Body: Heritage Advisory Committee Type: Minutes Meeting: Committee Date: November 14, 2024 Collection: Council Minutes Municipality: South Frontenac
[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Minutes/Committee/2024/Heritage Advisory Committee - 14 Nov 2024 - Minutes.pdf)
Document Text
Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee November, 14, 2024
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Meeting # Time: 1:00 PM Location: 4490 Battersea Road Present: Michael Gemmell, Wilma Kenny, John McDougall, Michael Payne, Councillor Scott Trueman Staff: Tom Fehr - Planner, James Thompson - Clerk, Heather Woodland - Deputy Clerk
1
Call to Order
2
Approval of the Agenda
a)
Resolution Resolution No. 02 Moved by John McDougall Seconded by Wilma Kenny That the agenda be approved, as presented. Carried
3
Confirmation of Minutes
a)
Resolution Resolution No. 03 Moved by Councillor Trueman Seconded by John McDougall That the minutes of the July 25, 2024 Heritage Advisory Committee meeting be approved. Carried
4
Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest
a)
There were none.
5
Delegations
a)
6 a)
There were none. Briefings There were none.
7
Business
a)
Subsequent Discussion Regarding Built Heritage Program. James Thompson provided information regarding a potential budget for the
Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee November, 14, 2024 Committee to pursue work on the built heritage program. The Committee discussed the submission of research regarding the heritage property plaque program provided by Michael Payne and circulated to Committee members on November 13, 2024. A copy of the submission is attached to the minutes. There was a discussion regarding the plaque program and its merits. John McDougall suggested the program would contribute to increasing the heritage profile in the Township. Michael Payne noted that the program would need to be voluntary with clear evaluation criteria, and that the designated sites should be the first properties to receive the option for plaques. Wilma Kenny suggested that the program begin with public buildings such as churches. Upon further discussion, it was determined that it would be helpful to the Committee to receive an estimate of cost and options for the plaques, and Heather Woodland committed to researching the City of Kingston plaque program and would bring it to a subsequent meeting. James Thompson suggested that the best approach would be to increase the profile of heritage in the community as a starting point, and that an annual event with heritage expert speakers could be beneficial to achieve this. He confirmed that the Committee would have the support of the Township to organize and advertise the event. He added that the plaque program could then be brought forward at a later date. The Committee had a subsequent discussion regarding the proposed event and shared ideas for speakers and potential themes for discussion, and it was determined that they would bring a list back to the next meeting for consideration. John McDougall commented that the Committee needed to involve Council in these discussions and that the direction for these programs needs to be clear. He added that there needs to be more members of the Committee and suggested further Committee member recruitment efforts. Councillor Trueman agreed with the need for clear and concise information for the consideration of Council. He raised concerns of the perception of forced designations, and the Committee agreed that this was not the intended approach. As a result of the inquiry regarding designations, the Committee discussed the designation requirements in the Ontario Heritage Act and the differences between listed and designated properties, including different municipalities' approaches to designations. Michael Payne added that walking/driving tours were other objectives of the Committee, and it was decided that the Committee would review the content of the existing tours and would forward them to staff. There were ideas shared for how the tours could be promoted on the Township’s channels and potential community partners and events. b)
Update regarding inventory project. Michael Payne inquired about the process for sending information to staff regarding the inventory project. The Committee and staff suggested different
Page 2 of 12
Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee November, 14, 2024 mechanisms and options for sending information to staff. Tom Fehr suggested that a completed form for each property would be ideal. It decided that it would be more efficient to have a single point of contact to compile the information from other Committee members and submit to staff. Michael Payne volunteered to be the point of contact in this regard. Staff will determine a process for submitting information and will send it to Michael Payne. In response to a concern raised about the frequency of meetings and the length of time between the November meeting and the proposed March, 2025 meeting, it was decided that there will be a meeting scheduled sometime in late January or early February, and that Heather Woodland would reach out to the members closer to the date. Resolution No. 04 Moved by John McDougall Seconded by Michael Gemmill THAT the quarterly meetings of the Heritage Advisory Committee be moved to 3:00 pm. Carried 8 a)
9 a)
10
Motions There were none. Notices of Motion There were none. Correspondence
a) 11 a)
Questions of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items) There were none.
12
Date of Next Meeting
a)
To be determined.
