30 January 2006
the more things change, the more they.......
Graphic: Original masthead of Shirt Tales (1942), company newsletter published by the Forsyth Athletic Association.
- Time Was When Walking was an Accomplishment/ Gasoline Shortage May Revive Art: "What a change the advent of the motor car has made!...We simply had to drive to church on Sunday! People simply could not walk. But there are indications that the art of walking may be revived. The current gasoline shortage, followed by the latest cut in value of ration coupons, will undoubtedly result in more walking in our everyday living....Let's walk and grow robust!"
- Brevitorial/Looking Ahead: "Whatever our station in daily life may be, we can and must resolve to do everything in our power to assure final victory for our forces and their allies in this world-wide conflict....but let us point out that all can be tremendously effective by following our daily tasks with this simple, three-point resolution in mind: First, Be Industrious.....; Second, Be Efficient...; and third, Don't Waste....."
- Shirt Tales is now an Institution: "The real value of such publication lies in the work of launching and fostering the various enterprises undertaken by employee committees. It should also assist in holding interest and welding a unity of purpose until success has been achieved."
- the Forsyth A.R.P. Association: series of lectures to provide training in 1) types and methods of daling with incendiary and high explosive bombs; 2) First Aid; 3) types of protection against war gases....and more
- Snapshot Contest Winners are announced with this editorial comment: "Coincidentally, the first three prize winners were girls, which by no means reflects on the artistic taste or technique of the male contestants...." Thanks to the Forsyth family archives, Kitchener ON!
Rambling Rose asks dear gentle reader: "Did you find the text hard to read? I chose the font colour to match the paper stock of the original Shirt Tales. Ah, memory tints all with its sepia tones! "
Labels: Forsyth
29 January 2006
all aboard the express to Kitchener's Heritage Block...last call to action!
Photo: Forsyth Building prior to 14 Jan 06 demolition and beside it the Mayfair Hotel. "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.....I don't wanna give it....Why you wanna givin it all away?" --- Joni Mitchell, Big Yellow Taxi
List of meetings dealing with Kitchener's Heritage Block buildings this week:
- Monday 30 January 06 Special Council Meeting following Budget session (approximately 11:45 a. m. to deal with a) Forsyth materials salvage; b) Forsyth remaining structures: Smythe Residence & Art Deco portion cf. Centre Block Committee member at 26 Jan 06 meeting: " we should give it [i.e. the Smythe Residence] away to preserve its historical significance" ---------------mmm?
- Monday 30 January 06 regular Council Meeting at 7 p.m. Council Chambers to deal with a) Councillor Galloway's motion to cap KPL @ $32.5 mil as the "rules appear to be changing" and b) Heritage Kitchener's request to add to inventory the city-owned Heritage Block properties cf. That at the February 6, 2006 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting, Council proceed to consider Heritage Kitchener’s recommendation regarding only the City-owned properties located within the Centre Block, being 11 Young Street (Mayfair Hotel), 156-158 King Street West (former Hymmen Hardware) and 48 Ontario Street North (former Legion building); and further, That consideration of the listing of privately owned properties within the Centre Block be deferred until such time as the process for public consultation regarding adding non-designated properties to a Heritage Register has been completed. cf. also the Centre Block Committee member previously quoted regarding the Forsyth Building, "This building and I say it quite candidly is a very unattractive building."
- Thursday 2 February 06 KPL/Centre Block at 8:30 a.m. in Conestoga Room to deal with Land Valuation cf. another CB Committee member quoted in 6 Dec 05 Record: "I have huge concern with the timelines because every month that goes by our buying power is reduced" and per 2 Sept 05 Record: "someone has to make tough decisions"
- Monday 6 February 06 DTS Committee meeting at 2:30 p.m. Council Chambers: to deal with Heritage Kitchener's recommendation et. al cf. #2 above
- Tuesday 7 February 06 Heritage Committee meeting at 4:00 p.m. Conestoga Room: packed agenda including Centre Block private property owners to appear before committee.
- Monday 13 February Council Meeting televised at 7:00 p.m. to deal with a wide variety of Kitchener Heritage motions. We need everyone present!
