Water tower could be demolished within six months

Though the provincial Ministry of Cultural Communications and Womens' Condition has declared a water tower in Senneville that is over 100 years old is unworthy of historical recognition but encouraged town hall to protect it, Mayor George McLeish said that was unlikely to happen at this point, citing ongoing vandalism fears.

"Unless you put an 80-foot tall razor-topped wall around it, you're not going to stop people from going there," he told The Chronicle<@$p> during an interview.

Built in a style that recalls medieval architecture by James Morgan, the water tower sits in a clearing in some woods near the Braeside Golf Course. The structure's fate has been a bone of contention between some Senneville residents, town council and the land's owner as of late.

The owner of the property was issued a demolition permit by town council on October 20, and this decision was reinforced at a council meeting last week, despite vocal opposition by some Senneville residents, as well as four written letters of objection by Senneville residents and eight by non-residents.

"There is no question that council does not deny that the tower is an ancient structure and that it's of some historical significance," McLeish said in a telephone interview. However, he added, it simply poses too much of a security and safety problem to remain as is.

Only protected by a knee-high wall, the tower is frequently visited by rowdy teenagers at night who engage in drinking and other inappropriate behaviour. According to town council, police gave out over 300 tickets for vandalism only this summer.

In 2001, council made a demand to the Ministry to analyze the tower and determine whether or not it is worthy of being provincially protected. The reply to that demand only arrived to Senneville seven years later, in a letter dated November 26, 2008.

"Our usual response time is two to four years," explained ministry spokesperson Colette Proulx. She ascribed two reasons for the lateness of this particular response. "In 2002, we had new legislation in on the Loi sur la Patrimoine," she said. Due to that update, responding to Senneville's request may have taken some more time than it should have.

Secondly, there was no real pursuit on behalf of the town to get a faster answer. "Since there was nobody following up on this file, it was left behind on the priority queue," Proulx explained.

Proulx said the ministry only classifies monuments as historical when they distinguish themselves provincially. "This type of architecture is not innovative at all for the time," she said.

Though the letter to Senneville said the ministry would not protect the tower, it recommended the town to do so.

"We would like to assure you that even though we do not intend to classify the water tower, we encourage you to take steps to sensitize people to the importance and value of its historical heritage," the letter signed by Montreal-area ministry director Brigitte Jacques read.

However, since the tower is on private property, McLeish maintained it would be difficult to take any such steps. Furthermore, he said the fact only four Senneville residents wrote letters of protest to council was an indication that not many in the village were opposed to council's decision.

According to Proulx, if the owner was interested, it would be possible to apply to an aid program from the provincial government to preserve the tower.

McLeish said the demolition permit granted by town hall gives the owner six months to take down the tower.