Talk:Rockcliffe Park

Joan S Contributions need to be factual and supported by references. Your recent edits to this article are opinion, seeking to argue the case for commercial interests. I've posted some edits to revert to a more neutral account of the situation. If you want to discuss, please post your reply here. Anna Litickle (talk) 16:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Anna Litickle has "reason to believe that "Joan S" is an agent for this developer", this is absurd. I am a homeowner and have no commercial interests whatsoever, other than wanting to ensure that my property rights are respected. There is broad opposition to the HCD in Rockcliffe, maybe it would be worthwhile visiting home owners who have had their properties designated as Grade 1 and see if they fully understand how the HCD restricts their rights. Grade 1 properties sit on the market for longer than Grade 2 properties and have to reduce prices considerably in order to encourage someone to take it off owners' hands. The edits being made are statements of the truth; it is true that the HCD restricts alterations to or demolitions of any property in the neighbourhood, why else would you need to obtain a heritage permit and seek consultation from the Rockcliffe Heritage committee? There are concerns that a heritage designation does not respect rights of property owners and spooks potential buyers, driving down market values, which is supported by the referenced article. I would say that there is only some support for the HCD, if a survey was conducted of the residents, the Rockcliffe Heritage Committee would be surprised with how many owners do not support it, but it is not in their interests to do that... Joan S (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

To Joan S: This article is about the Village of Rockcliffe Park, not a forum for debate on the merits of Heritage designation. The arguments you are presenting would be appropriate for a newspaper article, but not an encyclopedia. Here it is perhaps appropriate to report (briefly) the fact that there is disagreement, but not to argue for one or other point of view. The second paragraph of the Heritage section gives the facts about the heritage designation, information re the disagreement should be limited to the final paragraph. The comment about restricting alterations or demolitions was removed because it is repeated in the next sentence. Are there independent sources you can reference for your claims of "broad opposition" and reduced property values? The article referenced as #10 is irrelevant to this article as it concerns only properties outside Rockcliffe Park. The article referenced as #12 predates the adoption of the Heritage Plan. Anna Litickle (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Joan S: The scope of this discussion has broadened to include the City of Ottawa's heritage register, which specifically excludes Rockcliffe Park, so it has been relocated to the "Limitations and Issues" section of the Ontario Heritage Act page. The new material that you contributed recently has been removed because it sets out a one-sided view of the situation unsupported by any evidence. Anna Litickle (talk) 20:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)