The Farm as Cultural Heritage Landscape, part two

This post from October 31, 2018 is here.

It is really easy to subscribe to OHA+M on the Heritage Resources Centre website. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

The Farm as Cultural Heritage Landscape, part one

This post from October 9, 2018 is here.

It is really easy to subscribe to OHA+M on the Heritage Resources Centre website. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

Rails and Trails

This post from August 6, 2018 is here.

It is really easy to subscribe to OHA+M on the Heritage Resources Centre website. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

Cultural heritage landscapes, part three: Henry drills down

This post from July 16, 2018 is here.

It is really easy to subscribe to OHA+M on the Heritage Resources Centre website. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

Cultural heritage landscapes, part two… or a matter of significance

This post from June 21, 2018 is here.

It is really easy to subscribe to OHA+M on the Heritage Resources Centre website. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

Cultural heritage landscapes, part one

For those who have not yet subscribed on the UWaterloo Heritage Resources Centre website, or have had technical difficulties subscribing*, this post from May 26, 2018 is here: https://uwaterloo.ca/heritage-resources-centre/blog/post/cultural-heritage-landscapes-part-one.

*It is now really easy to subscribe. Just put yourself on the mailing list!

Wish list changes to the OHA, #3 ... or a consistent appeal process

For those who have not yet subscribed on the UWaterloo Heritage Resources Centre website, or have had technical difficulties subscribing, this post from April 27, 2018 is here:
https://uwaterloo.ca/heritage-resources-centre/blog/post/wish-list-changes-oha-3-or-consistent-appeal-process.

Good heritage stats are hard to find, 3rd edition

For those who have not yet subscribed on the UWaterloo Heritage Resources Centre website, or have had technical difficulties subscribing, this post from April 5, 2018 is here: https://uwaterloo.ca/heritage-resources-centre/blog/post/good-heritage-stats-are-hard-find-3rd-edition.

A Tax Class for Heritage Gets the Cold Shoulder

For those who have not yet subscribed on the UWaterloo Heritage Resources Centre website, or have had technical difficulties subscribing, this post from March 16, 2018 is here:
https://uwaterloo.ca/heritage-resources-centre/blog/post/tax-class-heritage-gets-cold-shoulder.

It’s in the Bag: A Tax Class for Culture Hubs

For those who have not yet subscribed on the UWaterloo Heritage Resources Centre website, or have had technical difficulties subscribing, this post from February 20, 2018 is here:
https://uwaterloo.ca/heritage-resources-centre/blog/post/its-bag-tax-class-culture-hubs.

OHA+M moves to Waterloo

In “The Blog Takes a Bow”  late last year I signalled that OHA+M would be relocating to the website of UWaterloo’s Heritage Resources Centre.  Well, c’est arrivé!

Heritage Resources Centre Director Michael Drescher and blogger Dan Schneider mark the new HRC-OHA+M alliance in Waterloo last month.

The hosting of the blog by the HRC was announced January 15 at the HRC’s annual general meeting in Waterloo.

Check out OHA+M at its new home here.

It goes without saying that I am thrilled by the move and the opportunity it represents.

I launched the blog three years ago, during Heritage Week 2015, with an article marking the 40th anniversary of the Ontario Heritage Act and the tenth anniversary of the 2005 overhaul of the act.  With new articles every few weeks, the blog now boasts more than 70 posts on a wide range of topics.  The focus from the start has been Ontario’s legal and policy framework for cultural heritage as well as current public policy initiatives and issues.

Let’s face it, serious discussion of heritage policy can be a bit dry and technical analysis of legislation, in particular, can make the eyes roll.  While I try to keep things engaging — and occasionally take a break from the “heavy stuff” altogether — OHA+M is not for all tastes.  A friend (?) recently referred to the blog as bigyawn.com!  Haha.

Okay, it is a blog for heritage policy wonks.  And, within that niche audience, the reception has been very gratifying.  OHA+M has come to be seen as a respected source of information and commentary.  Last October the blog earned its creator and blogger an Award of Excellence for Heritage Education, Awareness and Scholarship from the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals.

The new association with the Heritage Resources Centre is a great fit for OHA+M.

Many of you will be familiar with the centre and its former director, Robert Shipley. Robert retired last year, although continues to be involved with the HRC.  The new director, Michael Drescher, is committed to strengthening the HRC’s mandate.  That mandate, according to the website, is “to promote a better understanding of natural and human heritage for the improvement of planning management and public policy, through research, education, and extension work.”

