The Heritage Oakville committee approved two heritage permit applications and endorsed $252,000 in grant funding for 28 heritage restoration projects. The meeting included detailed discussion of conditions for work on a circa 1912 Edwardian house at 82 Second Street and a debate over how replacement cedar siding should be finished on a designated 1975 modernist lakefront property at 2366 Carrington Place. Committee members also noted the heritage grant program is “still oversubscribed,” with one member saying they would “remember around budget time” to seek more funding.

Topics Discussed

82 Second Street Heritage Permit Application

The committee approved a heritage permit for a circa 1912 Edwardian foursquare house with conditions. The application proposed demolishing rear additions, constructing a new garage, adding a side porch, and rehabilitating an existing structure for new uses: “Currently it is used for storage and the applicants are proposing to rehabilitate it to use as a pool cabana on the first floor and then a loft studio space on the second floor.”

Staff required that specific historic elements remain visible and be conserved, including that “the proposed wood shingles in the front gable and the north dormer are not supported as the current stucco half-timbering and wood trim and brackets are historic and should remain exposed.” Staff also required retention and restoration of historic wood windows and that first-storey brick not be covered.

Applicant representative Mr. Hicks told the committee the landscape plan was still being refined, saying: “I’ve just seen a landscape drawing yesterday that I think the committee and the staff will be quite pleased with in terms of how the project’s going to be further developed on the site.” The motion passed unanimously, and the permit included approval to remove three trees.

Cedar Siding Treatment Debate — 2366 Carrington Place

The committee debated whether replacement cedar siding on a designated 1975 modernist property should be finished to achieve a consistent grey appearance or allowed to weather naturally.

Committee member Jerry argued that cedar is typically selected with aging in mind: “Typically in architecture when something is designed with cedar natural cedar it is expected that it will age naturally.” He added that the colour relationship between materials was part of the design: “It shows the compatibility of the stone, the gray of the stone and the gray of the cedar.”

Mr. White noted that when the cedar was first installed it was not grey: “I would say though that when this material went on the building, it was in its in its natural kind of brown hue…” Jerry responded that, like copper, cedar is a natural material and that the original architect would have anticipated weathering: “When it’s applied to a building, it’s applied in the design concept generally and typically to age… I would say probably… 99% sure that he would have designed it with its aging component in mind.”

The committee ultimately approved the staff recommendation for the cedar siding replacement application (File: 2024107).

Heritage Grant Program — $252,000 Allocated

The committee endorsed funding for 28 heritage restoration projects, totaling $252,000, drawn from the annual program budget and carryforward funds. Staff summarized the program’s track record: “1.4 million over time of the program 13 years and 315 projects all together that amount leveraged off the grant funding is 7.9 million.”

Budget Pressure and Future Funding Needs

During discussion of the grant program’s demand, John said the program remains “still overs subscribed” and indicated he would raise funding during a future budget cycle: “I think we’ll obviously remember around budget time to potentially ask for a little bit more.” He also linked future demand to additional designations: “I think as the new designated properties kind of understand the maintenance that goes along with it, they’ll start reaching out more. So, I think we’ll have even more pressure going forward.”

Public Participation Requirements

The chair reminded attendees that the committee is advisory and that its recommendations proceed to council: “Any recommendations that we make today will go to the council meeting at its meeting on May the 19th at 6:30 p.m.”

Motions

Passed: - Motion to approve heritage permit application for 82 Second Street with conditions (unanimous) - Motion to approve heritage permit application for 2366 Carrington Place (File: 2024107) for cedar siding replacement - Motion to endorse Appendix A grant projects and amounts for heritage property restoration

Accepted as Information: - Delegated heritage permits circulated to committee

Attendees

• Jerry (committee member)
• John (councilor)
• Mr. White (architect/applicant representative)
• Mr. Hicks (applicant representative)
• Chair (name not specified)

Note: Full attendance roster not provided in transcript.