During the August 13 Council Meeting there was an
enquiry about why Central School, 1909, now the Tembec Building, does not have
heritage status considering it is one of Cranbrook’s oldest and most respected
buildings. Director Hale indicated there needed to be a nomination for that
building to go the list and then the nomination would go to Council for potential inclusion in the Bylaw.
A motion was made to refer this issue to administration
and the Heritage Committee for further investigation. Councillors Pallesen and
Scott voted against this motion. The
motion did pass but it is hard to understand why two city councillors would not
support a motion such as this.
Cranbrook has lost many of its heritage buildings or they have been altered
beyond recognition. Our historic
buildings are the places that remind us of where we have been and who we are.
By receiving this designation a building receives protection from major change
or alteration without considerable process.
The building was lovingly restored in 1984 but isn’t it time this grand
old building received what it deserves - recognition of its heritage value to the community?
This was a private building that has been a mainstay in Cranbrook with Crestbrook and now Tembec. To apply a special Heritage status to a privately owned property that moved out of the public sector many decades ago is an intrusion of government. That status should have been applied when the government originally sold the building not now.
ReplyDeletethis council even seek any input from the owners of this building prior to bringing this up at council table??? Albeit, it sounds like a great idea on paper not realistic, nor fair to the owners who have invested so much into this community.
I am proud of Councillor Scott and Pallesen for opposing this, at least they show respect for the fundamentals of someones property rights.
Well said, Anonymous. Councillors Pallesen & Scott are correct in opposing this infringement on private property rights. Heritage status should be at the request of the owner whether private individual, business or institution. It should not be forced on anyone.
DeleteWe thank Anonymous for further comments. Unfortunately they were not relevant to the topic of this post which is heritage status for a heritage building. They have therefore not been published.
ReplyDeleteDon't understand the opposition. Cities which preserve their heritage are more often than not respected for that and draw more economic activity as a result. They are frequently more attractive and well cared for. Certainly they are more interesting and worth visiting. Frequently heritage buildings are able to tap into grants which assist in upgrading. There is such a thing as the common good and would it not be for the common good to know this building will be able to keep its integrity in the future.
ReplyDeleteI don't get the opposition by those two councillors to an "investigation" into having it declared a heritage property. No final decision was being made on its future. Who knows? The heritage designation may enhance its value.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations to the Ktunaxa Nation on purchasing the Central School building. Also glad to read the following comments from Kathryn Teneese, Ktunaxa Nation Chair, "The building is historically iconic and we value the preservation of culture, tradition and heritage and, as such, we accept the responsibility of maintaining the heritage value moving forward."
ReplyDelete