County News
Whose heritage is it?
Colonel Henry Young’s home on East Lake Road was the first United Empire Loyalist residence built in Prince Edward County.
Council wary of property owner seeking collaboration
Council doesn’t do vague. In fact, if you want to develop the oldest United Empire Loyalist (UEL) home in the region, you had better have a clear vision and specific plans—before you come to council. Otherwise, you are likely to be tossed out on your ear in front of Shire Hall.
It didn’t help that council was already a bit irritated by his emails when Merril Mascarenhas took to the podium on Thursday. But things got considerably worse for him when he pressed for collaboration, rather than a yes or no to a specific proposal.
THE BACKSTORY
Mascarenhas’s story begins with a very old house on County Road 11, commonly referred to as East Lake Road. The home was built in 1815, half a century before confederation, by Colonel Henry Young. He was the first of the United Empire Loyalists to settle in the County. After the Revolutionary War, Young retired from the army and was granted 3,000 acres from Sandbanks to the east end of East Lake on the north shore of the lake.
Young’s story provides compelling insight into the settling of the County. But it is his home and surrounding land that have, once again, revealed Shire Hall’s complicated relationship with the County’s built heritage—particularly when it is held by private owners.
The Young home was included on a list of the County’s heritage resources—less than a full historical designation—until then-owners asked for it to be delisted in 2013. They were trying to sell the property and the designation was viewed by prospective buyers as a deterrent. Council eventually overruled advice from the Prince Edward County Heritage Advisory Committee (PEHAC) and removed the property from the list.
Enter Mascarenhas. He purchased the property in 2015. Since then, he has tried to figure out what is needed to restore the property— both structurally and culturally—to raise its profile as the important UEL asset that he and others believe the home and property represents. He figures this will cost about $500,000.
He is also trying to figure out how to exploit the property’s heritage in a way that could generate revenue to help pay for the restoration.
This is where his ideas run aground at Shire Hall.
MAKING HISTORY PAY
He believes that as the owner of a heritage and cultural facility, he should be given some latitude to figure out what the market needs within a cultural, historic, arts or tourism context. He suggests that just as farm wineries are permitted small commercial activities on their property, heritage properties should share similar considerations. County officials would rather he spell out in detail what he wants to do—they will then decide if it is permissible.
Mascarenhas says rather than proceed down a series of dead-ends, he would prefer a collaborative discussion about what might be possible. This, he suggests, would be more productive.
But the longer he enunciated this view, the more he managed to irritate Mayor Robert Quaiff and other councillors.
“It’s unclear what you want to do,” said Mayor Quaiff. “Our rules are there for a reason. We need to protect the neighbours.”
Quaiff dimissed the comparison with wineries, noting they are rooted in the County’s agricultural heritage. Mascarenhas tried to make the point that the property’s UEL heritage is also important.
Earlier, the County’s commissioner for engineering, development and works, Robert McAuley set the tone for the County’s discomfort in dealing with a hypothetical situation.
“I don’t fully understand the scope of what is being proposed,” said McAuley, explaining how this matter ended up on a council agenda.
But when Mascarenhas tried to spell out the possibility of small heritage and historical gatherings on the property, it only served to prompt more questions. How many events? How frequently? How many people?
Mascarenhas said these are issues he wants to discuss collaboratively with all stakeholders around the table— the United Empire Loyalist’s Association, PEHAC and the County, among others.
“I am looking to share this property with others,” said Mascarenhas. “It requires investment. I can’t do it alone. There isn’t clarity about what I can do on this property. We are seeking your co-operation with a historic asset.”
A MATTER OF TRUST
But councillors such as Roy Pennell weren’t prepared to trust Mascarenhas. He wants to evaluate a detailed business plan.
“Without a business plan, I don’t know how you want to fix [the property],” said Pennell. “How do I know you won’t fundraise for whatever?”
Mayor Quaiff assured Mascarenhas that the County was collaborating with him, but they needed more detail.
“We are getting there,” assured Quaiff.
It wasn’t exactly clear to Mascarenhas, as he left Shire Hall, where “there” was.
Thank you for explaining the situation re the Young property. I do not reside in P.E.C. but would gladly pay more in a municipal tax that would help preserve such properties. I hope the parties involved come to a satisfactory conclusion.
There are basically two ways to preserve built heritage; inside or outside heritage regulation.
Preservation of heritage buildings within the legal system produced by the Ontario Heritage Act, is in fact the strict regulation of built heritage, and regulation enforced by legislation is a form of governance. Canadians are governed more by regulation than general legislation.
Once the property is delisted by the owner, or removed from the inventory of heritage buildings, it is no longer subject to any community obligations, and also no longer eligible for government assistance. Delisting usually makes it more attractive for resale, ie: as an unencumbered property, but it closes the door to community input and control.
One would think that the formal disconnect would also end any lingering sense of ownership or control in the minds of the community, but a few people will always claim some sense of ownership, though they did not act when there was ample opportunity for those concerned to take steps to ensure the protection of the Young house. Since this is (was?)the county’s premier heritage property, and still in reasonable condition,it would have made a wise investment for the community. The fact that council did not move to acquire the Young property reveals a basic political reality in the County that few are willing to admit, but those of us who have worked in heritage preservation have suspected for some time. The truth about heritage interest in PEC is emerging now. Street evidence is very telling, and it suggests that genuine interest in heritage preservation in PEC, a starting node for Upper Canada, has been quite low. One local educator guessed it to be as low as 20%.
The Wellington Times could do PEC a valuable service by measuring the real interest in heritage preservation in a public survey. The most important question to ask everyone, not just those attending heritage meetings,is how much are you willing to add to your annual tax bill; $50, $100, $250, to cover heritage preservation? Collecting meaningful data is the first step to measuring the community’s appetite for real historic preservation. Everyone is quick to assume ownership of heritage properties, but few are willing to support it financially, year after year.
If the new owner bought the property on the strength of its heritage value, and expected Council to partner up with him in future, then he should have made some arrangements with Council before he bought the place. Helping Mr.Mascarenhas with his project now, even if it involves collecting marketing research data and developing strategies, would confirm that the local heritage committee is truly interested in preserving built heritage whether it’s controlled directly by them, or performed in a voluntary way outside the legal rigors of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Col. Henry Young U.E. is my 5th maternal Great Grandfather. I would be very interested in council’s ultimate ruling re this historic property. Please continue to protect our Canadian heritage.
Libby (Coon) Henson
Mono, On.
He is also my 6th Great Grandfather. We are from the line of the daughter Sarah B Feb 9, 1776. Are you aware of your line of ancestors in this family. I am from LaSalle, ON. My brother Gary Reid has completed the family tree and all the information is in there. Interesting to see your comment.
Darlene