Role of Heritage Committee questioned following Victoria Hall approval

The advancement of significant renovations to Victoria Hall, and yet-to-be-disclosed information on its future use, have left some residents and Council members alike questioning the role and value of Aurora's Heritage Advisory Committee.

These concerns were raised at both the podium and the Council last week as the accuracy of a staff report on the Victoria Hall restoration was brought into question.

The report by the Town's Heritage Planner, Adam Robb, noted at last month's Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) meeting, questions were raised “regarding the compatibility of the modern rear addition relevant to the historic character of Victoria Hall. Preference given to using bricks or trying to match the style of Victoria Hall through the addition and not use glass.”

Additional “concerns” noted in the report were shifting the main entrance of Victoria Hall from Mosley to Victoria Street, the scale of the addition, architectural style and more.

Critics of the report said the report does not the outright rejection of the addition expressed by many HAC members.

“The Heritage Advisory Committee, or HAC, is comprised of six dedicated knowledgeable and committed community volunteers, plus one staff and one Council member. Their meetings are open to the public, minutes are taken, forum is recorded,” said resident John Hartman, one of two residents who raised the issue at last week's Committee of the Whole meeting. “The HAC ‘advises and assists on all matters related to the conservation of buildings of historic and architectural value, and on all matters really relating to the designation and preservation of Heritage Conservation Districts in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act.'

“For me, the very key words are ‘on all matters.' I attended that meeting, my very first, as I wanted to learn more about this divisive project. I listened to every member ask questions and seek clarity on Vic Hall and, in the end, unanimously said no to the form and the proposed design. It was crystal clear…. Following that meeting several weeks later, a staff report dated May 12 that came out that no way mimics what was said in that forum. There is very little, if any, noted pushback on the proposed design and preservation of Vic Hall. You get it. I get it. You've paid thousands of dollars for an architectural firm for their input and not paid volunteers who are committed and longstanding Aurorans. I strongly suggest that each Council member…listen to that committee recording and come to your own conclusion.”

This viewpoint was bolstered by HAC member Linda Durringer, who said the Committee provided “comments, concerns, and suggestions” on the future of “this important heritage building… yet it appears none of those concerns were meaningfully considered.”

“The Committee was generally not in support of the proposed design. This raises a serious question: why have the Heritage Advisory Committee if the advice of the Committee is ignored?”

Aurora's HAC is currently chaired by Ward 3 Councillor Wendy Gaertner, who has previously served on the Committee. In her experience, she said she had never seen such “unanimous opposition” on the Committee than what was offered on April 13.

Ward 5 Councillor John Gallo noted he too was at the meeting and said it was “very hard” to “completely ignore all the comments” made at the Committee.

“They had many great suggestions, but they simply did not agree with the presented idea, architectural feel, for many, many reasons,” he said. “I think we need to stand beside and behind our Committees. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them said, ‘What do you need me for? Why are you asking me for my opinion, my time, and my volunteerism? You've asked me to be here for this specific reason, I gave you input, and you completely ignore it.”

Ward 1 Councillor Ron Weese noted he valued the input of all of Aurora's Advisory Committees and, particularly, the “expertise that exists” on HAC.

“Because Ward 1 has two heritage areas, cultural district as well as the heritage area, and the buildings and features within it, I've naturally learned a lot about the importance of and preservation of heritage, both in the natural as well as the built form in Aurora. I also attend many of the meetings. Although I'm not a member, I attended this particular meeting and have seldom seen such a unanimous objection to the permit application, and I agree with their stance and we'll be voting against this permit for that reason, and others that are incompatible with the neighborhood.”

An alternate viewpoint, however, was offered by Ward 2 Councillor Rachel Gilliland who shared comments received by a resident who previously served on the Committee.

“The comment was, and this is somebody who is a trained professional: ‘In addition to the new access point at the rear of the building as presented will provide greater flexibility and integration to the new Town Square. The style of the new addition is quiet, lightweight and elegant. The contrast and materials and form are exactly what has become standard practice and expanding heritage assets for repurpose. I understand people's tastes vary, but I feel that this is a transcendental way to approach projects of this nature. Ultimately, the outcome will be honest, unencumbered and clearly defined what is the original Victoria Hall, and what isn't.'

“I guess I feel really compelled to read this because… this is coming from an individual where we'll get two different pendulum swings from this person's opinion on all sides of heritage, so when I first received this letter of support, I was quite surprised and I really take a lot of weight in the opinion from this person.”

By Brock Weir
Editor
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter