Rehabilitation Dos and Don'ts

I recently came across a short but interesting article in an old booklet:

Rehabilitation: Dos and Don'ts by Edward Tooke. In Kleinburg Binder Twine Festival program dated Saturday, September 11th, 1982. This festival featured displays of rural life, concerts, and other entertainment in Kleinburg, Ontario. The vice-chair was none other than Pierre Berton, with his wife Janet supplying publicity and producing this guide. Tooke's article fit in well with the old-fashioned living theme. 

I don't expect anyone to read the small sepia-on-cream print in the photo above, so I've reproduced the article bit-by-bit below, along with my thoughts and updates. I'm not sure who Edward Tooke is (or was), and an online search hasn't helped. But his article is just as relevant today as it was in 1982. Perhaps more so. He begins:

"With current high mortgage and interest rates many homeowners are finding it necessary to retain and rehabilitate their old house, rather than selling out and moving into a new home. Often times people in this situation are living in houses which illustrate bygone architectural styles and techniques. If they are careless in their alterations, however, these people can destroy our valuable architectural heritage. Listed below are a few points to bear in mind when planning renovations to an older structure."

Jenny's Thoughts: Yes, fixing up an old house is a sensible choice, allowing you to improve your living space without the expense of buying new. You can upgrade your older plumbing or electrical systems, add insulation, update kitchens and baths, replace or repair roofs, and add value to your home without the stress of moving.

But what Mr. Tooke called carelessness has reached epidemic proportions. Nowadays, building owners are ruining properties with unsympathetic updates. This "carelessness" harms the traditional appearance of our local architecture.   

The Author's List of Dos:

"Sympathetic Alterations - Always be aware that changes to a building can be done in a manner respectful of its architectural style. If, for example, you wish to replace your old paned windows with modern, thermalpane, picture windows, be sure to retain the shape and dimensions of the original opening. Consider installing new muntin bars on the inside and outside of the picture window, so as to present the appearance of a paned window."

Jenny's Thoughts: I agree that changes to a building should respect its design. This is especially true of window replacements, which nearly everyone is doing nowadays because older windows are considered extremely energy-inefficient. New vinyl windows are believed to save energy. Just ask a window salesman.

Mr. Tooke wouldn't have liked this, and neither do I:

But old houses are dark, I hear you saying. The larger window brings in more light. Maybe. But I find it unreasonable to force older properties to adapt to contemporary aesthetics. If you buy an older home, you should expect to put up with a few inconveniences. Our ancestors did. If you insist upon replacing your windows, keeping the original size will save money, take less work and time, and look more appropriate.  

Muntins are those thin strips of wood that divide older windows into a grid of smaller glass panes. They had to be there in the old days because making large panes of glass was difficult. Real muntins looked like this:

Mr. Tooke suggests adding muntin bars to your replacement windows for a more traditional look. Yet, nowadays, fake muntins are everywhere. You can tell when someone is using an adhesive kit, especially when they can't even get the lines straight:

And some people are adding them to newer buildings, like this modern infill:  

You can usually tell when they're not real:

"Inconspicuous Mechanical Repairs - Nothing detracts from an attractive old home more than new exposed wiring, heating ducts or plumbing pipes. If your house requires such mechanical repairs, ensure they are hidden behind the walls or original trim."

Jenny's Mechanical Thoughts: I'm more concerned with the exteriors of buildings than the interiors. Nevertheless, the modern world indeed looks out of place in an old building. Bear in mind that wires can be run behind baseboards, that pipes can be routed through existing wall cavities, that metal pipes can be painted the same colour as your wall, and cords can be hidden in boxes. Just check your local codes and keep heating vents clear so air can flow.

"Background Reading - Many helpful books have recently been printed, including Remodelling Old Houses by George Stephens [sic], Restoring Old Houses by Nigel Hutchins and Tips on Home Maintenance in Canada by Heritage Canada."

Jenny's Book Reviews: The first of these books, by architect George Stephen, was reissued as New Life For Old Houses. I don't have a copy, but online reviews suggest it's interesting, if dated. It has sketches and drawings instead of photos and uses tools from the 1970s. Ditto for Hutchins' book, which I could have sworn I once had a copy of but now can't find.  Never mind, it won't reflect today's codes or technology either. And while it's great to have Canadian-specific guides, I'll bet the last one is equally obsolete. I'm not going to recommend one modern guide over another, but if you're a do-it-yourselfer, you'll want a new how-to book. And check for YouTube videos; there's an option Mr. Tooke didn't have!

