Lord love us. It's still out there at the side of Leslie. Since 2003 it has rested on its iron rails. Through wind and rain, blizzards and tornadoes, blistering heat and deep freeze, it has prevailed. Roof torn apart by raccoons, then draped with a tarp.
The door was opened to reveal the interior. Generations of wild creatures made it their home. They lived and died there and filled it with feces. Rain and snow poured in, mould crept across the floors and climbed the walls. So thick, the condition of interior was impossible to conjecture.
The last look revealed one side of the structure completely rotted and remaining corners further eroded.
To be moved, the building must be taken apart, board by board. To be rebuilt, rot must be removed and authentic boards found to replace the unsalvageable. The new structure would reduce in size from a cabin to a three hole privy.
Half a million dollars was a previous estimate for restoration on a foundation built by the developer who gifted the building plus. hydro,water,sewer and access also expected to be gifted by the developer.
Still , Councillors dedicated to preserving Whitchurch history clung to the conviction, somebody out there cared enough to salvage the structure; if only people knew, someone would surely come forward.
Staff were again directed to conjure terms for a proposal from interested parties .
Finally, at Tuesday's Council Meeting a report was on the agenda. At 11p.m. it came forward A design proposal was before us at a cost of $36,000.
Just for a design.
Councillor Granger moved deferral for the next Council to decide.
It failed.
Councillor MacEachern moved staff be directed..... blah blah blah ...same old.. same old.
It passed.
But here's the interesting part.
Last time, Petch house was discussed, I queried if the developer's original commitment still held true
The Mayor responded the solicitor and herself were to meet with the developer and that would be determined at the time.
The meeting was held. Tuesday's staff report stated the developer is still committed.
However, added to the agenda, was a letter from the developer. It said something different. They are prepared to write a cheque for $50.Ks towards the cost of moving the building and that's it.They would then consider themselves free of obligation.
Councillor Wilson inquired; did it mean $50Ks additional were being offered?
The Mayor said it did.
The Mayor apparently vets all staff reports submitted to Council.
On a resolution from Councillor MacEachern, staff were directed for the umpteenth time to find a party with a use for the structure and another to move it, restore it and thereby cover their political posteriors for the endless shambles they have made of the building and the issue.
Ar last, Councillor Wilson could no longer swallow the guff.
He voted against it.
Mr. Wilson ran his last campaign as a "tax fighter", although living up to that promise has proven...difficult.
ReplyDeleteThis vote could be a pre-election move to establish at least a shred of credibility on his running platform. It'll likely come up as a talking point for him in debates etc.
Still, whether it's an election ploy, or he finally got Religion at the last moment, the vote was the right one.
The Petch House saga is one of plenty of examples we have of this Council's apparent mission to run roughshod over the obvious interests of residents, in favour of goodness knows what.
Not you, though Ms. Buck- you'll always have my vote. We need your independent thinking and willingness to tackle the baloney. Keep it up, and best wishes in the Election. You'll have my vote!
Petch House should be, temporarily, turned into a boarding stable for the mare and her foal (or is that fool?) and ultimately into a mausoleum.
ReplyDeleteAsk not what I can do for my town; rather, what can my town do for me?
ReplyDeleteThe last post from me should have been headed:
ReplyDeleteAnother Morris-ism
Knowing Wilson it is nothing more than a campaign trick. It isn't even a drop in the bucket of the lapdog votes he has made with the the group. Too bad he didn't make the decision to think for himself at the beginning of his first and only term.
ReplyDeleteAs for being the tax fighter, considering he has supported all the outrageous legal expenditures, I don't know how he has the nerve to show his face around town.
Lets not forget Al Wilson also campaigned as a "Crime Fighter" something out of the scope of a civic level politician. Shouldn't that have been a clue that Mr. Wilson was out of his depth?His record as a "tax fighter" is absolutely abysmal.
ReplyDeleteOh he is a fighter alright.
ReplyDeleteJust ask David Heard who has been man handled with witness present and finger wagged in the face with witness present.
I do not know why David has not filed charges against him.
A fighter? Sounds more like a thug to me.
ReplyDelete