- Thursday 16 February Centre Block Committee: release of Request for Proposals document?==============> cf. the following items from 19 Jan 06 KPL/CB minutes offered up re the "rules appear to be changing" :
- "due to the escalation of costs associated with building a new central library, Project Committee discussed rewriting the City's objectives to be inclusive and exclusive of a new library....;
- "....any 'innovative financing' proposals ....would be evaluated by the City's Chief Financial Officer as well as a third outside party...";
- ".....the TOR will request in order to protect the facade of these buildings , that the Mayfair and 156/158 King Street W buildings be considered as though designated under the Heritage Act;
- ....the "Director of Facilities Management had no concerns of the structural stability of these two buildings";
- the original part of the Mayfair , which includes the first three floors, has historical significance, unlike the additional three stories above. Maintaining the first three floors was suggested";
- "at this time, Heritage Kitchener is undergoing the process of having these two buildings designated under the Heritage Act."
- "it's been determined that 1.9 metres (6.3 feet) right-of-way on Duke Street would be required for any new development. It was noted that there are buildings currently on the property line, thus this requirement cannot be met."
Labels: built heritage, Forsyth
21 January 2006
wasted opportunity? not in Galt's urban core...
Photo: downtown historical Galt, Cambridge Ontario. The Cross Canada Trail on the river's west side leads to the former Riverside Silk Mill (red brick building).
Decades ago, cities thrived if they were able to attract industry, with access to transportation, and low costs. But increasingly cities are successful because they are places where people want to live. --Ian Ellingham, an architectural consultant.
Professor Haldenby continues with the Riverside Silk Mill story ( cf. previous post for link)
" Only one large river-related industrial building survived the purge. But for a quarter of a century the Riverside Silk Mills stood, underutilized and threatened, the largest single sign of a general process of decline of the once thriving core area of Galt, one of the most beautiful urban landscapes in Ontario... [The mill] had been constructed in several phases between 1918 and 1948, and ...[still] stretches for 100 metres down the west bank just south of the Main Street Bridge.
Some of the mills were already going out of business when the last addition was built on the south end of Riverside Silk in the 1940s. Eventually, like all the others, it succumbed to the collapse of the textile industry in Galt: first spinning artificial fibres, then selling to foreign interests, and finally, in the 70s, closing down the industrial activity completely. Thankfully, the building survived the demolitions and flood control infrastructure that followed the great Galt flood of 1974. "
...Martin de Groot, Record columnist, toured the restored building in 2004 and marvelled:
"For most of us, this was our first direct encounter with what beyond a doubt is the most exciting civic development anywhere in the region, recent, current or planned. "
In what was once Busy Berlin north of the "Sauerkraut line i.e. Highway 401," we have on the south side of Duke Street West:
a) the wasteful destruction of the Forsyth building by neglect and demolition-- an act which Prof essor Haldenby describes as "a profound failure" -- as quoted in The Record 13 Jan 06 article by T. Pender
and if one just turns around to look over to the north side of Duke Street West:
b) the transformation of the St. Jerome's (1907-08 Neo-Classical) building into the Wilfrid Laurier School of Social Work, scheduled to open summer 2006. To see a slideshow of the restoration work currently in process, go to this link: http://info.wlu.ca/fsw/st_jeromes/NewKitchenerCampusRestorat/IMG_0026.html
& elsewhere in Brantford, Wilfrid Laurier University's restoration of the City of Brantford's Heritage Block http://www.wlu.ca/documents/7194/Taking_Shape.pdf
Labels: built heritage, history
wasted opportunity? not in Galt's urban core...
Photo: downtown historical Galt, Cambridge ON: the Theatre Cambridge's red-roofed white brick building on the river's eastern bank is reflected in the Grand River.
Professor Rick Haldenby, University of Waterloo School of Architecture, does not believe in wasting opportunities and tells his story in this month's issue of Perspectives thus:
"Though it is hard to imagine today, textile mills once lined the Grand flowing on its perfect north-south alignment through the city centre. In the nineteenth century Galt had come to be known as 'the Manchester of North America.' After the great Galt flood of 1974, most of the industrial buildings [lining both sides of the Grand River] were demolished and imposing concrete flood walls were installed... Much was lost in the core of Galt, but many of the splendid brick and limestone buildings survived. The church spires still rise over the streets and squares. Attempts to turn the river into an asset in Cambridge saw the creation of a riverside walkway system in the core and a unique system of parks that follow the water and connect the entire city.