13
Adjournment
a)
Resolution Resolution No. 05 Moved by John McDougall Seconded by Michael Gemmill That the Council meeting of the Heritage Advisory Committee be adjourned at 2:32 p.m. Carried
Page 3 of 12
Some thoughts on a Heritage Plaque/Marker Program for South Frontenac Township Hello James and Tom: I know Tom was going to work on looking into heritage plaque and marker programs for our next Advisory Committee meeting, but a request was also made that John and some of the other public members of the committee look into what some of our neighbouring townships have done as potential models for us to follow. John did this, and some of the rest of us also looked at what other local municipalities are doing in this area. We have had some preliminary conversations about what aspects of these programs impressed us and what might work in South Frontenac Township moving forward. Based on these conversations, here are some thoughts from Wilma, Michael, Tom and I that Township staff might want to consider in the report that is being prepared. The Ontario townships and some municipalities across Canada that we explored as possible models for a South Frontenac program included Loyalist Township, Leeds & Thousand Islands, Town of Ganonoque, Prince Edward County, Lennox & Addington (actually a county), Russell Township, and Puslinch Township. Links to the websites of these programs are included below, if interested. Links: https://www.loyalist.ca/en/explore-and-play/history-and-heritage.aspx https://www.leeds1000islands.ca/en/playing/heritage-and-culture.aspx https://www.gananoque.ca/town-hall/community-development/our-heritage https://www.thecounty.ca/residents/services/planning/heritage-conservation/ https://lennox-addington.on.ca/about/about-the-county-of-lennox-and-addington/ https://www.russell.ca/en/recreation-and-culture/historical-plaque-program.aspx https://puslinch.ca/culture-recreation/heritage/ and https://engagepuslinch.ca/puslinch-heritage
Summary: There seem to a wide variety of approaches that have been taken across Ontario to municipal heritage plaque and marker programs. These reflect the staff and financial resources of the different municipal governments. In general, the plaque programs undertaken by larger cities are more elaborate and require greater management than would be feasible in South Frontenac. For that reason, we have discounted the programs in place in Ottawa, Toronto, London, Guelph, or outside Ontario: Edmonton, Vancouver, Calgary and Winnipeg. Similarly federal and provincial programs were not viewed as appropriate models, although all of these programs have interesting features and approaches that could be worth a quick review by Township staff.
1 Page 4 of 12
Among the Ontario Townships which we surveyed a major consideration was the number of already existing municipally designated properties and sites. Several Townships have actively pursued designation of heritage properties in the past, and this in turn has lowered resistance to designation. Often these programs are now popular with owners of heritage properties and owners who are prepared to seek designation in the future. In these Townships heritage marker programs tend to focus almost exclusively on properties that are already designated, and new designations are added to the program as they occur. Other townships have far fewer designated properties. Some have no plaque programs or rely on other heritage organizations to take on this responsibility. Several have plaque programs such as Russell but take care to indicate that the erection of a plaque does not mean the site is designated as a municipal historic resource and that therefore the plaque program has no heritage conservation implications. The plaques are purely commemorative and are intended to encourage heritage awareness. If placed on a designated property, it is the designation bylaw that confers protection of the structure or site and not the plaque. This careful decoupling of heritage awareness from heritage conservation might be an approach South Frontenac would wish to follow. Summary of specific program features: Loyalist Township has a very active and sophisticated program that includes not just buildings but a heritage conservation district and designation of a landscape feature in the form of 9 stone fences of historical interest and value. The Township has about 30 municipally designated buildings as well and roughly the same number of sites which have been identified as having historical significance, but which are not already designated. All designated properties are required to have a historic plaque. Some applicants may already have plaques in place, suggesting that the Township’s plaque program is not limited only to designated properties. Leeds and Thousand Islands Township has 17 designated sites and 81 listed properties on its register. There are also a further 8 sites in the Township with provincial, national or international designations. Many of these do have plaques but the Township appears to have no formal plaque program of its own. The Town of Gananoque has 20 designated sites and a further 8 sites are listed on its register. Several of these sites have historical plaques, but the Town has no formal plaque program. Most of the plaques have been erected by other jurisdictions (federal or provincial) or by local heritage organizations such as museums. Prince Edward County has a similarly sophisticated heritage conservation and commemoration program as Loyalist Township. It has two heritage conservation districts and 96 municipally designated sites. All designated sites receive a plaque.
