Part 1: Structure Changes, Enforcement Tools, and Wellington HCD Rollout – 05/13/2026
- PECConnect
- May 13
- 5 min read
The Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee spent much of its May 13, 2026 meeting looking ahead rather than backward, with members discussing how the committee itself may need to evolve as the County takes on a growing list of heritage responsibilities. Chaired by Sandy Latchford, the meeting blended practical updates on permits and signage with a lengthy and sometimes philosophical discussion about the future structure of the committee and how heritage work should be handled in the County.
View the entire PEC Council meeting, or continue to speaker comments and councillor votes>
One of the first major discussions centered around the committee’s future terms of reference. Resident and heritage advocate Liz Driver addressed the committee during public comment, arguing that the committee’s responsibilities under the Ontario Heritage Act are becoming more complex and specialized, especially with the upcoming implementation of the Cultural Heritage Master Plan and the new Wellington Heritage Conservation District.
Driver questioned whether museums and cemeteries should continue to sit under the same umbrella as heritage designation work. She argued that heritage conservation work has expanded significantly in recent years, especially around cultural heritage landscapes, and suggested the current committee structure may be spreading expertise too thin. She also proposed stronger training requirements for future committee members and recommended adding clearer qualifications and expectations directly into the terms of reference.
The discussion quickly turned into a broader debate among committee members about how the next version of the committee should function. Councillor John Hirsch acknowledged that the issue is becoming increasingly large and complicated, especially with new heritage planning responsibilities expected in the coming years. Hirsch floated the idea of maintaining a central committee while relying more heavily on specialized working groups focused on areas like designation, museums, and cemeteries.
Other members worried that separating expertise too much could weaken the committee’s ability to make informed heritage decisions as a whole. Edwin Rowse argued that heritage designation and heritage permits are closely connected and require knowledgeable discussion within the main committee itself. Driver also pushed back against the idea of turning the committee into what she described as more of a “management committee,” saying the committee needs strong subject-matter expertise directly involved in public discussions.
The committee ultimately decided the conversation is far from over. Members agreed to gather additional written feedback from working groups, task teams, and staff before continuing the discussion later this summer. Latchford emphasized that several committee members were absent due to medical reasons and should have the opportunity to contribute before recommendations are finalized.
Alongside the governance discussion, the committee also received updates on several active heritage projects across the County. Janice Gibbins reported that work continues on potential heritage designations in North Marysburgh, with draft criteria completed and letters to property owners expected soon.
The committee also discussed the ongoing rollout of the Wellington Heritage Conservation District. Planning staff confirmed that information packages will soon be mailed to roughly 250 affected property owners and businesses in Wellington. The packages will include copies of the registered bylaw, heritage permit information, and details about available heritage grant programs.
Insurance concerns tied to designated heritage properties also resurfaced during the meeting. Staff noted that the County Council had recently passed a motion asking the provincial government to provide greater clarity around insurance availability and affordability for designated heritage buildings. The advisory committee will continue working on public education around those issues in future meetings.
Another practical topic involved heritage permit enforcement. Latchford said the committee has spent nearly two years waiting for clearer enforcement tools when heritage recommendations or permit conditions are ignored. Members expressed frustration that bylaws can lose effectiveness if there are no consequences for non-compliance. Staff confirmed that legal and planning staff are expected to bring proposed enforcement mechanisms to the committee’s June meeting as part of a larger property standards bylaw review.
Rowse also raised concerns about follow-up after heritage permits are approved, saying the committee currently receives little feedback confirming whether approved work was actually completed according to the approved plans.
The committee also revisited the idea of creating a visual archive of buildings inside the Wellington Heritage Conservation District. Members discussed photographing streetscapes, storefronts, homes, and even tree canopies so there is a clear historical reference point for future permit reviews and enforcement. Several members noted that old archival photos are often incomplete or difficult to use when trying to assess changes to heritage properties years later.
Outside of heritage permits and policy, the committee received updates on veterans’ commemorative projects, cemetery transfers into municipal management, and heritage signage planning. Latchford said the PEC Veterans Task Team has now compiled a shared list of local veteran commemorations and organizations, with the goal of centralizing information through the municipality’s new event calendar.
By the end of the nearly two-hour meeting, it was clear the committee is entering a transition period. Members repeatedly acknowledged that the next council term, combined with the Cultural Heritage Master Plan and ongoing Wellington HCD implementation, could significantly reshape how heritage conservation operates in the County over the next several years.
Key Takeaways
The County is preparing to fully roll out the Wellington Heritage Conservation District, with information packages soon heading to roughly 250 property owners and businesses explaining what designation means and how permit and grant systems will work.
The Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee is debating major structural changes, including whether museums and cemeteries should remain part of the same committee or become separate specialized groups in the future.
The County is finally moving toward stronger heritage enforcement tools after years of discussion, with legal and planning staff expected to bring proposed bylaw enforcement measures to the committee in June.
Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 2:00:19. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.
Comments