Family fights heritage district plans

The following article appeared in the February 23 edition of the Guelph Tribune;

An extended family that owns most of the property on one side of a small street has hired a lawyer to fight a city hall proposal to include the street in what would be Guelph’s first heritage district.
Members of the Jamieson family own five residential properties and a couple of vacant lots – all but three of the properties on the south side of James Street East. They would like to redevelop their property at some point in the future, lawyer Robin-Lee Norris told a meeting of a city council committee.
Some of the homes on James Street East “have outlived their usefulness,” Norris said of the residences southeast of the Gordon Street bridge.
“The family truly believes an error has been made in including James Street at all” in the proposed boundaries of the heritage district, she said.
The consultants hired by the city to study the potential heritage district don’t agree, though.
Their initial report says James Street East, which originally incorporated the electrical rail line, powerhouse and station of the Toronto Suburban Railway, would be one of four distinctive areas in the heritage district.
The other three are: a residential area from the Speed River south to Forbes Avenue that was known in the 19th century as Brooklyn; the Speed and Eramosa riverscapes; and the Gordon Street corridor from College Avenue north to its Speed River crossing.
The five-member committee voted unanimously Tuesday to recommend proceeding to the next stage in the process of creating the heritage district. That’s where consultants would propose design guidelines, after more public consultation, and also where the boundaries of the heritage district would be finalized.
However, councillors Bob Bell and Cam Guthrie voted against a clause that calls for the heritage district boundaries proposed by the consultants to be “acknowledged,” pending a final recommendation on boundaries in the next phase of the process. They were outvoted by Mayor Karen Farbridge and Ward 5 councillors Leanne Piper and Lise Burcher.
The heritage district issue now goes to Monday’s city council meeting for more debate.
John Gruzleski, representing the Old University Neighbourhood Residents’ Association, said his association supports creation of the heritage district and expects there will be others created in Guelph in the future.
“We are proud that the first of these is proposed to be in our neighbourhood,” he told the committee.
Heritage Guelph chair Paul Ross said skeptical and critical comments that have been heard from some local residents about the proposed heritage district are “very typical” of what has happened elsewhere in Ontario as such districts were being created.
“I think they (the criticisms) are to be expected. I think they are very healthy . . . and should be taken in that light,” Ross told council.
Studies have shown that Ontarians living in heritage districts “don’t find them to be onerous or time-consuming to deal with,” he said.
City hall and its consultants intend to do more consultation during the next phase of the process and hope to address many public concerns during this stage.
A motion by Bell to remove James Street East from the proposed boundary of the heritage district was defeated on a 3-2 vote. A motion by Guthrie to defer a decision on the heritage district, which had been suggested by Norris, also lost 3-2.
Coun. Ian Findlay, a non-committee member, suggested to Norris that the guidelines drawn up during the next stage of the process might allow for demolition of some homes within the heritage district that don’t have heritage value. He asked if this would help the Jamieson family.
Norris thanked Findlay for suggesting this compromise, but she said the Jamiesons “are not looking for compromise at this point.”