County News
Off the list
Council concedes to advising homeowners prior to adding their property to heritage inventory listing
Last month council approved the addition of a couple dozen homes in Ameliasburgh township to a listing of structures it considers to have heritage or cultural value. It was the fourth addition to the listing—an inventory compiled by the Prince Edward Heritage Advisory Committee.
The trouble is that no one told the homeowners. It wasn’t an accident or omission. Council decided it wasn’t necessary, nor was it compelled to notify property owners. It would simply advise them later and would make provisions to remove homes from the list if they came to council and asked.
They reasoned that being added to the list of homes of heritage or cultural interest was of little consequence to homeowners, merely requiring them to wait 60 days rather than 10 days before being issued a demolition permit.
Both the provision and list came about as a result of the destruction of a 135-year-old brick church on Main Street in Picton two years ago. The community was outraged, in part because the municipality was unable to stop it. Building officials were compelled to issue a demolition permit within 10 days of the application being filed. It was too little time to mount a defence of the church. The Sunday following the issuance of the permit Jim Sinclair smashed a large hole in the side of the church, touching off a firestorm of anger and frustration over the inadequate protection of the County’s heritage.
Council vowed not to let itself get boxed in like that again. It ordered that a list of potential heritage homes and structures be compiled, and it wanted 60 days to consider alternatives and options if owners were seeking to demolish their building.
Council gave its blessing to the fourth installment of the list. At the time some councillors worried that it didn’t seem right to be assembling a list of private properties without notifying the owners in advance. But most concluded the added restriction of 60 days before demolition was an insignificant burden and did not merit contacting homeowners in advance—after all, some reasoned, most properties on the list were included in the book Settler’s Dream and “they should know they are historic.”
After The Times published the list, however, several of the affected property owners were alarmed that their home had been included on a list and an extended constraint put upon their property without notification.
Several attended a committee of council meeting last week to have their property removed from the list and object to the process by which their homes had been added.
Some complained that the process seemed underhanded. Others said inclusion on the list made it more difficult to sell their home. One homeowner suggested that if council believed his home should be protected, the County should buy it.
Most were unclear of the distinction between their home being included on the heritage listing and being designated as a heritage resource.
“Forgive me for not understanding what this means,” said one homeowner, “but I’ve never been informed that my house was on a list.”
PEHAC member Geoff Heinricks said the compilation of the list was not meant to be something bad—or a hardship on property owners.
“It would never be used to designate a home against the owner’s wishes,” said Heinricks. “I’m sure of that. It is a working list. It is unfortunate it has blown up like this.”
Yet Heinricks and a majority of council supported the proposal tabled last week that homeowners is notified in advance that their property is being considered for inclusion on the list. It would also remove homes already on the list if requested in writing by the homeowner, rather than requiring them to come to council and make an appeal.
Mayor Peter Mertens said that while there was nothing wrong with the list—it was a mistake not to notify homeowners.
“This motion corrects this,” said Mertens.
Comments (0)