No Owner’s Consent, No Heritage. And support protecting genuine heritage

0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!

We do not agree that the heritage conservation areas in the Planning Proposal – Heritage Review 2019. 
1, The actual areas do not meet the heritage significance criteria.
From the report, we believe that the historical significance, historical association significance, Aesthetic significance Representativeness are all not met in general. Even though there are few items may meet the criteria but the areas as whole is not. 

The report also confirmed that there is no social significance, no technical/research significance. Rarity threshold is not reached.

From the map provided by council, the proposed area mostly covers the west side of Eastwood and Denistone. There is reasonable doubt that this is a bias heritage study and not a genuine heritage protection.

As the fact mentioned above, setting up this HCA is groundless. The council should use the limited resources to protect genuine heritage not this unreasonable HCA.

2, No Owner’s Consent, No Heritage.

According to the previous council meeting minute in 2010 and 2009 heritage review, the owner’s permission is the first step of the whole process of heritage listing.  The 2019 proposal is a violation of the 2010 resolution and promise of the council. The owners stand for the principle that a property should not be heritage listed without the owner’s consent.

It would be unfair that Council put the burden of maintenance of heritage on the property owners while Council enjoys the extensive power of the property, unless the owners give consent.

Hence, we objected this unreasonable proposal. The council should focus on the genuine Heritage Items.