A question of impact

Former councillor asks that two items be removed from Old Boys’ Memorial Entrance

During last Wednesday’s Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee meeting, a discussion resulted regarding an email sent by Hillier resident and former councillor Ernie Margetson. In the email, Margetson was suggesting that the gazebo and inukshuk sculpture that were erected for the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games beside the Old Boys’ Memorial Entrance in front of the Crystal Palace be removed.

“Understanding that Council has committed monies and invested a certain amount of emotion to restoring some dignity to the Old Boys’ Memorial for those taken in the Great War, can I please suggest that the gazebo and stylized inukshuk be removed adjacent to the building so as not to crowd the building with inappropriate clutter or compromise the aspect from Main Street of this designated structure,” he said.

Margetson also noted he would be happy to help seek cost effective means for removal and relocation if necessary.

“I believe they were only intended for the ceremony at that time, largely held within the Fairgrounds, and not intended to remain indefinitely. I feel that it might be appropriate time to move on from that event and restore the dignity to this most worthy little building. They just don’t fit there anymore,” added the former councillor.

Councillor John Hirsch wondered how Heritage legislation would deal with the situation.

“What’s interesting here is that we have three features close together which are there for very different reasons. The Old Boys Entrance has been there forever. The gazebo was put up in 2009 for a specific purpose, and the Inukshuk in 2010 for a specific purpose,” noted Hirsch.

Heritage Committee member Edwin Rowse believed it was a question of quick impact assessment of those new installations on the property.

I assume they were approved at the time and put up as a temporary installation. I would not remove them from the site for reasons of other peoples sensitivities and contributions of commemoration of those events that took place on the site.”

Rowse also mentioned he didn’t personally have a feeling that the items impacted very strongly on the value of the Old Boys’ Entrance, but that he had no objection if they were a short distance.

Heritage Committee Chair Sandra Latchford said she didn’t understand how the items were placed so closely to a heritage site in the first place.

“I think it was a practicality of the Olympic torch coming through Picton, so they wanted it out front, but it is not a good match. It wasn’t back then, either,” she said.

The whole fairground is designated,” added Rowse. “Technically we would need to get approval to remove those two pieces, and that is a process that staff could handle.”

Rowse suggested there were two options. “Stay as we are and accept the small heritage impact, or move them 10 to 15 metres away and set them up as their own commemoration of the 2010 games in Vancouver,” he said.

Committee member Ross Hamilton said if they were moved, it wouldn’t have to be far.

“But it would probably benefit both of those items that were put up to commemorate the torch run as well as the Old Boys’ Entrance. Allowing both of them to have their own context and own space,” said Hamilton.

Bob Waldon agreed that the items could use more space and an explanation.

“What stood out for me is that if these were removed, who else might be effected by that? It doesn’t strike me as a wise course of action to remove something without reaching out doing some sort of consultation to ensure we don’t create another problem.”

Chair Latchford said she wanted to see a staff report.

“I would like to hear what the rationale is, and what are we going to do with the Old Boys’ Entrance. Are we going to make that more functional to where it was when it was original or not; they virtually closed it down because the foot traffic didn’t go through there anymore, but it could, we need to get the bigger picture here for what’s happening for it, and for the sites.”

Rowse mentioned through talks with County staff, he had learned that the gazebo has a potential future use as a green room for performances at the Crystal Palace, but noting that the first task is to get the roof fixed before looking at other repairs.

“I don’t think they should be moved off-site. I don’t think they should be moved 150-metres away, I think they should be moved 10 or 15 metres. They are just very cheek-by-jowl at the road with the Old Boys’ building,” said Rowse.

Councillor Hirsch added one more potential complicating factor.

“It looks like it is starting to fall apart. It’s just a wooden structure. So is somebody going to come and say we need to spend money to restore the gazebo, whether it is moved or not? It clearly has a historical function.”

“We are struggling here because we don’t know why they are there,” said Committee member Waldon. “They were put there because they were important to somebody at some time. Let’s find out why they are there and what their purpose was.”

The committee voted in favour of an amending motion that council direct staff to explore the relocation or removal of the gazebo and inukshuk sculpture, and return to a future Built and Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee meeting with recommendations.