2 Page 5 of 12
Russell Township seems to be similar to South Frontenac in that it has few designated sites and does not seem to make much use of a Heritage Register. It does, however, have an interesting plaque program that it makes sure is carefully distanced from designation. It has a total of 16 plaques in place that are also enhanced by an interactive Google map based page on the Township website. The plaques are also enhanced by additional information on that website. The Russell plaques, however, are probably not a good model for South Frontenac. They are rather large and as the Township is bilingual, the text appears in both English and French. Some plaques commemorate events or businesses and are not directly related to specific buildings still in place.
The Russell Township Disclaimer that ensures the plaque program is not assumed to also be a form of designation. Puslinch Township’s program has some interesting parallels with South Frontenac’s situation, although like Prince Edward and Loyalist Township’s it too has many identified sites of historical significance. It has 15 municipally designated sites and currently its register includes a further 97 sites. The Digital Archive feature attached to the interactive Google map on the Township website is an excellent feature.
Puslinch Township is careful to ensure that property owners consent to having their listed properties included on the interactive map and that the public is aware that these are private properties. Puslinch places plaques on all designated properties and, with owner consent, on listed and other significant structures and places. The program as detailed on the engagepuslinchca site has some interesting features. In 2000 as part of the Township’s millennium celebrations 100 small heritage marker plaques were commissioned. Local museums and community groups, along with property owners worked with the Township staff and Heritage Committee to allocate these markers. Priority was given to existing designated sites and to properties listed on the Register but which have no formal legal protection. Within a few years all of the original plaques were mounted on properties, and since then the Township, through its heritage committee, has been allocating additional 3 Page 6 of 12
plaques on an annual basis for properties nominated by Township residents and individual property owners. Program Considerations: Plaque size, design, and type – Most plaque or heritage marker programs have adopted one of three basic plaque types. Many choose a simple badge or disk that indicates the property has historical significance but without including any details of that significance. In most cases, this additional information is made available through interactive maps, websites, published walking and driving tours or some other means. One advantage of this approach is that these plaques can be made in advance and are not custom designs or require custom fabrication. Examples below:
Other programs include some basic identifying information such as date of construction, name of site, original owners or the like. These can use a standard design template but do require individual fabrication. One variation on this type of plaque is being used in Kingston where there is a slight design difference between plaques placed on designated sites – the plaque specifies this – and sites of historical significance which are not so protected. Examples below:
4 Page 7 of 12
Finally many programs produce plaques and markers with images of the property (often archival) and a relatively complete account of the historic significance of the property in question. These plaques emphasis the commemorative/heritage awareness side of historical recognition programs, and provide immediate information on this. They do not require visitors to access a website or publication for more information on the property. But they do require custom design and fabrication, and they cannot be created in advance. Examples below:
One of the first considerations then for any program would be the style of plaque to use. These plaques can be fabricated in a variety of designs and materials ranging from metal to porcelain enamel to less durable materials like wood, plastic, or fibreglass. This would be a design and procurement issue that Township staff would need to consider.
5 Page 8 of 12
Criteria for Recognition: Programs also need to establish criteria for what properties and sites should receive plaques. In the case of South Frontenac this would almost certainly include, by definition, any designated properties, but beyond that alternative criteria would need to be established and some process for nomination and evaluation would be required. The Puslinch approach of creating a fixed number of plaques and then distributing them as part of a celebration or to mark an anniversary (perhaps the bicentennial of the first work on the Rideau Canal in 2026 which opened South Frontenac to development) also offers a chance to encourage public involvement in the nomination process. Creation of Supporting Information Sources: Most programs that are based on simple markers with no interpretive text or images rely on interactive maps, websites, on-line or printed walking and driving tours or other similar approaches to make the public aware of why a building or site merited this recognition. This does require on-going program support from Township staff in Planning, Communications, and potentially other areas. Plaque costs: Without a decision on design or materials, any estimate of plaque costs would be premature. However, we did contact a few Townships with programs that South Frontenac might want to emulate. For example, Loyalist Township produces plaques for all of its designated sites. These plaques have a standard design but do include additional information relating to the site in question, including date of construction, name of property, and a brief summary of significant or original owners and builders.
Township staff have told us that the original program budgeted approximately $200 per plaque in 2018. This figure was found to be inadequate, and currently the Township estimates that the cost of individual plaques is about $475. The Puslinch approach with a generic marker that can be produced multiple times would reduce these fabrication costs. Potential Candidates for inclusion in the program: Any plaque program undertaken by South Frontenac Township could probably begin by considering the list of 89 potential sites generated by a previous Advisory Committee in 2022.
