Bryn Mawr or Baird Cottage, a 1907 Queen Anne country house in St. John's, is at risk of being demolished. The owner has applied for a demolition permit. The house has Registered Heritage Structure status with the province, but does not have heritage status with the municipality. In St. John's, only municipal heritage status comes with any legal protection.
The rumor is that a local real-estate development firm,
KMK Capital, has agreed to purchase the seven acre lot on condition that a demolition permit is approved. A similar event happened last year when the 1883 Quinnipiac house at 25 Winter Avenue was demolished (see
previous thread, and
interior photos ). The owner had a sale pending with local ophthalmologist Chris Jackman, conditional on an approved demolition permit. City Council (with councillors Lane and Hickman notably dissenting) refused to issue municipal heritage status, claiming (falsely) that the City would be at legal risk due to the pending sale.
Adding insult to injury, KMK Capital purchased the 1848
Richmond Cottage back around 2011. City Council at the time approved a plan to subdivide the 3.5 acre lot and squeeze in 11 detached houses on the condition that KMK Capital restore Richmond Cottage to sell as a duplex townhouse (see
development plans ). Finally, a wealthy developer and Council were going to prove that it is possible to save historic buildings all while increasing density and making a profit (
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Loca...1800s-figure/1 ). Fast forward five years and KMK has built and sold the 11 houses while letting Richmond Cottage decay. They are now seeking a demolition permit, claiming restoration would be too expensive (
http://www.thetelegram.com/Business/...alling-apart/1 ). In an unusual move, City Council recently approved a Memorandum of Understanding that requires KMK to sell Richmond Cottage for $350,000 by May 1, 2017. If unsold, the Memorandum states that Council will agree to allow the building be demolished (
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Loca...-May-1,-2017/1 ). What's particularly strange is the Memorandum can't be legally binding. Current Council cannot bind the decisions of future Council. I worry that come 2017 some Councillors will wrongly claim the Memorandum has tied their hands and vote to allow demolition. I wish the city would either expropriate (at 1848, it's one of the oldest in the city), or flex some muscle and rezone it to parkland. That would set a nice precedent for future developers speculating on historic lots.
Given the tension between City Council and KMK Capital over Richmond Cottage, a stronger than usual
public outcry, and the symbolic provincial heritage status, there's hope that Council will vote to designate Bryn Mawr a municipal heritage building, saving it from short-term demolition. However, Richmond Cottage also has municipal heritage status, and that hasn't saved it yet. KMK has the resources to wait for Bryn Mawr to crumble. They've already had much of the interior stripped, possibly to bolster claims that building is falling apart. It would be great if Council would just rezone the whole seven acres as parkland, leaving renovation of the house as the only legal option.
Some local media:
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Loca...ric-building/1
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfou...mawr-1.3516311
http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&ID=61611
Bryn Mawr exterior:
Bryn Mawr interior, stripped:
Richmond Cottage exterior: