yorkregion.com
January 30, 2008, By David Fleischer

Town tries to protect entire observatory site

If we can protect all of the David Dunlap Observatory lands, we will.

That was the message from Richmond Hill politicians Monday night when a report recommending cultural heritage landscape protection for the 190-acre site was approved, unanimously.

Councillors even went further than what consultant André Scheinman called for in the report. Instead of seeking protection for just 48 per cent of the land, the site’s west half, they will continue to compile a more detailed report for Feb. 11, aimed at justifying the need to protect the entire site.

Council’s decision won the approval of a capacity audience. Eight delegates spoke after the presentation of Mr. Scheinman’s recommendations, pointing out its shortfalls and asking council for full protection of the lands.

“The report, as it exists, contains a number of errors and omissions which I think are significant,” said Prof. Tom Bolton, who worked at the observatory for nearly 40 years.

It is a good start, but has many flaws, from its lack of information about architectural features to its arbitrary drawing of a boundary that would leave numerous springs open to potential development, he said.

The University of Toronto’s lawyer, Stanley Makuch, asked the town to defer its decision since his client had not had time to review the study.

“We are disappointed that (a co-operative) approach was not taken with respect to the cultural heritage landscape designation,” Mr. Makuch said, touting the school’s commitment to heritage.

“We believe that historic preservation is best achieved through mutual understanding, rather than through a unilateral process,” he said.

Mr. Makuch’s request did not sit well with town officials who rushed to complete their report because of the university’s imposed deadline of Feb. 15.

Since October, town officials and others have made it clear they need more time to present a proper response.

“We haven’t had the time to evaluate what your board of directors did in October.

“That’s why we’re rushing,” Mayor Dave Barrow said.

“For you to ask us for some time is . . . offensive,” said Mr. Barrow, offering to defer the town’s report only if the university delayed its closing date.

Mr. Makuch said he was not in a position to make such an offer.

At a Jan. 16 rally held by opponents of the land sale, university vice-president Catherine Riggall reiterated the university had no intention of extending the deadline.

Councillor Lynn Foster took umbrage at the suggestion the town hadn’t worked with the school, saying university officials repeatedly stood up staff at scheduled meetings about the site’s future.

It makes more sense now, she said, pointing to recently revealed information the university had been negotiating with the Dunlap family to force the sale for nearly 20 years.

Comments ‘insulting’

“It makes it insulting to me, personally, to have you come here and make those comments,” she said to Mr. Makuch.

The Richmond Hill Naturalists have contested the town’s intent to designate only a part of the lands, instead calling for full protection.

“This is a park, and this place was here to support the observatory,” said Richmond Hill Naturalists president Marianne Yake.

“Today, you can give our history a true voice, and we ask that you give it a 100 per cent designation,” Ms Yake said.

Replying to public questioning, Mr. Scheinman said the idea of seeking designation for all of the land was never far from his mind, but he had erred on the side of caution in recommending protection for the western half, where most significant features are clustered.

There could be significant aboriginal sites on the land, he said, and there is information about the area still to be discovered.

High school students will lead a rally at the observatory (123 Hillsview Dr.) tomorrow at 2 p.m.

DDO HEARING TIPS

The big question regarding the future of the David Dunlap Observatory lands is how much of the 190-acre site will receive heritage designation.

That designation will be based on recommendations by the Conservation Review Board, a body of the provincial Ministry of Culture. Council is using a new power — cultural heritage landscape designation — to protect the lands and the buildings themselves.

The Liberal set out to uncover everything you need to know about the hearing, for a which date has yet to be set.

• The town has already issued a notice of “intent to designate” three buildings on the lands. It is being contested by the university (who want to narrow the designation) and the Richmond Hill Naturalists (who want to expand it).

• While hearings take place in a quasi-judicial format, decisions are not binding. Rather, the board will recommend to council what the best course of action is and the council will then pass a by-law based upon those recommendations.

• An historical designation does not freeze a property in perpetuity but any changes will require the consent of council. With the lands currently zoned institutional, a designation would make future development difficult.

• The format involves calling witnesses, cross-examinations and other court-like proceedings. There are opportunities for residents to address the board.

• Meetings are open to the public except in exceptional circumstances. You can expect the meeting to take place in Richmond Hill, at town hall or nearby.

• Meetings are usually a day or two; decisions are typically rendered within four to six weeks.

• Landowners are parties to proceedings and a new owner is set to be chosen by U of T March 15, with a sale closing in July. Anew owner could request time to assemble his or her own arguments, thus delaying the process.

• The town is preparing to expand that request its original designation plan to include all of the lands. According to the ministry, the board could order the town to begin the process again, but may choose to proceed with the hearing and allow new evidence. These are matters that would likely be decided in the pre-hearing stage.

Articles