The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

WHITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29,1988, PAGE ? PAGE SEVEN N The decision to designate or not rests ultimately with the municipality - it can either accept or ignore the recom- mendtions of the Review Board which in this respect is powerless. Nonetheless, Review Board decisions are seen as guidelines - something Whitby sorely needs. THE DESIGNATION OF LYNDE HOUSE After considerable hesitation I decided late last week to lodge a formal objection to the heritage designation of Lynde House. My action will be widely misunderstood. As Len Cullen told me on Friday, it was "throwing cold water on a joyous occasion" - the official opening of Lynde House. That is not my intention. I have the greatest respect and admiration for Mr. Cullen who, when he realized the treasure he had acquired, was prepared to do what had to be done - he restored Lynde House when the Town had chickened out. My objection has to do with heritage preservation in broader terms and how the protection offered by the Heritage Act was specifically withheld from Lynde House until now - when it is no longer necessary. My letter to the Town clerk follows. June 24, 1988 To Mr. Don McKay, Clerk, Town of Whitby As a concerned citizen of Whitby with a long interest and involvement with history in general and Lynde House in particular, I wish to register my objection to the designation of [Lynde House]. Let me say at the outset, that I am delighted that someone was willing to spend the money needed to restore this structure and from reports I have received I believe it was done well. My objection is to the process by which the designation of Lynde House has been approached. The Ontario Heritage Act and the process of designation was designed to protect buildings - Lynde House does not need protection at this point. It did need protection at just about every previous point in its history, and although designation was frequently suggested to Council, they have withheld the protection of the Heritage Act until protection is no longer needed. The move of Lynde House to Cullen Gardens angered the heritage movement both locally and provincially. If Council had conclusively demonstrated the necessity for the move, myself and others would have been satisfied. At the very least an offer to purchase its original site should have been made, alternate sites should have been considered, and the recommendations of the Feasibility Study of the Whitby Historical Society should have been considered. Subsequent actions have demonstrated that Council did not adequately consider the - implications of its actions. Council has consistently demonstrated an insensitivity to heritage, and its motion to designate Lynde House is a desecration of the purposes of the Heritage Act. It is especially reprehensible that a building which was in use as a public museum, maintained and operated with funds from all three levels of government, should have been given to a private owner over the objections of the Historical Society which operated the museum and without adequate compensation to any of the parties which had contributed to the museum over the years. I have long been an advocate of the architectural and historic importance of Lynde House. Indeed its restoration at Cullen Gardens has more to do with my advocacy than it does with Council's intervention. Although its architectural elements have been preserved on its new location, I would argue that its historic value was largely contextual and its historic reference to the Kingston Highway and Lynde Creek has now been lost. Indeed the move and subsequent siting of Lynde House was carried out in such a way that the original kitchen wing could not be reconstructed as part of the restoration. Although the rear wing would have been highly conjectural, it, nevertheless, would have added an important element to the building's interpretation. ...The restoration of this important early Ontario house was not supervised by an expert in the architecture of the period [and] ...the people who were most familiar with the house were not consulted either before or during the restoration. [Further], the designation report was rushed and contains inaccuracies. For example, it mentions "the level newel and caged staircase". The main staircase as it now exists is a creation of Cullen Gardens in 1988 and is pure conjecture. I would assume that the reference should have been to the railing alone which had been on the side staircase since the 1930's. ...[Also], the fanlight over the front door is not original - I constructed it myself within the existing frame in 1983 (the original fanlight had been replaced sometime in the early part of this century with a stained glass agglomeration). The designation of Lynde House raises a number of issues. In consultation with tbe Ministry of Culture and Communications, I bave concluded that referral of these issues to tbe Provincial Heritage Review Board is the only way tbat tbey wiil be aired. SincerelyDogA ern a 1