Mosman, Sydney residents furious as federation home is replaced by apartments

Residents of one of Sydney’s wealthiest suburbs are furious after a court ruled that a 117-year-old federation house can be demolished and replaced with a three-storey apartment building.

The five-bedroom house at 92 Raglan Street in Mosman, on the city’s north shore, has been standing since 1906, but is now set to be demolished.

Mosman City Council initially refused a development application for the three-unit building, but an appeal by the developer was upheld by the New South Wales Land and Environment Tribunal last Tuesday.

The apartment block will consist of three three-bedroom units, each with an outdoor terrace and open-plan living and dining area. Construction is estimated to cost more than $4 million.

An underground parking garage with six spaces is also being built.

The council received 96 responses from residents, the majority of whom were against the development of this ‘eyesore’.

“The house is a beautiful and historic home in the streetscape and I fear this will open the door for even more beautiful old houses in the neighborhood to disappear in the name of ‘progress,’” said one resident.

‘What an absolute disgrace.’

Another Mosman resident said: ‘This 1906 beauty appears to be in good condition and well maintained, making a significant positive impact on Raglan St and the suburb.

‘It has character and fits in with the streetscape and heritage of our neighbourhood. I am strongly opposed to its demolition and replacement with something that is completely out of keeping with the traditional architectural styles of Mosman.’

A woman who lives right next door to the house said the development not only damaged the aesthetics of the neighborhood, but also invaded her privacy.

“I find it sacrilegious that consideration is being given to demolishing it and replacing it with a soulless block of flats that will detract from the unique streetscape of Raglan St,” she wrote.

‘For me as a resident who is most affected by this development, this will have a serious negative impact on my privacy, safety and quality of life. In addition, it may negatively impact the value of my home.’

A fourth added that the proposed apartment complex ‘looks like a car park or toilet block.’

A Mosman City Council spokesman said the application for the development had been approved by the court “after the design was significantly amended” at the council’s request.

“This included a greater distance to the building, a reduction in building height and a reorganization of the floor plan,” the spokesperson said.

‘Given the concerns expressed by local residents about the originally rejected design, the Council invited all objectors (80) to present their concerns to the court during the hearing.

‘However, there was not a single objector who wanted to address the court.’

The house at 92 Raglan St, known as Gargrave, has two floors and features a swimming pool and a wrap-around veranda.

It last sold for $5.325 million in February 2019, and is now valued at $7.47 million.

When it became known that the demolition of the house had been approved, local residents immediately expressed their disgust.

‘These types of houses are what make suburbs like Mosman unique. As a former architect, now builder and proud resident of Mosman just a few doors down, I can’t express how sad this makes me,’ said one local on social media.

‘Why demolish this beautiful history to make way for a development that can be found in literally every other suburb in every other part of Sydney? Shocked, upset and angry.’

“Federation architecture has a grandeur that modern things don’t have. Most new things look more like offices than houses,” said another.

‘Soon Mosman will be nothing more than a suburb with big apartment buildings, no gardens, just a suburb. All the charm has gone, except for the sea around us,’ said one.

Long-time local resident Toni previously told Daily Mail Australia: “We don’t want high-rise buildings. They keep knocking down federation houses and for what?”

“They don’t have to tear down our old houses. That’s our history. They make everything look like metal and plastic.

“I’m sorry, but developers’ profits don’t outweigh our history.”

Neighbor Craig Meade said of the historic building: “If the house has been here for 117 years, it should be here in 117 years.”

Another resident called the demolition a “disgrace.”

“It’s a building that is valued. We already have a lot of development and huge housing,” they said.

“It’s just not attractive. I drive down the street all the time and see cranes everywhere.”

According to Pauline, a local resident, the new developments around Mosman are not sustainable because too many people want to live in a small area.

“It’s just getting too busy, there’s too much traffic. It’s just unbelievable,” she said.

‘Back in the day, you wanted to go to the local beach, Balmoral, at the weekend. It was fantastic.

‘I have nothing against people coming to the beach, but now it’s so bad with all the cars and people that you can’t move anymore.

‘There is room for visitors, but there is not enough living space.’

However, some locals said that not every house is more important than building homes.

“An old and well-maintained house is not reason enough to keep it. All heritage protection comes at a huge opportunity cost,” wrote Will Solomon.

‘While it is important to preserve prominent examples of historic styles, it is unrealistic to expect preservation standards to be so low that every house like this would require protection.

‘In a city that is struggling with a shortage of affordable and available housing, it is a very isolated case to claim that the cultural value of this architecturally mundane structure is greater than the material value of more housing.’

According to Richard Lipscomb, a local resident of Mosman, he sees ‘no problem’ with the changing atmosphere in Mosman.

“Mosman has a long history of development,” he said.

‘Everyone comes to the neighborhood and spends money on renovation.

‘Properties that were worth half a million ten years ago are now selling for two million.

‘I am in favor of development.’