Dalhousie University wins suit against HRM to allow it to tear down heritage home
Dalhousie University can tear down a house it bought for $1 million.
On Monday, Supreme Court of Nova Scotia Justice Peter Rosinski ordered Halifax Regional Municipality to revoke the heritage designation of 1245 Edward St. so the university can demolish it.
In a lengthy written decision, Rosinski castigated the heritage advisory committee and council itself, finding both the process used and decision to list the property was biased.
“There is a reasonable apprehension of an attitude of closed-mindedness at the (committee) level and a reasonable apprehension of bias at the HRM council level, a bread-crumb trail that led to a clearly unreasonable result,” reads Rosinski’s decision.
Dalhousie bought 1245 Edward St. for $1 million in July 2021 with the intention of tearing it down and holding the empty lot for some yet-to-be determined use.
On May 2, 2022, the university applied for a demolition permit and began gutting the interior in anticipation of its approval.
A week later, the Halifax University Neighbourhood Association applied to the heritage advisory committee to evaluate the property for heritage status, which would, if approved, put a stay on the demolition.
On July 11, Dalhousie was advised that the committee would be considering 1245 Edward St. on July 15.
The university was only allowed to make a written submission.
On July 14, Dalhousie received its demolition permit.
The committee reviewed the staff report that gave the building a heritage score of 64 out of 100 at its meeting and recommended to regional council that the building be registered.
At a September 2022 council meeting, Dalhousie presented its own heritage consultant’s report on the house that gave it a heritage score of 32 out of 100. The university also objected to the sped-up timeline to have the building registered as a heritage property.
Council voted to register the property and Dalhousie filed for a judicial review.
Rosinski found fault with the sped-up recommendation process and also with council basing its decision, at least in part, on Dalhousie intending to tear down the house while having no plan for the property.
“HRM’s preferred use of the property, as a residential building, for example, as opposed to an empty lot (as preferred by Dalhousie), is irrelevant to council’s decision,” wrote Rosinski.
“HRM cannot intend to defeat the owner’s preferred use of the property by effecting its own preferred use of the property through the process of inclusion of the property in the HRM Registry of Heritage Property.”
According to the decision, the university and HRM have come to an agreement on how the legal costs of the court action are paid. That hasn’t yet been made public.