But all attempts to bring new life to the Galt core went nowhere. Dedicated people in Cambridge had been looking for thirty years for a way to reverse the decline of their splendid core area. Museums, theatres, downtown malls had all been proposed and rejected for very good reasons... until .... In November, 2000, a meeting at the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce convened to discuss a proposed research initiative dealing with the challenges and opportunities faced by mid-sized cities, especially those in Waterloo Region, in dealing with the long-term decline in their core areas. The project team from the University of Waterloo School of Architecture came to ask the Chamber to lobby Cambridge City Council in favour of the project. At the end of the presentation one of the members asked pointedly, 'This is great, but what we really want to know is what it would take to move the School of Architecture to Cambridge?'...
... read all about this exciting dream come true in this month's issue of OAA's Perspectives magazine online at:
http://www.oaa.on.ca/client/oaa/OAAHome.nsf/object/Perspectives/$file/OAWI05Web.pdf
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men’s blood."-- Architect Daniel Burnham
Labels: built heritage, history
Fw: yellow bricks and open 6/6 windows
Oh, the tangled webs we weave /When we practice to deceive. --Sir Walter Scott, "Marmion"--Scottish author & novelist (1771 - 1832)
Labels: built heritage, Forsyth
19 January 2006
bragging rights or political stunt dance?
Photo: Freeport Bridge crossing the Grand River, Kitchener before its recent restoration. This photo was taken approximately 1984.
The City of Kitchener is just one of few municipalities in Ontario to have formally established a Heritage Planning function (in 1992) and the position of Heritage Planner (in 1993). However the City has been involved in heritage planning efforts well before it formally established the function.
The City's Heritage planner reported that very little of the original Forsyth building could be salvaged and that prior to demolition, he was only able to remove two signs and several Art Deco fixtures and features.
In 1979, only 5 years after the Ontario Heritage Act first came into effect, the City established its municipal heritage advisory committee (Kitchener LACAC or Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee). Since 1980, and with the work of its advisory committee, to date Council has designated 75 individual properties under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Councillors then turned to the question of what could be recovered at this stage in the demolition process and learned that it would still be possible to salvage a quantity of yellow bricks. ===> Rambling Rose learned previously that yellow bricks are extremely valuable commodities to a) the Ontario restoration building market: and b) Japanese consumers.
In 1988 the City successfully defended its first Heritage Conservation District by-law at the Ontario Municipal Board. Today, Kitchener is regarded as being one of the leaders in the Province regarding heritage district designation, having designated 3 heritage districts (Upper Doon, Victoria Park in 1997, and St. Mary’s in 2002) the most of any municipality in the Region, with a fourth district (Civic Centre) on the way. In fact, the St. Mary’s heritage district of wartime housing is the first of its kind in Ontario and possibly in Canada.
Response by Manager of Facilities to one Councillor's question: " We hired him to demolish. He is doing it."
The City was also the first municipality in Ontario to have established policies requiring the submission of Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs) where development applications impact known heritage resources. HIAs have proven invaluable in identifying conservation options that have served to balance preservation with opportunities for development.
Re demolition work process on Sat 14 January 06, I offer up this quote: "We started on Phase IV as we had determined that this building portion would take more abuse in order to prevent the risk of collapse." As observed by Rambling Rose on Sun 15 Jan 06 in the late afternoon: access to the City-owned parking garage directly adjacent had been secured to ensure that City employees arriving to work on Monday would have access to the garage.
In 1998 we successfully petitioned the Province of Ontario and got a Private Members Bill passed to establish demolition control powers for designated heritage property in Kitchener, powers only recently made available to all municipalities through amendments made to the Ontario Heritage Act.