"Consult Heritage Specialists - Government agencies including the Ontario Ministry of Culture and Citizenship and Heritage Canada employ specialists willing to advise on home restoration. Many Ontario communities have LACACs (Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committees) and the individuals serving on these committees are very interested in advising and assisting local homeowners with their rehabilitation projects. If interested, contact your municipal office."

Jenny's Updates: Did these organizations really supply free advice to private homeowners in 1982? Nowadays, the Ontario Heritage Act, administered by the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism, is primarily intended for municipal councils and planners, not individuals undertaking home renovations. I suspect the feds employ heritage experts, but their services are restricted to our national historic sites.  

If you need advice, consult your municipality's heritage planner. They're the ones who issue permits and provide guidelines on restoration projects. In London, contact heritage@london.ca.

There are also professional consultants such as private heritage architects and engineers who can provide condition assessments and advise you on restoration projects. They're obviously pricey and are typically hired by developers, cultural organizations, governments, museums, etc.

As for LACACs, they're gone. In London, LACAC was replaced by LACH (Local Advisory Committee on Heritage) in 1995. LACH has now been replaced by the Community Advisory Committee on Planning. They're happy to answer heritage-related questions; you can reach them at advisorycommittee@london.ca. 

The Author's List of Don'ts

"Sandblast - This technique ruins bricks, mortar and stone. Instead, have your building cleaned with a chemical or steam wash."

Jenny's Blast: Darn right! High-pressure sandblasting can destroy old masonry and erode hard surfaces, letting in moisture and leading to cracking and crumbling. Instead, try plain low-pressure water to rinse dirt off. Or steam cleaning, which also removes carbon, dirt, and old coatings. I understand that chemical strippers exist that provide a safe, eco-friendly clean that removes paint from masonry. What you use should be based on the material you're cleaning (brick or stone? what kind of stone?), what's on the surface (paint? pollution?), and the age of the building.

"Remove all previous additions - Consider that like a good bottle of wine, your house has matured over the years. The additions and changes which previous property owners have completed, providing they have been done in sympathy with the original building, serve to add character to many old houses."

Jenny: Right. Try respecting the work of previous homeowners. Additions show how the house grew over time and often match better than a new build. Also, keeping some old work saves you the high cost of tearing things down.   If the addition is in decent condition, try repairing old wood, windows, and walls instead of replacing them. If you absolutely must replace, find a sympathetic replacement that matches. Look for old photos or permits to see when and why past owners did what they did.

"Overcompensate - By replacing too many of your house's original features, you create a building which looks too new. Allow a little age to show through. For example, stair treads that have been worn by the feet of several generations should not be replaced, providing they are still structurally sound."

Jenny's Rant: Yep, everyone's overcompensating. As Shannon Kyles writes in The Story of Ontario Architecture, p. iv, we have "beautiful historic properties that are modified beyond belief or reason." Again, I'm more concerned with external appearances than worn stair treads inside. Building owners are renovating exteriors to death.

Why? I think there are four main reasons:

1. Modern safety regulations. New building codes insist upon fire safety, taller balcony railings, etc. Sure, the codes are intended to create safer structures, but they can alter historic appearances. Replacement railings should comply with the Ontario Building Code, which dictates heights based on the elevation. If in doubt, contact the city heritage planner for advice.

2. The high cost of specialized restoration provides owners with an economic incentive to simply gut a building or redevelop a site, rather than perform extensive repairs. When an older building is updated, renovators are using cheaper, more widely available modern materials.  Look, I get it. We don't have the vast quantities of cheap, high-quality wood we had in Victorian times. All the more reason why owners should try to preserve irreplaceable wood trim if they've got it. Repair it. Paint it. 

3. In an attempt to improve energy efficiency, older buildings are being refitted with modern materials like the previously-mentioned windows. Question: if homeowners can't afford high heating bills, how can they afford to replace all their windows? And is the outlay really worth the savings? Again, your window salesman will tell you yes. Call me cynical. BTW, see here for an interesting Parks Canada page about the heritage value and environmental sustainability of antique wooden windows. 

4. Changing aesthetics. While I understand numbers 1 to 3, this one drives me nuts. Why do people buy old homes and modernize them to the point that they no longer look old? To increase their "curb appeal" and "update" their look? What for? If you buy an older home, why not appreciate it for its age and appearance? Why erase its charm?

