On the eve of the demolition of another heritage house, the municipality of Chambly affirms, through the voice of its mayor, that it will be “the last”. In 2018, the untimely destruction of the Boileau house, in the same municipality, had led to a commotion in favor of the preservation of the built heritage.
This time, it is the Beauchamp house which is targeted. This house, which dates from 1855, has already escaped the worst. It had even been moved in 2005 to save it from being destroyed by a condominium construction project. A lot of money was spent to save her. However, in a tug of war with the former municipal administration, she was finally left to her own devices, explains the current mayor, Alexandra Labbé.
Citizens questioned the choice made by Chambly to allow the destruction of the Beauchamp house, a wooden residence of neoclassical inspiration. According to the municipality’s inventory of buildings, the Beauchamp house was judged, in 2020, to be of “high” heritage interest, due to its “good architectural authenticity”, its “age value” and its “building context”. establishment composed of several traditional dwellings.
Does the mayor fear that this demolition will cause a new outcry? The untimely destruction of the Boileau house had even encouraged the Auditor General to investigate the mismanagement of built heritage by public authorities. “I’m not afraid,” tells the To have to Mayor Labbé, “because I won’t let something like this happen” again. “I strongly believe in it. »
“What you have to understand from the Boileau house is that it is a terrible political revenge that has occurred. […] The story of Maison Boileau is not so much a story of heritage as of someone who took up too much space and too much power. The house had disappeared following a decision by the former mayor, Denis Lavoie, then targeted by a damning report from the show Investigation.
Concerns
The Société d’histoire de la seigneurie de Chambly recognizes that gains have been made since the disappearance of the Boileau house, such as the settlement of obsolescence and the use of archaeological digs during demolitions. But Louise Chevrier, member of the Society, recalls that several old houses in Chambly remain “under surveillance”. This is the case, in particular, of the Lareau house, located on rue Beattie, which dates from the middle of the 19e century. Deemed “uninhabitable”, it was put up for sale.
“The City says that the Beauchamp house will be the last. We greatly hope so. But will that really be the case? she asks herself. “We feel that there is a will, but I always wonder if there is a real conviction. Costs are often confronted with authenticity. »
To justify its decision to let the Beauchamp house be demolished this time, the municipality of Chambly relies on reports provided by its owner. The house has been neglected. This is obvious. The necessary renovations appear to be considerable. The owner rather wants to shave it to rebuild, with the approval of the municipality.
No second opinion
There was no second opinion from the city of Chambly to the reports provided by the owner, admits Mayor Labbé. The municipality’s demolition committee, where the mayor sits ex officio, is made up of two other elected officials. None of the three members has a background in architecture, heritage or history, agrees Alexandra Labbé.
According to the mayor, as the roof, the siding and part of the foundation of the Beauchamp house would have to be redone, this building is not worth saving.
Although several old buildings have been largely rebuilt, in whole or in part, there is no question for the mayor to plan to preserve this one. At most, the municipality wants to ensure, she says, that the new building that will replace this house evokes in some respects its old forms.
The end of the demolitions?
Is this really the end of demolitions in Chambly? The mayor says she is “excessively sensitive” to all the demolitions that may take place on her territory, both for houses listed for their heritage value and for others that are not, but which nevertheless disappear. “Those are even sadder. »
In this municipality, whose colonial origins date back to 1665, it appears that “we have houses that continue to disappear despite everything”, notes the mayor.
So what to do? The municipality now has regulatory provisions. “We have a new tool, which is the “obsolete regulation”. It should make it possible, she believes, to require owners to better maintain their buildings.
Couldn’t the municipality of Chambly also rely on the Cultural Heritage Act? In particular, this law allows municipalities to cite buildings in order to protect them.
The Mayor of Chambly is not convinced of the appropriateness of using the law. “I want to tell you that sometimes, we protect better by putting them in the inventory and supporting the owner than by going directly to quote it. This “very rigid” framework has the effect of “steering an owner because you quote his house and he is no longer insurable,” she says. The mayor adds that “the citation does not necessarily give access to grants”.
Yes, the use of Quebec law brings several disadvantages, continues the mayor: “I talked about insurance, because that’s what comes out a lot in the media these days. But in fact, there are a lot of rigidities in the quotation. There are no more modifications that are possible on the elements that are quoted. For her, citing a building to protect it under the law constitutes a level of protection that the municipality of Chambly does not really want to go to.
“This is not an approach that we have favored in Chambly”, explains the mayor, “except for the heritage buildings that we own”. How many buildings mentioned does the city of Chambly have? “Cities, there are not that many. The town hall of Chambly and its old fire station are among the very small number of buildings protected to the highest degree in the municipality.