About 2,000 London properties with heritage significance stand to lose important protections from demolition when changes to Ontario’s Heritage Act take effect on Jan. 1, 2027.
As that deadline approaches, city staff have put forward a list of 13 buildings for council to consider for full protection. In some cases, those efforts are getting push back from property owners and members of city council.
The urgency is created by provincial rules passed in 2022 that require municipalities to either designate properties for full heritage protection or remove them from lists of properties that have heritage potential, but haven’t been granted full protection.
London has about 2,000 properties on its list, which is called the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources. When owners of properties on the register apply for a demolition permit, the property is automatically evaluated and considered for the protection that comes with full heritage designation.
The changes will mean the register will be cleared on Jan. 1, leaving owners of those properties free to demolish or alter their buildings without triggering a heritage assessment.
‘A backwards step’
It’s a situation Maggie Whalley, a board member of the London branch of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario (ACO), said will leave hundreds of old buildings vulnerable.
“To me it’s a backwards step,” said Whalley. “Most countries, most societies, have come to value their heritage much more and this is going the other way, it seems strange to me.”
Full heritage designation for properties is still possible after the new year, however properties removed from the registry won’t be allowed back on the list for five years. There are a number of options that could trigger a heritage assessment, including a request by a property owner or a member of council.
Last year with the delisting deadline closing in, city council asked staff to prioritize 13 London properties to be considered for full heritage protection.
Those properties are being put forward at council planning committee meetings this year, a handful at a time, for possible designation.
Whalley said it’s a process that will allow the city’s heritage registry — and all the work and research that went into creating it — to fall into irrelevance.
“To lose the list, is really bad news,” she said.
Heritage designation? Not everyone wants it
Council’s planning committee voted to approve a request by the owner of this building, at 471 Nightingale Avenue, to not grant the property heritage designation. (Andrew Lupton/CBC News)
Not everyone is in favour of heritage designation.
Some property owners say the heritage rules can be restrictive, expensive, and in some cases, outright ridiculous. In 2023 a home owner in Wortley Village got into a tangle with the city when he used vinyl railings in a porch restoration of his heritage home.
He started the work without a permit and in the end he avoided having to re-do the porch reno.
Last week Patrick Malloy, owner of 471 Nightingale Ave., made a plea against heritage designation for his building off Dundas Street. The six-storey brick building is the former home of the Hunt Brothers Flour Mill and is currently in use as the Nova Craft canoe factory.
Malloy told the committee when he bought the building 30 years ago, it was neglected and pigeon-invested. Over time, he’s made extensive repairs and upgrades but said heritage designation would add $2 million to the cost to maintain and insure the building.
“The greatest threat to this building is not its age,” said Malloy. “The greatest threat is making it impossible to own and operate.”
Can’t hand-tie property owners, councillor says
Coun. Peter Cuddy said he opposes heritage designation in cases where it puts an undue burden on the property owner. (Colin Butler/CBC News)
The committee voted unanimously to accept the staff report, but to not move ahead with heritage designation.
Coun. Peter Cuddy said the city should step carefully to ensure that heritage designation isn’t onerous for property owners.
“Any time we put a resident in a financial burden to accommodate our heritage needs, we have a problem and we cant do that,” he said.
Art Deco inspired apartment in Old North
Another building up for heritage designation at last week’s meeting was the Norbert Apartments at 242 Huron St. The three-storey building dates from 1935 and its façade has decorative elements inspired by the Art Deco style.
Whether the Norbert Apartment building gets designated before Jan. 1 remains an open question. The city staff report said the owners didn’t respond when contacted about the heritage designation process in October and again in April.
Ray Stanton, of the building’s owner London Property Corp., wrote to the committee on July 10 requesting more time.
“I was unaware that this process has been undertaken and I have concerns about the implications and potential impacts that this designation will have on my property,” he wrote.
The committee voted to give the owner more time, though Coun. Sam Trosow worried about the impending deadline.
“It’s very important this gets done in a timely manner,” he said.
The list of other buildings up for designation ahead of the Jan. 1 deadline includes two churches, a synagogue and older homes in Old North.
Whalley disagrees heritage designations are overly restrictive for property owners. She said the rules are mainly aimed at preserving exterior details.
She said during the AGO’s neighbourhood walks, people are sometimes surprised to see heritage-designated properties that have undergone tasteful renovations.
“It doesn’t turn the property into a museum,” she said. “People are amazed. It’s just a few extra steps to get these things approved, it doesn’t mean you can’t do anything. It’s an entrenched mindset and it’s a pity that we can’t get past that.”
