The proposed development calls for the demolition of the historic workers cottages in Hill Street for a two storey building and carpark.

The cottages are within a council-imposed Heritage Conservation Area.

A number of neighbours along with the Orange Heritage Group have questioned the demolition plan.

Heritage Group President Charles Everett said yesterday he was not against the development but would rather see the original cottages incorporated as part of an entrance to the office block.

“What we are seeing is the slow but steady destruction of heritage in this city,” Mr Everett said.

“All developers are interested in doing is coming into this town and knocking things down. What we are saying is that the group is not against development in Orange but we would just hope to see the cottages form part of the exterior of the new building.”

The office block proposal has been before council for several months, with at least two new designs submitted to council for approval in recent months.

In a recent report, which described the cottages as ‘poor’, OCC planning and design coordinator Heather Nicholls said the demolition of the cottages will “have an impact on the integrity of the central Orange heritage conservation area and the character of the Hill and Summer Streets precinct”.

Ms Nicholls also advised council the preferred option is to incorporate the cottages into the design of any office complex at a potential cost of $305,000.

The developer was unwilling to proceed with such plans on the basis it would be uneconomical and impractical.

According to Mr Everett, a deliberate strategy exists in Orange to “allow cottages to become rundown so the developer and agent can then say it is not economical to look after them.”

“It’s a disgrace and is indicative of a culture that I think only exists in Orange,” he said.

A sign advertising a “soon to be developed office complex” has been posted on the front of the cottages for several months.

Agent for the new office block Gary Blowes yesterday rejected suggestions it was inappropriate to advertise a development before a development application had been council approved.

“I can put a sign on anything I like,” Mr Blowes said.

“We have two prospective tenants prepared to sign off on a lease. This whole thing has been unfair for the developer who has a plan that complies with 90 per cent of what is required. Every time council defers these kind of matters it ends up costing the developer even more money to the point where if they keep losing, they won’t come back.”

Despite concerns, the recommendation from Council staff, to be voted on at this Thursday’s meeting, is to allow the cottages to be demolished.

l Have your say - Do you agree with comments we are seeing the slow destruction of heritage in our city? Email bevan.shields@ruralpress.com with your thoughts.