Councillors then consider the question of how many yellow bricks they should purchase to preserve the City's Forsyth legacy. It is determined that 30,000 bricks (approximately 6 skids) of the approximately 1,000,000 bricks of the original building will suffice. ===Per Rambling Rose the following calculation: 30,000/1,000,000 = 3% sets a percentage value on the City of Kitchener's Heritage preservation commitment. REmbling Rose proceeds to mull over related statistics such as 1) Municipal planner has informed her "only 1% of Kitchener residents value its built heritage'" and 2) Compass study has determined that 10% of Kitchener residents value culture and heritage.
The City prides itself in the many heritage successes it has achieved, particularly in relation to the challenge of integrating heritage resources into redevelopment. Some of the more prominent projects and developments that have involved a high degree of heritage consideration and work on the part of the City include :
The adaptive re-use of the 1879 designated former Vogelsang Button Factory into cooperative housing (Bread & Roses Housing Cooperative - 307 Queen Street South);
Through Kitchener Housing Inc., the adaptive re-use of the designated former Victoria School into affordable housing units;
The adaptive re-use of the designated former Registry Office on Frederick Street into the Registry Theatre;
Working closely with the Region of Waterloo in the design and adaptive re-use of the designated former Waterloo County Gaol and Governor’s House into the Provincial Offences Courts and offices;
The award winning adaptive re-use of the former Berlin Interior Hardwood Floor Company Building located at 72 Victoria Street South, into modern office space;
The award winning adaptive re-use of the designated former Kaufman Footwear Factory into condominium lofts;
The adaptive re-use of the designated former St. Jeromes College into the WLU Graduate School of Social Work; and
The future adaptive re-use of the former Arrow Shirt Factory building into residential lofts.
Councillors then turn to consider Heritage Kitchener's motions re preservation of the post-demolition Smythe Residence and the 1937 Art Deco addition to the Forsyth building. Rambling thus learns the following: 1) the Art Deco portion comprises 6,500 sq. ft. of floor space; 2) Any redevelopment of theat building phase will require a Heritage Permit application; and 3) that Mayor Zehr believes that Council designated the Forsyth building in 1999 "in a hurry" and accordingly Council "must be very careful now" and hints at development possibilities.
In addition to its many adaptive reuse successes, the City has established various heritage programs like the Mike Wagner Heritage Awards which honour the efforts of property owners in following good conservation practice; and programs offering financial assistance such as the Designated Heritage Property Grant Program which makes funds of up to $3000 available annually to designated property owners; and the Heritage Tax Refund program offering up to a 40% reduction in property taxes to qualifying heritage property owners (Kitchener was only the second municipality in the Province to establish such a tax refund program).
Per usual, Council (with one abstention) defers to delay Heritage Kitchener motions 1) to preserve aand protect what should remain of the Forsyth building; 2) DTS 05-213 report concerning the updated process to add properties to the City's Heritage Register (required under Bill 60, the amended Ontario Heritage Act and PPS05 statements directing that a city's heritage resources "shall be conserved." The City's Heritage Planner is then instructed to refer the DTS 05-213 report to the development industry and to report back to Council within a month. Nonetheless, the Heritage Planner pleads with Council to add the already inventoried Centre Block properties to the City's Heritage Inventory now.
Footnote: Council approved an upset additional $50,000 to the demolition contract to provide for the yellow brick salvage brick operation. ==> Rambling Rose proceeds to calculate thus: $50,000/30,000 = $1.67 unit cost of the yellow brick she has in her possession as a souvenir.
Labels: built heritage, Forsyth
18 January 2006
demolition dirge
Forsyth demolition begins Saturday 14 January 2006
I walk down these city streets
Just a lonely man inspired
Hoping God will send me water down
To quench this burning fire
How I feel for the mountain
A monestary man
Things will stay the same so I'll remain
And show just who I am
Seeing things around me
Bonnie and Clyde
Grafitti with no message
Doctors, medicines, or pride
But it doesn't really matter
They're blowin' in the wind
On the cover of a magazine
Hallelujah
Babylon is falling
Babylon is falling
I try to wash my dirty hands
But they won't come off the water
Hopin' truth will make me clean and then
Redeem my sons and daughters
Though they're not yet on the very highway
Pass along below
That's why I left my mem'ries far behind the clumbsy road
Seems so simple
Future's the past
The present all the things we
Holdin' on to make th' last
But it doesn't really maeeaahhh
Blow eeeahh
Couuhaaahhh
Ahhhhh
Hallelujah
16 January 2006
per Jackhammer who provides this info:
I have attached a copy of tonight's Council agenda for your information.
