Trinity United Church in Charlottetown is not getting another chance to request windows for its new front doors.
It appealed to Charlottetown City Council for reconsideration of a council decision last October but the appeal was denied at the January council meeting this week.
The church wants to replace existing large sliding doors because of terrible drafts from the entry system in the winter, said Coun. Kim Devine, chair of the planning and heritage committee for the city.
"Heritage board approved new doors that swing out," she said. "What the church asked for, they applied to Heritage Board for, was to put glass panels in the doors."
It was that request for glass that was rejected.
Coun. Mitchell Tweel told council that no one from Trinity Church was at the planning board meeting where the reconsideration was discussed and rejected.
"As you know it is an historical church in our city," said Tweel. "Since this is second go-around, I just wonder if there is some kind of a compromise or solution that the city and hopefully Trinity Church and the congregation can live with."
Heritage board has meet with the church on more that one occasion regarding the issue, said Devine.
"(The church) came to at least two meetings, that I can recall, where we did discuss solutions," she said.
"We discussed solutions like security cameras," said Devine. "We discussed security solutions like pin-holes in the doors so that they can see members of the congregation coming up. We discussed at the last planning board meeting an interior vestibule that would not change the look of the doors.
"You are absolutely right about the historic importance of that church, Councillor Tweel. It is the oldest church in the city. It was built around the time of Confederation, 1864, and the doors are very significant, character-defining element of that church.
"Heritage board feels that on a church of such importance in the city, that we do need to maintain the historical elements that define the integrity of that building."
The appeal was rejected because there was no new information or doubt about the correctness of the original decision, said Devine.
Historic Charlottetown church's appeal for glass in new doors rejected by council
Historic Charlottetown church's appeal for glass in new doors rejected by council
- Published on January 15th, 2010
- Published on June 15th, 2010
-
Staff ~ Farm Focus
- Number of views : 380
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- John
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:38:59
If the church feels they need new doors but council (state interference in church matters) feels the door must be historically accurate, why not comprimise?: 1) use recycled plastic doors [replicas of the old] or 2) Refinish the current doors and have outter glass doors that will not cover them up?
-
- OLd Tory
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:34:56
Everyone should stop asking permission to do things, it's none of Council's damm business.
-
- John
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:27:48
Charlottetown's Heritage Board is the reason what the city's historic buildings are in such sorry shape. Owners can't do this. Owners can't do that. Summerside has beautiful historic buildings without any of the tom-foolery. Throughout Europe histroical buildings have been preserved to their former grandure while encorporating modern features such as thermo doors and windows.
-
- Batman
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:27:38
Well, city councillors do not have the backbone to refuse a businessman a permit to modify a restaurant on the waterfront that now blocks harbour views, or refuse a developer to build condos on the waterfront that also block views, or to refuse the construction of a large hotel in the the downtown that is higher than the regulations allow, but comes down hard on a United Church minister who wants to put strained glass windows in his church door.
This is the city council that refused to fight for the rights of people who did not want a cell tower in their backyards and let Industry Canada walk all over them as they did when IRAC overruled them on the mobile home park. The city is scared of the businessmen and their lawsuits, but know the minister will not fight too hard s they have no qualms about refusing him. In a word the city councillors are cowards. They break their own heritage laws and zoning laws all the time, but when a clergyman wants to put windows in the doors of his church that is somehow a terrible thing and has to be refused. -
- really now
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:26:59
It's funny that they cut down mature trees for Starbucks to come in, so that people could see a sign.This city really needs to get a grip,they pick sides on alot of issues, please don't pick fights with a church,and let then do what they feel is the best way to follow your rules.
-
- Neighbor
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:22:50
All this talk about how much of a heritage building it is and yet it is COVERED in graffiti that no one is bothering to clean up.
They talk about safety of seniors on the front steps but they don't clean the sidewalks all the way around the church to make it safe for people getting to the church.
Yes, the doors I am sure are an issue, but has anyone looked at the rest of the building? -
- Concerned Mother
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:22:35
Ok, yes its considered a Hertiage piece of property but my understanding for the windows is for the SAFETY! Just doesn't make any sense.
-
- A
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:22:25
Sure heritage is important...it will look very nice. All will be fine until an elderly person is pushed down the steps by a door swinging out and the church is sued! Then everyone will point fingers at someone else! Why not make it a tinted glass pane so it appears to blend better to at least address the safety. Perhaps the city can spend a large amount of money to fix the size of the landing. The city is forcing the change, be flexible!
