By Pepper Parr
May 14th, 2023
BURLINGTON, ON
Burlington struggles with how to save some of the heritage properties in the city. It seems prepared to settle for some of the facade of homes built in the mid 1800’s hoping that keeping some of the streetscape will let people know what parts of Burlington looked like.
Two in particular have taken up a lot of time recently. The Ghent property at Brant and Prospect – where the developer is refusing to work with the city to find a solution to save at least some of the building and replace it with a development that doesn’t offer much.
The other is a house on Walker’s Line that is in poor condition due to neglect. The location on Walkers Line just north of New Street is a part of the city that has a number of developments in the Planning Department pipeline.
David Barker, owner of a Heritage property on Lakeshore Road and a former member of the Heritage Advisory, delegated to the group where he had the following to say:
David Barker
Good evening. Thank you Chair and members of the committee for allowing me to speak this evening.
As a very proud owner of a designated heritage property I would like to tonight pass on to you some thoughts and observations I have that you can consider at a later time in regards to
Neglect over a couple of decades have made bringing this house up to an acceptable standard would be very expensive – there is no on even interested in saving the property. Its development value is significant and the area is undergoing a number of changes.
(1) A rated registry properties to be prioritized for designation consideration;
(2) designated locations where developers are already seeking to demolish (such as those on Brant Street and Walkers Line); and
(3) approaching owners of properties which are to be considered for designation.
At its last meeting in April, this committee determined that it would prioritize residential properties for consideration for designation ahead of properties such as churches, cemeteries and schools. I would suggest that the committee might wish to reevaluate this position bearing in mind the legislation tabled in the Ontario Legislature as Bill 98 The Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act.
The bill contains a feature that provides the Minister with the authority to make regulations prescribing the circumstances under which a sale or disposition of a school site or property may occur, including to whom the school site or property must be offered;”
The minister has said:-
“If a different board needs the property it would be sold to them, but if it is not needed in the education sector, the property would be considered for other provincial needs such as affordable housing or long-term care”.
With this in mind, I would respectfully suggest the committee reappraise its decision to exclude school properties from its designation consideration. Burlington Central and Lakeshore Public are both A rated properties on the heritage registry. The lands of both those schools are immensely valuable and would be a target for developers to build either homes or long-term care, which would require the demolition of the structures. We already know the direction the Ford government is going and does not hold heritage in the same high regard as it does developers. You will recall I’m sure that in the recent past both these schools have been considered for closure by HDSB. I suggest therefore the committee seek to have these school properties designated.
The oldest heritage structure on Brant at Prospect was once part of a 50 + acre farm.
I turn now to the topic of designated properties that sit on sites that an owner wishes to develop, such as 795 Brant St and 496 Walkers Line. Council will only consider options put to it by staff. The staff report on 795 Brant Street gave Council the stark options to either grant or not grant the demolition permit application.
A third option exists which rarely seems to get discussed. That option is to relocate the heritage building. During my time as a member of this committee the relocation option was put forward as something staff and the applicant might consider in relation to a property on Plains Road.
Regrettably in that instance the Committee Chair determined not to bring the option to staff’s attention. Relocation has occurred a few times and is a viable solution to preserve a heritage property. Some will say taking the property from its historic geographic location detracts from its heritage value. That might be so. But demolition detracts considerably more.
There exists a vacant land property for sale on Burlington Avenue, listed at about $800,000. Maybe the developer might be persuaded to buy the vacant land, cover the cost to move and install the structure there. In doing so the developer 50 + likely would be able to sell that property at a profit. It would allow the developer to develop the site as it would like. The City might show it’s appreciation by granting the developer some considerations in its zoning application. It’s a win for all parties. One can be pretty sure that should the matter get adjudicated by the OLT, the City and Heritage will lose. Has this option been discussed with these developers? I know the answer to that question is “no”. My question is “why not?”.
Lastly I turn to the Committee’s initiative to seek designation of certain A rated registry properties. Designation generally has a negative connotation with those unfamiliar with its ins and outs. As an owner of a designated heritage property for 30 years I can honestly say I have yet to find any negative aspects. I would like to suggest the committee engage owners of designated properties to be a part of the communication process with owners of properties being considered for designation. Goodwill Ambassadors maybe.
Related news stories:
A facade is all that will be left of the former Pearl Street Cafe
City can’t find a way to work the developer of a 28 storey tower on Brant Street
