Turn of the century home will be demolished

In a move that underscored the lack of municipal bylaws governing the protection of heritage homes, Beaconsfield's council overruled its demolition committee's decision to forbid the demolition of a 1921 cottage house it had deemed of historic value after an impassioned council meeting last Monday night, ending a year-long argument with a local homeowner.

"I think it's been a democratic process that we've followed," said Mayor Bob Benedetti after his council approved an appeal by owner Francine Wilson against the committee's earlier decision.

It was not a unanimous decision, with councillors Karen Messier and Roy Baird, who also sit on the demolition committee, voting against the appeal.

"If we don't take steps on protecting some of these houses, we're going to lose them," Messier told The Chronicle after the meeting.

Though admitting the home is in need of some repair, Messier said it was not beyond being salvaged. "The house was liveable," she said.

During the meeting, however, Wilson's legal representative François Tremblay made a presentation during which he decried the demolition committee's decision and council's original approval thereof.

"You're asking your citizen to spend $475,000 on repairs in the best of cases," Tremblay said, basing himself on estimates mentioned in studies of the property by various sources.

In a document written on April 29, 2009, for example, the firm Hudon Desbiens St. Germain Environment Inc. tells Beaconsfield council "the presence of mold in the interior of the home cannot be tolerated and must be remedied immediately to avoid any health problems to the occupants […] The relatively important humidity inside the house as well as the water infiltrations must be remedied."

And another document by BCA Consultants Inc. concludes the home's foundations are unstable. "The northern foundation wall bears many important cracks, which represents a problem in terms of structural integrity," the brief reads.

It also highlights how many parts of the house were constructed separately and "are not structurally harmonious with each other," estimating a total overhaul of the foundations may cost $270,000.

"The house is worth $299,000, let's say $300,000," Tremblay said during his presentation.

However, though Montreal's public valuations website does list 454, Lakeshore Road as having a value of $299,900, the total value including its terrain is $667,100.

The demolition committee had said in its April 30 decision not to allow the house to be torn down because it was "located in a place or zone that has been, or may be designed as a historical site," that it was typical of local heritage homes in its appearance, and was of particular value to local residents. "I think that the demolition committee did the right thing. I think we made the point, " Benedetti said.

He conceded that some of Tremblay's points were true, but added part of the reason the house had deteriorated so dramatically was because Wilson, after purchasing it a year ago from previous owner Alan Turner, abandoned it and went to live elsewhere.

Some who attended the council meeting also spoke in favour of allowing Wilson to do as she pleases with the property.

"I think the city needs to look into its historical building bylaws," said Michèle D'Anjou, who had originally written a letter in support of protecting the home, but said at the meeting she has changed her mind since she maintained the house does not meet Beaconsfield's own criteria for heritage homes.

"This is a perfect example of how the city subjectively uses criteria to decide to demolish or not to demolish," she added.

Gilles Perron, another resident, said he had originally been in favour of keeping the home as well but now changed his mind, feeling he was "misled" by council.

Councillors David Pollock and Wade Staddon both remarked that the city needs to come up with more rigorous bylaws on what constitutes a heritage home.

"We need to enforce bylaws that can be there, and can be made clear," Pollock said, adding new homeowners should know what they are in for when they buy property that has possible historical value.

"The problem with the demolition law in one respect is that there is very little jurisprudence on it," Staddon said, adding he would like to work on a more solid heritage home bylaw if he is still councillor come the next municipal elections.

Wilson intends to have a new home built after destroying the current one. "It was in very bad condition," she said Monday night after the meeting. She could not comment further, stating she was too emotionally overcome with the joy of knowing she would be able to go through with her plan. "I've been fighting for this for a year," she only added.

For now, however, the home remains, moss and vines growing on its side and front walls clearly indicating it is not occupied. Spider webs cover its electric meter. Bags of publicity flyers and newspapers lie unopened at its doorstep. One of the brand-new, 360-litre recycling bins Beaconsfield recently purchased for its residences stands unused there as well.