-
- Anne
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:20:09
I totally agree with Louis. I think that they should keep the outside doors the way they are but install sliding glass doors inside the original wooden doors that will allow the outside doors to be kept open but the inside will be weather tight and also people can get into the church without any problems.
Best of luck to Trinity and to Rev. Moses. -
- do it anyway
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:17:43
the church should put in the doors they want. Then Council will have to embarrass themselves by forcing their replacement (or covering the windows - won't that look nice)
-
- bill
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:16:52
---hey!! as long as it looks like council wants --to heck with everything else---close it down-- leave it empty ---but don't change it--of course you could gut it and make a brewery or pub out of it
-
- nitpicker
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:14:35
I'm pretty sure, 'Sammy', that whatever the church is doing, or not doing, regarding the situation in Haiti is not influenced by these doors.
I doubt the door issue is so all encompassing that the church has had to cease functioning. -
- A
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:14:27
Yep, you've all pretty much summed it up!
-
- Ridiculous
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:12:35
The same city council that couldn't be bothered with big things like maintaining public green space along the water, or ensuring that new downtown developments include parking for the increased population density, DOES care what kind of doors a church installs?
Clowns. -
- Robert
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:11:21
May I suggest a compromise solution?
The church can install a stained glass window in each door. This would satisfy both safety and aesthetic criteria.
R. Magnusson -
- John
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:10:19
Members of the Heritage Board are obviously smoking more than tobacco if they feel that windowed doors would compromise the integrity of the building. With so many clowns on that Board, one would think the circus is in town.
-
- Chris
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:05:11
for once the church is the one trying to get with the times and the government is the one forcing them back to the dark ages of door fixtures
-
- sarah
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:04:44
i agree with the councillors that they should leave the doors there but try to figure out how to fix the draft around the door. i like the doors there it makes the church ...
-
- Safety
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:01:44
Alphonse - brilliant posting. But you've hit the nail on the head. When heritage collides with safety and common sense, it is discouraging to see council opts for the former.
This is a poor newspaper account btw. The nub of the issue is whether or not by putting in solid doors that swing out, it places people on the outside at risk of being turfed down a steep flight of concrete steps. A glass pane or two so that people opening the door can see whether anyone is on the other side is a sensible safety precaution that would not detract from the look of the building. -
- Charley
- - June 21st, 2010 at 20:00:57
I understand the Fire problem with the BIG sliding doors. Is it possible to have a set of swinging doors inside the BIG door then leave the BIG doors over during service.
The BIG doors add to the decor of the Church . -
- peibossman
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:53:32
i fully support Rev. Moses...the town council is being nosy, dictatorial, and silly...shame on them...
-
- Idea
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:52:49
Build a small vestibule with another set of doors. That way the big doors can be kept open and the second set leading from the vestibule into the narthex can be made of glass.
-
- Louie
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:50:43
Apply new weather stripping on original doors, and install auto slideing door sensors.
-
- Alphonse (Red) McGurr
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:49:17
I guess they never had glass back in the days when the church was built. Obviously a couple of panes would ruin the look and feel of the building.
Whats next remove the central heating and put a coal stove back in, disconnect the sewer line and erect a historically correct looking outhouse. Why not go all the way and put up a barn so people can tie their horses when they come to church.
Lets not go part way, lets make it a real historical and cultural experience to visit downtown Charlottetown. And while they are at it remove the electricity from Province House and put the whale oil lanterns back in. -
- Just wondering
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:45:52
I wonder if they could put some sort of hinge on the middle of each of the two doors? That way they would be weather stripped for drafts. Then when opened only half the doors would open to the outside while the other halfs would swing to the inside thus maybe not knocking people off the small steps outside.
-
- PE
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:39:25
This is ridiculous. Safety matters more than aesthetics. WHY is council involved in this at all?????
-
- Bill
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:38:25
The only real question here is, can Jesus find His way into the church?
-
- Curious Georgia
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:38:10
It's high time Heritage addicts displayed common sense. We can't save everything historical when it comes to ensuring public safety.
Speaking of defining integrity Ms. Devine. There are more urgent issues going on in our fair city and the world, e.g. hunger, poverty, homeless people, Haiti, war. Focus? -
- Sammy
- - June 21st, 2010 at 19:37:53
It astounds me. Tens of thousands of people are trapped under rubble in Haiti and the church, which one would assume would be working to help these people, is fighting with the city over doors.
