So, if you thought the battle to preserve the Crysler-Burroughs property at 187 Queen St. was done with town council’s close-fought vote that defeated the owner’s rezoning application to allow for this historic, heritage designated property to be carved up and significantly altered … think again.

This week the application, supported by a staff report — significantly enhanced from previous iterations — recommending acceptance, is scheduled to come before the town’s committee of adjustment.

The application by the owner of the property, Rainer Hummel, proposes to sever the original historic lot into two parts, create a new driveway off Queen Street to service the proposed front lot compromising the 19th century contextual orientation of the house and land, while profoundly impacting the designated home’s facade and historic presentation with a two-storey addition that includes garage doors fronting on Queen Street.

Now, for contextual purposes, let’s visit the history of this property.

Completed circa 1822, the dwelling — very likely designed in the cubic form Regency style — was constructed as the home of R.M. Crysler, a prosperous merchant here in Niagara-on-the-Lake and member of Upper Canada’s notable Crysler family.

Originally, the facade of the house probably fronted on Queen Street. However, when the property was sold in the late 1830s, the new owner, Charles Hall, embarked on a substantial project to remodel the home in the latest architectural style — Greek Revival. 

An addition was built on the easterly wall which altered the dwelling’s square footprint to rectangular. Fluted pilasters with carved ionic capitals were installed to visually support a substantial cornice set with modillions that wrapped the entire house.

To complete this remodel, an impressive entry way was introduced into what had been the side wall of the house (possibly because the proximity of the house to both Queen and Simcoe streets would not allow for the construction of a statement portico in keeping with its new Greek Revival style).

Importantly, this alteration established the building’s facade orientation into the lot as it still presents, 187 years later.

Some eight or nine decades later, the portico — no doubt in substantial need of repair — was rebuilt in the then-popular Classical Revival style while the rest of the building retained its Greek Revival elements.

This historic gem has anchored this section of the Queen Street streetscape for 202 years.

And, its deep original lot — as surveyed in the late 1700s — has served to echo and enhance the open space opposite on Simcoe. Moreover, located as it is, open to view from the street, it provides a very rare glimpse into the historic land requirements of 19th-century town dwellers to grow food for their tables.

Therefore, I would argue that, combined, the land and dwelling fulfil virtually every requirement to be classified as a critical component and vitally important element of Old Town’s cultural heritage landscape and history.

Indeed, this is why, according to the Burroughs family (who had the property designated in 2002), the inclusion of “the lands” in the designation was done. They viewed the entirety of the land and building as inextricably conjoined in terms of heritage.

Hence, the document in Schedule B under “Designation” reads: “This designation applies to the lands and more particularly to the entire exterior facade and structure of the house, the exterior doorcase and entrance portico and to interior features including the early trim and doors on the first and second floors, all existing fireplaces and mantels, original pine floors and both the main and rear staircases.”

But, to no one’s surprise, town staff do not see it that way.

Indeed, while they admit that the designation document states that it “applies to the lands,” they argue that because “the lands” are not specifically identified as an individual heritage attribute (included again after the words “and more particularly”) then “the lands” are not intrinsic to or “contribute meaningfully” to the property’s cultural heritage value or interest.

Finally, working from this premise, they suggest that “severing the property does not diminish” its heritage or cultural importance.

It is a patently fallacious argument based on the completely untenable position that the words “more particularly” can be used to limit or quantify the existent heritage attributes that contribute to this property’s cultural heritage value or interest.

But let’s move on …

The second last paragraph of Section 5 (Discussion/Analysis) reads:

“Staff are of the opinion that the policy framework has been sufficiently addressed by the applicant through the submission of supporting documentation, and do not anticipate adverse impacts to the heritage character of the dwelling, adjacent properties and the overall character of the neighbourhood.”

Since I am not a planner, let’s accept that the author of this report, with a university degree and four years of work experience in the discipline, is sufficiently qualified to advance the opinion that the policy framework has been sufficiently addressed. However, exception needs to be taken on the next three items.

Consider the first point claiming there will be “no adverse impacts to the heritage character of the dwelling.”

Allowing a severance will require a driveway entrance to the new, smaller designated lot. There are two options, one off Simcoe Street and the second off Queen Street.

Now, the Simcoe option is feasible and, at 30 feet, 11 inches, would just barely allow for the construction of an attached garage off the easterly wall of the designated dwelling within lot setbacks (given that this would be considered a side yard setback based on the orientation of the house).

Accepting that the separating link from the designated dwelling to the new addition would be severely constrained — or eliminated — this option has some merit in that it presents the least impact, albeit not “no impact,” on the heritage elements of the designated dwelling.

On the other hand, the Queen Street option, which the applicant has advanced, is a completely different story.

In this scenario, and the one generally recommended by town staff, the gracious front lawn in front of the building’s facade has been replaced by a drive court. A single-storey 12-foot link has been attached to roughly 25 per cent of the designated facade that leads to a two-storey garage with living space above, that has its garage doors presenting directly onto Queen Street.

Not only does this option adversely and significantly affect the 187-year-old heritage facade and its historic grounds, but it would be the first allowance of an attached, directly street-fronting (20th-century phenom) garage on the entire length of Queen Street — something that carries with it a very dangerous precedent for future applications on this anchoring street in Old Town.

Not to mention it requires the removal of a relatively young, but completely healthy boulevard tree, thereby reducing even further NOTL’s inadequate tree canopy — the lowest in Niagara.

The next point referencing “adjacent properties” can be generally summarized by suggesting the single shouldering property on Queen Street would be acceptably impacted, however, the shouldering property and the facing property on Simcoe would be profoundly affected.

The third point, suggesting this application would have no impact on “the overall character of the neighbourhood,” we have already visited in this column so, in summation, allow me to suggest that granting the severance as presented, would fundamentally and irreversibly diminish the cultural heritage landscape of NOTL.

If you agree, be present in the council chambers on Aug. 15 to respectfully voice your opinion before the committee of adjustment. Provincial legislation allows that any person physically present in the chamber during this meeting must be heard and their comments documented to be included in the committee’s decision.

Again, it is back to you folks … stand up and be counted or accept a future town designed by unsympathetic developers working in your backyard.