Marc Aubin, President, Lowertown Community Association 205-100 Boteler Street, Ottawa, ON K1N 8Y1

Committee Members, Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee, 110 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1 Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Dear Members of OBHAC, Regrettably, I will not be able to attend the meeting this Thursday night. I am the main organizer and master of ceremony for a heritage event that our community association is hosting at a local seniors residence. There will be, however, a representative appearing on behalf of the community association. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the OBHAC for all its hard work and I hope that this particular file will be the subject of careful and compassionate consideration. This letter is regarding the staff report (# ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0217) on the proposed demolition of 273 and 275-279 Sussex Drive. This report does a huge disservice to the value of the buildings being considered, the community of Lowertown, and the members of the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee and Planning Committee. I fear that the document was written to be purposefully misleading and is therefore inappropriate. How is the report misleading? 1. Mixes transportation and heritage issues together It is my understanding that the mission of the OBHAC is to evaluate a request purely for its heritage merits. To request that OBHAC members make a decision that includes evidence of a non-heritage matter transportation in this case would be expecting them to go beyond their area of expertise. As such, I would recommend that you disregard this misleading approach taken by the report and focus your advice solely on the heritage information provided.

2. Does not fully explore transportation solutions Despite my comment above, it is necessary to point out that there are several transportation solutions that have been put forward. City and NCC staff have tried as much as possible to dodge these solutions with irrational arguments that once again mislead people. I will not return to all of these reasonable solutions at this time, since it is not OBHACs area of expertise. Nonetheless, I will demonstrate the way in which staff have misled you on this component with the following example. We indicated on several occasions, that the sidewalk widths being proposed for this section of Sussex (3.6 metres) were much wider than other sections along this portion of Sussex that are being renewed. The report has quite conveniently failed to include the sidewalk widths being proposed in this particular location where the buildings in question are located. In the discussion portion of the report, staff included the widths for the bike and road lanes, but left out the sidewalk widths. Even more misleading is the fact that staff included measurements of the sidewalks in the accompanying diagram, but did not include the measurements of the sidewalks directly next to the buildings proposed to be demolished. This would lead someone to think that the sidewalks will only be 1.8 and 2.5 metres wide when they will actually be 3.6 metres wide on both sides. Once again, I only use this as one example of the transportation dimension that staff are trying to conveniently muddy. Solutions are available that would save the homes. 3. Leaves out the part about famous people living in the buildings Adrienne Clarkson I was very surprised to see that the heritage evaluations were not updated. They are now 20 years old. The most important fact that was left out in both the evaluations and the report was that Adrienne Clarksons family lived in the row house when they first came to Canada as refugees in the 1940s. In her recent book, ironically called Room for All of Us, Clarkson wrote quite fondly of her days in this rowhouse and Lowertown and she even included a photograph taken behind the rowhouse of her as a child. There is no doubt that this story contributes richly to the status of this building and would likely contribute to raising it to a category 1 building. The total lack of mention of this fact in the main section of the report is again another misleading move. Or, is the history of an immigrant and Chinese woman who later became governor general of Canada unimportant to the City and NCC?

Jacques Faucher The report also fails to mention Jacques Faucher. This French-Canadian, whos family lived in the rowhouse for a number of years, recently released a locally sensational book on growing up in and the history of Lowertown, Les chemins de la mmoire. Mr. Faucher has been responsible, in a large way, for a renewed interest by Ottawas francophone community in the important history of Lowertown and their place in that history. Once again, does the City and NCC have no regard for the history of French-Canadians and their Lowertown? Mandia family The Mandia family lived in the house at 273 Sussex Drive from 1947 to the 1990s. The Mandia family is the story of a Sicilian immigrant family that came to Canada in 1902. The family opened a fruit business that thrived for years at the corner of St. Patrick and Dalhousie in Lowertown West. It was an important business in the community given its longevity for over 50 years it provided produce for places like Rideau Hall. After her husband passed away in 1930, Rosina was known as a pioneering Ottawa business woman who ran the fruit store while also raising seven children. Does the City and the NCC not value the history of this pioneering womans early role in the work place, Sicilian immigrants, and a single working mother? 4. Does not fully explain the Category 3 status of Lowertown It is quite misleading for this report not to have more carefully explained the place of a category 3 building in Lowertown. This heritage district, by its very nature, has very few significant heritage buildings in the purest sense. However, it is the fact that this was a working-class heritage district that renders the buildings, as a whole group, much greater than the sum of their parts. Individually, the buildings in Lowertown have almost no chance of survival, but as contributors to the greater context of preserving a district reflective of a late 19th and early 20th century example of a French-Canadian workingclass neighbourhood, they are invaluable. The other question that arises is: how much is too much? At what point will we have eroded the value of the heritage district too much with lax heritage policies and multiple exemptions, such as the one being proposed? There are currently only 11 category 1 buildings in the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District. There are 60 category 2 buildings and there are 222 category 3 buildings. The overwhelming majority of these buildings are category 3. If a building such as the current category 3 rowhouse being considered, with its connection to Clarkson and others, is of little value, then what kind of precedent does this set for the rest of the category 3 buildings in Lowertown?

