Voter guide: Everything you need to know about the municipal election in the Hamilton area

The rendering of the new house in old Dundas offers a modern, bright design that fits with the vintage neighbourhood.

Or it is flashy and out of context with the Victorian surroundings.

Debate over the vision for 208 Melville St. in the town core seems moot at this point, because a petition opposing demolition of an existing home on the property has helped delay, if not scuttle, the plans of its new owners, a Toronto family that bought the house for $1.05 million.

We're a young couple trying to build a home for our kids and feel we're being pushed out of a town that we were promised was hospitable ... I'm just kind of gobsmacked," said Jenny Fellman.

Fellman and husband Doug Chapple bought the 132-year-old stucco house in September 2021, drawn by Dundas's reputation as a walkable" and friendly community.

The listing read: Charming century home in the heart of Olde Dundas ... Ideal for investors or if you are looking for a place to renovate and call home ... Large 50'x120' lot leaves room for so much potential!"

The couple says advice they received suggested the most cost-effective plan was demolishing the old and building new, rather than renovating. The home is not a designated heritage property.

They began obtaining permits last spring toward demolition, and paid to install a required new water and sewer line; Fellman said they have paid for permits, securities, and architectural fees totalling nearly $150,000.

Joel Tanner, CEO and creative director of SMPL Design Studio, the Hamilton architectural firm that designed the new home, said everything had been approved and all that was required was a clerical" sign-off from the city on demolition. That would have happened last week - but for a new wrinkle at a city council meeting Sept. 28.

At that meeting, Ward 13 Coun. Arlene VanderBeek proposed a motion for a heritage conservation district study of properties on Melville Street, triggering an interim control bylaw that puts a halt to new construction and demolition for one year. The motion passed.

She cited the petition that had been signed by 75 members of the neighbourhood which consists of only 84 homes."

The petition requested an urgent" review of the looming home demolition, adding that 208 Melville is a sound house. It is architecturally representative of its original era and blends into our common streetscape."

VanderBeek told The Spectator that she feels for the couple, and it is unfortunate" they are caught in this situation," but the measure is the only way we can protect and define the important overall heritage character" of the neighbourhood.

In an email, she added that she had not seen the new design when she made the motion, and the petition was only one factor in her decision, in addition to an outcry" of concern expressed by neighbours once people realized that the house at 208 was going to be demolished."

Tanner, however, feels his clients were targeted by a last-minute political hijacking after having jumped through the required permit and planning hoops.

We are now in a predicament where the client has to spend more money and waste more time, and lose the construction season window ... They can't move to Dundas next fall with their kids to go to school," he said. We have been put in a pickle and it is frustrating."

Chapple said the financial toll is insane ... and there is also the emotional toll, after you've put your heart and soul into building your dream."

The petition was organized in part by Melville resident Don Oakie. He said it was never anyone's intention to upset the new owners, but stressed the importance of maintaining the integrity" of neighbourhoods, where vintage homes with intangible historical memories are not replaced by new ones out of context with the area.

I don't fault anyone for not understanding this from the get-go," he said. There was nothing evil in the intent with their plans. I put it down to miscommunication."

Oakie said the couple may have been ostracized" by neighbours if the new build had gone ahead.

I've seen it happen," he said. Or would a discussion (beforehand) have been better?"

VanderBeek added that concerns were expressed" the previous owners of 208 Melville had accepted a reduced offer for the house from the new owners on the basis that they believed the house would not be demolished."

When the couple bid on the home, Fellman wrote a letter to the seller that read: We understand the desire to feel good about passing on a beloved property to a family that will honour what it has meant to you," adding how excited they were to raise their three-year-old and six-month-old there, and look forward to the possibility of living at 208 Melville amongst your tulips and daffodils."

I told him we wanted to raise our family there, I never said within those exact four walls," she told The Spec. I didn't vow we wouldn't tear it down."

Fellman said that as a sign of respect for the character of the street, they requested no variances from the city for the new design, and incorporated Tudor-style arches as a way to pay homage to the original home that also featured that touch.

On Thanksgiving Monday, Fellman and Chapple went knocking on doors, handing out pumpkins and introducing themselves to neighbours - they have been living in Toronto since buying - and showing the rendering.

Fellman said one neighbour opined that the design was ugly," while others were complimentary.

One option Tanner said he raised at a meeting last week with VanderBeek and city planning staff was conducting a private heritage inventory immediately on 208 Melville alone (he said it would cost $8,000 to $10,000), and submit the findings to the city for review.

He said following that, the newly elected city council could vote on amending the interim bylaw before year's end to perhaps give Fellman and Chapple the green light to build.

Heritage inventories of homes on Melville Street have been conducted in the past - a 1994 Dundas LACAC survey, and a 2017 city-wide inventory of pre-Confederation buildings - and 208 Melville was not identified as a heritage property in either process.

The petition opposing demolition noted the importance of property rights of individual homeowners," but added that we seek to balance those rights with our collective responsibility to maintain the character of our neighbourhoods."

Fellman said they understand neighbours have heartfelt emotions in what we are doing but we chose a tasteful design, and followed everything the city asked us to do ... I don't have to like what someone is wearing, or how you garden; it's a free country and it's about you doing you while showing respect for others."

Jon Wells is a feature writer at The Spectator. jwells@thespec.com