Block winners Darren and Dea Jolly face fine over illegal demolition

A MELBOURNE council has demanded reality TV renovators Darren and Dea Jolly rebuild a heritage-listed home they controversially demolished without a permit.

The Block's Darren and Deanne Jolly win big, taking home more than $900,000. EMBARGOED until 10pm Adelaide time, April 29, 2015.

A MELBOURNE council has demanded reality TV renovators Darren and Dea Jolly rebuild a heritage-listed home they controversially demolished without a permit.

The Block winners also face a substantial fine for illegally knocking down the Californian bungalow at 14 Irymple Ave, Kew East after the City of Boroondara revealed their intentions to take the couple to court.

The Jollys outraged residents on the avenue — who expected the couple to restore the rundown house — when they levelled the property last month.

But Mrs Jolly told the Herald Sun at the time that neighbours had “got the wrong end of the stick” over what they were doing with the site.

Irymple Avenue residents, including Debbie McColl-Davis and Ken Duxbury, were horrified the Jollys had demolished the house rather than restore it. Picture: Nicole Cleary

Her agent Sean Anderson explained the Jollys had permission to demolish 95 per cent of the house, but elected to take it all down when Mr Jolly discovered extensive rot and termite damage.

But Boroondara council said Mrs Jolly and her former footballer husband had only been granted permission to partially demolish the building.

Bulldozing the entire house was in breach of the permit that it had issued, the council said at the time.

Director of City Planning at the council, John Luppino, released a statement late last week stating that the couple had been granted retrospective approval for the illegal demolition.

Mr Luppino said the approval required the home be reconstructed “to the same detail as the original, reusing the existing roof tiles, bricks to the porch and chimney, front door and windows”.

“This process is the only means by which council is able to insist upon reconstruction of the front portion of the building,” he said.

“Council considers reconstruction of the original parts of the dwelling will produce the best outcome for the site.”

As well as requiring a rebuild, Mr Luppino said the council also intended to prosecute the Jollys for the illegal demolition in the Magistrate’s Court.

The maximum penalty for breaching the Planning and Environment Act is 1200 penalty units or a $180,000 fine.

Mr Jolly told Fairfax Media he and his wife would vigorously defend any legal action taken against them.

He said the couple had no choice but to demolish the home and planned to fully rebuilt its facade as part of a new four-bedroom family home.

“We knew it was in very poor condition, but we loved the look of the house, and that’s why we proposed to build it back as it is,” he said.