Part 1: Delhi Park, Heritage Landscapes, and Committee Priorities - 10/02/2024

The meeting was held virtually and live streamed. Members approved the agenda and the minutes from the previous meeting after a small correction to the meeting date. There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

An announcement was made that the county is currently recruiting for several volunteer positions, including an open seat on this committee and opportunities to join the Heritage Designation Working Group. Applications were closing later that week.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council meeting, or continue to speaker comments and councillor votes.

Deputation on Delhi Park and Cultural Heritage Landscapes

A major portion of the meeting focused on a deputation about Delhi Park in Picton. The presentation explained the background of recent work on an accessibility and active transportation plan for the park and how that process uncovered a deep and layered cultural history.

Delhi Park was described as a landscape shaped over time by human use, including its early role as a portage route, later industrial activity, decades as a town dump, and its current role as a public park connected to cemeteries and nearby neighbourhoods. The presenter argued that this history qualifies Delhi Park as a cultural heritage landscape under provincial definitions.

The committee discussed the idea of adding Delhi Park to the county’s Cultural Heritage Master Plan. Members noted that cultural heritage landscapes are often overlooked compared to buildings, even though they can carry equal historical value.

Photo: Prince Edward County

Accessibility was a key theme. While Delhi Park is currently informal and organic in how people move through it, the lack of accessible paths makes it unusable for many residents, including people with mobility challenges, parents with strollers, and anyone visiting during winter or wet conditions. The discussion focused on balancing formal accessible pathways with informal trails so the park remains flexible while becoming inclusive.

There was also acknowledgment of environmental and safety issues, including steep slopes, slippery conditions, and buried debris from the park’s history as a dump. Members agreed these realities must be part of any future planning. The deputation was formally received by the committee.

Heritage Training for Committee Members

The committee discussed heritage training offered by the province, specifically a 45 minute online session covering the role of municipal heritage committees, an overview of the Ontario Heritage Act, and recent legislative changes.

Members agreed that while the session would be introductory, it would be valuable for new members and a good starting point for more in-depth training later. There was broad support for moving ahead with the session as soon as feasible, especially given upcoming work related to the Wellington Heritage Conservation District.

Working Group and Task Team Updates

The Heritage Designation Working Group reported that it met in September and is planning a public presentation of plaques or certificates for recently designated properties. This is intended as a positive public recognition effort rather than a pressure campaign.

It was noted that uptake for voluntary heritage designation has been lower than hoped. Members discussed widespread misconceptions that designation prevents homeowners from making changes, which discourages participation. The committee discussed improving public education through newsletters and real-life examples to show that designation does not freeze a property in time.

The Cemetery Task Team reported upcoming guided tours of Glenwood Cemetery, intended to share history, discuss preservation challenges, and engage the public. Updates were also shared about the chapel condition and ongoing engineering assessments.

Permits, Signage, and Work Plan Review

Staff reported that there have been very few heritage permit applications recently. Members questioned whether changes in staffing or internal processes could be contributing to this and asked staff to check whether heritage reviews are consistently flagged during building permit applications.

The committee reviewed its work plan, including unresolved items such as gateway signage for heritage districts, enforcement protocols, heritage permit criteria, and grant funding awareness. Members emphasized the need for consistent signage design across Picton and Wellington and expressed frustration with delays tied to staffing and legal review.

Budget questions were raised about funding for plaques and grants, especially given rising costs. Members agreed this would need closer review during the upcoming budget cycle.

The work plan discussion was received, and the meeting adjourned with the next meeting scheduled for November 6.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 1:07:28. 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.