Part 2: PEC Moves Ahead with Heritage Designations While Raising Concerns About Permit Compliance - 10/4/2023

This section continues the Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee where they met virtually on October 4, 2023 and focuses on who spoke to key items, how decisions were handled through motions, and what the outcomes mean for heritage properties and residents across the County. Rather than listing updates separately, it follows how discussions developed and where decisions were made.

Deputation discussion and committee response

The committee first heard a deputation from Steve Staniek, who raised a request connected to cultural identity and language use in public infrastructure. His submission focused on the term traffic circle, asking that it be formally recognized under the Ontario Heritage Act for the intersection at County Road 1 and the Loyalist Parkway, instead of the more commonly used term roundabout.

Committee members, including Lorri Busch and Sandy Latchford, asked questions about how traffic terminology is defined and whether there are differences in function between the two terms. Valrie Porter added context by noting that traffic circles and roundabouts are not always interchangeable and referenced existing documentation and standards. Staff also clarified that while the committee can receive and consider such submissions, final authority over road design and signage rests with the province.

In the end, the committee did not move forward with any formal recommendation but instead passed a motion to receive the deputation, meaning it was acknowledged and entered into the public record without committing to changes.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap>

Heritage designation decisions and voting

The committee then moved into the heritage designation report, where Councillor John Hirsch spoke in support of proceeding, noting that all four property owners involved had been engaged and were supportive of designation. Members discussed the importance of clear communication throughout the process, particularly around public notice requirements, the possibility of future ownership changes, and the costs associated with advertising and heritage recognition materials such as plaques.

Following this discussion, a motion was passed recommending that Council designate four properties under the Ontario Heritage Act, authorize the required notice process, and proceed with bylaws if no objections arise. This decision moves the properties closer to formal protection status and reflects continued progress in the County’s broader heritage designation work.

Permit oversight and enforcement discussion

Attention then shifted to the heritage permit master list, where Councillor Hirsch raised concerns about compliance, specifically referencing the Faulkner House in Picton, where changes appeared to differ from an approved permit. Staff clarified that when alterations do not match an approved heritage permit, a new application is required in order to regularize the work and bring it back into compliance.

Staff also agreed to follow up internally on the matter, reinforcing the committee’s ongoing interest in ensuring that approved heritage processes are properly followed.

Working groups and future priorities

Updates were also provided on the street naming task team, which continues to support naming needs linked to new development in areas such as Wellington. Staff noted that several new street names have already been approved by Council as infrastructure expansion continues, and that the remaining list is being refined to support upcoming growth and planning requirements.

The broader work plan discussion confirmed that the committee will continue focusing on key areas such as heritage designation, permit oversight, cemetery documentation, and related policy development, ensuring that both new applications and ongoing issues remain part of its regular workload.

Before adjourning, the committee confirmed its next meeting date of November 8, 2023, where enforcement procedures and related updates are expected to be discussed in greater detail. The meeting officially adjourned following a motion moved by Councillor John Hirsch.

Overall, these decisions continue to shape how heritage protection, oversight, and naming processes are managed across the County, ensuring both cultural considerations and regulatory compliance remain part of ongoing committee work.

What it means for locals and residents

This meeting mainly shows how heritage decisions are still very much in a “process stage” rather than immediate change on the ground. The traffic circle discussion highlights that ideas can be raised and recorded, but not all of them translate into action, especially when provincial authority is involved.

The designation approval signals that heritage protection is moving forward in a structured way, with consultation and clear legal steps rather than sudden restrictions. At the same time, the permit compliance discussion shows that the committee is paying attention to how approved heritage rules are followed after the fact.

The ongoing work on street naming and planning coordination means growth in areas like Wellington will continue to shape how roads and neighbourhoods are identified. Overall, the impact is gradual but steady, focused on balancing heritage protection with everyday development and use of local spaces.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 46:46. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.