Smiths Falls heritage building to be demolished

A heritage building gutted by fire last spring in Smiths Falls will be demolished, the town’s committee of the whole decided last week.

The former water treatment plant, a long-standing stone structure on the banks of the Rideau River and a mainstay in the landscape of downtown Smiths Falls, was all but destroyed by a fire on May 8, 2023.

The massive blaze left behind the shell of a structure originally built in 1868, leaving town council to decide whether to preserve its remains or proceed with demolition.

While an engineering report last year said preservation was technically possible, town staff last week recommended full demolition of the property, since that’s the option the town’s insurance company would pay for.

“We believe that option one, the full demolition of the facility, removes the risk from the town, and it provides, unfortunately, the best option,” Stephanie Clark, the town’s director of community services, told the committee.

“What we are asking of you tonight, is to examine your appetite for risk, and while I know this an emotional decision for a lot of folks, we must balance that risk that we entertain as we make decisions of this magnitude.”

An official cause of the fire was never determined, the town’s fire chief Rick Chesebrough said Monday, as the building was never deemed safe to enter. He said, however, it was considered suspicious.

The building’s history dates back to the 19th century when the original stone building was built for Jason Gould as a grist mill in 1868, while the adjacent three-storey brick section was added by then-owner Adam Foster in 1886.

The town purchased the site in 1910 for its waterworks — including hydroelectric generation, and another addition was added in 1924 and 1927 for waterworks operations, with another added in 1952 as a filter plant.

It was a functional water treatment plant until 2010, when it was decommissioned after the town built a new facility, but it remained a dominant fixture along the river and downtown core in general.

Smiths Falls chief administrative officer Malcolm Morris said another option would be for town officials to “self-manage” the restoration project by getting a payout from the insurance company and taking that money to restore it themselves.

While the building holds significant historic value in the small town, most of the committee was not willing to put the town at risk of any unexpected liabilities by taking on the project.

“For me it came down to the risks. The building is not stable,” Coun. Peter Mckenna said, adding the insurance company assumed the risks, paying the costs of a demolition.

“To mitigate the risk to our corporation, and to the Town of Smiths Falls, I feel we have to move ahead with the demolition.”

Coun. Stephen Robinson said he went around town and did an informal survey of residents to gauge whether council should restore or demolish the building. He asked 321 people whether they should demolish or save it, or if they didn’t know or care, he said.

He said 270 people — or 84 per cent — said “without hesitation” that they should demolish it, adding only six people wanted it saved.

Based on that, and the information council has learned throughout the process, he said he agreed demolition was the only path forward.

Coun. Dawn Quinn agreed.

“We can’t put the town of Smiths Falls at risk of doing this on our own,” Quinn said, adding she supported demolition.

“I don’t see any other way that we can go.”

The building was designated under Ontario Heritage Act in 1977, and the Act prohibits the demolition or removal of any property or building on the property unless authorized by council.

The recommendation to demolish the building included the idea of salvaging and retaining some of the stones and bricks from the structure to use, potentially, when redeveloping the site, but any type of redevelopment would likely be years in the future, Clark said.

“It would take a couple of months to get started. Obviously we’d like to amp that up and get started as soon as possible,” she said, adding it could take between nine and 12 months to complete the process.

The report will proceed to an upcoming council meeting for a final vote.