POLICY REPORT
BUILDING AND STRUCTURE
Date: September 9, 1996
Dept. File No. RGL
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of City Plans
SUBJECT: Heritage Revitalization Agreement for 1638 Marpole Avenue
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council authorize the City to enter into a Heritage
Revitalization Agreement for the site at 1638 Marpole Avenue:
to vary the Subdivision By-law to permit non-conforming
parcels; to vary the maximum FSR of the First Shaughnessy
Official Development Plan from 0.45 to 0.47 to permit
construction of the new house as it has been designed under
DE401296; to secure the preservation of the heritage building,
listed in the "B" category on the Vancouver Heritage Register;
and to commemorate it with a bronze heritage plaque;
B. THAT the Director of Legal Services bring forth the by-law to
authorize the Heritage Revitalization Agreement.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of A
and B.
COUNCIL POLICY
Council's Heritage Policies and Guidelines state that "buildings listed
on the Vancouver Heritage Register have heritage significance, and that
the City's long-term goal is to protect through voluntary designation as
many resources on the Register as possible".
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to seek Council's approval of a Heritage
Revitalization Agreement (HRA) to secure the conservation of this Tudor
Revival - style house built in 1911 (listed in the "B" category on the
Vancouver Heritage Register) by permitting site subdivision, and a floor
space relaxation for the proposed new house.
BACKGROUND
The site is located on Marpole Avenue in the First Shaughnessy District
(FSD) and comprises one legal parcel of 3417 m2/36,785 sq.ft. The
property is a large estate and has an important heritage building and
mature landscape features.
A proposal (subdivision application and Development Application
DE401296) has been submitted by John Hollifield, Architect, on behalf of
Fred Moroz of Molnar Development(Shaughnessy)Ltd. The proposal is to
retain and restore the exterior of the heritage building and subdivide
the site into two. The heritage building will remain as a single-family
residence; a single-family dwelling will be built on the new lot. (See
Appendix A for subdivision proposal; Appendix B for Development
Application.)
DISCUSSION
Development Proposal
The configuration of the requested subdivision (see Appendix A) has been
proposed so that the heritage building occupies one parcel (Lot 2) and a
new western parcel (Lot 1) created for a new single family dwelling. The
parcels to be created do not meet the minimum width requirements of the
Subdivision By-law, in the FSD but can be approved through a variance
granted in a Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA). Section 592 of
the Vancouver Charter allows for a HRA to vary a wide range of by-laws,
including the Subdivision By-law. The issuance of a partial Development
Permit will assure that the exterior restoration work is done to the
heritage building, before construction of the new house begins.
The Subdivision Approving Officer has granted preliminary approval to
the proposed subdivision (Appendix A) subject to the requisite HRA being
approved, amongst other conditions. A development application,
DE401296, for the design and siting of the new building, as well as the
restoration of the exterior of the heritage building, has been approved,
also subject to the HRA (Appendix B). The recommended HRA will also
have provisions that subsequent changes to the buildings be subject to a
Heritage Alteration Permit (HAP).
The FSR relaxation from 0.45 to 0.47 for the proposed new house is
required because its street-fronting garages are counted in the floor
space calculation in the FSD. Due to the steep slope of the site,
providing access to the garage from the side or rear (which would thus
exclude the garage area from the FSR) is impracticle.
The HRA will also require replication of both the heritage building and
the new house should they be damaged or destroyed.
Heritage Value
The house is a good example of the Tudor Revival style. Although the
architect is unknown, it was built in 1911. It is listed on the
Vancouver Heritage Register in the "B" category. The property is the
estate of John Hecht and was owned by his company (Equitable Real
Estate Investment) until its sale to Molnar Developments. The house is 2
and 1/2 storeys high, has characteristic Tudor Revival detailing, with
wooden clapboards and half timbering on the upper floor. The site
slopes steeply up to the south, with the house set in the far southeast
corner of the lot. The estate features many notable landscape elements,
including a stone wall along Marpole Avenue, and a terrace to the north
of the heritage building.
Compatibility of Conservation with Community Planning Objectives
One of the goals of the First Shaughnessy Official Development Plan is
"to promote conservation and restoration of meritorious pre-1940 homes
and maintenance of the estate-like image of development in accordance
with design guidelines adopted by Council". It also aims "to limit
further subdivision to protect the character of the area". While the
latter is intended to discourage subdivision, staff and the First
Shaughnessy Advisory Design Panel are supportive of this proposal
because of the significance of this site and building. Further, it is
of note that the site has the potential for two infill dwellings under
current FSODP provisions. Staff are supportive of the current
subdivision proposal, which would result in only one new building, as it
better preserves the site's estate character.
Compatibility of Conservation with Lawful Uses of the Property and
Adjoining Lands
The existing house is a single-family use, as will be the new dwelling.
Both are conditional uses of FSD. As noted above, the new house as
proposed requires a minor floor space relaxation.
Condition and Economic Viability of the Property
Overall, the building is in good condition. Some restoration work is
required to the exterior, primarily in the terrace railings and the
entrance area. The proposed subdivision, combined with the Heritage
Revitalization Agreement, will ensure that the heritage house can be
conserved.
Support to Enable Conservation
The Manager of Real Estate advises that the subdivision does not provide
an excess profit to the developer. The price differential between the
sale of the property as is (i.e., 3,417 m2/36,785 sq. ft. lot with
existing house) and subdivision into two lots is far too small to make
the retention of the existing house on its own a viable proposition.
The market for such a large lot with an old house is very small compared
to the market for lots in the 1400-1850 m2/15,000-20,000 sq. ft. range
that permit construction of new houses, or for existing houses on
smaller lots. In conclusion, the applicant s costs and revenues are
reasonable and we see no excess gain to be made by the developer by this
subdivision.
By signing the HRA the owner agrees that the opportunity to subdivide
the lands as proposed and to construct the new house is full and fair
compensation for the obligations on the owner by this agreement.
COMMENTS OF THE FIRST SHAUGHNESSY ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL
The proposed subdivision and accompanying HRA were reviewed by the First
Shaughnessy Advisory Design Panel on three occasions. The Panel
supports the proposed HRA and subdivision, noting the advantage of fewer
buildings on the site than what is currently permitted under the ODP.
Concerns raised throughout the Panel's reviews were with regarding to
the heritage building. The Panel had concerns about the restoration,
and maintenance of the heritage structure, and the timing of work for
both buildings. The Panel requested that the work on the heritage
building be completed prior to commencing any work on the new building.
Additional concerns were regarding maintaining the appearance of one
large estate lot irrespective of the new subdivided lot. The common
boundary line between both lots was requested to be left open and free
of obstructions within the front yards of both dwellings. The panel
supported the design of the new building.
Staff note that the issuance of a partial Development Permit will
address the Panel's concern about the restoration work being done on the
heritage building prior to commencement of construction of the new
house. In addition, the HRA restricts obstructions along the new
property line thereby reinforcing the appearance of a single estate.
CONCLUSION
The conservation of this important building and estate in the First
Shaughnessy District will be achieved by the proposal to subdivide the
site with the design and siting of the new buildings controlled by the
Development Application. Both subdivision and DA approval are subject
to the City entering into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement.
* * *