902 Foul Bay Road, Victoria, BC

I took these photos back in August but never got around to posting about this house until now. Sadly, the reason I am finally posting it is that it was mostly gutted in a fire yesterday. This is a sad end to what's been a sad saga for a while. But let's start at the beginning...

This house is heritage designated--not just the outside, but the interior and grounds as well. It was built in 1911, and architect John A. Di Castri redesigned the kitchen in the 1970s. Here are some photos from the 70s from the Hallmark Heritage Society (more at the link).

Here's the "charming little octagonal bay", as the Victoria Heritage Foundation describes it

The house received its heritage designation in 2003. However, a recent owner was a pet hoarder, and had about 100 cats in the house at one time. This left it in awful shape inside. In January 2014, "inspectors for the Vancouver Island Health Authority and the City of Victoria found the condition of the house, which was not heated in the last two years of its occupancy, posed health risks" (Times-Colonist). The page where this was posted has since been taken down, but the Hallmark Society had written sometime last year, "It is highly contaminated by cat urine and feces. [...] In 2008, it was cleaned up somewhat but now the interior woodwork is in poor condition and the roof is rotten. It looks like somebody is living in the basement."



There's some more info on a few Facebook threads. "Foul Bay and Quamichan has been condemned a few times. The scent of cats is overwhelming and the realtor was wearing a hazmat suit" (comment on a post from August 2015; the thread also has a few photos). "I know the woman who inherited/lived there for many years with too many cats. It was condemned several times, then she lived with my parents a block away. Now it has sold, and yet I still see her panhandling" (comment on a September 2015 post, which also has a photo). "As some one who used to live there and a friend of the family i witnessed the transformation from a classic home to a run down dump, after the owners father and mother died she started taking in cats and letting them take over, myself and the owners son tried our best to fix the house and remove the cats but it was really a losing battle, every time we got a step foreword the owner (the mother) would take 2 steps back, in the end after years of trying we had to bring health services in and have the place condemned, it was pretty sad" (comment from yesterday). Here's another good photo.

However, the sale listing is positive: "BRING THIS HOME BACK TO ITS FORMER GLORY! This home sits on a spectacular property on the Victoria side of the Oak Bay border. The home has wonderful Arts & Crafts elements such as the half timbered upper story. The interior has many beautiful original features including 2 grand fireplaces, original wood, leaded glass & more." Although, at the end it is noted, "Home & Land being sold 'AS IS WHERE IS' This home has deferred maintenance. [...] PLEASE DO NOT GO ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE LIST REALTOR PRESENT"

yeah, my photos are crappy

The new (current) owner says they were planning to rehabilitate it, but after realizing the extent of the damage, they requested to be able to demolish it in April 2015. From the Heritage Advisory Panel meeting minutes:

• It was clear in the realtor sale notice that the property is heritage designated and that any changes would be to the satisfaction of the City. Examples of similar houses that were contaminated by animals and then rehabilitated include a property on Amelia Street and Ross Bay Villa.
• Can it be restored? Applicant: No. Initially the goal was to restore the house. However, Island Health has advised that there is no guarantee that the house would be liveable after rehabilitation due to odours, insects, etc. Obtaining insurance would be difficult. [...]
• It appears that the applicant’s request is actually to de-designate a heritage designated house. The house is so compromised that it is unable to be rehabilitated due to health concerns.
• Is the house beyond redemption from a health viewpoint? Senior Heritage Planner: According to a City report in 2013, the house was ordered vacated by the Vancouver Island Health Authority. [...]
• This is an example of demolition by neglect. Animals have destroyed the building. It cannot be determined from the information provided whether the building is salvageable. Clean it up, then reassess the status of the building.
• Applicant: There is sufficient information regarding the health hazards of the building, for example, mould resulting from moisture (urine) and leaking pipes. Remediation could be attempted, but no sealant can ward against the leakage of microbes and biohazards. No one will guarantee that health risks will not continue.
• [...] According to current regulations, the applicant would be required to clean up the property regardless of whether the property were to be rehabilitated or demolished.

In the end, the demolition request was denied. But in September 2015, the owner requested to de-designate the property. The October 2015 HAP meeting minutes report: "Following the Panel’s review [in April], staff recommended that the applicant obtain an opinion from a Heritage Professional, who has consulted with the Environmental Consultants, Remediation Contractors and Health Authorities that have carried out site visits to the subject property, in order to confirm whether any historic material on the property could be remediated in a way that would satisfy insurers and health authorities. A request to de-designate the heritage-designated house and property was received from the applicant on September 23, 2015. The request is based on environmental assessments of the subject property, many of which render the house contaminated beyond reuse, and an opinion of Keay Cecco Architecture Ltd. who have identified historic fabric that can be retained."

