Town takes ‘unique’ approach on Wauchope property preservatio

By Chris Simon Innisfil Scope March 2 2011

There may be a way to protect the Wauchope House from destruction, without having it listed on the municipal heritage register.

Town council attempted to bridge the gap between a recommendation from its heritage committee — which wanted the home placed on the registry — and the Wauchope Family, during a meeting Wednesday night. Council will enter into negotiations with the Wauchopes, in an attempt to ensure the home is protected, without the need for registration. The move was approved in a 7-2 recorded vote.

As a result, the sides will have 90 days to reach a negotiated settlement. 

“Council will, in short order, be considering the implications of the community strategic plan, Inspiring Innisfil 2020, along with associated (heritage) strategies,” said councillor Doug Lougheed. “The Wauchope Family has expressed a desire to work with the town to find a solution. The home does meet the heritage test, which is what the committee was charged to (find out). It’s not my function, as a councillor, to put any financial impact on property owners. The Wauchopes clearly indicated they did not want their property on the registry. (But) they do not want to see it demolished; they’ve put a lot of love and care into that house. The problem with this property is its in a changing zone in an actively developing area. That leads to a disconnect in value. All we’re asking for is some breathing room to put the right policies in place.” 

The dispute has pitted individual property rights against the need to protect historically significant landmarks, and sparked outcries from residents on both sides of the issue. By the start of the meeting, council had accepted 30 letters from residents, and correspondence from the Wauchope’s lawyer and the Ministry of Tourism and Culture.

“Once listed, no developer is going to be interested in acquiring the property,” said Wauchope lawyer George Gibson, addressing council. “The difference between the value of the property as it is, and as a potential development site is huge. This amounts to a penalty that no person should be allowed to suffer for the benefit of others. The Wauchopes have given much to this community, and now you are on the verge of destroying their financial position. If there is any way that such arbitrary and unfair action can be avoided, it should be explored to the fullest degree.”

The registry would set a 60-day restriction against demolition of the home, giving council an opportunity to provide permanent protection. 

The committee initially asked for the home to be placed on the registry during last year’s municipal election campaign, a decision that was deferred until the new term. Then in December, council asked the committee to prepare a more thorough report on the property, to help decide if placement was necessary.

During the campaign, former deputy mayor Gord Wauchope suggested he would have difficulty putting the home on the registry, since it is viewed by his family as a ‘retirement nest egg’. However, he has indicated the preservation of the house would be part of any condition of sale. 

Since that time, Gord’s wife Brenda has indicated the home is ‘deteriorating’, and in much rougher condition than suggested by heritage committee members.

“If this is rammed down the Wauchope’s throats, how many people are likely to be encouraged to actively participate in heritage preservation? I suspect it will lead to a complete loss of desire to maintain the features of other properties the committee finds so appealing, lest their property come under fire,” said Gibson. “This could result in a degradation of properties within the town.”

But other councillors say the move sets precedent. In 2008, the previous term placed the Barclay House on the register, without the consent of the homeowner. 

“The motion is reactive to a particular situation happening right now,” said councillor Lynn Dollin. “I’m a little uncomfortable with the fact it has become so personal, instead of about the property and where we’re going. We did (register Barclay) … it’s unfair to me to deal with two fairly similar situations differently. We try to deal with everyone fairly, or equally unfairly.”

Councillor Ken Simpson and mayor Barb Baguley voted against the plan. Simpson says the community’s heritage should take priority over the profitability of a property.

“What is going to happen to the house?” He said. “When I read this motion, it doesn’t tell me what the end result will be. I made a commitment to preserve the heritage of the community. I don’t think the need for profit and developer land should preclude the need to preserve heritage.”

Meanwhile, several council members chastised residents for the tone of the debate, noting the heritage committee had been unfairly criticized. 

“I’m proud of our heritage committee, they have responded and worked with the mandate proscribed by this council,” said Baguley. “When people volunteer their time … to lend their expertise, it hurts my feelings that we can’t accept the volunteerism in the spirit that it is for the betterment of the community. The opportunity was there (for others) to be on the committee. Our committee works diligently and in (the community’s) interest.”

Wauchope heritage home escapes registry

By Rick Vanderlinde Simcoe.com Mar 03, 2011 

INNISFIL — The Wauchopes have their wish — for now.

Their 135-year-old home will not be place on the town’s heritage registry for at least three months under a plan passed by council Wednesday night.

In a deal engineered by Coun. Doug Lougheed and Coun. Rod Boynton, former deputy mayor Gord Wauchope and his wife, Brenda, will not allow the Innisfil Beach Road house to be demolished for at least 90 days while they negotiate the home’s future with the town.

“They’ve agreed that they would work with the town and that they did not want to see the house demolished,” Lougheed said. “This gives us a little breathing room to put the right policies in place. We are dealing with people who are honourable. I think we have to have a little bit of trust.”

Council voted 7-2 in favour of the move, which means the house will not be registered under the Ontario Heritage Act. Mayor Barb Baguley and Coun. Ken Simpson opposed the plan.

As a member of the heritage committee, Lougheed recommended council register the house, which would require the owner to give 60 days notice before demolition.

However, as a councillor he voted against his committee’s recommendation after he learned placing the home on the registry could hamper its potential commercial value and drive away developers.

“It’s my basic philosophy that it’s not my function as councillor to place financial burden on property owners. As a result of my research, I’ve come to the conclusion that that would happen,” Lougheed said.

Lougheed said he hopes negotiations with the Wauchopes will lead to future town policies, including a funding source to help the town preserve heritage sites.

Council received 31 letters on the issue, with 22 urging them to vote against registering the property. Many Wauchope supporters said the town should pay “fair market value” to purchase and preserve the house.

But Deputy Mayor Dan Davidson said the municipality could never afford to buy heritage homes.

“Innisfil is not Disneyland with a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow,” Davidson said. “To buy this house could cost $1.2 million. I just couldn’t vote for that. That would be a 10 per cent tax hike.”

Some councillors questioned why the Wauchopes aren’t required to register their home, when council voted to register the Barclay house against the owner’s wishes in 2009.

Wauchope voted to have the Barclay house protected on the registry while he was deputy mayor. The move was controversial because the owners of the commercial property, which was for sale for about $1.6 million, didn’t want it designated as an historic site.

“It does seem unfair to deal with to fairly similar situations differently,” Dollin said. “We have strong opinions on both sides to this issue.”

But Boynton, who voted against registering the Barclay house, said council’s policies must evolve.

“Is this council so set in its ways that we can’t take new information and re-examine our decision?” Boynton said.

Town clerk/lawyer Jason Reynar advised that heritage decisions are made on an individual basis and do not set precedents.

Reynar added the town has the power to rescind a registration on a heritage home, which it could do for the Barclay house if it opted to.

About 10 heritage activists in the audience were clearly disappointed with council’s decision, saying the house should have been protected through provincial legislation, not a separate agreement.

Many of those activists were outranged when developers demolished a pioneer McConkey home to build a new plaza on Innisfil Beach Road. The Wauchope house is the last “McConkey” home in Alcona.