Posts: 6,475
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
88
I hesitated to open a new thread, but I saw an article in the Record about whether Cambridge's downtown(s) should be made heritage districts. The discussion is spurred by an apparently bad cladding of the red brick Merchants Bank building along the river in Galt, next to the old Post Office. The article has "before and after pictures" and, indeed, the "after" seems hard to digest. Unfortunately, the property owner did not respond to the Record's request for an interview, so there is no indication of why the new cladding was required (deterioration of the brick? water infiltration? need for insulation? the metal siding was on sale?).
It will be interesting to see whether this generates discussion in Cambridge. I don't know to what extent individual buildings in downtown Galt have heritage protection, but the idea of protecting the entire area seems worthy of discussion, at least.
http://www.therecord.com/news-story/7053...istricts-/
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
It does look terrible, I agree, but I hate the idea of bringing in another layer of control over what people can do on their own property.
Posts: 4,912
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
118
Wow, that's brutal.
I agree with Canard though, controlling what people can do is not the answer. Even more so in this case because there is a LOT in all three Cambridge cores that shouldn't be protected.
Posts: 417
Threads: 49
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
10
The cladding is the least of the problems at that address.
_____________________________________
I used to be the mayor of sim city. I know what I am talking about.
Posts: 6,475
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
88
(01-08-2017, 10:57 AM)Drake Wrote: The cladding is the least of the problems at that address.
Bad building?
Posts: 896
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
11
The problem with making them heritage districts is that it's too late. There are already too many buildings that don't really qualify as heritage (the TD bank in Preston, Cambridge Place in Galt). What would be better is targeting the heritage buildings themselves and putting in new regulations to protect them specifically - and regularly review what's on the list with temporary protection put on buildings that might qualify in future.
Posts: 417
Threads: 49
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
10
(01-08-2017, 11:00 AM)panamaniac Wrote: (01-08-2017, 10:57 AM)Drake Wrote: The cladding is the least of the problems at that address.
Bad building?
Sorry to be vague. My limited experience with that building left me with the conclusion that it was poorly maintained and run like a soon to be slum. The apartments on the 2nd floor are pretty rough and reminded me of the debacle on Weber St that caused all the drama and eventual closure.
_____________________________________
I used to be the mayor of sim city. I know what I am talking about.
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
I really fear for designating core areas in a blanket of heritage. These are the areas that are supposed to be the focal point of a city, where growth and renewal is strongest. I fear that such designations choke off an area, and if the cores of Cambridge were to be closed off to development, Cambridge itself would likely follow the path of Mississauga of all but the last little while, with little urbanization, primarily becoming a suburban sprawl farm, and with people gradually becoming as unaware of Hespeler, Preston, and Galt as Mississauga's residents are of Streetsville.
Posts: 1,476
Threads: 5
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
41
A better solution would be to designate the area of heritage interest (but not necessarily a lock-stock-and-barrel blanket heritage district) and to make funding and expertise available to property owners who wish to repair their property. Cambridge has been lucky enough to have areas where there is decent urban fabric that preserves some of its historic character. It's no mistake that film crews are more likely to film in the downtown cores of Cambridge than elsewhere in the region.
Posts: 6,475
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
88
How much power do municipalities have in terms of setting/enforcing design standards for areas without heritage designation? It seems like not enough.....
Posts: 896
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
11
(01-09-2017, 10:24 AM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: I really fear for designating core areas in a blanket of heritage. These are the areas that are supposed to be the focal point of a city, where growth and renewal is strongest. I fear that such designations choke off an area, and if the cores of Cambridge were to be closed off to development, Cambridge itself would likely follow the path of Mississauga of all but the last little while, with little urbanization, primarily becoming a suburban sprawl farm, and with people gradually becoming as unaware of Hespeler, Preston, and Galt as Mississauga's residents are of Streetsville.
Since when were Mississauga residents unaware of Streetsville?
We still have a lot of area available for redevelopment. The whole of the Hespeler Road area between Industrial and Franklin, for starters. A lighter touch will be necessary in the old districts to avoid overwhelming them. It's harder to add density to areas where the roads are already well over the capacity they were designed to sustain. With Preston the solution is easy; get rid of the through traffic. Hespeler and Galt will be much harder.
Posts: 1,935
Threads: 102
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
18
Cambridge is looking into to different options for heritage protection of buildings along the Grand River in Galt.
http://m.therecord.com/news-story/724080...-buildings-
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
https://www.therecord.com/news-story/831...-park-dam/
"It may be better for fish passage or the wavy-rayed lampmussel and silver shiner or flood control, but the people who flooded councillors with their save-the-dam messages appear to have won out."
Really? After watching Brantford deal with flood, after council will lampoon the costs of proposal after proposal, they'll spend potentially 8 figures for a vista that hurts the environment, hurts fish, and risks flooding Cambridge? Wow.
|