The following story is one still all too common in the culture of Australian Real Estate.
This home was built perhaps half a century ago and conforms to the design principals of it’s day. It’s modest from the street, has a leafy non-formal garden and a flat roofed carport. It makes the most of natural light with large windows and lovely slate paved courtyard orientated north, as is the backyard, just perfect for summer evenings.
But in middle age, this little house has seen better days. Maybe a rental, it sits spare until the local Real Estate agent is called and it’s put on the market.
If this was in California, maybe this home would be sold and sought after for it’s Mid-Century merit, the potential to revive it back to it’s glory days, it’s possible sustainability cred. But no, as with many properties of a similar vintage in this country, the house is ignored and it’s the land that is only considered sellable.
To add insult to aesthetic injury, the property is spruiked as having a planning permit and designs to bowl it over and replace it with a McMansion Villa apparently it too is ‘architecturally designed’. (Investigations by MA lead to CK Designworks, a high profile firm who’s predominant claim to fame seem to be commercial monoliths in Dubai).
Who would have thought someone who can afford to live in Toorak, would want a house identical to those that plague our nameless outer suburbs?
From this
To this
Markets are markets, and you cannot blame people for wanting the best price for their property. However, it is sad to see a home sold this way (which could be demolished tomorrow) in the knowledge it will be desirable in the longer term.
This is the same way earlier architectural styles have been discarded and one can only now cry at the lost beauty of some Victorian and Edwardian originals that have fallen under the wreckers’ ball in the past.
In her fantastic book ‘Iconic Australian Houses 50/60/70’ (pub. Murdoch Books 2007) Karen McCartney quotes writer Brendan Gill’s ‘Gordon Curve’:
“This posits that building is at it’s maximum moment of approbation when it is brand new, that it goes steadily downhill and at 70 reaches it’s nadir. If you get a building past that sticky moment, then the curve begins to go up again very rapidly until at 100 it is back where it was in year one. A 100- year old building is much more likely to be saved than a 70-year old one”
This is where we presently stand in Australia today with original Modernist homes. Although a small groundswell of support (dear reader!) is growing, many of these rare properties are still being sold for their land value and not their intrinsic appeal as comfortable, sustainable and light filled houses. This situation is made all the more distressing when you see Mid-Century homewares, furniture and fabrics increasingly sought after whilst the houses, where these articles belong, are being bulldozed one by one. Do you keep the mummies and raze the pyramids?
Let us hope this particular home in Cleeve Ct. Toorak finds a sympathetic owner. One who knows that a media room, faux Georgian styling and 6 ensuites does not necessarily mean quality. A person who appreciates integrity of a good living environment and preserving a worthwhile aesthetic.
3 Responses to “A Case for Cleeve Court”
Real Estate
Profiles
Sadly its more than likely that a Toorak buyer will want a McMansion, though the approved design looks almost Vienna Secession inspired, but is just as unresponsive to sun angles as any Tuscan Villa.
I would also like to comment on the McCartney quote -the danger point seems to be more like 30-40 years, for instance virtually every 50s – 70s office tower in the Melbourne CBD had at least the foyer, and more lately the cladding, done over between 1990 and now. The appreciation of anything 1930s Deco is now up there with Victorian, so the 70 year point marks their arrival at acceptance, even obsession by some. There is a significant appreciation of mid century modern growing right now, though sadly not enough to save the many great little houses (being little doesnt help either). But equally at risk right now is PostModern places, not appreciated, not old enough to be in heritage studies, not protected, and indeed probably seen as somewhat embarrassing by current generation of architects.
It is really sad to see these amazing homes destroyed to make a quick buck, I attended an auction yesterday for a house currently listed on the Modernist Australia website at 9-11 Booyong Avenue Lugarno. It was a perfect example of 60′s design, everything was original and in perfect condition, just waiting for another family to move in and love as the previous family had done for many years. Unfortunately I ended up in a bidding war with a developer constantly make calls to numerous people trying to round up more money. I got to $962,000 and had to pull out, the reserve was not met and I believe it was negotiated to $990,000 with the developer. So for $28,000 this beautiful piece of 60′s history will be destroyed and two ugly homes will be built for two families with no taste. All for the sake of “progress” it’s a huge step backwards if you ask me with no respect for our past. There should be laws against this, the energy it will take to knock down a perfect full brick with concrete slab house, excavate and build two more would be enourmous. All this destruction for a relatively small profit.
Hi Dale, I was also at the auction for 9-11 Booyong Avenue. Your prediction was right and the house has been bulldozed!!! Such a shame, such a waste and so stupid and unsustainable. It truly was an amazing home, probably the best modernist home in Lugarno. I spoke to you briefly after the auction and I was disappointed for you and your partner. I could see how keen you were on the place. I really wanted it too but was never really in the hunt. I hope you have since found something to your good taste! It’s good to see that there are people out there who appreciate modernist architecture but sadly we can’t save every home. I agree with your sentiment regarding laws against this type of behaviour. Ideally people should be made to justify the demolition of a building on sustainability grounds – 40% of landfill waste in this country comes from the building industry which is simply ridiculous.