Schomberg Heritage Conservation District

As homeowners on Main Street, my husband and I are thrilled that the township is considering a feasibility study for a heritage district. We fully support exploring the details of what a heritage district would look like. We firmly believe in preserving the town’s existing heritage, which contributes to the unique character and beauty of our village. While we recognize the importance of updating or replacing buildings when necessary, we feel that this should be done while maintaining the heritage style that defines our community.
In recent years a few new buildings have been constructed on Main Street which are beautiful additions to our community. They are aesthetically pleasing, and in harmony with the historic character of the village. We advocate for this style of architecture to be encouraged when future replacements are necessary. It is our understanding that with a heritage district any protected elements would apply ONLY to features of historic significance. Newer buildings, or parts of buildings that have previously been replaced or renovated, would have NO restrictions placed on them. We are confident that a heritage district would not impose overly restrictive requirements regarding specific materials or color choices. This approach would allow homeowners the flexibility to select colors and restoration materials that align with their preferences and budget.
A well-designed heritage plan could address the community's major concerns, but to do so effectively, we need clarity and accurate information about what a heritage district would entail. We need to address and correct the misinformation that has circulated throughout the community. The feasibility study is essential for providing this understanding and allowing the community to make an informed decision about what is best for the village and its property owners. We respectfully urge King Township to proceed with the heritage conservation district feasibility study.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Allison Ferrante

I think that Schomberg and its public leadership are tepidly effective with isolating themselves from economic realities surrounding them. I would encourage the legacy protecting the village to look to the south and observe what a wonderful, vibrant existence that Klienburg and Unionville created with their Villiage. Trying to maintain Schomberg the way it is will give the same results; a stagnant, void community that cannot sustain local business and will not attract new residents into a core, rather within surrounding areas that will go to Vaughan and Newmarket to shop and enjoy cultural and commercial offerings

As the owner of a century home and a business on Main Street I am fully in support of establishing a Heritage Conservation District. Maintaining the look and feel of the village is important and the first step is to have the staff assess what the benefits, costs and options are and to bring those forward to residents so a rational choice that benefits everyone can be made. Once lost, historic village character cannot be recaptured.

We moved to Schomberg because of its heritage homes and ambiance, there are not many historic villages like ours left. Once the history is removed we can’t get it back. I feel strongly that our historic village must be preserved. I don’t agree with heritage homes being torn down and replaced with large modern homes that stick out like a sore thumb because they are sandwiched between two heritage homes. Eg; the recent new build on Church St. Large modern homes have their place, but not within the historic part of our village. When it’s not feasible to keep a heritage structure it should be replaced with something that looks like a heritage structure, and that fits in with its surroundings. However, having said this I also don’t feel that residents of our heritage homes should have to deal with harsh restrictions on home improvements, and have to ask permission when it comes to colour schemes etc. We should be able to restore and renovate when necessary, and chose the finishes we like. There must be a happy medium because all or nothing just doesn’t make sense.

I love this town and was fortunate enough to be able to purchase a home here in Schomberg where I have invested my hard earned money. I have lived on Church Street over 20yrs now. I love the people and the historical properties here however I do not agree with creating zones where a small group of people are going to be able to create rules that will dictate what I can do with the exterior of MY property. All those in favour with this motion and do not live in the affected areas, please fee free purchase an existing historical home in town or look into having your home or street deemed historic I would love that too.

Growing up on the edge of King City (west of Westin Road) my family and I frequented Schomberg routinely. Allowing it to be developed without any oversight or control to protect the heritage of the main street would be a shame. It is important to keep the character and consistency of the existing look and feel, while allowing for growth. To have a Heritage Conservation District (HCD) such as Schomberg would be a great decision to protect it for years to come.

It is of utmost importance to designate the historical downtown of Schomberg a Heritage Conservation District and limit large scale development.

We have a unique village within 50km of the biggest city in Ontario. It has a strong community of residents and groups that chose to live here and enjoy the special heritage features of the village. They must be preserved. We cannot have people outside of the community determine what changes will be made that will gradually destroy the ambience. Everything must be done to save the homes, the businesses, and ambience of the village. Once gone, it can't come back.

I fully support King's idea of preserving the heritage of Main St, Schomberg. It's the heart and soul of our town. The charming, old-world appeal of Main St was what made us fall in love with Schomberg and choose to live here. We stumbled upon it on a day trip years ago and we were hooked. It's rare to find a small town that still holds onto its historical character these days. I'd hate to see Schomberg lose that charm to modernization. Small towns struggle to bring visitors to their town to spend their hard-earned cash and retail is not enough to ensure success, but making it a destination for many reasons does. I’m aware that the designation would come with specific requirements that will need to be weighed against the needs of Main St owners and their retail success, but I believe that retaining the unique character of Schomberg will serve it for decades to come.

If there was ever an ideal location to have a Heritage Conservation District (HCD) in King Township, I cannot think of a more appropriate place than Main Street, Schomberg. It is such a beautiful example of how heritage can be protected in a vibrant community. I'm very puzzled why anyone who owned a home in the proposed HCD would oppose this. One would assume that if you lived in a heritage home you would want to protect it. I have heard and read the comments of some who oppose the HCD but it seems that their concerns are based on half-truths. For example, if a house is designated, it is more likely to go up in value, not down as is being declared. Insurance rates do not increase because a property is designated because the expectation is that you would be rebuilding (in the case of fire, for example) to modern standards not replacing as a heritage home. Banks do not hesitate to refinance heritage homes although I have heard that secondary lending organizations are not as willing - this is likely because they do not understand what designation really means. And designation may prescribe what features need to be maintained but does not prevent renovations etc. Many municipalities have grant money available and some decrease property taxes in the form of rebates to help with maintaining heritage properties. Truly a HCD designation would benefit not just the owners of these properties, but would also bring economic opportunities to Schomberg. A win win situation for everyone!
CF, a Schomberg fan

I used to live in Hampstead in London, England. Schomberg's Main Street gives me a feel of the Hampstead High Street. Full of character and nice shopping. Good to know there is action undertaken to preserve the character of the area. As to possible restrictions, modern residential areas have them too, no boats on driveway, no clothesline, etc. All on the same principle of preserving the beauty and character of the area.

