Listen to this article
Estimated 4 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
More than 300 heritage properties in Cambridge, Ont., could lose their protection because of the province’s new More Homes Built Faster Act, say heritage supporters.
The housing bill introduced by the Ford government, known as Bill 23, got a lot of attention when it passed in November for how it speeds up new home construction. But it also changes parts of the Ontario Heritage Act, which means thousands of properties listed on local heritage registers might be taken off.
Karen Scott Booth, vice-president of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario’s Cambridge and North Dumfries branch, thinks this move is mainly to clear the way for infill projects but calls it “totally irresponsible.”
“It’s the destruction of what we, as a society, have valued for generations,” Scott Booth said. “All these buildings are not left to us to destroy, they’re left to us to preserve and conserve.”
The City of Cambridge currently has 332 properties on its heritage register. With this new law, city council has two years to officially designate them or else they’ll get dropped from the list.
Right now, if a property’s on the heritage register it has to meet certain rules and needs extra checks before any demolition. Bill 23 wants to get rid of that requirement.
Hardy Bromberg, who’s Cambridge’s deputy manager for community services and development, worries that not all buildings on the registry will get designated under these new rules.
“We are afraid we may lose many of them,” he said.
Bromberg pointed out that Cambridge has been pretty good about reusing old buildings around town. He gave examples like Blacksmith Lofts and Gaslight District in Galt.
“We want to keep as much of our past as possible,” Bromberg added.
The city plans to spend six to eight months looking over properties on the register so they can figure out which ones need protecting first. They also want property owners to know about grants that might help them maintain their historic homes.
Environmental benefits to retrofitting
The Architectural Conservancy of Ontario sent an open letter last December to Premier Doug Ford warning that these changes could do real damage across Ontario’s heritage sites.
“It is not an exaggeration to say that in two years, when municipalities will be forced to remove listed protection from most of the 31,000 or more heritage properties across Ontario, that it will start to rain buildings,” the letter said.
Hardy Bromberg, Cambridge’s deputy manager of community services and development, says there is fear not all the buildings currently on the registry will be designated. (Kate Bueckert/CBC)
“There is no evidence that heritage conservation frustrates housing provision, and plenty of evidence that when an unprotected community landmark is demolished, the public reaction is swift and unforgiving, with extreme frustration at the loss of both cultural and environmental value and material.”
This is why now those who care about preserving history are trying harder than ever to work with cities too,” Scott Booth explained.
She mentioned how developers along with towns should come up with creative ways to build more houses inside existing urban areas without messing up historic sites or green spaces protected by law.
A suggestion she brought up was promoting laneway homes plus other small extra units behind main houses.
“They’re just not being creative with land use,” Scott Booth said about provincial efforts.
Kae Elgie used to chair Architectural Conservancy’s board once noted reusing older buildings often takes less time than tearing everything down first then building anew.
“There are also environmental benefits to retrofitting and reusing heritage buildings,” Elgie added.
According To data from The Architectural Conservancy there are roughly thirty-two thousand registered historic places across Ontario at risk because of this new bill.
Source link