Michael says the collaboration on OHA+M “will expand the HRC’s role as ideas generator and centre for the discussion and debate of heritage legislation, policy and issues.”

For my part the commitment of the HRC to house, manage and promote OHA+M marks a major turning point and takes the blog to a whole new level.  I’m excited to see how this works out.

What will change, besides a different address and new look?  Not much from the reader's standpoint.  But we do expect the commenting function will be friendlier, making it easier for readers to share their thoughts.  If you’ve never commented on something you liked, didn’t agree with, or thought something more could be said — why not give it a try?

What you need to know: The “old” blog at the blogspot address will continue to exist but will essentially go dormant.  This will be the last post to that site.  From now on new posts will go up at the new HRC address, where all previous posts can also be found.

To continue to receive new posts, followers and subscribers of the blog (or me) will need to re-subscribe using the RSS Notifier app (at the upper right on the new home page).

Please re-subscribe — we don’t want to lose you.  And if you’re not a subscriber, there’s no better time!

... and ahead in 2018

As for 2018, here are some things to watch for. 

The Trudeau government’s reaction to the ENVI report

The report of the Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development came down on December 8.  Minister McKenna has 120 days to respond.

The report is a strong one and contains a set of 17 excellent recommendations for government action.  There is no reason the government should not move on all of them.

The National Trust for Canada, which is leading on the file, isn’t idly counting down until April.  It has written a letter to the Minister, to be endorsed by umpteen heritage sector organizations across the country, identifying a number of priorities that can be acted upon quickly and urging that the 2018 federal budget include measures that will encourage investment in the revitalization of historic places (particularly tax-based incentives and grants/contributions).  The letter also requests a meeting with the Minister to discuss and assist.

The government has a once-in-a-generation opportunity here.  Will they take it?

Rollout of changes to the OMB

Every one interested in planning and heritage is watching — and wondering — how this will play out.

Bill 139, which (among other things) converts the Ontario Municipal Board to the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal and makes changes to its scope and powers, received royal assent last month. By my analysis there is less here than meets the eye, but there will be real implications for our planning appeal system, even if these are more than a little unclear at this point.  

While the legislation is a done deal, it’s not yet in force.  The changes come into effect “on a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor.”  Having legislation take effect on proclamation is done to give the government time to put the needed administrative infrastructure in place.  For example, Bill 139 creates a new agency, the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre, which will provide support services (including information on land use planning, guidance on tribunal procedures, and advice or representation) with respect to Planning Act matters under the jurisdiction of the OMB/Local Planning Appeals Tribunal.  This agency will have to be set up.

Apparently there has been a great surge in planning applications by those anxious to get in under the wire and have their applications considered under the current system. The government has set rules for the transition. [1]

The new system is supposed to be in place by the spring.  Given the transition rules it is unlikely the first appeals will be heard by the LPAT until late in the year.  So we won’t get a sense how this is really working until 2019. 

Heritage as an issue in provincial and municipal elections

The question is really whether heritage will — or won’t — be an issue in the 2018 elections at the provincial and local levels.  The answer may depend on people like you.

What questions would you put to the candidates?

Also on my radar for 2018 will be:

• the results of the efforts, led by Mohawk College instructor and old windows champion Shannon Kyles, to get the province to change its energy conservation incentive programs to include the restoration of existing window and doors,
• the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s long-awaited new guide to heritage resources in the land use planning process, and
• new appointments to the Conservation Review Board.

Shannon Kyles, drill in hand

Note 1: The rules are:

• appeals that are already before the OMB as of the date of Royal Assent (December 12) would be subject to the existing rules and would be heard by the Ontario Municipal Board 
• appeals made after the new rules are proclaimed into force (date unknown at this point — likely April) would be subject to the new rules and heard by the new Local Planning Appeal Tribunal 
• appeals of matters between the date of Royal Assent and the date that the new rules are proclaimed: 
• would be heard by the Ontario Municipal Board if the planning matter began (e.g. the complete application was received) before the date of Royal Assent; and 
• would be heard by the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal if the planning matter began after the date of Royal Assent.

Looking back at 2017 ...

Happy New Year!

Since everyone else is doing it — ruminating on the old year left behind and prognosticating on the one just launched — I suppose I should too.

For 2017, here are my top three heritage highlights. 

