Part 1: Zoning, Climate Action, and EV Readiness: Key Decisions from PEC’s Environmental Committee - 7/5/2023

The Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee met on July 5, 2023 as a virtual meeting livestreamed to the public. The meeting was held to review heritage related matters across Prince Edward County, including plaques, permits, policies, and the ongoing work of heritage designation.

The meeting was chaired by John Hirsch, Vice Chair of the committee, who stepped in because the regular chair was unavailable. Hirsch guided the meeting and kept discussion focused on heritage process, policy clarity, and practical outcomes.

The meeting began with approval of the agenda, confirmation that there were no declared conflicts of interest, and adoption of the minutes from the June 14 meeting. There were no objections or changes raised at this stage.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

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

Cemetery maintenance concerns

An early announcement raised concerns about cemetery maintenance in Waupoos, following correspondence from a resident. The issue was brought forward to ensure it was on the committee’s radar.

County staff explained that a new corporate wide maintenance contract had caused early season delays. Standards of service were outlined, along with the reality that cemeteries are not maintained to park or golf course standards. Staff confirmed the issue was being monitored and asked that any public complaints be sent directly to operations so work orders could be created.

Missing heritage plaque at Long Reach Lookout

The main deputation came from John Lyons, who spoke about a missing heritage plaque at the Hayward Long Reach Lookout. The plaque, installed in 2011, has been missing for many years and continues to generate public questions.

Lyons explained that replacing the plaque would be straightforward because the original casting still exists. He also noted that the plaque had originally been installed with minimal security and may have been stolen due to its collector value.

Committee members discussed whether replacing the plaque with a more secure installation was enough, or whether alternative signage should be considered in the future. The focus remained on restoring the missing plaque properly and preventing repeat theft.

The committee supported moving forward with a replacement plaque and emphasized better security during installation.

Heritage permit for 48 Bowery Street

The committee reviewed a heritage permit application for 48 Bowery Street, which proposed adding a window to the side wall of a designated building.

Members reviewed the designation bylaw and original heritage attributes. Discussion focused on whether the proposed change respected the historic character of the building. Committee members agreed the window style matched existing features and that the location avoided the main facade.

The permit was supported as being consistent with heritage guidelines and respectful of the property’s designation.

Murals and art installation guidelines

The committee revisited mural and art installation guidelines after discovering that a newer draft existed than the version approved at the previous meeting.

Staff explained the need for a formal motion to reconsider, followed by review of the updated draft. The revised document clarified installation and removal processes and reframed the document as a guideline, rather than a policy, to align with a future County wide arts plan.

The committee supported the revised guideline and agreed it should be shared with staff working on broader arts policy development.

Non designated heritage properties

Staff presented two municipal properties for consideration. The former fire hall at Base 31 was recommended for removal from the non designated heritage list due to its altered condition, structural issues, and lack of heritage character.

The former grain elevator on the Millennium Trail was recommended for addition to the list due to its strong historical connection to rail based agriculture and County development. Staff explained that roof repairs were planned and that designation could enhance the property’s long term value.

The committee supported both recommendations.

Heritage designation working group update

An update was provided on the Heritage Designation Working Group, including discussion around a draft letter to property owners whose buildings appear on the heritage list.

Committee members discussed tone, clarity, and whether letters should be personalized. Staff explained the need to balance speed with customization and confirmed that the working group would refine the letter and oversee communications.

Work plan review

The committee reviewed updates to its work plan, including upcoming enforcement discussions under the Ontario Heritage Act, sidewalk patio bylaw revisions, and coordination with other advisory committees.

Minor corrections were noted, and the work plan was received.

What This Means for the Locals

This meeting shows how the County is continuing to take small but steady steps when it comes to protecting local heritage. Some items, like replacing the missing plaque and approving a minor building change, are straightforward, but they still help keep historical places visible and respected.

There is also a clear focus on improving how things are done behind the scenes. Updates to guidelines, better communication with property owners, and ongoing work on heritage designation all point to a more organized approach moving forward.

At the same time, decisions around adding or removing properties from the heritage list show that the County is actively reviewing what should be preserved and what no longer meets the criteria.

Overall, this means residents can expect gradual but consistent work on heritage issues, with more clarity, better processes, and continued attention to preserving the County’s history over time.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 55:041. 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.