5 Not Providing all the Options Available The report attempts to mislead the reader in thinking that there are no alternatives. It refers to competing values, although all of these values can in fact be met if there were any interest in compromise or flexibility on the part of the City and NCC. For example, while several examples were given of how to save the buildings, the report only focuses on the one of moving the buildings. While moving the buildings is still feasible, less expensive options would be merely saving the faade or doing a reconstruction. The argument that the NCC does not have the financial means necessary is again misleading, since it is more than willing to spend quite a significant budget on the reconstruction of the roadway whose design includes many expensive features that will never provide a financial return except to meet a design goal. Similarly, there are values greater than just the financial aspect for the buildings concerned and to reduce the argument to an economic excuse is an embarrassing proposition for such a resource-rich organization. There is no doubt, however, that the NCC would benefit quite well financially if it were to sell the properties concerned for the construction of a future embassy. Public Institutions Should be Held to a Higher Standard One of the most shameful parts of these proposed unnecessary demolitions is that two upstanding public institutions are the culprits. If this were a heritage file concerning a developer or resident, then the City would fully apply its heritage standards and expect a reasonable compromise to be found. In the past, these compromises have included moving buildings, saving facades or doing reconstructions. In fact, one would expect that the responsibility of public institutions is not only to meet such minimal heritage standards, but to aim above those standards and act as models of heritage preservation and protection. Instead of holding the NCC to the standard, the City is recommending we lower the bar for this public institution. This is disgraceful and embarrassing. Sadly, what hurts the most in this file is the mean-spirited approach of the NCC. Despite all pleas for compassion, it has taken its all too often high and mighty path and ignored Lowertown. It has easily disregarded that our emotional attachment to these buildings contributes to our identity as a community. Instead, it would like to create a small piece of Lebreton Flats at the corner of Sussex and Bolton Street to remind us they have not really changed. They still have no regard for the history of Ottawa or the residents that live here. They have no interest in preserving the history of immigrants to Canada or French-Canadians; a former female and Chinese Governor General; a French-Canadian historian; or a pioneering working immigrant woman a widowed Sicilian mother of 7 children who owned and operated a successful fruit business in Lowertown for over 50 years. This is a shameful disregard and I could not think of a better example where a compromise was absolutely necessary to preserve heritage buildings.

Precedent 324-334 Bruyre Street In the matter of the rowhouse located at 324-334 Bruyre Street in Lowertown East, the OBHAC previously recommended last August that this property be designated. This property was outside a heritage district and did not have any famous connections, such as the one to Adrienne Clarkson. Nevertheless, it was demonstrated that this rowhouse did have value in being designated and the OBHAC agreed. Given this earlier recommendation and precedent, I hope that the OBHAC will seriously consider recommending the designation of the rowhouse at 275-279 Sussex Drive and 273 Sussex Drive under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and to deny demolition of both 273 and 275-279 Sussex Drive given their importance to the integrity of the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District. Please consider the attached recommended motion. Most sincerely yours,

Marc Aubin, President, Lowertown Community Association

Attachments Motion Recommendation Mandia family story

ANNEX A - MOTION RECOMMENDATION

WHEREAS: it is traditionally the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee only advises on issues strictly related to heritage matters and is not influenced by other areas where the OBHAC members do not have expertise (i.e. transportation); the City of Ottawa and National Capital Commission, two financially resourceful and significant public institutions that have a responsibility to aim above the standard for heritage protection; it has been demonstrated, through some compromise and flexibility, that there are several viable options to save the buildings concerned while still meeting the other objectives of the Sussex Renewal project; the buildings at 273 and 275-279 Sussex Drive represent an important part of the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District, and have a significant connection to former Governor General, Adrienne Clarkson; the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District draws its heritage value from the fact that it was a working-class neighbourhood and that any individual buildings might not be worthy of strong evaluations while the sum of all the buildings contributes in an invaluable way to the experience of this district; OBHAC previously recommended the designation of the Gauvreau rowhouse at 324-334 Bruyre Street, which was neither in a heritage district nor connected to any famous individuals;

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the OBHAC recommend a Part IV designation of the rowhouse at 275-279 Sussex Drive and the houses at 273 Sussex Drive, and, given the evidence, deny the request for demolition of both the buildings at 273 and 275-279 Sussex Drive.

ANNEX B Mandia Family Story