Part 2: PEC Heritage Committee Reviews Bill 23 Impacts, Property Rules, and Register Changes - 11/20/2024

The second half of the training session focused on practical questions from committee members, planning staff, and heritage working groups about how Bill 23 will change day-to-day heritage management across Prince Edward County.

While no formal decisions were made, the discussion provided important clarification about how municipalities must now manage heritage registers, communicate with property owners, and apply the updated Ontario Heritage Act rules moving forward.

A recurring message throughout the session was that Bill 23 does not eliminate heritage protection, but it does force municipalities to work more quickly, prioritize more carefully, and communicate more clearly with residents.

Photo: PEC Council (YouTube)

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

Provincial Staff Clarify the Intent of Bill 23

Andrew Jeans and Chris Lawless from the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism led the training session and answered questions from committee members and staff throughout the meeting.

Both presenters stressed repeatedly that Bill 23 was not designed to remove heritage protections altogether. Instead, they explained that the legislation is intended to create clearer timelines, more structured evaluation standards, and greater certainty for property owners and municipalities alike.

One of the major changes discussed was the requirement for municipalities to actively manage their heritage registers instead of leaving properties listed indefinitely without designation decisions.

The presenters confirmed that Wellington’s Heritage Conservation District already meets the updated provincial thresholds under Bill 23, including the requirement that at least 25 percent of properties satisfy two heritage criteria.

They also noted that most heritage conservation districts typically exceed this threshold comfortably and that the new requirements are not expected to create major barriers for legitimate heritage districts moving forward.

For Prince Edward County, the discussion made clear that heritage management will now require more active review, stronger prioritization, and tighter timelines than in previous years.

Valrie Porter Highlights the Work Ahead

Committee chair Valrie Porter guided much of the discussion and emphasized the significant amount of work now facing the heritage committee.

She noted that managing the heritage register under the new provincial timelines will require careful coordination between committee members, staff, and working groups. Porter also stressed the importance of supporting property owners who may now face greater confusion about changing rules, designation timelines, and permit requirements.

Her comments reflected growing awareness that heritage committees will need to become more proactive rather than simply maintaining long-standing lists of potential heritage properties without formal action.

For residents, the discussion signaled that heritage-related processes may become more active and time-sensitive moving forward.

Councillor Kate MacNaughton Pushes for Clearer Public Communication

Councillor Kate MacNaughton raised several detailed questions focused on how homeowners will understand the new rules and when heritage permits are actually required.

She specifically questioned how residents in Wellington and other heritage areas will know whether their properties are considered contributing or non-contributing within heritage conservation districts, and what obligations come with each designation.

MacNaughton also expressed concern about ensuring residents receive clear, practical information rather than being expected to interpret lengthy district plans or technical planning documents on their own.

The discussion reinforced the idea that public communication will become increasingly important as the County adjusts to the new Bill 23 framework.

For homeowners, particularly those living within heritage districts, the meeting highlighted the need for better access to plain-language guidance and staff support to avoid confusion around permits, renovations, and approval processes.

Planning and Clerk Staff Clarify Policy and Title Requirements

Planning staff also raised several technical and legal questions during the session.

Scott Pordham from planning asked how Bill 23 affects municipal Official Plan policies and heritage evaluation standards moving forward. Provincial staff confirmed that municipal planning documents must now reflect the updated requirement that new designations satisfy at least two heritage criteria rather than one.

Deputy Clerk Catalina asked whether non-contributing properties within heritage conservation districts must still appear on property title records even if the buildings themselves are not considered historically significant.

Provincial staff confirmed that the answer is yes. Because district designation applies to the entire district boundary rather than only contributing buildings, all affected properties remain identified through title registration processes.

For residents and future buyers, this means heritage district status will continue appearing during title searches even for homes classified as non-contributing properties within the district.

Heritage Working Group Raises Concerns About Register Timelines

One of the most significant comments of the meeting came from Liz Driver of the Heritage Designation Working Group.

Driver emphasized the importance of keeping properties on the municipal heritage register for as long as legally possible during the new two-year review window established under Bill 23. She warned that removing properties too quickly could permanently limit the County’s ability to designate them in the future.

Provincial staff strongly agreed with her assessment and advised municipalities to avoid removing listed properties unless there is a clear and defensible reason to do so.

The discussion highlighted one of the biggest strategic shifts created by Bill 23: municipalities now face much stricter timelines for evaluating whether properties should remain listed or proceed toward formal designation.

For Prince Edward County, the conversation reinforced that maintaining a carefully managed heritage register will become increasingly important if the municipality wants to preserve future heritage protection options.

Provincial Staff Explain Permit Rules for Property Owners

The training session also provided practical clarification about how permit requirements apply to different types of properties within heritage districts.

Provincial staff explained that:

• Contributing properties will almost always require permits for visible exterior alterations or significant changes.

• Non-contributing properties generally do not require permits for routine maintenance or ordinary work.

• Demolition or major new construction projects within a heritage district still require municipal approval regardless of contributing status.

The presenters also strongly encouraged municipalities to provide plain-language guides for homeowners rather than relying entirely on lengthy technical district plans or legal documents.

For residents, the distinction between contributing and non-contributing status will likely become increasingly important when planning renovations, exterior work, or redevelopment within heritage areas.

The discussion also acknowledged that better communication and education could help reduce frustration and confusion among homeowners unfamiliar with heritage rules.

Meeting Clarifies the New Heritage Landscape

Although the meeting involved no formal votes or policy changes, it provided important insight into how heritage planning is changing across Ontario under Bill 23.

The overall message from provincial staff was clear: municipalities must now move faster, prioritize more strategically, and communicate more effectively with property owners and the public.

For Prince Edward County, where heritage conservation plays a major role in tourism, community identity, and local planning, the discussion highlighted how future heritage decisions will increasingly require careful coordination between council, staff, committees, and residents.

The meeting also reinforced that heritage protection itself is not disappearing, but the rules governing how municipalities manage heritage properties and districts are becoming significantly more structured and time-sensitive moving forward.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 1:05:52. 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.