A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
From the Star:
Worth saving?
Heritage properties help to form both individual and collective identity, and our sense of who we are comes
in part from the places we inhabit
Mar. 4, 2006. 02:08 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
Canada is on its way to becoming a country without a past.
Though not lacking for history, we tear down the architectural evidence with gleeful abandon.
According to Carolyn Quinn of the Heritage Canada Foundation (HCF), the only national advocacy group dedicated to the preservation and promotion of historic buildings and places, the numbers tell it all. In the last three decades alone, we have destroyed fully 20 per cent of the nation's pre-1920s building stock. That's no mean feat. Indeed, it is estimated that 35 per cent of total waste in landfill sites comes from demolished buildings.
"Canada gets a failing grade in terms of heritage preservation," Quinn says. "There's tremendous work going on on the ground with local volunteers trying to save threatened buildings. But there are barriers set up to prevent heritage preservation in Canada.
"The federal government could make a tangible commitment by taking care of its own heritage properties. We also need to look at eliminating tax disincentives."
The foundation now issues an annual heritage report card and a list of the 10 most endangered buildings in Canada. It makes for interesting, if depressing, reading. Included is everything from the 1882 Bell Barn in Indian Head, Sask., a rare circular structure, to the 1961 Bata Shoe Headquarters in suburban Toronto.
Also mentioned are the 1913 Lister Block, the "oldest surviving major office/retail complex" in Hamilton; the magnificent 1932 Burrard Bridge in Vancouver; the 1876 Alma College in St. Thomas, Ont.; and the Southwest Point Lighthouse, 1831, in Anticosti Island, Que.
But as Quinn also points out, "the protection of heritage sites falls under provincial jurisdiction. And most provinces have legislation that gives power to municipalities."
"The federal government does have some control over sites that have been designated and which they own," she says. "It would nice if the federal government could proceed with the Canada Historic Places Act, which has been promised for a long time.
"Generally speaking, provinces could do a much better job; there are too many good buildings coming down. For example, Alberta has the strongest legislation but they don't use it. It has the smallest number of designated buildings."
The acknowledged leader in the field is Quebec, which has always played an activist role in cultural matters. After that come British Columbia and Ontario, where the provincial heritage act was updated last year to give it more teeth.
But, argues Ernest Buchner, executive-director of Heritage Toronto, Canada lags behind other countries such as the U.K. and the U.S.
"In other countries, there's a greater awareness of heritage because it's part of the national identity," he says. "We're definitely not there yet."
Ironically, if the unexpectedly huge success of Doors Open is any indication, the public appetite for heritage is enormous. The two-day event, which attracted nearly 200,000 participants in Toronto last year, gives the public access to some of the city's most important heritage sites. But translating that excitement into action has been difficult.
"Ontario's in better shape than it was," Quinn says, "though we still have a long way to go."
Often, however, the issue isn't so much the lack of good intentions but the presence of unintended obstacles. Buchner uses the example of building codes, one of those hidden factors that normally don't attract much attention. But in Canada, these codes take precedence over heritage legislation; that can make for problems when it comes to restoring and renovating historic properties. Contemporary safety requirements and the like bear no resemblance to those of the 19th century.
"In the U.K., heritage legislation trumps code in the majority of cases," Buchner says.
Most agree, however, that the most effective way to encourage architectural preservation is tax incentives. In Ontario, Buchner explains, property tax cuts of between 15 and 40 per cent are available.
In Toronto, tax cuts for heritage property owners will be introduced this year for the first time. Though the program won't be fully implemented for three years, it could mean tax savings of up to 40 per cent on designated buildings.
"It's going to encourage heritage property owners to invest in their properties," Buchner says. "Older buildings can be more expensive to maintain. This will help mitigate that."
At the same time, there's no doubt more legislation is needed. As the HCF report states:
"Over 1,300 designated federal heritage buildings held in public trust for the people of Canada do not have statutory protection from demolition or inappropriate change. Canada is the only G-8 country without such legislation."
But the real story here may be that Toronto and Canada are missing out on the greater economic benefits of heritage. The fact is that cultural tourism, which includes heritage, is one of the fastest growing sectors of the tourism industry, and one that this country has missed consistently.
"Cultural tourism is big and growing bigger," says Marion Joppe, director of the School of Hospitality and Tourism Management at the University of Guelph and former chair of Heritage Toronto. "It has to do with demographics; cultural tourism is important to somewhat older travellers with higher education and lots of disposable income. But we're not seeing as much of that growth in Canada as in other countries."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`In other countries, there's a greater awareness of heritage because it's part of the national identity'
Ernest Buchner, Heritage Toronto
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Joppe puts it: "High-profile architecture creates an instant identity whether it's new or old. You can show almost anybody a picture of Sydney Opera House and they know which city it's in. Historic architecture is the soul of a city. Heritage is what makes cities unique. It's what gives cities their identity. If you have just bland modern architecture, you feel you could be anywhere."
