It’s a steadily growing pot of money homeowners have been reluctant to apply for since the fund was created more than two years ago.
The city’s Heritage Advisory Commission recently discussed proposed amendments to the Heritage Conservation Fund, created to provide owners of heritage buildings money to complete renovation works that preserve and protect their buildings’ heritage characteristics.
Money in the fund comes from a levy that’s applied to all new building permits.
The current fund balance is $321,891.
Applications are on a first-come, first-served basis for a maximum of 50 per cent of the capital cost of projects. The maximum any property owner can obtain in a single year is $15,000.
Only a few applications have been made thus far.
The commission was told that despite the fact there are many older homes in Delta that require refurbishing, the requirement for the owners to sign a restrictive covenant could be a detriment.
It was noted that the covenant can often discourage residents from applying because it can appear to be too restrictive and the paperwork involved too onerous and untimely.
The commission was also told that the covenant restricts the owner from making subsequent changes to the home that could damage the heritage character.
Staff walk each applicant through the application process, but it was noted more clarity could be provided to the public regarding the restrictions, timeline and requirements of the covenant.
During city council’s discussion on the underutilized fund last year, community planning director Marcy Sangret was asked if the fund could be better used for other heritage preservation efforts.
Sangret noted one of the impediments identified is that an applicant has to acquire three quotes for works, which can be difficult if the work is specialized.
Staff were directed to look at several ideas to amend the program and bring them back to council for consideration, including the possibility of using some of the money for a Delta heritage project.
Mayor George Harvie agreed the fund wasn’t aimed at building up a pot of money “to squirrel away” and, if it’s not better utilized, he suggested maybe the levy should be removed.