6 Page 9 of 12
This is that list: Street Name
Address
Name
District
Type
Ownership
Year Built
Amelia Street
4350
Sydenham Holiness Church
L
Church
1899
Amelia Street
4361
Wesleyan Methodist Church
L
Church
1900
Battersea Road
2965
Battersea Road
2989
Battersea Road
3145
Battersea Road
3627
Sunbury United Church
S
Church
Battersea Road
3760
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
S
Church
4448
Sandhill Cemetery Vault
S
Church
Battersea Road
Private
1990 1852
??
Battersea School S.S.6
School
1847
Bear Creek Road
??
Silvertop Cottage
1900
Bedford Mills
??
B
Trappers Cottage Church
Boyce Road
4064
P
Stone House
Boyce Road
4086
P
Stone House
Boyce Road
4106
P
Stone House
Desert Lake Free Methodist Church
L
Church
1846
St. Andrew’s Anglican Church
B
Church
1925
Harrowsmith St. Peter’s Anglican Church
P
Church
1925
Braken Road Canoe Lake Road
St. Stephen’s Anglican Church
2106 ??
Cedar Haven Lane
29
Church Street
3964
Colebrooke Road
1226
Colebrooke Road
4145
Corner of Church and Portland
Farmhouse
St. Paul’s Anglican Church
L
Church
Cross Street
4664
Bethel Penecostal Church
S
Church
1912
First lake Road
6313
The Blue Roof Farm
George Street
4432
Township Offices - Women’s Institute
German Road
4735
Petword Free Methodist Church
P
Church
1891
Green Bay Road
32
United Church of Burridge
B
Church
1891
Green Field Road
3852
Harrowsmith Road
3958
P
Church
1872
Harrowsmith Road
3981
Harrowsmith Presbyterian Methodist Church Brad’s House
P
House
Harrowsmith Road
4358
Old Church
Henderson Road
4115
Henderson Road
4241
Henderson Road
4247
Holleford Road
3849
P
Church
1880
Holleford Road
4428
Holleford Road
4789
Holleford Road
4797 School
1838
Keelerville??
??
1907
Holleford United Episcopal Methodist Church
Kellerville School
7 Page 10 of 12
Latimer Road
3877
Latimer Road
4382
Latimer Road
4617
Latimer Road
4642
Latimer Road
4647
Latimer Road
4681
Inverary United Church
Leveque Road
6034
The Bellrock School House
Main Street
6024
Bellrock Mill
Maria Street
3797
Blacksmiths Shop
McFadden Road
5238
Millburn Road
4556
Petworth Road
1273
Petworth Road
4060
Petworth Road
4275
Sigsworth House
Stone House
Petworth Road
5246
Petworth Mill
Mill
Perth Road
4101
Redmond Road
3255
Free Methodist Church
Church
Road 38
3964
Anglican Church
P
Road 38
4941
Abrams Home
P
Road 38
4979
St. Paul’s United Church
P
Church
1919
Road 38
5592
Hartington Methodist Church
P
Church
1873
Road 38
5595
South Frontenac Museum
P
Stone House
Road 38
6652
The Asselstine Hotel
Road 38
6689
Trinity United Church
P
Church
1910
Road 38
6724
The Doctors House
Road 38
6791
P
Church
1940
Road 38
6826
St. Martins in the Fields Anglican Church The Ice House (Asselstine Hardware)
Round Lake Road
3687
Rutledge Road
1423
Rutledge Road
2069
Rutledge Road
2168
Rutledge Road
2279
Rutledge Road
2869
Stage Coach Road
3338
Stage Coach Road
3542
Stage Coach Road
4295
Grace United Church
L
Church
1861
Sumac Road
3119
Sunbury Road
2754
St. John’s Anglican Church
S
Church
1863
Sunbury Road
3105
Sunbury Road
3127
Sunbury Road
3136
Sydenham Road
3977
St. Patricks Roman Catholic Church
L
Church
1858
Verona Street
6037
The Saw Mill
Washburn Road
2448
Washburn Road
2616
S
Church
1877
Wilmer United Church
L
Church
1912
Milburn School
S
School
1860
Quaker Meeting House
Church
Church
8 Page 11 of 12
Wellington Street
2219
Wilmer Road
4282
Winding Creek Lane
1014
Yarker Road
4094
Yarker Road
4208
Battersea United Church
S
Church
1858
9 Page 12 of 12
