HELP SAVE Historic 100 yr old Building Eatons Canada- is it worth saving?
|I| taylorchuk钞 |II|
(Eatons)
(Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada just above North Dakota)
Could some people help us in Winnipeg determine whether we should try to
save a very historic commercial building in the hear of our city.
There has been a great deal of controversy over this issue where many people
want to preserve this very attractive building and have it redeveloped into
uses which would be ideal for the area. (appartments/condos, grocery
store/retail, library use)
However, a decision was made without proper public participation to put a
Hockey rink /Entertainment complex in it and knock the building down in
August (2 months from now)
The city council voted today to *not* put the building on the historic
properties list which now allows the developer the right (apparently) to
knock the building down.
The Eatons building became empty 1.5 years ago when the company closed
operations and was restructured.
We kept being told that the arena would possibly go into this building and
we would retain the facade...so any other interested commercial purchasers
of the building were basically given the impression that the space was
spoken for.
So now, we are in a rush situation to decide if Chicago style early 1900s
architecture with huge limestone bricks, brass and windows, is worth saving.
The city council has advised us that they don't think it should be
protected.
Is there any other way to have a 100 year old magnificent looking building
with many alternative uses saved?
I was told that Balitmore has done some amazing rennovations to older style
buildings with a company called Southern Development Corp.
I put up a picture of the bulding on a site that I might work on later.
www.geocities.com/downtownwinnipeg
The builders of the project have plans on this site www.truenorth.mb.ca
PS: many Hollywood film companies come to Winnipeg because of our old
historic shopping area called Old Market Square...which is why we find it
strange that the city wishes to demolish this building when there are many
other vacant properties available near by for it
Harvey V
<taylo...@home.com> said:
> re: advice on determining historical relevance of 100hyr old
> building (Eatons)
> (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada just above North Dakota)
>
Tactically speaking, do you have someone on your side on the city
council that will make a nuisance of themselves while the issues are
being debated? I've been involved on the architectural history side of
such issues a number of times, and have found that the final decisions
are very seldom based on the historic and architectural merits of such
buildings.
That said, in most jurisdictions of which I am aware, the viability of
development -- either for the re-use of the building or for its
replacement -- is excluded from consideration for listing. Unlike
financial viability, however, the aesthetic quality of the replacement
*can* form part of the decision to allow/prohibit redevelopment.
Generally speaking the main criteria for the protection of historic
buildings are pretty well-established. The situation differs from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction, of course -- in your case provincial
rather than national laws will apply, and the specific criteria should
be readily available to you -- but the main questions usually revolve
around:
Date: how early is it in terms of the city's commercial
development history?
Design: does it exhibit innovation in its structure?
Attribution: was it designed by a known architect? If so,
how central to his/her (usually his) work is this particular
design?
Rarity: if being listed for its expression of "typical"
rather than individual design, how many other examples of
such buildings exist and are protected?
Completeness: how altered has it been, internally and
externally?
Historical association: is the building associated with
specific historic people or events?
In addition to full protection, many jurisdictions also have some form
of aesthetic/design control for "conservation areas" which is intended
to protect and enhance the general character rather than specific
buildings of an area (usually by limiting change to the exterior of
buildings). I don't know if this second tier of protection exists in
your city.
HTH
Harvey
|I| taylorchuk钞 |II|
I will comment below and have forwarded this post to some other people who
may have more to contribute than myself since I am not fully aware of all
the historical details etc.
**
Harvey V wrote in message ...
>On 21 Jun 2001, I take it that "|I| taylorchuk钞 |II|"
><taylo...@home.com> said:
>
>> re: advice on determining historical relevance of 100hyr old
>> building (Eatons)
>> (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada just above North Dakota)
>>
>
>Tactically speaking, do you have someone on your side on the city
>council that will make a nuisance of themselves while the issues are
>being debated? I've been involved on the architectural history side of
>such issues a number of times, and have found that the final decisions
>are very seldom based on the historic and architectural merits of such
>buildings.
>
**
There are 3 councilors who agree with delaying the process before making
this final demolision plan (about 10 others are against saving it)
>That said, in most jurisdictions of which I am aware, the viability of
>development -- either for the re-use of the building or for its
>replacement -- is excluded from consideration for listing. Unlike
>financial viability, however, the aesthetic quality of the replacement
>*can* form part of the decision to allow/prohibit redevelopment.
>
**
Well...in this city Winnipeg we have so many empty decrepid buildings that I
feel its important for the detractors to know that this building is still
solid and could easily with the right plan and money become something very
viable again (appartments/grocery/library expansion)
You do say that financial viability isn't really important to get historic
status.