Please note that under delegations, there is a delegation appearing requesting that the new central library issue be placed on the Municipal election ballot.
Also, Development and Technical Services Committee item 3 dealing with the Heritage non-designated properties is being deferred. (again? this report is crucial to moving our listed properties to the Heritage Register required by Ontario Heritage Act & the usual tactic of defer, delay, and deny a request & precisely how we have lost the Forsyth designated property --- per rambling rose)
As well, Heritage Committee reports on the last two pages are also on the agenda.
As well, attached are the detailed minutes of the special Council meeting last Mon Jan 9th where Chief Building Official Jim Witmer announced his demolition order. ===> file attachment that won't copy to post here.
- Links to relevant info:
minutes from the Special Heritage Kitchener meeting of January 10, 2006 are found here:http://webdocs.city.kitchener.on.ca/weblink/index.asp?DocumentID=419168&FolderID=417038&SearchHandle=0&DocViewType=ShowImage&LeftPaneType=Hidden&dbid=0&page=1
Labels: Forsyth
as both municipal authority over buildings designated under Part IV of Heritage Act and landowner in this situation
Windowsash has just e-mailed this comment:
"Unfortunately it looks as though the City did not move quickly or with enough commitment to retain their own heritage building. This sets a very poor example for the private and non-government sector in the region. Once again I have to reiterate that the conservation of a city owned heritage property can not be guarantee when the heritage approval lies at the municipal level and when a property is.
>> Even if this building was in such poor condition that it had to be demolished (having never inspected it I am unable to comment with any insight), I am nonetheless shocked that valuable heritage fabric such as the 6/6 double hung windows were not/are not being salvaged. Authentic yellow brick like that on the Forsythe is a very valuable resource for conservation projects where replacement brick is needed. Again I shocked and frustrated by the loss of this heritage property. "
Labels: Forsyth
Measuring tape with practical experience in overseeing demolitions of heritage buildings has looked at the report filed and comments thus:
"I have reviewed the report and found on the page 3, under 'Demolition and Related Issues' , the second sentence ending: '...all pre-demolition environmental concerns have been addressed.' On the page 4, under 'Financial Implications'. the third point 'Removal of environmental materials is known to be an issue which the City is required to address, but the exact nature and cost in this regard is unknown at this time'.
On the third page it looks they know environmental issues, on the fourth page nature of environmental materials are unknown???? "
Labels: Forsyth
Crane requests action as follows:
"In the interim it is absolutely critical to attempt to forestall further damage. I need to concentrate exclusively on the above, so if ANYBODY/SOMEBODY is willing to participate in creating as much flak as possible as an obstacle to further damage....
Action Call issued thus:
then we need complaints -
>>>> a. the Ministry of Labour's Occupational Health and Safety enforcement people are in Waterloo at 885-3378 -- the issue is the propercontainment and removal of asbestos -- it is not being done.
>>>> b. the Ontario Ministry of the Environment makes itself maddeningly inaccessible. There are several numbers under Environment on page 9 of the blue pages in the 2006 phone book - Environmental Spill Reporting (water waste air) 1 800 268 6060, Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (doubtful) 1 800 701 6454 Environment Canada, Ontario Region, Environmental Emergencies 416 739- 4826
>>>> and the Region is involved - Emergency Spills 575 4505. The possibility that the demolition contractor will want to landfill materials that include hazardous substances may be of interest to the Waste Management people at 883 5100.
>>>> the issues are asbestos, PCBs (transformers and light ballasts),volatile gases (fluorescent tubes and HVAC equipment), lead (paint) and hydrocarbons (in the water in the boiler room).
>>>> For those with an aversion to retaliation from the City, it should be possible to have your identity remain confidential. Normally, a demolition contractor would remove and secure for proper disposal all hazardous materials. This didn't happen and these materials are not being properly controlled in the rush to do whatever.
>>>> I haven't yet obtained an identity on the blog, but please post this on my behalf.
=Done as of right now & e-mails previously forwarded to appropriate officials."
Phone call this morning from Skylight who made two calls and is providing this contact information:
Ontario Ministry of Environment local office (Guelph) 519-826-4255 x 64278 contact Beth;
- Environment Canada maintains Pollution hotline 24/7 at this number 1-866-663-8477 but can be contacted directly at 416-739-4809 ask for Jeronim
Skylight believes Ministry of Labour should be involved. Please post relevant info in comment section following this post? Thanks all Ramblingrose
Labels: Forsyth
Skylight, a structural engineer, writes to CBO and has yet to receive a reply to the following:
" I have just reviewed the January 9, 2006 Forsyth Building report that was stated to be “carried out in a very short period of time” and prepared by Yulun Sze, of Sze Straka Engineers.
As far as I can see, this report only reflects the visual observations. I would like to know what structural drawings were used for reference, and where the engineering calculations are, that have determined the ultimate failure of the structure.
Also, page 4, paragraph 1, states “the wall was severely bowed”. There is no quantity of measure in relation to a vertical axis of the original position of the face of the wall to reflect said bowing. There is also no quantity of measure to compare the current deflection of the wall with that of the deflection that was witnessed in the April 2005 visit.
Furthermore, on page 4, paragraph 2, there is reference made to the precast panels, and their current condition. Typical steel frame construction in 1937 would dictate that these panels are affixed to the structural steel columns, beams and girts, so therefore they are not a structural component of the building and do not affect the structural integrity of the building. Your consultant may as well have pointed out cracked glazing in the window frames.
I have personally used Dick Kappeler to assess the brick conditions on some sites that I have built cellular telecom sites on, and as far as I know, Mr Kappeler holds neither a CET or P. Eng designation in this province (correct me if I’m wrong), and his Masonry Review should not have been included as Appendix “B” in a Structural Engineering report.
Can you provide these answers?
Although never on the Heritage Register, Screwdriver on Louisa Street was structurally assessed after an initial fire that also suggested a demolition plan. An Order To Remedy Unsafe Condition was not carried with the swiftness of this latest Order # 001A-06 for the Forsyth Building.
As the City of Kitchener have never enforced their own property standards on this site, and allowed the structure to deteriorate to the said conditions that were visually observed by your independent consultant, and the fact that the site is on the Heritage Register, protected under the Heritage Act through Bill 60, the only responsible recourse would be to comply with the Building Code Act, section 17.1, and order the City of Kitchener to follow through with “remedial repairs or other work to be carried out immediately to terminate the danger”.
Over the years, I have toured numerous buildings of architectural and historical significance from Detroit to Toronto to Buffalo, and witnessed the transformation of structures in absolute ruin to wonders of heritage preservation and renewal.
Demolition should not be an option when the site is currently on the Heritage Register.
I await your reply. "
Labels: Forsyth
15 January 2006
legal loopholes
Photo: exposed air vent in the oldest, industrial vernacular Forsythe Building Phase I (1900). This vent was never capped and allowed rain & snow to penetrate the building over a period of five years.
- Zyg Janecki, member of the KitchenerMC and former co-chair, has been in communication with the Ministry's Paul King regarding this situation, where the CBO is in contravention of the Ontario Heritage Act. The demolition of this building again illustrates the need for a means of legal action. ==>Per Rambling Rose: Just learned from Committee Chair that his request for legal counsel for Heritage Committee was denied by City Solicitor on grounds of "conflict of interest" resulting from having previously advised City Council on legal matters regarding tomorrow's demolition of the Forsythe building.
- The Bridgepoint Hospital building in Riverdale (Toronto) is close to being demolished as unsafe, despite apeer review disagreeing with this diagnosis. Municipal Council meets onTuesday. The hospital administration has been warned that an OMB hearingmay be sought and the Ministry of Public Infrastructure has been alerted.
