The owner of a house designed by architect Harry Seidler has told a tribunal that he doesn’t want to live in a museum and that the owner of the expensive property should be able to demolish it if it does not suit their needs.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Michael Bowden is appealing the ACT Heritage Council’s decision to add the Deakin home to the heritage register on the grounds that significant changes to the property have destroyed its design integrity.
Mr Bowden told the tribunal on Friday that registering the house would devalue it and no one would seek to make the house smaller and restore it to its original condition.
He said he thought no private houses should be heritage listed without the owner’s permission.
But an expert report prepared by heritage architect David Hobbes found that, despite extensive additions, including an extension designed by Seidler, the house was still an important example of the Post-War International architectural style and should be added to the heritage register.
Mr Hobbes said the house retained its "cubiform" shape visible from the street, which Mr Bowden denied.
Mr Hobbes said the house had extensive alterations made throughout its history but these were reversible and did not reduce the heritage character of the building.
Mr Bowden said it was "fanciful" that anyone would restore the house to its original, smaller state and pay the rates charged on the block, but he agreed that the house was worth investing in.
"I’m suggesting no owner would come on to the property and want to do that," he said.
Mr Bowden rejected the "highly restrictive" and "exceedingly onerous" terms of a draft development control plan for the block prepared as part of the provisional heritage registration.
"I don't want to live in a house where I can't make changes and improvements according to mine and my family's needs," Mr Bowden said.
ACT Heritage Council chair David Flannery told the tribunal that heritage nomination increased the value of homes because owners appreciated the certainty a house would retain its unique character.
Mr Flannery said changes to the house were expected over its life, as with any building.
Under cross-examination from Mr Bowden, Mr Flannery said the Heritage Council never assessed what impact a heritage listing would have to the value of a property.
Mr Bowden told the tribunal he believed the house was never properly nominated by the Royal Australian Institute of Architects in 1995 because no form was lodged at the time.
He told the tribunal the family was first notified of the nomination in 2000, five years after it was lodged.
Mr Bowden said he was not notified of the outstanding nomination when he bought the house from his father in late 2010.
He said the Heritage Act "essentially discriminated" against the owners of nominated properties and owners have no rights under the act to "negotiate just terms".
"I think the owner of this very expensive property should have the right to demolish and start afresh if the original bachelor house doesn't meet their needs."
The house was one of Seidler's first Australian commissions outside Sydney and was built for Mr Bowden's father.
The tribunal stayed its decision pending further written submissions from Mr Bowden and the ACT Heritage Council which were due to be lodged next week.