Toronto, of course, is dangerously full of exactly the kind of architectural anonymity that Joppe refers to. The "Cultural Renaissance" now underway in this city should go some way in changing this, but even then Joppe says it won't help as much as it could have.
"We've let the opportunity fizzle," she says. "We should have had a high-profile marketing campaign to go with it."
As time passes, however, the very definition of heritage changes. One of the big debates now raging concerns "modern" architecture. Forty or 50 years after they were constructed, there's a growing number of buildings from the 1950s and `60s that deserve designation. This has become a hot topic in Toronto. As Quinn points out, "people have a hard time with the idea that a building that's younger than they are could be declared a heritage site."
In Toronto, one need look no farther than the Bata Shoe headquarters on Wynford Dr. and the half-round building at Bridgepoint Health (formerly Riverdale Hospital). City council has approved the demolition of both. Then, there's the Hummingbird Centre, which could be buried alive beneath on oversized and overblown condo tower.
But recently, the heritage movement has been casting around for new strategies to accomplish its ends; the latest is to align itself with ideas of sustainability. As Quinn makes clear, "the sustainability message is now a big part of the conservation message."
According to the HCF report: "It is widely recognized that older buildings contain large amounts of embodied energy and require fewer resources to upgrade and restore than would demolition and redevelopment or greenfield development. Yet, Canada's existing building stock represents the largest collection of material assets for which there is no coherent management and stewardship policy."
In other words, tearing down buildings is a tremendous waste of energy, and at a time when such waste can no longer be tolerated, we must think twice before resorting to such drastic measures.
But beyond all that, heritage plays a critical role in the formation of identity, both collective and individual. Our sense of who we are comes, at least in part, from the places we inhabit.
"New Orleans can face its problems partly because it has such a strong identity," says Toronto heritage architect Michael McClellend.
"It's difficult to imagine such a thing as an Ontario identity. I see myself as a Toronto guy. That means a culture of tolerance, diversity, multiculturalism, and all those things ... But we're still working on it. We're still creating an identity. The whole issue of preserving buildings is about the culture of the place you live in; that's fundamentally tied to personal identity.
"The problem is that a lot of people don't get it and don't think we have anything worth saving. With attitudes like that, we'll never develop an identity of our own."
The future, it seems, depends on the past.
AoD
Worth saving?
Heritage properties help to form both individual and collective identity, and our sense of who we are comes
in part from the places we inhabit
Mar. 4, 2006. 02:08 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
Canada is on its way to becoming a country without a past.
Though not lacking for history, we tear down the architectural evidence with gleeful abandon.
According to Carolyn Quinn of the Heritage Canada Foundation (HCF), the only national advocacy group dedicated to the preservation and promotion of historic buildings and places, the numbers tell it all. In the last three decades alone, we have destroyed fully 20 per cent of the nation's pre-1920s building stock. That's no mean feat. Indeed, it is estimated that 35 per cent of total waste in landfill sites comes from demolished buildings.
"Canada gets a failing grade in terms of heritage preservation," Quinn says. "There's tremendous work going on on the ground with local volunteers trying to save threatened buildings. But there are barriers set up to prevent heritage preservation in Canada.
"The federal government could make a tangible commitment by taking care of its own heritage properties. We also need to look at eliminating tax disincentives."
The foundation now issues an annual heritage report card and a list of the 10 most endangered buildings in Canada. It makes for interesting, if depressing, reading. Included is everything from the 1882 Bell Barn in Indian Head, Sask., a rare circular structure, to the 1961 Bata Shoe Headquarters in suburban Toronto.
Also mentioned are the 1913 Lister Block, the "oldest surviving major office/retail complex" in Hamilton; the magnificent 1932 Burrard Bridge in Vancouver; the 1876 Alma College in St. Thomas, Ont.; and the Southwest Point Lighthouse, 1831, in Anticosti Island, Que.
But as Quinn also points out, "the protection of heritage sites falls under provincial jurisdiction. And most provinces have legislation that gives power to municipalities."
"The federal government does have some control over sites that have been designated and which they own," she says. "It would nice if the federal government could proceed with the Canada Historic Places Act, which has been promised for a long time.
"Generally speaking, provinces could do a much better job; there are too many good buildings coming down. For example, Alberta has the strongest legislation but they don't use it. It has the smallest number of designated buildings."
The acknowledged leader in the field is Quebec, which has always played an activist role in cultural matters. After that come British Columbia and Ontario, where the provincial heritage act was updated last year to give it more teeth.
But, argues Ernest Buchner, executive-director of Heritage Toronto, Canada lags behind other countries such as the U.K. and the U.S.
