Regina Construction III

[StealthGirl]

New owners want the city to remove heritage status so they can demolish the glass house in the Crescents and build new. Something is weird in this story; they say they don't have much choice but to demolish it. Why would you buy a house that doesn't work for you? I hope this doesn't get pulled down for a Usonia ugly chicken coop.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Glass+house+facing+demolition/10827476/story.html

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by StealthGirl

New owners want the city to remove heritage status so they can demolish the glass house in the Crescents and build new. Something is weird in this story; they say they don't have much choice but to demolish it. Why would you buy a house that doesn't work for you? I hope this doesn't get pulled down for a Usonia ugly chicken coop.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Glass+house+facing+demolition/10827476/story.html

Oh my God.

If the City approves this I've lost all confidence in council. What's the purpose of the heritage property list if you can just easy remove it whenever you feel it's convenient and cost-effective.

[Drofmab]

Originally Posted by StealthGirl

New owners want the city to remove heritage status so they can demolish the glass house in the Crescents and build new. Something is weird in this story; they say they don't have much choice but to demolish it. Why would you buy a house that doesn't work for you? I hope this doesn't get pulled down for a Usonia ugly chicken coop.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Glass+house+facing+demolition/10827476/story.html

My bet is the house never worked for them... the location worked for them.

The house belonged to the owner of Ruffles (was next to Leo's, I believe), and it reflected her unique style. Perhaps not to everyone's liking. I know people who went through the house a couple months ago during the estate sale. Apparently it needed a lot of work - not clear if this was structural/mechanical or simply cosmetic.

The house did sit on the market for a looooong time (8months minimum, probably a year) - so there's something more at play here (perhaps the house is structurally/mechanically fine & her estate just priced it too high; or it needs expensive renos, which made the price too high for many buyers).

[thefourthtower]

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1218183&page=4

Some nice pictures of thee city I love the one with the twin towers

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Drofmab

I know people who went through the house a couple months ago during the estate sale. Apparently needed a lot of work - not clear if this was structural/mechanical or simply cosmetic.

I took a tour of it when they were having an open house. The flat roof over the entrance was leaking bad and ruined the plaster, the house is settling and cracking all the walls, the windows leak and you can hear every car that drives by, the electrical is all knob-and-tube that's never been touched, the upstairs bathroom doesn't work (had a big sign saying don't touch any fixtures), the basement consists of a concrete hole in the ground that smelled like pickles, and the old attached garage roof is caved inwards which turns the roof into a swimming pool during the summer. It's a massive project. That's why it sat on the market so long. Plus it's only a two bedroom house (master and a guest) which makes it a poor family home.

But all problems considered, it's a heritage property. It's one of the most unique homes in Regina in one of the most prominent locations in the city. This demo permit shouldn't be taken lightly.

[skthunder77]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

I took a tour of it when they were having an open house. The flat roof over the entrance was leaking bad and ruined the plaster, the house is settling and cracking all the walls, the windows leak and you can hear every car that drives by, the electrical is all knob-and-tube that's never been touched, the upstairs bathroom doesn't work (had a big sign saying don't touch any fixtures), the basement consists of a concrete hole in the ground that smelled like pickles, and the old attached garage roof is caved inwards which turns the roof into a swimming pool during the summer. It's a massive project. That's why it sat on the market so long. Plus it's only a two bedroom house (master and a guest) which makes it a poor family home.

But all problems considered, it's a heritage property. It's one of the most unique homes in Regina in one of the most prominent locations in the city. This demo permit shouldn't be taken lightly.

As much as I agree, we can't expect someone to throw good money after bad...where was the onus on the previous owner to maintain the heritage property if it was so important?

I do question why someone would buy a property that absolutely didn't work knowing the hoops they would have to jump through afterwards.

In the end, it may have just sat there for longer deteriorating further...in my opinion, the city is stuck on this one.

[HomeInMyShoes]

^There is no onus on owners to keep up heritage properties, only an onus on modifications and renovations done to the property. The Travellers Pigeon Co-op illustrates that nicely. When you buy a heritage property you should be aware of what you are signing on for.

[James Gablan]

I also toured the glass house when it was up for sale, I was not impressed.

The first thing I noticed was that the furnace is huge, the house loses a tremendous amount of heat through all the glass block windows. The cold glass also contributes to massive amounts of condensation, which was visible on the walls immediately below the windows; the plaster was all crumbling and behind it was a lot of mold.

The house was built during WW2 and it was obvious that they did not have the materials available in sufficeant quantities as was needed: The foundation, insulation and the wiring in particular were very poor.

The upstairs bathroom has some of its plumbing on the outside wall, it is obvious that at some point the pipes froze and burst. There is significant evidence of water damage on the ground floor from burst pipes above. Given the warnings not to use the toilet I suspect the pipes are still broken.

Most damning of all is the foundation, which has shifted to the point where several of the doors, including the front door, do not open.

The weirdest things was that the shower on the main floor was not located in the bathroom but in the laundry room.

I have a feeling that if you removed everything from that house that needed to be fixed all that would be left is a hole in the ground.

[StealthGirl]

Then maybe the greater discussion needs to be around the condition of buildings at the time they are designated heritage buildings. Maybe their needs to be a minimum standard before it can be designated heritage to ensure worn out buildings are not given the protection. You can't save every old building. Obviously the damage didn't happen to this house overnight. Or maybe there needs to be periodic checks to make sure certain standards are maintained for heritage building so they aren't allowed to degrade to demolition-necessary (see Connaught).

