A battle is brewing in Melbourne's leafy bayside suburbs over mid-century homes, with claims a preservation plan will see property prices drop and prevent much-needed upgrades.
The homes in suburbs like Brighton and Beaumaris, south-east of the CBD, are the result of a melting pot of influences that proponents say should be given heritage listing.
As waves of European migrants settled in Melbourne from World War II and through the 1950s and 60s, they brought with them a unique sense of style.
Experts say they left their mark, particularly on Melbourne's fringe suburbs, establishing a new architectural style called "mid-century modern".
Wind forward to the new century and for the third time, the Bayside City Council is trying to introduce a Heritage Overlay on 160 properties in the area demonstrative of the style.
Architect and Grand Designs Australia host Peter Maddison is one of the Brighton residents affected by the move.
He has welcomed the listing of his 1969 Brighton home with open arms.
"We've spent 20 years renovating this [house] and are comfortable with the thought someone will take over and appreciate what we've done here," he said.
But he admitted mistakes with the heritage assessment were inevitable.
"There are going to be some houses that are missed completely, that are behind high fences that the heritage advisers don't see, there are going to be others that look great on the outside but are actually … beyond repair," he said.
But many owners of potential heritage-listed homes have deep concerns about the way the homes were assessed.
They say independent consultants GJM Heritage, who were hired to assess properties, did so based only on drive-bys, using old and sometimes outdated building plans and images from real estate websites and Google Maps.
Beaumaris resident Neville Fuller, one of 20 residents at a block of apartments known as The Point, said the back of the property was mistakenly identified as the front.
"If buildings are worthy of heritage listing, that's good for Bayside," Mr Fuller said.
He said The Point was already under two existing overlays imposed by the council and the additional one would be even more restrictive.
"We can do very little with our buildings anyway," he said.
"The report … is all about heritage architecture and it is not about the people, and we are impacted very much — financially, emotionally, wellbeing, people are really concerned."
Home owner Lea Jaensch said she was shocked to receive a letter notifying her that her home could be heritage listed after it had been knocked back during two previous assessments by the council and Heritage Victoria.
She said what followed was an "intense period of understanding what heritage means".
But she was particularly frustrated at the way the overlay was stopping her from making much-needed repairs to her property, despite not yet being in place.
This includes repairing the rusted and leaking roof of a back storage room and getting rid of mould and other hazards such as suspected asbestos.
Importance of heritage 'greater than the owner'
Mr Maddison acknowledged there was a lack of understanding around the listing, and what it would mean for owners.
"I totally understand it, it's our major asset in our life," he said.
"I also understand the importance of engaging and preserving our past … that's greater than the owner itself."
He said he wanted to reassure residents that the overlay only applied to the facade, so renovations inside or changes like solar panels on roofs would still be possible.
Mr Maddison is a patron of Beaumaris Modern, a group formed in 2017 which has become a vocal advocate for protecting heritage buildings.
In a submission to the council, the group said while all other Victorian councils had completed heritage studies, Bayside was lagging behind.
It highlighted the "intervention of the [then] planning minister, the Hon Richard Wynne, insisting Bayside Council complete and implement their heritage studies".
Speaking to a parliamentary inquiry in January, however, the council said it was completing "a municipal-wide study at considerable cost and resourcing" after the Minister requested the scope of the then-voluntary scheme be broadened, and said it could give "very little support" to owners of heritage homes.
"Given the lack of control that council has in making a final decision on heritage matters, council may not be the best authority to oversee the application of heritage controls," the submission reads.
A spokesperson for the Victorian government said all councils had been requested "to identify places of local significance and use the planning system" to ensure they were preserved.
Advocates speak up as council decision nears
Bayside City Council will hold a meeting on July 19 to decide whether or not to adopt the study and commence the process to apply it to the nominated processes.
It will then go to new Planning Minister Lizzie Blandthorn for the next steps.
Home owners have promised to keep advocating for their rights.
"We're fighting it strongly and we will continue to fight it strongly with council," Mr Fuller said.
"And I hope the councillors look at it from the point of view of the people".
Ms Jaensch said she thought the opposed residents still had a good chance to get their point across to officials.
"I think council is listening," she said.
"How could they not?
"Eighty per cent of submissions to the process opposed it, 70 per cent of the people who raised their voice at council about it oppose the study.
Ms Jaensch said there was "definitely a place for heritage" and that the group opposing the plans "all adore heritage".
"But not at the cost of personal, individual home owners who are having to bear the cost for the entire community," she said.
The residents face stiff opposition from proponents such as Beaumaris Modern and Mr Maddison.
"You wouldn't demolish Pompeii, you wouldn't demolish the Parthenon, and you wouldn't demolish mid-century architecture," Mr Maddison said.
"Because the houses are here now, we don't appreciate them. When they're gone, we'll appreciate them."