Why are so many brick buildings being painted white, black, or grey? Are these people attempting to protect aging masonry? If they had mismatched bricks or stains, are they hoping to create a more uniform appearance? Or are they just trying to make older homes look contemporary? I suspect the latter. They're hoping to "brighten up" or "refresh" their older home, to make it stand out on their street. They've just got to be different. 

"Be Deterred by Costs - There are restoration funds available from the Federal Government through CHIP, RRAP and CMHC grants, the Provincial Government through OHRP, BRIC and the Ontario Heritage Foundation and also from many local municipalities. Again, if you are interested, contact the appropriate government authority."

Jenny on Acronyms: Lots of alphabet soup here. Let's take a closer look:

CHIP is the Community Heritage Investment Program, in London managed by London Heritage Council. These grants mainly fund museums, heritage organizations, and those working in the heritage sector. See here for more information.

RRAP (Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program) has transitioned into the Ontario Renovates program and is available to seniors over 60, persons with disabilities, etc. to repair their homes or make them accessible. The City of London has info about it here.

I'm quite sure that the CMHC, or Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, doesn't offer grants for personal renovations. I think they provide loans for builders and developers for affordable housing, energy retrofits, etc.

The OHRP was a now-defunct Ontario government program that provided low- to moderate-income homeowners with loans for home repairs. It was shut down in '93 by Bob Rae's NDP, which seems a little ironic, don't ya think?

I'm puzzled by BRIC (Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities) because as far as I can make out, it's this American program operated by FEMA to help mitigate natural disasters. We may have an equivalent, but it still doesn't seem like the right place to go. Maybe it meant something else in 1982.

The HODG or Heritage Organization Development Grant still exists, but the money is generally for historical societies, museums, and other heritage organizations.

So where do Londoners go for grants? Try London Community Foundation, which manages more than one fund to which homeowners can apply. Applications are submitted through their website.

Then there's ACO London, which has given grants to qualified donees in the past. At the moment, however, this organization is reimagining itself. I hope they'll be bigger and better than before.  

"Finally, Don't Get Discouraged. - The recent revival of our interest in this country's cultural heritage will pay off in both the short and long terms. If, and when, you do sell your property, you can expect a high return on the hours of careful work which you have put into the restoration of your old house. And future generations will benefit greatly from an awareness of their architectural heritage. As a wise Canadian was once heard to have remarked, 'If you don't know where you came from, how can you ever hope to know where you're going.'"

Jenny is discouraged: Because in 2026 our heritage is under attack. The main culprit is provincial legislation like Bill 23 (More Homes Built Faster Act) and policy updates aimed at accelerating real estate development. These changes prioritize fast-tracked housing and infrastructure over historical preservation by weakening municipal oversight and statutory protections. Not that our municipality was much interested to begin with. And I suspect many people nowadays are apathetic about heritage, being justifiably concerned with how their salaries aren't keeping up with inflation. 

As for future generations, I fear they won't have many well-preserved older buildings to look at. I doubt if most people realize what we're losing. How many children learn about our local architecture in school? Do they know what a London Door is? Do they know Queen Anne from Second Empire? 

Sometimes it seems like everyone's out to make heritage preservation as challenging as possible. Take the insurance companies. Often, insurance premiums are higher on a heritage property, for many reasons. It's difficult to replace specialized building materials. Knob and tube wiring may cause fires. You may be able to lower premiums by replacing old electrical and plumbing systems, maintaining your home, and shopping around for lower rates. Some brokers may think heritage rules always force exact, expensive replicas, but they often don't. 

As for the quotation, I did a search online and found it attributed to both Maya Angelou and James Baldwin, but as neither of them was Canadian, I guess it was someone else. Maybe it was Tooke himself. Doesn't matter. It's true enough. 

The past provides lessons. History in general tells us how things got to be the way they are now, provides us with core rules and beliefs by which to live, and helps us understand which failed policies shouldn't be repeated. Old buildings tell us how our ancestors lived and worked, what was good and not so good about their time, and why we're fortunate to live now.

"As a concerned owner of an older building, you must be proud of the manner in which you are contributing to the conservation of your community's heritage." 

Jenny sums up: I like Mr. Tooke's last sentence. It suggests a sense of duty. If you buy an older home, you "must" understand that it will need specialized repair work, that the heating and cooling systems may cost more to run, and that upgrades need to follow local heritage rules. You need to manage the upkeep and pay the energy bills. But there is indeed a reward. You are keeping history alive for future generations and maintaining your older neighbourhood's distinct look.