Moving House

P.C. · May 22 09 07:51

What ON EARTH were they thinking. This is so insane. They would have to drag me kicking and screaming to pull this one off.

[FONT face=Tahoma size=4]After 117 years, a Vancouver house is forced to move eight inches[/FONT]

[img class=thumbnail id=story_photo style="WIDTH: 203px; HEIGHT: 140px" height=240 alt="This tiny cottage on East Georgia near Jackson, which probably dates to 1892, was found by city officials discovered to be eight inches over the property line to the east. The city made homeowners Amos Hertzman and Caitlin Pencarrick pick it up and move it back on their lot." src="http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/www.timescolonist.com/after+years+vancouver+house+forced+move+eight+inches/1610004/1609663.bin?size=620x400" width=419 border=0] [img class=thumbnail id=story_photo style="WIDTH: 196px; HEIGHT: 141px" height=224 alt="One-month-old Posey takes a nap in her mom, Caitlin Pencarrick's arms as two-year-old Bennett and dad, Amos Hertzman, vist their home which is still under renovation. The tiny cottage on East Georgia near Jackson, which probably dates to 1892, was found by city officials discovered to be eight inches over the property line to the east. The city made homeowners Hertzman and Pencarrick pick it up and move it back on their lot." src="http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/www.timescolonist.com/after+years+vancouver+house+forced+move+eight+inches/1610004/1609837.bin?size=620x400" width=399 border=0]

VANCOUVER -- Strathcona is Vancouver's oldest neighbourhood, with many houses dating to the 1880s and 1890s.

Houses from this era tend to be "non-conforming." In city-speak, this means buildings that don't conform to modern zoning, or code. Often the city relaxes modern regulations for homeowners, but every once in awhile, renovating an old house causes them fits.

This is the case with a tiny cottage on East Georgia near Jackson. In the course of restoring the house, which probably dates to 1892, city officials discovered it was eight inches over the property line to the east.

The city placed a stop-work order on the renos, and made homeowners Amos Hertzman and Caitlin Pencarrick pick it up and move it back on their lot. The cost was about $6,000, but the inconvenience was just as costly — the couple recently had a baby, and the delay means they won't be able to move back into their house for a few months.

[A href="http://www.timescolonist.com/After+years+Vancouver+house+forced+move+eight+inches/1610004/story.html"][FONT size=2]http://www.timescolonist.com/After+years+Vancouver+house+forced+move+eight+inches/1610004/story.html[/FONT][/A]

JJ · May 22 09 09:57

Just a warning if you live in a old house be careful about going for a building permit. As if you renovate a house you will be expected to bring it up to today's building code.

Sportsdude · May 22 09 10:09

Well it doesn't surprise me. This is how Vancouver treats its history.

P.C. · May 22 09 12:22

Well it doesn't surprise me. This is how Vancouver treats its history..

Sportsdude · May 22 09 01:17

Why the angry face at me? lol

Vancouver thinks it doesn't have a history, therefore moving a 100 plus year old house 8inches seems no big deal, since the city doesn't have a history. So goes the logic.

Remember this is the city that tore down the old Vancouver Hotel and replaced it with the Sears monstrosity.

P.C. · May 22 09 03:36

Why the angry face at me? lol

Vancouver thinks it doesn't have a history, therefore moving a 100 plus year old house 8inches seems no big deal, since the city doesn't have a history. So goes the logic.

Remember this is the city that tore down the old Vancouver Hotel and replaced it with the Sears monstrosity.

The old Vancouver Hotel (the second of three) was not torn down or 'sacrificed' to accommodate the TD building which is now in that location. (not the Sears tower) The second Hotel Van was used as a barracks in WWII and had been originally planned to be torn down in agreement between the developers and the city of Vancouver for the third Hotel Vancouver. At that time, the building was barely over 30 years old, so could hardly be classed as a heritage building in 1949.

Sportsdude · May 22 09 03:42

I've always seen TD/Sears as one combination to me. I know it says 'TD replaced it' but from the pictures the hotel looked like it went beyond the Court House which would mean Sears bath tub building area.

stupid tub, the thing needs to be called a blight and eminent domain it! I swear. lol

Yeah they thought it wasn't historic because Vancouver was like 'eh we don't do historic, blower up' lol

P.C. · May 22 09 05:57

SD....it wasn't historic. A 30 year old building, hardly qualifies as historic. It doesn't even come close....it's barely out of its vintage stage at 30. Sears Tower/Harbour Centre is on Hastings, TD and Hotel Van are on Georgia.

P.C. · May 23 09 03:44

You come back here young man !

49er · May 25 09 01:09

be interesting to find out how the city found out that house was seating 8" over the PL. Even if someone paid for a property survey, only property corners would've been staked

anyway, what happens to possesion is 9/10th of the law

P.C. · May 25 09 02:29

be interesting to find out how the city found out that house was seating 8" over the PL. Even if someone paid for a property survey, only property corners would've been staked

anyway, what happens to possesion is 9/10th of the law

It is interesting 49er. But most interesting of all is, apparently the whole block is out by about a foot....give or take a few inches. All of the surrounding neighbours agreed, that it wasn't a problem for them. The city likely found out, through applying for their permit to do renos. They claim they cannot issue a legal permit to a home that isn't situated according to the law. A ridiculous unnecessary expense for this family. It makes my blood boil.[/DIV]

JJ · May 25 09 04:31

49er wrote:
be interesting to find out how the city found out that house was seating 8" over the PL. Even if someone paid for a property survey, only property corners would've been staked

anyway, what happens to possesion is 9/10th of the law

They took out a building permit for a renovation, they probably had to have a site survey and building plans. As I said before if you do renovations up have to upgrade to the new building code.

Michel · May 25 09 06:54

P.C. · May 25 09 07:01

It is crazy. It didn't bother the neighbours, as they are all in the same boat. They should go together as a group and fight against this....as they could be next. If my house was over on 8 inches of the neighbours property....but the neighbour on the other side is 8 inches over on my property....it's no harm no foul. Leave it alone.

49er · May 25 09 10:50

.....Using modern surveying technology the city also found that all the lots in the block were laid out slightly askew to the street........

it is crazy......considering that 117 years ago they were using a screw dial transit and a steel chain, without making temperature adjustments, to establish the lots. It like comparing the use of a slide rule with todays calculators. If I was the homeowner I demand the city to proof that the monuments that they used to take off, check in with the original monuments used 117 years ago

Moving House

Michel