A massive, 835-page town planning report rejects most of Solmar’s requests to demolish or make substantial changes to buildings and other heritage assets on the historic Rand Estate property.

The report, by the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake’s heritage planner Denise Horne, says the plan by Solmar (Niagara 2) Inc. “falls short of achieving conservation as envisioned by the Ontario Heritage Act, applicable policies and best practices.”

Solmar applied to make changes to or demolish several features of the properties at 200 John St. E. and 588 Charlotte St.

While some of the proposed alterations were recommended for approval by council, the vast majority were rejected.

The report by Horne contains 10 appendixes, detailing her assessment of Solmar’s proposals.

“Conservation of the Rand Estate requires the preservation and restoration of the character-defining elements of the landscape that was designed and managed by the Dunington-Grubbs, including mature trees and plantings, the formal designed gardens and axial walkway with its designed rooms and nodes,” the report says.

“In addition, conservation of the Rand Estate requires the restoration and rehabilitation of buildings that formed the early farm complex on the estate.”

Solmar’s “proposed Commemoration Plan falls short of achieving conservation as envisioned by the Ontario Heritam,ge Act, applicable policies and best practices,” the report says.

Horne’s report and town staff recommendations will be presented to the NOTL municipal heritage committee during a virtual public meeting on Monday, April 12.

As well, council has scheduled a special public meeting at the Niagara-on-the-Lake Community Centre on April 24 at 5 p.m.

Residents will be allowed to make presentations at both meetings but must register in advance on the town’s Join the Conversation page.

The exhaustive planning report systematically analyzes and makes recommendations on a huge list of changes proposed by Solmar for the historic property.

For 200 John St. E., among the changes Horne’s report recommends refusing are:

• A plan to remove mature trees and plantings, and construct a road and pedestrian pathway.
• Removing healthy trees along the site’s boundary wall.
• Removing and widening the boundary wall opening and removing the brick pillars at the property’s entrance.
• Removing the circular mound garden and building a new one in a different location.
• Relocating the bath pavilion and demolishing the carriage house.
• Removal of healthy and viable trees near the Whistle Stop.

However, at 200 John St. E., Horne’s report also recommends approval of:

• Demolition of the Calvin Rand summer house so long as the wide-plank floors are salvaged, as proposed.
• Restoration of the swimming pool garden according to the original Dunington-Grubb drawings.
• Restoration of the Peony Garden adjacent to the Tea House, that mowing of the area stop immediately and the original (existing) plants be provided on-going maintenance,
• Solmar’s plan to restore the Tea House.
• Removal of the swimming pool but only if it is replaced by a shallow reflecting pool of the same dimension and shape.
• Restoration of the Whistle Stop structure and the reuse of its salvageable wood brackets.
• An archeological assessment be completed for the entire property.

For 588 Charlotte St., Horne recommends that:

• Demolition of the main residence (former stables and barn), be approved but with conditions.
• Any materials that can be salvaged from the main residence (such as the cupola, weathervane, horse stall doors, wood half-glass door and wood panelling) be reused on the properties, as recommended in Solmar’s Commemoration Plan.
• Relocating a one-storey outbuilding be approved, with conditions.
• Demolition of two smaller sheds be refused.
• An archeological assessment be completed for the entire property.

The community advocacy group Save Our Rand Estate “endorses and agrees with most of Ms. Horne’s conclusions and recommendations,” said SORE spokesperson Judy McLeod.

“In particular, we are very pleased with the recommendation that Heritage Act permits that would permit the subdivision access road up 200 John be refused. That was always a ludicrous idea.”

“SORE believes the appropriate access to the Rand Estate for both the proposed residential use of the back half of the estate and for a presumed hotel on the front half should be combined and based on the historical access route between 144 and 176 John.”

The group also applauded the recommendation that the historical axial walk and circular mound be restored.  

“The Marotta companies tried to eradicate these features during the outrageous 2018 clear-cutting episode, which resulted in the Heritage Act prosecution by the Town. Ms. Horne is trying to repair some of that damage even though the prosecution never reached a trial on the merits.”

The only aspect of Horne’s report that SORE disagrees with is permitting the demolition of the Calvin Rand house and the barn stables.

“Those buildings were designated by the Darte and Disero councils. SORE’s heritage experts agree with that designation.”

SORE urged council to reject the Heritage Act permits sought by Solmar, so that the Ontario Land Tribunal can adjudicate the case and “make an informed decision based on a fulsome examination of evidence tested by cross-examination.”