Heritage committee endorses agreement for former high school

The southern facade of the former General Amherst High School was part of a heritage easement agreement discussed as part of the July 9 meeting of Amherstburg’s heritage committee.

The town’s heritage committee has endorsed a heritage easement agreement regarding the former General Amherst High School.

A draft heritage easement agreement between the Valente Development Corporation, the owners of the former high school property at 130 Sandwich St. S., and the Town of Amherstburg appeared on the heritage committee’s July 9 agenda. 

It has not yet gone before town council.

The draft agreement states the town agrees that Valente may perform “authorized work” including the dismantling and reconstruction of the 1922 and 1951 south-facing facades and the dismantling and commemoration of murals on the west wall of the former school gymnasiums. 

“The three murals constructed in 1967, described as: ‘Canada’s Centennial Year,’ “North to Freedom,’ and ‘New France,’ may be removed and shall be commemorated or re-interpreted on site. The existing plaques describing the three murals will be retained and reused alongside an interpretive plaque approved by the Town,” the draft agreement states.

Reconstruction of the 1922 and 1951 south facades that face Bill Wigle Park, “does not require the use of the existing foundations; however, the facades must maintain their current locations once reconstructed, unless an alternative location is explicitly identified and approved within a Heritage Alteration Permit.”

“The Owner may reconstruct elements of the original facade which are documented in the historical architectural drawings, or in historical photographs, and included in the Heritage Impact Assessment; the ornamental stone elements shall be salvaged from the south facade, as described in the Conservation Plan,” other items in the draft agreement read. “All ornamental stone elements, architectural detailing, brick coursing, brick patterns, fenestration, and physical dimensions as documented in the Conservation Plan, are to be reconstructed.”

Other parts of the draft heritage easement agreement  include: “Replacement brick may be utilized in the reconstruction of the facade. Any replacement brick units must be a technical match to the original in size, colour, and texture, subject to approval by the Director of Development Services or designate; Mortar utilized in the reconstruction must be compatible with salvaged ornamental stone elements to prevent accelerated decay of the original elements; and, once the 1922 and 1951 facades are dismantled, the Reconstruction of the facades shall be completed prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any structure on the Development Lands.”

Heritage planner Adam Coates told the committee said the heritage easement agreement “creates a legal framework that is registered on the property and title to manage historical significance during redevelopment.” 

Coates pointed out the clause that allows for new brick in the reconstruction of the south façade “but keeping many of the other elements in the façade including the patterns, the design elements, the stone elements, the fenestration and things of that nature.”

The agreement allows for the removal of three most northern murals along Laird Ave., Coates acknowledged, provided they are “properly commemorated or reinterpreted” on the property.

Coates said the draft agreement gives some guarantees as to what can happen on the site. 

The agreement mitigates risk, he added, stating the agreement is an appropriate path to deal with large projects such as the one proposed. 

“In general, these are the things we’ve agreed upon. Substantially, this is what the agreement looks like,” Coates told the committee, after emphasizing it still has to go to council.

Councillor Linden Crain asked if Valente Development Corporation is in favour of the agreement. Coates said he did not want to speak for the Valente group, but “we have worked together and I believe he is on board with this strategy because I believe the intent was always to do these things.”

“This hopefully gives him the guarantees that he needs to ensure ‘this is what I have to do. I know what I have to do’,” said Coates. “Again, I can’t speak for Valente Development but we have been working collectively and I believe we have come to a good agreement.”

Deputy Mayor Chris Gibb suggested a letter of endorsement may help town council get a better picture of what everyone’s comfort level is with the negotiated settlement.

“I think this is a better way to handle it than originally proposed,” said Gibb.

Gibb thanked Coates and his team for working with the developer.

“Maybe if there was a letter from Valente Development, that might help council. Taking off my heritage committee hat and putting my council hat on, that’s one thing I’d like to say,” said Gibb.

Heritage committee chair Simon Chamely questioned if a letter is necessary if no objections are heard prior to council’s consideration of the matter.

“The Heritage Act allows for the heritage easement agreement and they are required to go to the heritage committee before going to council,” Coates pointed out. “It requires a bylaw to enter into that agreement. It’s the bylaw that’s going to council.”

Committee member Stephanie Pouget-Papak said the draft agreement “does what we want it to do” and save the south façade and its architecture, also pointing out the agreements regarding the murals. 

“I think this is a good common ground,” said Pouget-Papak. “As a committee, we’re not trying to stop development but we’re trying not to lose our charm.”

Committee member Stephanie Thomson believed the draft agreement shows things “are headed in the right direction” and the basic understandings and requirements are being addressed.

Thomson believed the document needs a bit of “fine tuning but the legs of it are in place.”“I’m pleased with what I see. I’m pleased with the direction this is going,” she said. “I think that what we end up with in the town will be what the townspeople want and have made clear that they want, if this is to go ahead.”

Heritage committee endorses agreement for former high school

By Ron Giofu