"In other countries, there's a greater awareness of heritage because it's part of the national identity," he says. "We're definitely not there yet."
Ironically, if the unexpectedly huge success of Doors Open is any indication, the public appetite for heritage is enormous. The two-day event, which attracted nearly 200,000 participants in Toronto last year, gives the public access to some of the city's most important heritage sites. But translating that excitement into action has been difficult.
"Ontario's in better shape than it was," Quinn says, "though we still have a long way to go."
Often, however, the issue isn't so much the lack of good intentions but the presence of unintended obstacles. Buchner uses the example of building codes, one of those hidden factors that normally don't attract much attention. But in Canada, these codes take precedence over heritage legislation; that can make for problems when it comes to restoring and renovating historic properties. Contemporary safety requirements and the like bear no resemblance to those of the 19th century.
"In the U.K., heritage legislation trumps code in the majority of cases," Buchner says.
Most agree, however, that the most effective way to encourage architectural preservation is tax incentives. In Ontario, Buchner explains, property tax cuts of between 15 and 40 per cent are available.
In Toronto, tax cuts for heritage property owners will be introduced this year for the first time. Though the program won't be fully implemented for three years, it could mean tax savings of up to 40 per cent on designated buildings.
"It's going to encourage heritage property owners to invest in their properties," Buchner says. "Older buildings can be more expensive to maintain. This will help mitigate that."
At the same time, there's no doubt more legislation is needed. As the HCF report states:
"Over 1,300 designated federal heritage buildings held in public trust for the people of Canada do not have statutory protection from demolition or inappropriate change. Canada is the only G-8 country without such legislation."
But the real story here may be that Toronto and Canada are missing out on the greater economic benefits of heritage. The fact is that cultural tourism, which includes heritage, is one of the fastest growing sectors of the tourism industry, and one that this country has missed consistently.
"Cultural tourism is big and growing bigger," says Marion Joppe, director of the School of Hospitality and Tourism Management at the University of Guelph and former chair of Heritage Toronto. "It has to do with demographics; cultural tourism is important to somewhat older travellers with higher education and lots of disposable income. But we're not seeing as much of that growth in Canada as in other countries."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`In other countries, there's a greater awareness of heritage because it's part of the national identity'
Ernest Buchner, Heritage Toronto
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Joppe puts it: "High-profile architecture creates an instant identity whether it's new or old. You can show almost anybody a picture of Sydney Opera House and they know which city it's in. Historic architecture is the soul of a city. Heritage is what makes cities unique. It's what gives cities their identity. If you have just bland modern architecture, you feel you could be anywhere."
Toronto, of course, is dangerously full of exactly the kind of architectural anonymity that Joppe refers to. The "Cultural Renaissance" now underway in this city should go some way in changing this, but even then Joppe says it won't help as much as it could have.
"We've let the opportunity fizzle," she says. "We should have had a high-profile marketing campaign to go with it."
As time passes, however, the very definition of heritage changes. One of the big debates now raging concerns "modern" architecture. Forty or 50 years after they were constructed, there's a growing number of buildings from the 1950s and `60s that deserve designation. This has become a hot topic in Toronto. As Quinn points out, "people have a hard time with the idea that a building that's younger than they are could be declared a heritage site."
In Toronto, one need look no farther than the Bata Shoe headquarters on Wynford Dr. and the half-round building at Bridgepoint Health (formerly Riverdale Hospital). City council has approved the demolition of both. Then, there's the Hummingbird Centre, which could be buried alive beneath on oversized and overblown condo tower.
But recently, the heritage movement has been casting around for new strategies to accomplish its ends; the latest is to align itself with ideas of sustainability. As Quinn makes clear, "the sustainability message is now a big part of the conservation message."
According to the HCF report: "It is widely recognized that older buildings contain large amounts of embodied energy and require fewer resources to upgrade and restore than would demolition and redevelopment or greenfield development. Yet, Canada's existing building stock represents the largest collection of material assets for which there is no coherent management and stewardship policy."
In other words, tearing down buildings is a tremendous waste of energy, and at a time when such waste can no longer be tolerated, we must think twice before resorting to such drastic measures.
But beyond all that, heritage plays a critical role in the formation of identity, both collective and individual. Our sense of who we are comes, at least in part, from the places we inhabit.
"New Orleans can face its problems partly because it has such a strong identity," says Toronto heritage architect Michael McClellend.
"It's difficult to imagine such a thing as an Ontario identity. I see myself as a Toronto guy. That means a culture of tolerance, diversity, multiculturalism, and all those things ... But we're still working on it. We're still creating an identity. The whole issue of preserving buildings is about the culture of the place you live in; that's fundamentally tied to personal identity.
"The problem is that a lot of people don't get it and don't think we have anything worth saving. With attitudes like that, we'll never develop an identity of our own."
The future, it seems, depends on the past.
AoD