Heritage or no, $1 Brantford church owners threatened to destroy murals
The owners of a nearly 150-year-old church in Brantford threatened to remove its heritage murals and woodwork last week as it sparred with city council over the fate of the church.
The owners, unhappy that the city seemed poised to add protections to the historic elements of the church, emailed city councillors proposing that Brantford buy it from them.
"If they didn't, we felt we had no choice but to secure the value here and that would involve removing the historic features that would be designated," said Andrea Murik, who bought St. Jude's church with her partner Nick Dushko last year.
"As far as removing, I mean it's our property, right?" Murik said. "We were still within our rights at that point to do whatever we needed to do to the property."
But, she adds: "We were trying to avoid that."
Monday, the city council met in private session to discuss possibly buying the church, but nothing seemed to come of that. But in the public part of the meeting, council reversed its vote from last Tuesday and declined to designate the church historic.
"We were shocked," Murik said. "We were pleasantly surprised."
'There was a real concern'
Though the church has been a national heritage site since 1993, the city's decision means there are no protections in place that would ensure the murals and woodwork are conserved or remain part of the building.
The councillors originally planned to meet June 27 to ratify their vote last week to add the protections.
But upon word of the owners' threat, they moved more quickly.
"There was a real concern that to give more time would allow the owners to destroy the heritage features," said Coun. Dan McCreary, who was among the four councillors who voted to designate the building.
Murik said the potential protections had made it very difficult to get any buyers interested in the 10,000-square-foot church.
"Nobody was sure what they could do to the building," she said. "We felt like our backs were up against the wall. With a historic designation especially on the interior, it made it very difficult for anybody to re-purpose the building."
'I don't agree with designating against the owner's wishes'
A councillor who voted against the designation said it was about property rights.
"I don't believe in limiting a property owner unnecessarily," said Coun. Greg Martin.
"If governments want to dictate to people what to do with their property, then they should pony up some cash to help them do something about it.
"I don't agree with designating against the owner's wishes."
That reasoning came despite the fact that last week, the city's heritage committee chairman appeared before the council saying that should not be a factor in such decisions.
He cited an Ontario Superior Court decision from 2003 saying that that is "the request for consent by the owner to the historical designation of the church was not consistent either with general interpretation or the purpose of the Ontario Heritage Act."
Martin said he hopes the city's heritage committee and the new owners will be able to work out an arrangement.
"Hopefully they'll find a buyer that wants to preserve those features," he said.
But McCreary sees the vote as another black eye for Brantford's heritage record, already damaged by voting in 2010 to demolish 41 historic buildings.
"People across the country have got to wonder what the heck's the matter with us," he said. "I think we diminished the heritage value of the entire country."
McCreary plans to bring motions to start a fund for heritage property preservation, and to task some bylaw enforcement officers with specific heritage protection duties.
kelly.bennett@cbc.ca