A homeowner is furious after the local council decided a one-sentence anonymous submission was enough to get his property heritage listed – costing him a fortune.
Tian Xiang Sun claims she has lost $461,250 due to the secretive process of placing the heritage overlay on her home at 23 Clapham Street Balwyn in Melbourne’s inner-west.
The ruling has prevented Mr Sun from demolishing the house and building a new one, which was the plan when he bought the property at auction last July and paid for it three months later.
Mr Sun signed a building contract shortly after making the purchase, unaware that a public submission had been made to Boroondara City Council in September requesting that the house be heritage-listed.
That single sentence describes the house as “an interesting and well-resolved example of a low-rise Craftsman bungalow with Japanese influence.”
According to the anonymous author, the property also exhibited “superb and very intact decorative details and a distinctive use of massing to create a low, very solid house.”
Based on that submission, council officers recommended the property be heritage listed, which requires the owner to preserve the property, even though it had previously been overlooked for heritage protection in 1991 and 2015.
As a result, Mr Sun, who was unaware of the heritage nomination for several months after the deal because neither the seller nor the council were obliged to disclose it, was forced into breach of his building contract as he was unable to proceed with construction plans.
This house in Melbourne’s inner west has been recommended for heritage listing, taking its new owner by surprise, as they intended to demolish it.
Mr Sun, who was born in China, has hired law firm Mills Oakley to argue that the council’s wealth nomination process is unfair.
Lawyers also argue that Mr Sun has been discriminated against because of his ethnicity.
Council officials denied that Mr Sun was racially targeted.
“These allegations are rejected as unfounded,” said a report by officers to the council.
‘It should be noted that the nomination… was submitted by the nominator and accepted by the board prior to the settlement date.
‘Consequently, council officers were not aware of the identity of the current owner when the nomination was accepted.’
This one-sentence submission by an anonymous author was the basis for council officials’ decision to heritage list the property.
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal confirmed The age that an issue involving the parties was included in its human rights list last week.
Boroondara councillors on Monday voted to maintain the heritage nomination process and proceed with listing 23 Clapham Street, along with seven other properties in Melbourne’s inner west that were also suggested through open submission.
Councillors also rejected an amendment stating that submissions could only be made by people living in Boroondara.
However, Councilwoman Cynthia Watson argued the process was flawed.
“Is it fair that someone from Vladivostok can see their property on the internet and then promote it?” he told The Age.
He also said that estate filings on a property should not be made while it is changing hands, as this would be unfair to the unsuspecting new owner.
The owner says the unexpected heritage listing has cost him nearly $500,000
“The owners are collateral damage to the protection of heritage,” he said.
Boroondara’s director of urban life, Scott Walker, said the council was ready to defend the legal action brought by Mr Sun.
“The council bases its decision solely on the heritage value of the property, regardless of who nominated it, who owns it or when it was purchased,” he said.
Daily Mail Australia has contacted Boroondara City Council for comment.