Steve Otto’s appointment to the Order of Canada

Just as the year ended, long-time heritage stalwart Steve Otto received the county’s highest accolade.  The citation for his appointment as a Member of the Order of Canada reads: “For his sustained advocacy in support of heritage conservation and for his contributions to preserving and promoting Ontario’s buildings and architecture.”

For those who don’t know Steve, there is more on his background and accomplishments on the Architectural Conservancy Ontario website here.

I first got to know Steve when I joined the then-Ministry of Culture and Recreation in 1980.  Steve was the first executive director of the Heritage Conservation Division. (Imagine a whole division devoted to heritage — how times have changed; but then the the work of the division encompassed Ontario Heritage Foundation (now OHT) programs as well as ministry heritage programs.)  Until his departure in 1981 or so to work on an Ontario bicentennial project, Steve was the boss of Larry Ryan, the manager of the Heritage Trust unit, who was my boss.

Steve was/is famously meticulous and I can still conjure up his trademark little notes to staff, well-crafted in black ink, suggesting follow-up on this or that.   He may have found his true calling later doing historical research — Anthony Adamson once called him a “ferret” for his ability in this respect — and as a writer and advocate.

I remember Steve as a strong promoter of the fledgling OHF heritage easements program (my bailiwick).  I fondly recall his counselling me not to say that we “took” easements on properties.  One “took” snuff, said Steve; one acquired easements.

Hearty congratulations, Steve.

Steve with friend Lynne DiStefano, St. Marys, 1995

The little bill that (almost) could

It’s been quite a ride — much of it documented in these pages — for Peter Van Loan’s private member’s bill to introduce incentives for heritage conservation into our tax system.

Mr. Van Loan, the Conservative Critic for Canadian Heritage and National Historic Sites, launched the bill in December 2016.  Having survived a Second Reading vote last March, it got taken up by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI) in the fall.  But it died when the committee decided at the end of November not to proceed with it.

Bill C-323 would have amended the Income Tax Act to create a 20% tax credit for the costs of rehabilitation of recognized historic places. It would also have provided an accelerated capital cost allowance for capital expenditures incurred in rehabilitation projects.

As the National Trust for Canada noted, passage of the bill would have been a real game-changer for built heritage in this country. But, while that was not to be, the bill still had quite an impact.

Coming seemingly out of nowhere, the bill prompted much discussion and debate — inside and outside the House — on Canada’s cultural heritage, the federal government’s part in its conservation and the efficacy of heritage tax measures in particular. Generating widespread support from heritage advocates nation-wide, the bill was a major catalyst for a study on all of the above by the ENVI committee, which resulted in its landmark report Preserving Canada’s Heritage: The Foundation For Tomorrow, released in early December. A report which ironically includes a strong recommendation for tax incentives.

Hats off to Peter Van Loan for this important and valiant effort.

The Gore Park miracle

Miracle may be overstating just a bit, but it came as a wonderful surprise when the developers of the historic Gore Park buildings in downtown Hamilton decided in November to … save them all.  (All the façades, that is.)  This after Hamilton city council voted last January to approve their application for complete demolition of two of the four designated structures.

The four Gore Park buildings with 24 and 28 King St. W. on left

24 - 28 would have been replaced by this

Assuming follow-through, we have a happy ending to one of the province’s highest-profile and highest-stakes heritage controversies, a five-year saga going back to 2012.

According to news reports, the developers credit their change of heart to a “third party consultant” who showed them a way to preserve the façades of the doomed buildings that hadn’t previously been considered.  (Okay, let’s find this guy/gal and get them to weigh in on every other situation where we’re told that a building is too far gone and not even the façade can be saved.)

Kudos to the developers (and their consultant) for this sensible and character-preserving result.  And special kudos to the Friends of the Gore who campaigned tirelessly for the preservation of the Gore Park buildings, including promoting a change.org petition.

Friends of the Gore Carol Priamo (left) and Diane Dent (right) receiving an

advocacy award from Cathy Nasmith at the October 2017 ACO awards dinner

Photo: Stephanie Mah

Time to get on with a Gore Park HCD!

Did I say three highlights of 2017 ... can we squeeze in one more?

The restoration and reopening of the Brockville railway tunnel

Last August Brockville proudly reopened its magnificent old railway tunnel under the downtown.  The project involved a complete restoration of the 525 metre-long structure, with some added bells and whistles.

I have just two words for this project — WOWWY ZOWWY! Put Brockville on your list for 2018.

Brockville railway tunnel

Coming shortly: what to watch for in 2018.