I will add comments of its significance below
**
>Generally speaking the main criteria for the protection of historic
>buildings are pretty well-established. The situation differs from
>jurisdiction to jurisdiction, of course -- in your case provincial
>rather than national laws will apply, and the specific criteria should
>be readily available to you -- but the main questions usually revolve
>around:
>
> Date: how early is it in terms of the city's commercial
> development history?
>
**
Yes. It was built in 1904 and was the first large commercial building on our
major street called Portage Avenue in Winnipeg, Canada.
It was a meeting place for the community and housed 1,400 staff and was the
largest employer after the government and the railroads.
picture of it on my site www.geocities.com/winnipegdowntown
**
> Design: does it exhibit innovation in its structure?
**
It has huge main floor windows surrounded by intricate brass frames....
limestone around it like our Provincial Legislature buildings....
**
> > Attribution: was it designed by a known architect? If
so,
> how central to his/her (usually his) work is this particular
> design?
>> Rarity: if being listed for its expression of "typical"
> rather than individual design, how many other examples of
> such buildings exist and are protected?
>
**
Not sure about the architect..but it is called "Chicago style" of
architecture apparently.
There is one other building about as large and historic looking, the Hudson
Bay store a few blocks away.
We have an area called the Old Market Square where filmmakers go to make
their films.
***
> Completeness: how altered has it been, internally and
> externally?
>
**
It was built in 1904 and I believe had a major addition to it a few years
later.
I believe it received new black tinted windows/glass (seen on webpage)
perhaps 20 years ago.
I can't speak to what was remodelled inside.
**
> Historical association: is the building associated with
> specific historic people or events?
>
**
It is an Eatons bulding....which was one of the first and largest retail
families in Canada.
It survived a few major events in Winnipegs history like the flood of 1950
etc.
It was always a meeting place...and meetings probably took place in front of
it during the famous Winnipeg strike of 1919.
**
>
>In addition to full protection, many jurisdictions also have some form
>of aesthetic/design control for "conservation areas" which is intended
>to protect and enhance the general character rather than specific
>buildings of an area (usually by limiting change to the exterior of
>buildings). I don't know if this second tier of protection exists in
>your city.
>
*
Yes...apparently there are 3 or so levels of historic status that it could
have been granted.
This last city hall meeting yesterday was to see if it should have any
status...possibly it was level 2...but it was denied completely .
So now, the builder is excited about being able to demolish the building in
August.
I don't see how a group of a dozen or so councilors, many of whom have only
been in the job for a year can make a decision which will directly lead to
the remapping of our downtown and the demolision of one of
Manitobas/Winnipegs most recognizable historic buildings.
>HTH
>Harvey
Scott Willing
whole thing sounds like a railroad ram-job to me. They are in such a rush to
bulldoze that building -- and with so little regard for planning principles,
for the people in the downtown core, for traffic and safety issues, and for
considering alternatives, that it's hard not to think there's something
really crooked happening behind the scenes. Either that, or city council is
just out of their depth and they've been mesmerized by dazzle.
The attitude from the vice-pres of True North (damn their hides for using
that moniker) was unbelieveable. When asked why they hadn't even shown a
business plan, he stopped just short of saying "piss off". The attitude
seems to be that it's a private development and that public opinion,
consultation and review simply doesn't need to be tolerated.
As if this weren't arrogant enough of itself, I understand there's something
like $40M of public money on the line?
What the !@#$?!
On one plane of consciousness, I couldn't care less what happens in
Winnipeg, and while I'm at it, the ghost of Tim Eaton can kiss my butt.
Civilization is on a rocket-ride to hell anyway.
But when people claim Canadians don't have any culture, is it any wonder?
When we're ready to plow under a building like that (especially when even
Calgary <giggle> is discovering the value of the few old buildings they
have) and slap up an arena? Whoa, dude, pass another brewski, eh? If you
drive over that median you can shortcut the line-up for parking, eh?
Whatta bunch of classless, visionless louts.
Shameful.
-smw
|I| taylorchuk³® |II| <taylo...@home.com> wrote in message
news:1zaY6.8671$Vf.9...@news1.rdc1.mb.home.com...
|I| taylorchuk钞 |II|
how the main representative of this project outright refused to answer any
questions by the host about showing the business plan to the public.
The comment continued to be made that it was a private led project and that
these details would be released in due time.
It is getting at least 1/3 of government money (over $35 million..of total
$140mill project)
I don't want to see this great looking and very solid 100 year old building
rushed and demolished in August until some answers come forward.
See this news site that I found tonite.
http://www.newwinnipeg.com/news/n010621landtitle.htm
Here is a story which is even more shocking about this building which was
apparently sold for $10 (worth $3mill)
******
Scott Willing wrote in message ...
>|I| taylorchuk钞 |II| <taylo...@home.com> wrote in message