11 The other relevant controls include:
o DCP 38 - Residential Design Manual
o SREP 20 (Hawkesbury Nepean River)
o Dual Occupancy Code
o DCP 31 - Access
o DCP 40 - Waste Management
o DCP 43 - Car Parking
o DCP 47 - Water Management
The Evidence
12 Detailed evidence was presented by:
o Mr P Rappoport; Consulting heritage architect for the applicant,
o Mr P Dignam; Council's heritage architect.
o Mr T Beaven; Council's landscape expert.
o Mr A Morton; Consulting arboriculturist.
o Ms N Sonter; Consulting landscape architect.
13 Both heritage experts undertook assessments of "Grosvenor Cottage" and agreed that it has a moderate level of heritage significance. According to Mr Rappoport's heritage impact statement (HIS):
"The subject dwelling at 81 Grosvenor Street, Wahroonga has been established in this report to have some historic and aesthetic significance in the local area. The existing dwelling, constructed in the c.1910's, provides evidence of local residential development around WW1 and is a modest example of the Arts and Crafts style of architecture. The subject dwelling exhibits some of the typical Arts and Crafts characteristics, especially the multi-gabled roof form, solid rock-faced stone footings, bay windows, tall chimneys with terracotta pots, a variety of external finishes (including the weatherboards forming an apron to the sleep outs, similar to the existing bay window treatment), exposed joists (instead of the usual rafters), as well as the high-waisted front door with Art-Nouveau-style swirled coloured glass side and fanlights, fanlights, face brick fireplaces, square wooden detailing and a robust staircase. However, there have been extensive internal and external modifications since original construction, in particular the alterations to the street front facades, the addition of the garage and the enclosure of the sleep out and undercroft. The dwelling has been so altered that it is difficult to read the existing interior and exterior as an Arts and Grass house as it was originally intended. The street facades have been muddled by ad hoc additions and replacement of the original fenestration resulting in an incoherent street presentation. The additions are intrusive and in our opinion, have dramatically reduced the significance of the dwelling."
14 Mr Rappoport made his assessment of significance based on the 7 separate criteria established by the Heritage Office of NSW. From this he concluded that the dwelling could be demolished because:
o Although the subject dwelling is listed as a locally significant heritage item, this listing was incorrect as it was based on historical information relating to other buildings in Grosvenor Street. Furthermore, the Arts and Crafts style interior and exterior have been muddled by unsympathetic modifications, reducing the aesthetic contribution of dwelling to the street. The interior layout has become incompatible with current lifestyle expectations.
o The dwelling is currently in an overall state of disrepair and the owner has also been advised that it is not financially viable to maintain the dwelling in its current condition. The costs associated with the maintenance works has further contributed to the decline of the dwellings physical fabric. This, combined with a number of inappropriate modifications that have been carried out in the past has altogether reduced the aesthetic significance of the place to the point out that photographic archival recording could be capable of capturing the significance of the place. Further, the diversity of house styles in the streetscape is such that the proposed new dwellings would be capable of being absorbed into it.
o The demolition of the dwelling should be permitted, subject to preceeding photographic archival recording in accordance with the guidelines set by the NSW Heritage Office.
15 Against this, Mr Dignam says that:
o The significance is not related to the size of the item and that other comparable sized dwelling are recognised as having exceptional heritage significance.
o That archival recording is useful for recording change to an item such as when minor demolition occurs associated with additions and alterations or when demolition is unavoidable due to conditions or other factors such as road widening but is not a substitute for retaining them.
o It is preferable to retain this dwelling and the later infill of verandahs, introduction of other inappropriate materials and alterations are relatively minor and could be readily removed.
o The house is structurally sound and capable of continued use and could sustain alterations, additions to suit contemporary living standards consistent with accepted conservation practice.
o Repair and refurbishment of the item is viable and it can be retained as a house in its existing residential setting. The heritage significance of the house justifies its retention and conservation.