Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastal
Council does decide.
Staff makes recommendations - it does not decide.
Heritage Advisory Committee considers Staff/Public input and advises council - it does not decide.
Public makes nominations - it does not decide either.
|
Yes, I'm sure we all understand that council decides. What I was trying to emphasis is that HRM doesn't have a list of heritage 'resources' or potential heritage buildings (which aren't designated) that need to be monitored. Right now it's very piecemeal and ad hoc; giving no one any certainty about anything. For example: I own a building and want to blow it away and building something new. Under the current system - I have no idea if the building has an 'heritage' value so KeithP or OldDartmouthMark could come out of the woodwork and scream it has heritage value because 50 years ago some historic speech occured there or some other obscure reason (example).
So my suggested list and method of developing that list gives everyone (administration and the public (ie the Heritage Trust)) the opportunity to submit sites for consideration. All the list would do is be a site by site list of sites that should be considered for heritage designation and simply monitored. It has no meaning beyond that. That's how we do it in Calgary and in the permit system sites are flagged with this so that when applications come in that may impact the heritage nature of the building - the application can be circulated to the heritage staff for comment.
Whether the buildings would be 'saved' or designated is all part of the discussion that occurs as part of evaluating any changes to the building. If say an application came in for a change of use to a commercial space on the groundfloor - that shouldn't trigger any major issues. But if a demolition permit came in - that would trigger some discussions. Whether those discussions would 'save' the building or lead anywhere is all a matter of how the discussion with the owner/applicant would unfold.