The Edwardian-style house boasts a private ballroom and cellar. Located in Melbourne’s affluent, leafy south-eastern suburbs, the heritage-listed Canterbury house was last sold in 2019. A real estate advertisement at the time touted its potential for renovation as one of the 1,320sqm property’s many selling points.
Within four years of its sale, the house – named Shenley Croft – mysteriously caught fire in December. There is an active police investigation but no charges have been laid.
The facade of the house remains intact but the house’s structure is in ruins. The local council now considers it to have “fallen into disrepair”.
The future of the property, built in the early 1900s, could have ripple effects on the extent to which the state government will mandate heritage-listed buildings be restored to their original condition.
Melbourne’s Boroondara council, which includes Canterbury, last week voted unanimously to order the rebuilding of the house if anyone sought to develop the site. The decision now sits with the state’s planning minister, Sonya Kilkenny.
Efforts to contact the property’s owner for comment were unsuccessful.
Heritage experts said local councils were testing planning provisions that were initially designed to prevent incidents like the infamous Corkman Irish Pub demolition, where developers illegally tore down the historic Carlton hotel in 2016 without planning permission or a building permit.
Historian Dr James Lesh of conservation consultancy Heritage Workshop said the case was among the first in Victoria to use the Corkman provision to retain heritage places.
“It’s a test for the planning minister to see whether they’re prepared to take seriously these provisions to rebuild and protect heritage places,” he said.
It is unclear how long it will take the minister to determine a position.
“If the minister chooses not to use it, it would raise questions about why it’s in the planning scheme at all,” he said.
“The objective of the provision is to deter property owners from allowing their heritage buildings to go into disrepair or to be illegally demolished.”
The Corkman’s demolition and the successful prosecution of the landowners prompted the Victorian government to introduce tougher penalties for destruction of heritage buildings. In 2021, additional provisions were passed by the state parliament to prevent developers from financially benefiting from the illegal neglect or destruction of heritage places. The changes included allowing the state government to regulate the development of land where a heritage building has been unlawfully demolished or left to fall into disrepair.
One woman who grew up in Shenley Croft told the Herald Sun she had watched as the house was neglected in recent years. Renowned architect John Edmund Burke designed the property in the early 1900s but reports of missing roof tiles causing leaks have alarmed residents since the house’s 2019 sale.
In December, a planning permit for the site for a partial demolition and construction of two dwellings lapsed because of failure to respond to a request for further information.
A council report presented at last week’s meeting said the Canterbury house had “remained vacant and fallen into disrepair”.
“The property was the subject of several customer complaints and site inspections made by [council’s] Local Laws regarding overgrown vegetation, building disrepair and unsecured entry points to the property,” the report said.
“Victoria police has advised that the fire is being treated as a confirmed arson case.”
It said the “unlawful demolition” had raised concerns about the heritage overlay and its ability to protect places of heritage significance.
“There is a need to prevent or mitigate neglect and unlawful demolition, and potential development gains that could arise from such action,” the report said.
Lesh said if reconstruction of the site was not required and the regular planning scheme was applied, the large property could accommodate multiple townhouses – a greater number than the two dwellings previously approved by the council.
“The destroyed heritage building provided greater constraints for the site because any proposed additional dwellings had to respond to the cultural significance of the existing structure,” he said.
He stressed that the council had a reputation for strong heritage protections and was typically resistant to medium- and high-density housing.
“The outcome for the site is uncertain,” he said.
Documentation of the heritage-listed home was prepared for the approved planning permit, which Lesh said would help ensure the accuracy of a potential reconstruction.
“There is always that debate in heritage circles about reconstruction and its appropriateness,” he said.
“But the relevant test is always the quality of the built outcome and the continuity of cultural significance.
“Here, we might actually get a pretty good reconstruction.”
