I need to kick myself to not type before I have coffee, this is really becoming a problem lol.
Protection is the wrong word. Let's face it; if a home isn't registered and someone wants to gut it or tear it down - then bye bye house. I think you could do a number of things:
- Encourage registration of the homes and provide tax incentives and grants to help keep the homes in good repair.
- Create Bylaw rules or policy that would goven any new infill houses or additional to keep them in character in terms of design (cornaces, woodwork, etc), materials...etc.
- Register the entire streetscape (it's been done on Tower Road and another which I can't think of).
Or any combination of these. I think I mentioned in the Trillium thread in terms of the NSLC in Schmidtville, that one way to try to compromise with the residents is to enact rules and policy to kept the predominantly low rise residential in that area in the same character, while allowing the Trillium block to fill out - that could be a good compromise.
One other thing that could also be an option is to identify in the various secondary planning stategies an inventory of existing and potential heritage assets (or do it as a stand alone project). Then have council accept the list and update it from time to time.
One last note about your comment JET: most cities have a bylaw about upkeep of the property in terms of keeping lawns mowed, the property clean, the building in a good state of repair. Most places call them community standards bylaws and I believe HRM actually already has one. It's just that the only way to get anything to occur is that there would have to be a complaint and there are typically resource issues with most bylaw enforcement departments Canada wide (although I don't know about HRM).