Once in a while we see a turn of phrase that really hits the nail on the head.
Such was the case at a Centre Wellington council meeting where councillor Fred Morris stated the obvious so well: “Have we passed the moment of practicality?”
The question came about as council debated whether or not to issue an intention to designate a little old house on Provost Lane in Fergus under the Ontario Heritage Act.
The property sold last fall for $142,000. The only reason we know that, is we actually viewed the home thinking it was a great buy and potentially a great project. We missed out on it by a few hours.
The place was, and is, in very rough shape. At best it would need to be gutted back to the walls and upgraded. But, and this is always the trouble with such projects: the scope of work is rarely known until the renovator is into it so deep, there is no point of return. That’s where the current owners find themselves.
It is hard to justify the expense to rejuvenate an old dwelling when the end product would be so greatly altered, its significance as a heritage property would be dubious.
We suspected it was a log home because it reminded us of a project we completed 15 years ago. The original farmstead on which our family settled in 1892 had a little log house that we were fortunate enough to restore tastefully. When we started renovating most neighbours thought it was a tear-down because the house was in such rough shape, having been out of our family’s ownership for three decades.
With a bit of vision and a less-than-business-like attitude for the funds invested, we now have a cozy rental home. Had it been left longer to suffer the elements, it may have reached an unredeemable state.
This expands on the point Morris was making about the moment of practicality. If such properties of historic interest can be restored, have to it. If however a structure has passed a point of practicality, there should be no question it’s time to start anew. It’s about that simple.
Restoring a heritage home and outbuildings is not for the faint of heart. It can be stressful and a tremendous drain on resources, but we applaud those who make that choice.
The Fergus property in question was not designated at the time of purchase and seeking to designate it now as a mechanism to thwart a demolition permit bid smacks of a heavy hand, which should be a real concern for all owners of heritage properties.
Heritage zealots flexing their muscles and quoting legislation, without offering up some sort of compensation to achieve their ends, seems unfair to us. It is these cases that cause many property owners with a passion for history to avoid heritage designations in the first place.
Council now has a chore on its hands that will boil down to striking a thoughtful balance between heritage preservation at any cost and the right of homeowners to make practical, pragmatic choices.
