J.D. Irving-owned Brown House in Saint John's uptown has heritage designation lifted

Despite a last-minute effort to delay it, Saint John city council has passed a controversial proposal to remove the heritage designation from a building owned by J.D. Irving Ltd..

Known as the Brown House, the heritage home is located on King Street East in the city's uptown.

The company has owned it since the mid-1990s, and once rented out the apartments in it.

But, it has been vacant since 2016, and the company has been seeking removal of the heritage designation so the building can be demolished.

The Heritage preservation board would not allow the change, despite several attempts by the company. 

J.D. Irving management made it clear the company had no intention of repairing the building or offering the property for sale.

And city staff said they had no means of forcing the company to repair the building because it wasn't unsafe.

So, the company and city staff reached an agreement that would see the heritage designation lifted, the house demolished and a playground built on the site.

That agreement was passed by council back in July in a close 5-4 vote.

At Monday's council meeting, Coun. Joanna Killen put forward a motion in an attempt to table third reading.

She said there had been suggestions by some members of the public that the bylaw did allow the city to demand repairs or fine the company.

"I do think that we need to look at the reasons we got here," Killen said. 

"So I would love to table and ask for professional advice from our general counsel on how this happened and what needs to be done … so this doesn't happen ever again."

Killen wasn't able to get support for the motion, although some councillors were clearly unhappy and feeling they were forced into the decision on the heritage designation.

It was defeated 6-3.

City manager John Collin cautioned councillors against making assumptions about what might happen to the building if the heritage designation remained in place.

"This building is not unsafe at this point in time" he said. "Everyone predicts or assumes that it will be unsafe at some point in the future. That's an assumption."

He said the building's condition may never get bad enough that the city has to act. 

"Another plausible scenario is that it could remain just as an ugly-looking building for a very long period of time before it is addressed." 

"That's why to a degree our view is, and our recommendation is, to remain focused on the question of whether you wish to designate or not. The discussions on the future possibility that it would be declared unsafe and therefore we would take actions is conjecture at this point in time."

Coun. Greg Norton opposed the decision to remove the heritage designation 

"It's a decision of practicality versus principle, and that's what it's coming down to and both sides have their merits. One side sees the practicality of it and the other side sees a principled position on it."

"And we can debate those and I foresee that there'll be other applications that will come under a similar lens, but for me I will choose the principled approach as it relates to this and continue to vote no," Norton said.

In the end, practicality won out, and the heritage designation was lifted after a 6-3 vote.