Shaughnessy Heritage Dwelling demolished years after fireplace


The attractive A-Listed Heritage Home at 3737 Angus Drive in Vancouver has been demolished.Jimmy Jeong / The Globe and Mail

One of many oldest heritage properties in Vancouver’s Shaughnessy neighborhood has been demolished, the conclusion of a long-running battle between the home-owner and town, after a hearth gutted the vacant home 5 years in the past.

The Raunsefell Home at 3737 Angus Dr., a “Heritage-A” listed construction that was preserved inside First Shaughnessy’s Heritage Conservation District, is now a pile of rubble. It had caught fireplace after being vacant for a few years. Proprietor Miao Fei Pan and his spouse, Wen Huan Yang, did not dwell in the home, however had plans to renovate the ten,000-square-foot Tudor dwelling they purchased in 2012.

House owners previous to Mr. Pan had made intensive repairs to the home, preserving the distinctive woodwork and craftsmanship. Famous architects Samuel McClure and Cecil Fox designed the home in 1910, and it was one of many few remaining unique Shaughnessy Manors.

However in late October, 2017 a significant fireplace broke out within the higher flooring. The hearth was handled as suspicious and ultimately confirmed by Vancouver Hearth and Rescue Providers.

It was “maliciously set”. However no expenses had been ever filed.

The hearth left an enormous gap within the roof and about 40 per cent of the home was gutted. On November 1, 2017, per week after the fireplace, town ordered that steps be taken to protect the property.

The order acknowledged that the house owners had been to “preserve the constructing in such a method as moderately attainable to stop injury attributable to climate, an infection, rot or comparable decay.”

In an e-mail, town stated the house owners and their contractors assured them the work can be accomplished.

In 2017, a hearth broke out on the highest flooring of the home, inflicting large injury to the roof. The hearth was later deemed suspicious. Nonetheless no expenses had been laid.Patrick Gunn

Nonetheless, the opening was not lined and the inside remained uncovered to the weather for over a 12 months, to the chagrin of heritage advocates and followers of the home. It was a part of heritage advisor John Atkin’s Shaughnessy strolling tour.

Mr Atkin says the destruction of an necessary heritage home occurred as a result of it had stood empty for too lengthy. They are saying that if the proprietor had taken instant steps to restore the home, it might have been saved and restored.

“It was at all times one in all my favorites of the way it was renovated. It was an exceptionally considerate retention…so it was actually unhappy to see it go up in flames. And people unique supplies embodied one thing that shall be misplaced

“If instant efforts had been made to safe the construction and canopy it and there was an intention to keep up it, sure, it might have been maintained, albeit with a hell of quite a lot of work. And that is most likely what we ended up with.” A brand new construction can be nearer. But when the intention was to retain it, I feel it will have occurred.

After sitting with out repairs for too lengthy, town took the house owners to the BC Supreme Courtroom to order repairs in September, 2018, after which lawyer Ryan Parsons grew to become concerned. Mr Parsons says the issue for the house owners is that the fireplace has prompted such intensive injury.

They are saying that the proprietor is in a foreign country and isn’t accessible for interview.

“One of many huge issues is [the fire] Largely destroyed the roof and one of many higher flooring, which snapped the lateral helps of the 4 large chimneys. It was a fluke for him.

In the summertime of 2018, the proprietor was on the point of put up scaffolding to shrink the home when town initiated bylaw prosecution proceedings for not complying with an order to cowl the opening in a well timed method, Mr. Parsons says . The town additionally launched a civil motion searching for an order to restore and restore the house to the house owners. However, he says, when the house owners known as WorkSafeBC to tell them of the plan, they had been informed that staff couldn’t go inside a “fall radius” of the chimneys.

“We obtained an professional report from the engineer… which stated that the place can’t be repaired; ‘You’ll be able to’t restore it.’ The proprietor wished to do it as a result of it’s a lovely home. However the structural injury was intensive.

“The town obtained its personal engineer who stated, ‘Nicely, sure it may be repaired.’ Nevertheless it was an attractive, I will respect, but it surely was a really shaky concept about the way you’d do it with an enormous machine. I could not work out how you could possibly get it into the neighborhood. to achieve the highest.

Finally, he says, town deserted bylaw prosecution. The house owners got here up with a demolition plan, which was authorised by WorkSafeBC and utilized for a demolition allow, agreeing to place a covenant on the title that they’d construct a brand new home that was a duplicate of Raunsfeld Home, as That is ordered by town. The town stated a third-party engineer decided the constructing was broken past restore. It issued a demolition order and the home was taken down.

The town acquired a growth allow to duplicate the home in September, which is at present underneath evaluate.

The property’s assessed worth is $9,508,000, though an estimate on the time of the fireplace prompt the worth was as excessive as $14-million.

The scenario has been “financially devastating” for the house owners, Mr Parsons says. “And there was no simple method out. I am going from a imprecise reminiscence, however for scaffolding and shrink-wrap, it will have been a number of hundred thousand {dollars}. After which what do you do with it?”

Heritage advisor John Atkin says the thought of ​​changing the home with a “duplicate” will not be far-fetched, given the intensive work required to deliver older properties into line with fashionable constructing codes. They are saying that many “outdated” Shaughnessy mansions have been extensively rebuilt. The town has no management over what is completed of the house’s inside, so the house owners needn’t replicate the Previous World glory of the 1913 Raunsfeld Home.

“We speak about heritage conservation requirements, however with our present regulatory course of, it’s nearly unimaginable to take action,” says Mr Atkin.

Different jurisdictions make allowances for inheritance, he says.

“It isn’t like anyone right here is saying, ‘We hate legacy.’ However that we’ve got sure ourselves in order that we do not take a heritage construction and say, ‘It is heritage, and the influence of treating it in another way will not wreck the environment.’

“And so I feel it comes right down to asking: what’s legacy and why are we saving issues?”



Supply hyperlink