The proposed demolition of a home here generated considerable debate on how to best protect the community’s heritage resources.
Though citizen efforts failed to convince council to oppose the demolition and put the building on the township’s heritage building registry, councillors here have not ruled out another look at the process.
Prior to the Sept. 22 discussion, Mayor Joanne Ross-Zuj declared a conflict of interest – due to “family ownership” of the property – and stepped out of the room and away from the discussion. Councillor Walt Visser chaired the portion of the meeting in her absence.
Elora resident Bob Jackson said the home in question belonged to the mayor’s parents.
The owners of the property at 191 Wellington Road 7 have stated they have no plans to rebuild at this time and will be grading the area where the house was to a level and stable condition.
Chief building official Randy Bossence explained the application received was for the demolition of the single storey dwelling, which has been vacant since 1996, when an occupant passed away.
Bossence said that as per normal practice, demolition control permits are circulated to Heritage Centre Wellington and the planning department as well as public works and the fire department.
He added the 1870s house is not recorded in the township’s municipal heritage register nor is it a historically designated property.
Bossence noted that comments from Heritage Centre Wellington state the property is not a rare example of architecture and does not appear to have any significant historical or cultural value.
Councillor Kelly Linton had concerns with the timing of the review by staff and the heritage committee. Linton said the memo received by the committee came on Aug. 28, after its regular meeting, and its next meeting was not until the day after the Sept. 22 council session.
“Whenever you have an 1870s house, even if it is not on the inventory it is good to have a full discussion,” said Linton.
He added that since the owner did not intend to rebuild he saw no time-sensitive issue and asked if the item could be deferred.
Bossence said that from his perspective, once his department gets the application, “we are bound by the Building Code Act as far as time limits.”
For a simple permit, without the demolition control bylaw, there’s a time limit of 10 days to issue a permit or refuse it. With the demolition control bylaw in place, the time limit is extended to 30 days to approve or refuse the application.
“But ultimately it comes to timing and the provincial government has statutes for the timing of each stage to render a decision,” said Bossence.
Councillor Kirk McElwain asked, “Is there any way the demolition can be allowed yet still retain the heritage features – or for reuse?”
Bossence said that under the Ontario Building Code, “because it is not designated a heritage building, it is something we could ask, but not enforce.”
Township planner Mariana Iglesias was also unaware of a means to impose conditions on a demolition permit.
Councillor Steven VanLeeuwen asked if there was a safety issue that required the house to be taken down.
Bossence said, “Is it in a state of immediate structural fatigue? No. There is no danger of collapse.” He added the application was treated the same as any other.
Iglesias said if council chose to defer or withhold a decision the applicant can appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board. “That is the only recourse should council refuse it or not make a decision on the matter.”
Jackson spoke at length on why he believed the demolition should not be allowed. He lives at the corner of David and South Streets in Elora – adjacent to the property in question.
Jackson spoke of the iconic heritage homes which give the village its internationally-recognized character and quoted Group of Seven artist A.J. Casson, who described Elora as Ontario’s most beautiful village. “I agree with that characterization,” Jackson said.
He explained his efforts were to ensure non-renewable heritage resources that provide unique 19th century small-town character are protected. He was joined by some of his South Street neighbours who were also concerned about the future of the neighbourhood.
Jackson opposed the application and referred to the building as the Ross family home – since land registry records indicate the Ross family owned this home for some time.
He said on Aug. 5, Centre Wellington received correspondence asking it to protect the Ross house, by listing the building in the heritage registry and designating it under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Within two weeks an application was made to demolish the building, he said, adding that because of an address change – from 284 South Street to 191 Wellington Road 7 – many local residents were unaware what building was being demolished.
As such, he said “the process was clearly not intended to engage the public in decisions that affect the neighbourhood and property values.”
Jackson described the building as an “ornate working man’s cottage.” He noted that several years ago council designated an even smaller building which was less ornate.
Jackson felt the application was brought before council prematurely and should go back to staff and Heritage Centre Wellington and that council should not be influenced by a deadline.
Councillor Fred Morris took issue with Jackson’s zeal as protector of local heritage and also with his qualifications to protect heritage.
“By your own testimony, you’ve said this house is in your backyard. Our information states that house has stood empty since 1996. Why haven’t you acted until now? Surely you must know as a qualified heritage advocate that time and weather will destroy an empty house.”
Jackson said the lot is meticulously maintained so he assumed the building would be as well. But he agreed if there is no maintenance houses do degrade.
VanLeeuwen said the issue was not about Jackson, but the home. He had no issue with deferring the matter to see if the house is actually worth demolishing or not.
Morris respectfully disagreed, saying, “This is more than about a house. It is about heritage in Centre Wellington.”
He said the challenge of council and the heritage committee is to get people motivated to step forward and allow homes to be designated to preserve the past.
“We want to do that in a cooperative way,” Morris said. “If a heritage building owner does not want to spend money to fix up their heritage property the township cannot force them to do so.” He said the courts have agreed that owners cannot be forced to spend money just to satisfy heritage rules. Morris added council could delay the demolition permit “but what are you hoping to achieve?”
Linton noted that from the start, the heritage registry was intended to be a living document – where properties are added and/or deleted.
Councillor Mary Lloyd believed the proper time was given to allow staff to report on the matter. She said people have come forward to have their homes listed, and so have those who want their homes taken off the list. Lloyd said the opportunity to list the home has existed since the heritage registry was created.
“I feel we are being pushed to do something outside the provincial legislation because we have groups reacting after a demolition permit was applied for – as opposed to pro-actively seeking out homes and adding them to the list,” said Lloyd.
Visser said he has been on council a long time and has dealt with numerous heritage properties.
“The one thing council has always agreed upon is that we oppose hostile heritage designation,” he said. “If the owner of the property does not want it designated I don’t feel we have any right to force that on someone’s own personal property.”
Visser then pointed out the request for the heritage designation did not come from the owner.
Ultimately council voted to approve the demolition permit.