- Clarification from ON Ministry of Culture as follows: So, in the normal course, if a building is considered unsafe or in danger of collapse, an order would be made by the CBO under the Building Code Act requiring its renovation, repair or demolition. The owner would then have to get a permit from the municipality under the Building Code Act to carry out the required work. Before this permit can be issued, any applicable law must be satisfied. In the case of a designated property, the provisions of section 33 with respect to alterations or section 34 with respect to demolition, as appropriate, would have to be followed. In both cases council's consent and consultation with the municipal advisory committee is mandatory before work could proceed.
You should also note that the Ontario Heritage Act contains a clause saying the act prevails over other acts and regulations in the event of a conflict between them.
The only exception might be in cases of dire emergency (where for example a building is actually collapsing or about to collapse) and there is no time to follow the process above, in which case the CBO could order the repair or demolition and then have it carried out immediately.
The fact that the municipality is the owner of the property doesn't change any of this. Section 8 of the OBCA says "No person shall construct or demolish a building or cause a building to be constructed or demolished unless a permit has been issued therefore by the chief building official." ................................................. Per Gable: we suggest that citizens engage a lawyer right away to review roles of Chief Building Official under the new Ontario Heritage Act.....and appeal for process reasons if possible.
Labels: Forsyth
sleeping beauty awaits.....
Photo: Forsyth 4th floor cafeteria 1937 Art Deco building looking northeast.
Labels: Forsyth
13 January 2006
Help Wanted: Structural engineer with heritage expertise in wood building structure
Photo: wooden supporting beam in Forsythe 1900 (Phase I) building as of October 2005 after a long period of non-maintenance of this designated heritage structure.
Labels: Forsyth
11 January 2006
Is this a Cultural Heritage Landscape?
Photo: View of the historic core of Kitchener taken from the sandhill corner of Benton and Charles Streets. Reading the photo from L to R: in the distance, the post-modern Toronto-Dominion bank tower building, in the forefront the historic listed properties on Queen Street (originally Schneider's Road)including the five-storey red brick late Victorian Walper Terrace Hotel, built in 1893 and totally refurbished in the 1980's. A designated heritage structure.
A Site of Regional Heritage Significance (SRHS) must meet four or more of the following ten criteria:
1. It is recognized on a municipal, regional, provincial or national heritage list;
2. It dates from a prehistoric or early historical period in the development of the municipality, region, province or nation;
3. It is a good representative example of the work of an outstanding municipal, regional, national or international architect, engineer, builder, designer, landscape architect, interior designer or sculptor, or is a good example of vernacular architecture;
4. It is associated with a person(s) who is recognized as having made a significant contribution to the social, cultural, political, economic, technological or physical development or as having materially influenced the course of municipal, regional, provincial, national or international events;
5. It is directly associated with an historic event which is recognized as having municipal, regional, provincial, national or international importance;
6. It is a significant example and illustration of the municipalities prehistoric or historic social, cultural, political, economic or technological development;
7. It contributes to the effectiveness of the urban and rural composition, streetscape, viewshed, or landscape of which it may form a part;
8. It has the potential for contributing to commercial tourist or other development that is based on heritage and/or culture;
9. It is part of a group of similar bridges/structures which contribute to the particular "look" of the area or region;
10. It is part of a group of historically associated structures which may be totally within the Region or which may be part of a larger area within the context of the Grand River (a nationally designated Heritage River).
For more information, please contact:
Labels: built heritage
03 January 2006
Is it better to defer, to delay, and do nothing....or?
Photo: abandoned Forsyth sign inside the equally abandoned Forsyth building. In 1997, Forsyth of Canada & its trademark were sold to Harris Hester in 1997. It is now known as The John Forsyth Shirt Co., Ltd., of Toronto, Ont., Can. As of September 19, 2005, PremiumWear, Inc. of MINNETONKA, Minn. announced that it has been acquired by The John Forsyth Shirt Company Ltd., d.b.a. Forsyth of Canada, ("Forsyth"). http://www.premiumwear.com/content.m/about/news
- On Monday 9 January 2006, the City of Kitchener answered that question in the form of a media release as follows: "KITCHENER – Late today, the City’s Chief Building Official issued an Order for the Remedy of an Unsafe Situation which calls for the immediate demolition of a significant portion of the Forsyth building in Kitchener’s downtown. The City will initiate the demolition immediately and the process will commence as soon as all arrangements have been made.The order is the result of an independent engineering consultant’s report received by the City this morning from Sze Straka Engineers that indicates that the deterioration of the Forsyth building, a historic former factory that faces Duke and Young Streets, has progressed to the point of potential collapse. 'The report indicated that a structural collapse of the building could be imminent. Public safety is always paramount and because of the seriousness of the deterioration, and the building’s location in a high-traffic area, a decision needed to be made immediately,' said Jim Witmer, director of building. Link to the full media release http://www.city.kitchener.on.ca/living_kitchener/forsyth.html
02 January 2006
Can this building be saved?