The Tremaine house is another example of a building that had protection but wasn't being maintained. It's going to be a parking lot.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchew...-be-demolished-for-parking-lot-1.2940676

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by StealthGirl

New owners want the city to remove heritage status so they can demolish the glass house in the Crescents and build new. Something is weird in this story; they say they don't have much choice but to demolish it. Why would you buy a house that doesn't work for you? I hope this doesn't get pulled down for a Usonia ugly chicken coop.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Glass+house+facing+demolition/10827476/story.html

Yes, something is very strange about this story. The expression "buyer beware" springs to mind. It is like the RM of Sherwood bought this house. "We didn't understand the advice that was given to us". Sometimes people need to be rescued from themselves - to expect the city to do it in the form of lifting the heritage status is not realistic.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

Oh my God.

If the City approves this I've lost all confidence in council. What's the purpose of the heritage property list if you can just easy remove it whenever you feel it's convenient and cost-effective.

It is just on the holding list. It is not designated a heritage property. The new owners will probably have something like $1/2 million into the lot alone, once demo is done, which means they will no doubt be planning to build something better in its place. I used to think this was a cool house, but really it is pretty odd. Mediterranean and Art Moderne styles? What?

I would have no problem with the Commission requiring the owners to submit plans for the replacement house for approval. There are some great infills in the area that are vast improvements over what they replaced.

For example, this one on McCallum:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@50.431664,-1...3m4!1e1!3m2!1sj762Hi0kcOooa-zacrYfcg!2e0

There is another infill on Albert south of the Glass House that is so true to the neighbourhood era that no one knows it is anew house. It even has the old fashioned stucco.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by James Gablan

...
I have a feeling that if you removed everything from that house that needed to be fixed all that would be left is a hole in the ground.

...and the bomb shelter! I always wanted one of those.

[Stormer]

Now I remember why I used to think that was a cool house. It used to have a flat roof. I think it was the 70's or early 80's when the out-of-context Mediterranean tile roof was added.

It was this sort of style:

[Stormer]

This got me thinking about another lost art moderne structure in Regina. The Grenfell Apartments. They were razed to make way for the ugly, pre-cast Grenfell Tower:



(Top image: City of Regina Archives, Bottom image: Laura Pfeifer)

https://reginaurbanecology.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/before-and-after-the-grenfell-apartments/

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Stormer

This got me thinking about another lost art moderne structure in Regina. The Grenfell Apartments. They were razed to make way for the ugly, pre-cast Grenfell Tower:

Thanks for the pic - although I remember the hotel between the bay and the grenfell, I have no recollection of those apt buildings at all.
For anyone else struggling with the difference between art deco and art moderne:
http://architecturestyles.org/art-deco/

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Stormer

The new owners will probably have something like $1/2 million into the lot alone, once demo is done, which means they will no doubt be planning to build something better in its place

The realtor's matrix shows they purchased the property for only $370k, but that's neither here nor there. I get what you're saying.

In the comparison to Connaught I see the difference being Connaught was structurally unsound and unsafe for people to be in, whereas this home was simply uncared for and needs updates and repairs. It's akin to a classic car with a completely rusted out frame where the seats may fall through vs. a classic car with a bad motor and shotty suspension. The former is beyond repair, but the latter is just looking for someone with some passion, money and time to bring it back to life. Crushing it would be a shame.

It sounds like the Dodds were the wrong people to buy this house. It needed an owner that appreciated what it had and didn't look at it as being "in the way" of their ideal home.

Originally Posted by Stormer

I would have no problem with the Commission requiring the owners to submit plans for the replacement house for approval. There are some great infills in the area that are vast improvements over what they replaced.

Yes, if the City could force them to build a home there that is comparable to the homes around it and maintains the neighbourhood's character I would be fine with that. I just don't think a policy like that exists, does it? The City could stipulate the square footage or frontages or technical details like that but I've never heard of them saying what style of exterior needs to be used on a private residence.

[Dan0myte]

Originally Posted by Stormer

Now I remember why I used to think that was a cool house. It used to have a flat roof. I think it was the 70's or early 80's when the out-of-context Mediterranean tile roof was added.

Ah, neat! I always thought it was strange that the entryway was flatroof and the garage was flatroof but then the main building was a conventional roof. It didn't make any sense.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by Dan0myte

The realtor's matrix shows they purchased the property for only $370k, but that's neither here nor there. I get what you're saying.

In the comparison to Connaught I see the difference being Connaught was structurally unsound and unsafe for people to be in, whereas this home was simply uncared for and needs updates and repairs. It's akin to a classic car with a completely rusted out frame where the seats may fall through vs. a classic car with a bad motor and shotty suspension. The former is beyond repair, but the latter is just looking for someone with some passion, money and time to bring it back to life. Crushing it would be a shame.

It sounds like the Dodds were the wrong people to buy this house. It needed an owner that appreciated what it had and didn't look at it as being "in the way" of their ideal home.

Seems like there must be issues. The house next door is listed for $725k.

I think there is a another difference with Connaught. Connaught was a publicly owned building and this is a private residence. I am not sure how I feel about the Government telling you what you can and cannot do with your house (within reason).

[one_brick_at_a_time]

Both properties look like dumps and without anyone wanting to spend the money to renovate completely, they will just crumble and be a waste of space. That doesn't mean I want them to go, but especially the war time house, it looks like half of those types of houses left in Regina because their oweners haven't kept them in good repair.

[scotty c]

It sounds to me like the buyers saw a property that had a great address. They did some digging and saw that it was on a potential heritage list and decided to roll the dice on buying it in hopes they could reverse the heritage decision and build something brand new on a great lot.

Best case for them they get the okay and have a great new house. Worst case scenario they put it back on the market and hope that someone else buys it.

Seems like the thing that makes the house a heritage property (windows) is the same thing that makes it difficult to keep the house in a good state (condensation, mold, etc.). That may be a pretty good argument as to why it needs to be torn down.