In a marathon session, St. John’s City Council tentatively agreed to allow three JD Irving properties to be removed from heritage listing.
The controversial properties at 111-119 King St. East include two vacant lots and a large dilapidated post-war house.
JD Irving purchased the properties in the mid-1990s and they are adjacent to the company’s headquarters in St. John.
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 boarded-up entrance of JD Irving’s apartment building at 111 King Street East. (Hadel Ibrahim/CBC)
The company argued that the building, known as the Brown House, did not fit into the streetscape with neighboring buildings, mostly built in an earlier period, and was therefore not historically significant.
But the Heritage Preservation Board disagreed with the argument and refused to make the changes.
Meanwhile, the building continued to be demolished, and in early 2020, Mayor Donna Reardon, then a city councillor, questioned the company’s motives.
“My concern is that there is neglect going on there,” Reardon said.
“The building will be lost over time. There seems to be absolutely no intention of us trying to save her or rescue her or do anything with her.’
Monday night’s public hearing was to consider the company’s proposal to turn the building site into a play park in exchange for removing heritage designations from all three properties.
A concept drawing of the proposed JD Irving Park says it would be built on the site of the so-called Brown House on King Street East. (City of Saint John)
JD Irving would agree to maintain the park for 20 years.
When asked why the company is not interested in selling the property. Irving spokesman Douglas Dean said it was considered important because of its proximity to the plant and the company did not want to lose control of the land.
Expressed public opposition
At Monday night’s council meeting, there were many people who opposed the project.
Greg Patterson, a local landlord, told the council he had pushed the idea of a cultural precinct on King Street East since 1998 until it became a reality.
“Seven buildings specifically were demolished on King Street East in six years,” Patterson said. “So we defined the streetscape in 2005.
“There has been no demolition on King Street East since then. There are hundreds of thousands of dollars in historic restoration done on properties in my neighborhood.”
Photo showing some of the mold and water damage at 111 King St. East. (JD Irving)
Patterson said if JDIrving wanted to build a park, the company could do it on the vacant lot it owns next door and fix up the building instead.
“So let’s do both. Let them keep the property for restoration and repurposing. Let them build the park.”
John Fraser owns a property on nearby Princess Street.
He told the council he had spoken in favor of removing the heritage designation of two different properties, including his own, and had been rejected.
“Both candidates included people who restored buildings, people who maintained buildings, people who paid for the electricity, people who maintained the heat, 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, by their own choice, neglected, has become more derelict than it was before. And they ask to be let out under special circumstances. To me, that’s wrong.”
The Heritage Conservation Review Board also opposed the project.
Jennifer Brown of Dillon Consulting spoke on behalf of JD Irving. Her company was asked to inspect the building.
She said the engineers’ report deemed the cost of restoration not feasible, stating the rear of the building was structurally unsound and the front, although in slightly better shape, would have to be stripped bare. to bare trees to eliminate mold damage and hazardous materials.
There were others who spoke in support of the idea, including estate agent Bob McVicar and historian Harold Wright.
Many councilors raised concerns and said they could not support the plan.
Count. David Hickey pointed to a clause in the contract that would allow JD Irving to stop maintaining the park if vandalism becomes a major problem.
Photo of the interior of the building taken by Dillon Consulting Engineers. (JD Irving)
Council asked staff to reconsider whether this should remain.
Count. Paula Radwan said she could not support the plan and expressed disappointment with JD Irving’s handling of the issue.
“You buy a building, you own it, you take care of it. If you can’t, sell her to someone who will,” she said.
Count. Joanna Killen, Coun. Greg Norton and Hickey also voted against.
But a slim majority voted yes.
Count. Gary Sullivan seemed to sum up what many others on this side were thinking.
“We don’t have the power to force them to do anything with the building other than what they’re doing with the building right now,” he said.
“At the moment it’s a terrible eyesore in a prominent location in the upper part of town. Do I, as a councillor, want it to sit there as a dilapidated eyesore for the next X years?’
The proposal still has to go through a third reading.
Add Comment