Editor:
Buck up in the name of heritage, Oct. 27
This article was written about our building on Delta Street, so we would like to clarify a few things.
We do not consider ourselves "developers." Most developers would have no interest in preserving a heritage building with the added costs involved. We are simply long-time Delta residents that own and care for a piece of Delta's heritage.
The comment, "Council supported a series of heritage incentives to the tune of $55,600 as well as varying the parking requirements," is not exactly accurate. Our $55,600 incentive is as follows: Delta has arbitrarily determined that we need 21 parking spots on our property for this proposed project. We are only able to provide six spots on our property.
Delta is in the practice of charging a property owner that cannot achieve these impractical parking requirements a fee of $3,200 per parking spot in order to go ahead with their project. Delta has agreed to waive this fee for us as an incentive. This parking incentive has a $48,000 value to Delta.
Another $5,000 is for lane improvements that are not necessarily planned and $2,500 represents legal fees for the agreement.
Delta has also varied some other building requirements, although these types of variances can be requested by any type of property, not only heritage buildings. There has been no cash value placed on these variances.
Although we do appreciate not being required to pay these parking fees, we would like to see a policy in place for owners of such properties to have assistance in preserving and maintaining these important parts of our history.
We have suggested incentives similar to ones Surrey, Vancouver and New Westminster have in place. These cities offer such incentives as yearly grant or tax rebates for owners that spend money maintaining their heritage properties.
We have concerns about the suggestion of looking at these heritage applications on an "individual basis." Without guidelines in place we feel it gives staff the power to control these important negotiations with owners, thus possibly putting the start and completion of these projects at risk.
Lastly, our research shows our building was actually built in 1912. We are excited with the thoughts of finally being able to have this project move forward as we approach its 100th birthday.
Linda Park and Pierre Bonato
