Senior Vancouver city staff’s proposal to ban demolition of pre-1940 houses in First Shaughnessy District has generated a heated response.

It’s one of several measures included in a rezoning application to create Vancouver’s first “heritage conservation area” in the neighbourhood bounded by West 16th and King Edward avenues and Arbutus and Oak streets.

Of the 143 letters sent to the city, 89 were in favour of general manager of planning and development Brian Jackson’s recommendation to council. However, a majority of speakers at a public hearing on July 28 were opposed, and their written submissions to the city reveal how worried they are about the effect on property values.

One speaker, real-estate agent Peter Saito, said that he and his partner, Vivian Lee, have sold almost $100 million worth of property in Shaughnessy since the start of 2014.

“Today, not many people will dare to actually buy a run-down pre-1940 house anymore,” Saito wrote in his submission. “The last 4 sales in 1st Shaughnessy not on a busy street have all been post 1940s.”

Those “demolishable lots” were priced at $642 per square foot. He claimed that a pre-1940 house would have to be sold for $400 per square foot, which would be a considerable discount.

“Someone truly desperate to sell enough because of circumstance will eventually agree to sell at this price,” Saito stated.

Another speaker, Nancy Tchou, claimed that banning demolitions of pre-1940 homes in First Shaughnessy will “choke” development, leading to the deterioration of the neighbourhood. “There will be a lot more dilapidated eyesores,” she stated in her written submission.

Tchou alleged that some property owners are unable or unwilling to maintain old, rundown homes and huge yards due to their financial circumstances, health, advanced age, and/or other reasons. And she insisted that there are buyers prepared to invest millions of dollars to redevelop these sites “only if demolition is allowed”.

The written submission from Loy Leland claimed that not all houses built before 1940 are worth saving. Leland also declared that the process has “created cynicism and mistrust”.

Another speaker, Pearl Chow, maintained in her written presentation that the proposed changes “would have grave impact on the value of my property as well as the beauty and development of First Shaughnessy”.

An economic analysis by Coriolis Consulting Corp. suggested in a report to the city that incentives—such as allowing secondary suites, coach houses, infill units, and multiple-conversion dwellings—would enable homeowners to generate more revenue. The consulting company acknowledged that lots between 18,000 and 30,000 square feet “appear to be the most negatively affected”.

But the firm stated that this “might be offset” by permitting two infill units rather than one on these sites.

That didn’t satisfy Chow. She mentioned in her written submission that a person doesn’t spend millions of dollars on a beautiful home in a very good neighbourhood so a unit can be rented out. She also claimed that having tenants would “negatively impact” privacy.

“I feel that the characters [sic] of First Shaughnessy would be significantly improved if the pre-1940 houses are allowed to be demolished and rebuilt with stricter guidelines to ensure desirable designs are retained, rebuilt or added; rather than imposing a blanket ban on demolition of all pre-1940 houses,” she wrote. “There are already a good number of houses in First Shaughnessy on the Heritage list.”

Another speaker, Victor Wong, also urged council to lift the prohibition on redevelopment of pre-1940 homes.

“The pre-40s home property will lose market value in comparison to those who have the right to build,” he wrote.

There were more than 40 other short form letters from Shaughnessy homeowners on the list of July 28 speaker submissions. They declared support for existing zoning and opposed creation of a heritage conservation area.

All of this suggests that this controversy likely won’t die down when the public hearing reconvenes on September 15.

Heritage advocates are keen to retain those old homes in Shaughnessy, even if not all of the residents agree with this idea.