avenue dating from August 2014. It doesn't look great.

    14 Irymple Avenue.jpg

    Though it's not too bad from above.

    14 Irymple Satellite.jpg

    If you look at the sales particulars the garden's been cleared since then. No photos from the inside though, which suggests it's a bit of a wreck.

    My guess is that this is a probate sale, and the house hasn't been maintained for years. I might be inclined to give Darren the benefit of doubt in this case.

    Most of the comments in the newspaper articles are probably down to Deanne not being popular, and also neighbours typically hate change especially when it might hurt their home's value. Given the state of the plot in August last year, almost anything will improve the streetscape.

    If you want a real scandal, VCAT allowing the pencil tower on appeal at 141 - 149 La Trobe Street strikes me as a much bigger deal.
     

    Attached Files:

    Esel likes this.
  15. JoannaSimpson

    JoannaSimpson New Member

    Joined:
    13th Oct, 2015
    Posts:
    2
    Location:
    Victoria
    I cannot stand people who deliberately ignore the law.

    When I bought my weather board house (which is not heritage listed) it was standing on one stump, was an electrical nightmare with rotten timber underneath, in the walls and roof as it had not been maintained for decades, yet we were able to demolish the back of the house without impacting the structural integrity of the front. I agree with Lisa, what is he doing calling himself a builder when he clearly did not assess the structural integrity of the section which was listed before demolishing the balance?

    I also agree with Scott, I would fine him, as the Builder $250k for failing to comply with the Heritage overlay and then ban the owners from building for 10 years. That will teach them.

    But the Council is weak and will do little about this.

    Have a look at this property
    http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-vic-hawthorn+east-109218886

    A couple of philistines bought this property in 2012 and because they could not sell it for the inflated price they wanted some 18 months later, they demolished it and the Council let them demolish it without notifying anyone about it. Unfortunately there was no heritage overlay and we tried to have Heritage Australia intervene but they and the Council would do nothing.

    This house was immaculate with the prior owner spending a lot of money to restore it.

    So, if you are relying on the Council, don't waste your time.
     
  16. jsoe000

    jsoe000 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    30th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    45
    Location:
    NSW
    hate to say it but I wouldn't be surprised if D&D get away with all these naughty things like they did on the Block with their manipulative tactics. The council should employ the foreman Keith to deal with this case.
     
    Brian84 likes this.
  17. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,962
    Location:
    Brisbane
    That is a tragedy. What a gorgeous house. What were they thinking???
     
    JoannaSimpson likes this.
  18. Brian84

    Brian84 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    961
    Location:
    Sydney
    2 things come to mind. Themselves and $$$$
     
    JoannaSimpson likes this.
  19. JoannaSimpson

    JoannaSimpson New Member

    Joined:
    13th Oct, 2015
    Posts:
    2
    Location:
    Victoria
    I agree with Brian84. It was a stunning house and now they are building modern box monstrosity.

    I don't mind modern buildings but to demolish such a stunning home to replace it with what is essentially a large box seems completely pointless.

    The owners own a property development company which says it all really.
     
    Brian84 likes this.
  20. Graeme

    Graeme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    258
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Then again, there are a few places that have either been flattened, or potentially would have been flattened if approval had been granted in projects on this forum and Somersoft. So maybe we're all part of the problem. :D

    The problem is more acute for modernist architecture, particularly when the plot is underdeveloped in modern terms.

    A Seidler house in Warrawee was recently advertised more as a development site than something to preserve. The owners of another Seidler in Blakehurst were upset when it was provisionally heritage listed because it knocked a chunk off its value.

    Both of these houses are lovely, the Blakehurst one would be on my shopping list if I had a spare $2 million lying around right now. Do take a look at the listing.

    I don't think that everything needs to be preserved. This house in Kew was relatively tatty, and poorly aligned on its site. I'd have probably flattened it myself.

    Perhaps we need a law that buildings can only be replaced if something of superior architectural merit is built on the site. :p