Line drawing of the Forsyth factory building taken from Uttley's 1937 history of Kitchener.
- The project must involve the rehabilitation for commercial use of an historic property owned/leased by an eligible recipient.
- The building must be put to commercial use in a business, or made available for such a use, immediately following its rehabilitation (or within a reasonable amount of time - under 6 months).
- The rehabilitation project must be of substantial magnitude; that is either (1) at least 50% of the most recent depreciated cost base of the property for federal income tax purposes or (2) in the case of a leased property, at least equal to five years net rent at the current rate at the time of application
- A Certification Service Provider, accredited by the program, must certify the project to be consistent with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.
- The recipient must agree to meet the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
Where to begin? By meeting two requirements:
1) to ensure that the Forsyth building meets the requirements of the Canadian Register of Historic Places as an historic place thus:
*an historic place formally recognized within a provincial/territorial/federal jurisdiction and listed individually on the Canadian Register of Historic Places OR
* a property located within a larger listed historic place (such as a district) and that has been explicitly identified as a "Contributing Property" at the time of the official recognition by the appropriate authority within a jurisdiction (this part of the definition will be adjusted in the next CHPIF call for applications).
and
2) to include in the Terms of Reference for development proposals of the Centre Block, the following criteria:
For purposes of the program, commercial use will include any use that is being used primarily or has been acquired for use primarily (more than 50%) in the business of the owner or of another person that contributes directly or indirectly to the purposes specified in the articles of incorporation of the owner. This includes, where appropriate, the use of historic buildings as residential rental properties or bed and breakfast establishments, if owned by a taxable Canadian corporation.
or
Made available for "commercial use" means that the owner is actively seeking to put the building to use in its own business or to lease or rent the building for a suitable use by another person.
For more information on Commercial Heritage Properties Incentive Fund, go to: http://www.pc.gc.ca/progs/plp-hpp/plp-hpp2a_E.asp
Labels: built heritage, Forsyth
01 January 2006
tribute to textile industry!
When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece.--John Ruskin,
English critic, essayist, & reformer (1819 - 1900)
I am dedicating this blog to all those who worked with their hands to stitch the shirts worn by generation after generation of men and women in this community.
The plaid shirts worn by my four brothers one Christmas in the early 1950's (in the above photo )are my personal remembrance of the local textile industry that once was to be found here.
About a month before Christmas, Mutter took the bus along King Street and then walked over to the rag jobber's place over on Strange Street. There she searched through bin after bin of cuttings from local shirt manufacturers that hadn't quite met standards. She paid for her selections by the pound, went home and recut each piece to the dimensions of one of her sons above, and stitched them together in time for Christmas gift-giving. That was our personal version of similar shirts being manufactured in the factories in time for Christmas.
More than fifty years have passed. The rag jobber became prosperous and no longer sells job lots in the warehouse by the train tracks on Strange Street. Thanks to globalization, all of our textile manufacturing plants have long since been shut down and relocated elsewhere. We are left with empty buildings that bear silent witness to what was once a thriving industry. How much longer until even these buildings have been demolished and we have lost all memory of a time and place when "love and skill worked together to create a masterpiece?"
This blog's title Shirt Tales was the title of a company newsletter put out by the John Forsyth Co. of
Kitchener, Ontario. This is a cyber-attempt to revive that newsletter in order to communicate with all those committed to preserving the historic Forsyth building now threatened with demolition. I am hoping that we can use the new tools of communication to preserve something that for many here represented community and continuity across the generations.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