There was disagreement as to whether parts of the house (like the exterior or at least features such as windows and stonework) were salvageable or not. The conclusion was, "it is not clear [...] that if all of the contaminated fabric were to be removed, whether the extent of contamination would still apply to the underlying structure. With a HAP [Heritage Alteration Permit], there would at least be an opportunity to reevaluate the conditions when all of the fabric is removed. At that point, one would be in a better position to consider the next step. The building needs to be de-contaminated before the applicant returns to the Panel. At that time the Panel may be better able to consider the evaluated condition of the building and whether it might be fully decontaminated and insurable. There is no indication that the exterior is unsalvageable and therefore, it could be reutilized in a new development. Materials can be salvaged and retained during the

decontamination process." So the request to de-designate was denied.

Apparently, according to that document, "The applicant did not enter the house before the purchase", which seems foolish. If they bought it intending to rehabilitate it, wouldn't they have taken a good look to make sure that was possible, or to assess how much it would cost?

Anyway, the whole thing is moot now that the building has been largely destroyed by fire. Someone called the fire department around 12:30 am on Monday, but because the house was boarded up, the crews couldn't get in and could only fight the fire from the outside, which is why the damage was so extensive. The fire chief called the remainder "a burnt-out shell". It's not known yet what caused the fire; "a preliminary probe around the perimeter of the building yielded no obvious cause", and the house "was considered unsafe to enter and inspect further".

The owner said he was told the building will need to be torn down, which, judging by these post-fire photos, is accurate. As I said at the beginning, this is a very sad ending for this formerly-lovely home. Councillor Pamela Madoff "said other developers had wanted to buy and restore the property. 'If the other guys had gotten it, it would have been well along its restoration process by now and wouldn’t have sat empty for a year and a half at risk the way that it has been.' " A Chek News article (which also has a video of the fire) adds, "Michael Sweet was one of the developers wanting to purchase the home two years ago. 'From previous experience, this building would have pushed over a million to restore the exterior and interior of the building due to neglect and deterioration but it was absolutely restorable,' Sweet said."

The building didn't have electricity anymore, but according to Chek News squatters had been inside. Some suspicion is being directed at the owner (multiple comments in that thread), though, since this has worked out quite well for him.

Here are two photos from during the fire, and one more post-fire. The person who posted those must live nearby; they note in one of the descriptions, "The fire broke out about 12:15am last night. Earlier in the day we'd noticed the boarding over the front door had been removed." I'm not sure what to make of that fact, but it definitely seems like it must be connected to the fire somehow...

Anyway, here's the Google street view link, although you can't see much because the whole area was overgrown. And the last of my photos:

2018 Stanley Avenue, Victoria, BC

This one has only recently become abandoned; several months ago, it was in the process of being renovated, but then the work stopped and now it's sitting fenced with the roof half off, construction material scattered around the yard, and some recent graffiti marring the front (which happened after I took the above photo). Here's the Google street view link.

I haven't taken any more photos or done much of my own research, because other people have already been doing both. A recent Vic News article states: "Originally built in 1912, the arts and craft California bungalow-style home (designed by the same architect who designed the original McPherson Theatre) has all the original features such as the copper beam ceilings, french doors and push button light switches still intact" (see interior photos below). The reason the house made it into the news is that some of the neighbors have been advocating for it to be saved, rather than demolished. There's even a Facebook page, Save 2018 Stanley Avenue, with regular updates, photos, and more info: "Built in 1912, this character house was designed by Jesse M Warren. Its new owners are considering demolishing it after neglecting it the past 4 months."

More info came out in a recent CTV news segment. Apparently the renovations stopped because an environmental assessment returned "negative results", leading the owner to decide it would be best to just build a new house--and so the current one was left with the roof open to the rain, even after the owner promised to tarp it way back in September. The owner plans to start construction of the new house in January; according to Vic News, the neighbors are hoping the current house can be relocated.

Vic News also informs us that "The former owner lived in the character house for several decades before he passed away. His family eventually sold the property earlier this year." Before the sale, the house was mostly hidden behind trees. The sale listing read: "If you are HANDY this home is the perfect place for you. 1912 character home with beautiful original built-in woodwork untouched." The photos from the listing don't show up on that page, but I found them using Google image search, and have included them here.

Here's one more photo I found, and there are more on the Facebook page.

One more quote from the Vic News article: " 'The owner has the right to do what he wants with his property. But I also felt that the house brings a lot to the neighbourhood and has the potential to be a shining star,' [Chris] Grieve [founder of the Facebook page] said, adding some people have even offered to buy the home in order to save it." So clearly there's a lot of interest in keeping this house around, and with all the publicity it's been getting, hopefully that's what will happen.

1152 & 1154 Johnson Street

I discovered these two today, soon to be torn down to make way for condos. They were built in 1902, so they're over a hundred years old, but now we're going to lose them to development.

1152, left side--check out the lovely art glass window

art glass close-up

1152, back

1154, front

back

1154, back

1154, side

There's not much of a story here--from Google maps, it looks like they were lived in until just recently. So they're not technically abandoned, just vacated and waiting for demolition.

