Keep the house and change it, or knock it down and start again? It's one of the first questions I'm asked, and the answer is usually in the bones of the building rather than the look of it.
When altering makes more sense
If the structure is sound, the house sits well on its stand, and the rooms you like outnumber the ones you don't, an alteration is usually the better route. You keep what already works — mature trees, established garden, thick walls, generous ceilings — and spend your budget on what doesn't. Many of the most dramatic transformations in my portfolio kept most of the original house.
When the existing house works against you
Sometimes the house is in the wrong place on the site, faces the wrong way, or has been altered so often that there is little worth keeping. If most walls, the roof and all the services need replacing, you may be paying new-build prices for a compromised plan. That's the moment to consider starting again.
If the house is older than sixty years
Demolition of a structure older than sixty years needs a permit from the provincial heritage authority, and it is not granted lightly. For heritage houses, a sensitive alteration is often the only realistic path — and, handled well, the more rewarding one.
How I assess a property
On a first visit I look at orientation and light, the condition of roof, walls and foundations, how the house meets the garden, and what your title deed and zoning allow. Then we talk about how you actually live. Most of the time, the right answer becomes clear to everyone in the room.
Not sure which way to go?
Ask me to look at the house before you decide. An hour on site can save a very expensive wrong turn.
