Article content continued

“I think I can say that executive committee was disappointed in the way Beljan carried out this development. In their defence, I don’t want to make them out as the sole villain here. I think the city itself has to be much more intentional on heritage. I think the province has an obligation to step up with more funding in these situations as well.”

He said the company’s development proposal was approved by city administration and never came before the city council of the day, which preceded his tenure.

“But I don’t think the politicians are off the hook here. We have to let administration know if we’re serious about preserving heritage or we’re not. And we often send mixed messages to administration.

“I think probably when the proposal was put before administration, they could have been more adamant about protecting the lot itself. … I think the commitment made by Beljan was they would try to do what they could to preserve and protect the house. I’m not going to say anything too strong about that but the proof is in the pudding, the proof is in the way that the lots were designed and the homes were put in, it looked like there was no real intent to make (the residence) a showpiece for that development.”

David Johnston, the city’s principal heritage planner, said his department has previously offered Beljan financial incentives to rehabilitate the property and has approached the company recently, asking for a figure that would be “the tipping point for them.”

“In the case of Sylvancroft, we were prepared to look at something above $75,000,” which is the normal cap for such grants, Johnston said.

dbarnes@edmontonjournal.com

twitter.com/jrnlbarnes