WELLINGTON NORTH – Some in Mount Forest and Arthur are concerned the historic character of downtown buildings could be stripped away.
That’s why council have directed staff to look into adopting a bylaw, policy or guidelines to prevent property owners from completing façade upgrades that don’t preserve a building’s historical character.
Two community members submitted written requests to council about such a bylaw, and one gave a verbal delegation to council during a July 28 meeting.
That correspondence followed councillor Penny Renken’s suggestion for a bylaw to preserve historical façades at an earlier meeting.
Long-time Mount Forest resident and business owner Trina Reid said she came to council “out of a love and concern for our extremely beautiful and growing downtown areas of Wellington North.
“In Mount Forest, most of our buildings in the downtown were established in the late 1800s and have a unique aesthetic as well as a structural resiliency, and this is something we absolutely need to preserve,” Reid said.
She wants a bylaw to “help curb the commercial owners from making changes to the buildings that would challenge their structural integrity” — though any modifications to a building’s structural integrity are regulated by code and subject to inspection and approval from municipal officials.
Mount Forest Museum and Archive volunteer managing director Kate Rowley submitted correspondence titled: “A letter of public education and support to address the threat to our main streets’ built heritage in Wellington North.”
Rowley lauded the township for its Community Improvement Program, that provides financial support to property owners’ improving their buildings and locations, encouraging preservation of historical façades.
“Our weakness lies in private development on the main streets that does not apply for public funding,” Rowley said, as “this is where we have no guidelines.”
She suggested the township introduce a designated heritage liaison for people to contact with questions, a list of buildings that are “worth saving” based on age, condition and historical significance.
She also suggested a “protective bylaw or regulation to review development proposals and building permits on only those identified buildings to ensure they are sensitive to the building’s historical interest.”
Rowley said she understands “the word ‘heritage’ sets off alarm bells for local economic planning,” but said it shouldn’t.
“Demolitions or cover-ups are rarely the better option for the community, for tourism, for aesthetics, or for the environment. Protecting our built heritage is the smart cultural thing to do, the smart economic thing to do, and the smart environmental thing to do,” Rowley stated.
Councillor Renken described her appreciation for the different façades in Wellington North’s downtown, calling them beautiful and unique.
“I really think that they are worth preserving. They are history. They tell a lot of stories,” she said.
Renken feels pride was taken in their construction, and said, “you don’t see buildings built like that nowadays.
“I think it’s up to our generation to try to preserve them wherever possible.”
Councillor Steve McCabe agreed with Renken’s remarks and said he would support “strong guidelines” to preserve façades.
But he was hesitant about a bylaw.
“That kind of handcuffs renovations and handcuffs people that own the buildings,” he said.
Councillor Lisa Hern offered similar input.
She likes the idea of increased protections, however a bylaw gave her “pause,” she said, adding she favours “more of a positive approach.”
Renken said that suggestive guidelines wouldn’t have “teeth,” as a bylaw would, to handle “somebody that will deliberately come along, do what they want, and ask for forgiveness later.”
Mayor Andy Lennox said, “The bylaw is the only avenue to do that and we’re probably going to get into heritage designiation to do that.”
Be it a bylaw or guidelines, councillor Sherry Burke said, “I’m in full support of it.”
“We need to protect our heritage,” she added.
Fearing “detrimental” modifications made by building owners, Burke asked about temporary stopgap measures.
CAO Brooke Lambert said staff could provide information to owners that “speaks to the heritage and the value of some of the existing façades and some of the sympathetic improvements that could be made, if they’re looking to do that, as well as opportunities to potentially get some funding for that through our façade program.”
Without a bylaw in place, Lennox said he doesn’t think the township has authority to prevent owners from making changes — but a legal opinion would be needed to confirm.
“My guess is the majority of the building owners want to make the best use of that property and want to see the value increase, and if heritage preservation and improvements that sort of align with the nature of those buildings is something that they can do it’s probably a good option to consider,” Lambert said.
The mayor said he appreciates old architecture, but said if preservation is beneficial to the community, the onus and expense shouldn’t fall solely on property owners.
“We should be prepared to contribute tax dollars to preserving that (architecture),” he said.
“We better put our money where our mouth is.”
The mayor added he appreciates that council is asking staff for a report on the feasibility of regulating façade preservation.
“We can start to unpack some of these things,” he said.
Lennox pondered how to make potential regulations fair, who would decide which buildings were included, and what modifications would be permitted.
“These are details we need to figure out before we start saying ‘no, you can’t,’ or ‘yes you can,’” he said.
“I’m in favour of us proceeding with this,” he added, but said, “I think we need to be careful about what we can and can’t prohibit or stop because people who own these properties have private property rights too.
“If we’re going to infringe on them we have to figure out how we can do so in a fair and equitable way.”
