Heritage Places Strategy Engagement
The City has launched its engagement on the Heritage Places Strategy. Please take a few minutes to complete the survey, which closes on June 8, 2025.
The Garneau Community League Position
The City Plan consistently and repeatedly identifies heritage as a significant value that “tells the story of how our city came to be.” In practice, however, heritage has functionally no standing in planning decisions.
This has been illustrated in the past year by major planning policy changes. For instance, engagement on the Heritage Places Strategy began one day after Council made its decision on Priority Growth Areas, kickstarting new development in areas with significant heritage assets. In this case, heritage was literally an afterthought.
Many of Edmonton’s heritage landmarks have been lost, in the name of progress, only to be regretted later. To avoid further erosion of heritage resources, we believe the City should take a much more proactive position in protecting heritage assets.
We believe that the City of Edmonton’s operational definition of heritage is too narrow. Unless a property is listed on the inventory or register, it is not considered to have heritage value in land use decisions. This is problematic because many significant heritage properties are not on either list.
Recommendation: The City should widen its definition of heritage assets. The City could also proactively work with communities to identify heritage buildings and streets that are currently not listed. Ideally they could be added to the inventory, but at minimum they should be identified as having heritage value.
The City’s discussions of heritage rarely consider the surrounding context, often an important part of the heritage character of a place. Not considering context can also inadvertently disincentivize property owners from listing their homes.
Recommendation: Create more heritage districts in neighbourhoods, which incentivizes heritage designation and ensures new development is sympathetic to its context.
Recommendation: Create policy that ensures land use changes in heritage neighbourhoods considers the context of the street and the entire community. This consideration should extend to properties that are historic, but not necessarily on the inventory or register.
The processes to be added to the inventory or register can inadvertently impede heritage protections.
Currently, homeowners seeking to be added to the register are eligible for a one-time matching grant of up to $100,000. To access the full funds, however, owners need to have $100,000 of their own or the ability to do that much work. This financial barrier can incentivize homeowners to defer designations, which often means that the building changes hands or deteriorates before it can be designated.
Recommendation: Considering changing the funding model to a staged or lifetime-grant, to allow improvements to be made over time and prevent interested owners from putting off designation.
Requirements for the heritage inventory may also be too strict. Even if a homeowner is interested, they may be told their home doesn’t qualify for the inventory.
Recommendation: Consider lowering requirements to qualify for the heritage inventory.
Property owners are currently required to do their own research on the history of their properties to be eligible for the inventory, which can create a barrier to listing.
Recommendation: Provide staff resource time to assist with research or consider working with U of A Planning Program to have students assist with research.
There is currently no policy in place for heritage tree protection.
Recommendation: Consider creating a heritage tree policy.
Funding for the heritage planning and resource preservation is chronically underfunded.
Recommendation: Collaborate with other levels of government to open up funding for heritage planning and protection.Many residents are not aware of the heritage program.
Recommendation: Provide workshops in heritage communities periodically to increase awareness.