As a property owner and long term resident on Main Street, I fully support this initiative by King Township. Schomberg is attractive to many people (both current/prospective homeowners and tourists) because of its historical charm and heritage properties. Like it or not, Schomberg IS a heritage community, it should be protected as such. The minor inconveniences of this incremental change are far outweighed by the surety that this community will continue to exude the appeal, charm, character, and attractiveness that it has for so many years.
Look at the case studies - Rosedale, Cabbagetown - some of the highest priced, most in demand communities in Toronto - and a reprieve of the generic condos and fleeting modern construction that has occurred throughout the rest of the city core.
I implore the residents of Schomberg to take this initiative seriously and consider its merit to our wonderful village.

My family lives in a heritage property in Schomberg. The village is so amazingly unique because of its heritage and it would be a tragedy to watch it lose its appeal, as so much of the surrounding area has over the years. I fully support this idea.

I have spent the majority of my life in or around Schomberg and am thrilled King is exploring the HCD designation. The historic aesthetic, charm, and heritage of this community should and must be protected.

Insurance Bureau of Canada... ". Buy enough insurance. Some insurers may not offer guaranteed replacement cost coverage (full cost of replacing your property) for a heritage property even as a policy add-on."

As a property owner on Main Street I oppose any restrictions/encumbrances placed on my property. The street is growing and improving on it's own, I will ad without the help of the town. If King wants to do some good why not start with widening the road or cleaning up the sidewalks along main. Perhaps you can invest in the fairgrounds or building a sidewalk on Western Ave. There are a ton of projects that need attention before this. I'm strongly against it.

As a multiple long time business and property owner on main street we are strongly against the township delegating money towards this project/study. The last thing we need is more restrictions making it harder for us to grow and sustain our businesses (that are in these proposed heritage buildings) . I would have to agree with some of the other concerned residents here that if such parties want to make use of their time with this study that should be with their own dollars and further to that it should be on a case by case basis not lumping the entire main street into one restrictive plan.
There has been no reason or cause for such a proposal, in fact, all I have seen has been amazing growth in the last two-three years that has only added to the street and it's beauty, which most likely wouldn't have been possible if any restrictions were put into place and if so I can guarantee it would have been more costly and taken ten times as long.
I am all for keeping in mind the historical main street charm as we grow and expand, but this is only going to restrict growth at a time where it's never been more difficult/expensive to create new businesses.

I do not want the Township placing any restrictions on my property. Town resources should not even be used for studies requested by special interest groups, let them fund their own studies. For those property owners, yes, owners, not tenants. If you want your property designated you are able to voluntarily do so.

I also find the pamphlet misleading in that it has been designed to appear to have been created by King Township, which is not the case. The statements that this designation will not have a negative affect on property values, insurance prices etc are entirely false and misleading. Mr Mayor and Council please stop wasting your time and our money now and do not go any further with this request

Hi everyone, I agree that while the discussion is important to have, we should not be entertaining potentially untenable restrictions.

Better use of our municipal time and resources should be on executing the streetscaping plans.
Given the number of years spent on developing the streetscaping plans, there was no significant call out for new bylaws for a Heritage Conservation district.
I take that to mean the streetscaping is deemed more important to execute than including additional heritage bylaws.

Hello fellow Schombergers! I love you guys and I really like the fact that we are a community who can discuss important topics. A community who loves to work together to execute amazing events in the community that is looking to the future for our children. Bearing that in mind I absolutely do not support this byelaw initiative conservation is an activity that should be property specific and be based upon specific reasoning. The reasoning should be thawed out. It should be intellectual and it should not be restrictive for the creative contribution of the owner. It should not force properties to stay in a state of stasis. It should not restrict homeowners from being creatively expressive about their property. it should not prevent change. Change is required to accommodate future generations of families. Future technologies that may allow us to reduce our carbon imprint. If you prevent change in construction, then you will limit our ability to build green buildings on Main Street in Schaumburg, you will prevent the spaces from being allocated in a sensible way that will allow for new families to play and gather. Looking at case studies from other municipalities, where they have assigned a blanket conservation district in two streets one can find many examples where restrictive government byelaws have made for senseless suffering to the homeowners. There are examples where homeowners wanted to do something beautiful, and where the byelaws prevented them from making those changes. There are examples where homeowners have rebuilt a home completely very similar to what it was before, but change the colouring of the brick or of the roof, and been told that they will be fined by the municipal government. A byelaw of the sort in a small community like ours is inappropriate. It is inappropriately restrictive, and it is absolutely lazy. There are not that many properties that should be considered for preservation. But the question then again is who decides what to preserve and what not to preserve? Who should be the one who has the final say I do believe that as a community we should have a dialogue, and that is normally why there are meetings. Council meetings where individuals can express their opinion. Please if you have an interest in allowing for a future on Main Street in Church St, where we are each able to make our individual contribution to the landscape. Please do not support this bylaw. Yes, conservative actions are important, but they must be done in a thoughtful way and on an individual basis.