J.D. Irving's efforts to demolish Saint John heritage building one step closer to reality

In a marathon session, Saint John city council tentatively agreed to allow three J.D. Irving properties to be removed from a heritage designation.

The controversial properties at 111-119 King St. East include two vacant lots and a large, dilapidated post-war home.

J.D. Irving purchased the properties in the mid-1990s, and they are adjacent to the company's Saint John headquarters.

The company has been seeking the change since 2016 and wants to demolish the building, which has been vacant, unheated and boarded up for six years.

The company has argued the building, known as the Brown House, does not fit into the streetscape with neighbouring buildings, mostly built in an earlier period, and therefore isn't historically significant. 

But the Heritage Preservation Board did not agree with the argument and refused to make the changes.

In the meantime, the building continued to degrade, and in early 2020, Mayor Donna Reardon, who was then a city councillor, questioned the company's motives.

"My concern is that neglect is happening there." Reardon said.

"The building will be lost over time. It looks like there's absolutely no intention of trying to save it or salvage it or do anything with it."

The public hearing on Monday night was to consider a proposal by the company to turn the site of the building into a play park in exchange for the removal of the heritage designations on all three properties.

J.D. Irving would agree to maintain the park for 20 years.

When asked why the company has no interest in selling the property. Irving spokesperson Douglas Dean said it was considered important because of its proximity to its headquarters, and the company did not want to lose control of the land.

Public opposition voiced

There were many people who opposed the project at Monday night's council meeting.

Greg Patterson, a resident landlord, told council he pushed the idea of a heritage area on King Street East starting in 1998, until it became a reality.

"Seven buildings specifically were torn down in King Street East in six years," Patterson said. "So we designated the streetscape in 2005.

"Since that time, there were no demolitions on King Street East. There's been hundreds of thousands of dollars of historic restorations done to properties in my neighbourhood."

Patterson said that if J.D.Irving wants to build a park, the company could do it on the vacant lot it owns next door and fix the building instead.

"So let's do both. Let them keep the property for the restoration and repurpose. Let them build the park."

John Fraser owns property on nearby Princess Street.

He told council he had spoken in favour of the removal of a heritage designation on two different properties, including his own, and was turned down.

"Both of those applicants involved people who restored buildings, people who maintained buildings, people who paid for the electricity, people who kept the heat on, people who housed people who work in the city and pay taxes in the city." Fraser said.

"And now there's a building that someone, because of their own choices has neglected, has become more derelict than it previously was. And they're asking to be let out under special circumstances. To me that is wrong."

The Heritage Preservation Review Board also opposed the project..

Jennifer Brown of Dillon Consulting spoke on behalf of J.D. Irving.  Her company was asked to inspect the building.

She said the engineers report deemed the cost of restoration was not feasible, stating the rear section of the building was structurally unsound and the front section, while in somewhat better shape, would have to be stripped to bare timbers to remove mold damage and hazardous materials.

There were others who spoke in favour of the idea, including real estate agent Bob McVicar and historian Harold Wright. 

Many councillors expressed concerns and said they could not support the plan. 

Coun. David Hickey pointed to a clause in the contract which would allow J.D. Irving to stop maintaining the park if vandalism becomes a big issue.

Council asked staff to take a second look at whether that should remain.

Coun. Paula Radwan said she couldn't support the plan and expressed disappointment at J.D. Irving's handling of the issue.

"You buy a building, you own it, you look after it. If you can't, sell it to somebody who will," she said. 

Coun. Joanna Killen, Coun. Greg Norton and Hickey also voted no.

But the slim majority voted in favour.

Coun. Gary Sullivan seemed to sum up what many of the others on that side were thinking.

"We have no power to compel them to do anything with the building except what they are doing with the building right now," he said.

"It's currently a horrible eyesore in a prominent location uptown. Do I as a councillor want to have it sitting there as a dilapidated eyesore for the next X number of years?"

The proposal still has to pass third reading.