Google street view May 2014, looking like actual homes

Google's image of the back, May 2014

I also found some photos taken in October 2014 by Lotus Johnson (reproduced here under a creative commons license).

source (Flickr)

source (Flickr)

Another house, 1406 Chambers Street, also built in 1902, was already torn down to make way for the new development. It used to be right behind these two. I never saw it in person, but here's a photo taken by Lotus Johnson, also in October 2014.

source (Flickr)

Here's Google's image from May 2014. I bet the garage was original.

Google's image of the back of 1406 Chambers/side of 1152 Johnson, May 2015

So, basically, we're losing a cluster of 1902 houses, leaving this one on Chambers (also 1902) surrounded by new buildings. I wonder how long it will last.

This article about the new development, published October 6, 2015, says that "Currently at the site crews are dismantling structures in preparation for construction." I'm glad I caught the two on Johnson before they're completely gone.

515-517 Wilson Street, Victoria, BC

This is another one in Vic West, built in 1912, a lovely character home. It's got finials! And drop finials!

And obvious fire damage. Its story is pretty sad. First, there was a fire in January 2014. According to Victoria News: "A top-floor suite at a Vic West character home is uninhabitable [...] after a coil heater overloaded an extension cord. Victoria fire crews were called to the home [...] around 6:45 a.m. Inside, they found a man struggling to put out a hallway fire that was spreading from the carpet up the walls of his suite."

The Times-Colonist fills in more details: "Contrary to bylaws, the smoke alarm in the top-floor suite was not working, said Victoria Fire inspector Chris Royle. The top-floor suite had heavy smoke damage. Total damage is estimated at $20,000. The other suites are habitable and the tenants have returned home. [...] A long, lightweight extension cord powering a small space heater was found coiled on the carpet with some clothes on top. The heater was always running, putting the cord under a constant load. Royle said an electrical cord coiled and bundled together produces heat, which it can’t dissipate, causing the cord to melt and ignite."

Here's the house in May 2014, though (via Google), still looking fine from outside.

What makes the story so sad is that there was another, much worse fire in February 2015. You can read the whole story here, but basically the fire started in the basement around 10 p.m. and spread quickly; everyone got out, but there wasn't much the firefighters could do. A woman and her son had just moved into the top floor suite, which had just been fixed up after the 2014 fire, earlier that day. (More of their story specifically is in this article--really sad. :( There's also a post-fire interior photo.) The first article says that "The landlord, Tasma Hinch, inspected the damage on Monday, walking past the charred walls and stepping over debris in a state of near-disbelief. Hinch, who has owned the home for the last 40 years, said she expects it will take a year and a half to repair the structure". The fire caused about $600,000 worth of damage, rendering the house completely uninhabitable. One more relevant article is here. A previous tenant mourned the situation on Facebook, saying the house "had a cuteness about it".

Google's photos from May 2015 show signs that work is being done on it, or was; as you can see from my photos (taken just the other day), it doesn't look like much is going on now.

Here are a few more of mine. I love that house next door, a heritage-designated home built in 1906.

You can see where this is on the house in the third photo from the top

I'll be keeping an eye on it to see if the renovations progress, and I'll post an update here if I see that anything's changed.

234 Edward Street, Victoria, BC

I happened upon this one while biking in Vic West today. Ever since I started keeping an eye out for abandoned/boarded-up buildings, I've realized just how many there are around here (and probably every city), including some really interesting ones that aren't talked about online at all--like this one.

See older images below--two of these side windows were previously stuccoed over

There used to be a porch supporting the roof; see below

I could only find two references to it online. The first is this 2010 ad (found on page 4 here). The house looks pretty different, right?

Built in 1905; "offers a grand entry [and] gorgeous wood stair railing"; "needs work" but "what an exciting opportunity!"

Here it is in 2009 (thanks, Google!). This is the view from Edward Street; check out the Catherine Street view here.

See? Only one window on the side. Lovely stained glass on the bay window.

Ugh, stucco--but the new owners were taking the stucco off, restoring the house, in fact, according to the Victoria Heritage Foundation, which claims it "was rehabilitated in 2011-12". Here it is in August 2011, stucco mostly gone.

Here you can see that the new window was put in right where two old windows used to be

And June 2012, all stucco gone except the small patch that's still there today.

All windows free! Of both stucco and boards. Still loving the stained glass. Enjoy a close-up here.

Something's also going on with the porch there, and it was gone by September 2012.

In the next street view image, May 2014, it looks basically like it does now. So someone started fixing it up... and then stopped. Did they find something wrong with the house that made it not worth continuing? Was there a fire? Money issues? And will the work ever continue, or is the house (built in 1905, remember) now doomed to slowly rot away?

One more interesting thing to note is that e-valueBC, who assessed it in 2014, refers to it as a "non-manualized structure". Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that term is actually defined anywhere online. The "comments" section of the assessment page says "building unfinished". Thanks, e-valueBC. I just wish you could tell me why!