Heritage house given reprieve of ‘deconstruction’
A large historic house nestled at 1542 Mount Douglas Cross Rd. since 1913 and slated for “deconstruction” by its owner has received a 60-day protection order from Saanich council.
The reprieve has heritage proponents hoping that a solution can be found to prevent the house from being taken apart.
The original 2,500-square-foot Meacock residence, one of the largest farmhouses in the region, was home to fruit growers Arthur and Kate Meacock for two years more than a century ago.
Arthur Meacock was one of the original signers of the petition to incorporate Saanich. During the 1920s, a pheasant farm operated on the spacious property. At one point, it was occupied by Percy and Blythe Plimley, owners of one of the earliest auto dealerships in Western Canada.
Saanich council unanimously refused to approve the demolition requested by owners Gurdip Singh Binning and Surinder Kaur Binning of GSB Developments, who want to build a three-storey, 6,815-square-foot house for their multi-generational family. The plans would require front and rear setback variances, one 23 feet closer to the next property than allowed, which were also rejected unanimously by council.
Gurdip Binning, a developer of about 60 houses, said he bought this one without realizing it was on the Saanich Heritage Register, which includes buildings that are determined to have community heritage value.
There are about 300 houses on the register, of which 84 have a Heritage Designation Bylaw protecting the exterior character of the building. The Meacock house does not have this designation or the formal legal protection that comes with it.
Coun. Vicki Sanders said she has viewed the property and believes “it’s worth keeping.” Although it has seen better days, it is home to several University of Victoria students.
In a report to council, Saanich planning staff recommended that council remove the house from the register and ask the owners to document its heritage features for the Saanich Archives and to provide for the reuse of salvaged materials.
Saanich has the legal power to give a house heritage designation to protect it, but could find itself having to compensate the owner, a step not usually taken by Saanich. The 2016 B.C. Assessment valuation is $951,800, including $90,800 for the house — an increase of $210,000 from 2015.
Nearby resident Patricia Summers told council that it’s heartbreaking to contemplate another heritage structure being torn down for a house that resembles “a huge motel,” dwarfing her own house of 3,200 square feet.
“It’s not in keeping in any way with the neighbourhood … and it’s not something that will be welcomed,” she said.
Project designer Wil Peereboom told council he loves heritage homes. “If someone wants to pick it up and take it off the site, we’re happy to do that.”
The non-profit Saanich Heritage Foundation will meet Tuesday to discuss the issue, said Ken Johnson, a member of the Saanich group and president of the regional Hallmark Heritage Society. “If we could get Saanich planning staff involved, that would be better for us. The Saanich Heritage Foundation can’t do it alone.”
The Meacock house represents “a disturbing trend,” Johnson said. “Deconstruction is just a nice word for demolition. This house can be saved,” he said, with restoration costs in the neighbourhood of $70 to $80 per square foot.
“The Greater Victoria region is losing heritage houses at an alarming rate,” said Carolyn Affleck in a letter to Saanich council. “These buildings ring with the stories of past families and the values, concerns and esthetics of the era in which they were built. Our lives are enriched by this living history, but with every old home that is destroyed, this history is chipped away at, and before we know it, we’ll have nothing to show for it. Or maybe, we’ll have one or two heritage homes preserved as museums.”
The Saanich register notes that the Meacock house is distinguished by its wraparound porch, bell-cast hipped roof structure, stone pillars, its setting and the history of its occupants.
Saanich staff first met with the applicant in October 2015 to discuss heritage significance and outline options, such as restoration grants and the potential to subdivide to create an additional lot if the Meacock home were restored on the property.
“The applicant/owner understood the opportunity, but advised that he would like to continue with his proposal to demolish the heritage building and replace it with a new single family home,” said a Saanich report.
As to the setbacks, the developer was aware that his application encroached on setbacks meant to keep spaces between houses, the report said.
“Due diligence was not done,” the Saanich board of variance said. The applicant continued to council, nevertheless.
Gurdip Binning told the Times Colonist that his extended family lives together in Langford, including his 92-year-old mother. He said the proposed house would be the largest he has ever built.
He said he is contemplating his options, and has not ruled out saving the house, moving it, or putting the new house in another spot on the site to comply with setback rules. “I’m still deciding it. No rush. No rush.” The site variances rejected by council would have allowed him both to build the proposed house and seek a subdivision for another house some time down the road, he said.
A structural evaluation by Stephen Malkow of Mann Engineering and Planning Corp. in 2015 pointed out substantial deficits in the Meacock house, concluding that it is “not structurally competent.”
But members of the Saanich Heritage Foundation who made a visual inspection concluded that the exterior of the dwelling is in good shape. They agreed with Mann Engineering on foundation and basement structural issues, but suggested it’s feasible to repair foundations and improve structural support.
Johnson said he hopes that council’s rejection of the variances for the proposal will persuade the developer to rethink the demolition. “The Hallmark Heritage Society is urging the developer, the Saanich Heritage Foundation and planning staff at Saanich to work together to formulate a development plan that will retain the historic house while meeting the needs of the owner.”
Oak Bay, for example, allows heritage revitalization agreements where an existing house is retained, with or without additions, and more buildings built on the site, all while keeping the interests of the neighbourhood in mind, he said in an email.
“I’m hopeful,” Sheila Colwill of the Saanich Heritage Foundation said.
There are several incentives available to aid municipalities in negotiating solutions with property owners in exchange for conservation, she said, including land-use flexibility, relaxation of bylaws or permission for new uses.
Such negotiating tools have been successful when both parties were looking for solutions, she said. She cited the 1910 Ambleside house at 3912 Carey Rd., which was saved and became part of a larger townhouse complex, and Westwood at 4794 West Saanich Rd., saved from demolition by the approval of an adjoining border change.
She spoke to the Meacock proponents following the council meeting and found that they indicated “some willingness to look at alternatives” that would preserve what she called “this grand Edwardian structure.”