“For the sake of the heritage district, town residents and the Shaw, I hope they succeed in tabling a design that will work,” writes Brian Marshall of the upcoming Royal George Theatre renovation.
“Change within the heritage district is one thing, but the wholesale flouting of the heritage district guidelines — specifically designed to preserve its ‘special character’ — is a horse of a different colour,” writes Brian Marshall.
The proponents of the Royal George Theatre redesign “are slavishly following the flawed protocols of the Venice Charter to produce a design which, in the view of several architects of my acquaintance, is utterly inappropriate within the context of the Queen–Picton historic district,” writes Brian Marshall.
“This application risks undermining the district’s founding principles by demolishing three 19th-century buildings and significantly altering the streetscapes of both Queen and Victoria streets,” writes Brian Marshall.
“Building more of the same type of homes faster will do nothing but add to the current glut on the market of properties that a significant segment of our society simply cannot afford or, in other cases, do not want,” writes Brian Marshall.
“I support the Shaw’s overture for redevelopment of the Royal George. However, it must be done sympathetically, within context and not at the expense of the Part V heritage district,” writes Brian Marshall.
“Good design costs no more than bad design, but bad design will scar a street, neighbourhood and community for decades,” writes Brian Marshall.
The clear-cutting of a forest in Virgil this year to make way for development is “only a single, relatively small, local example of the potential devastation which could, and likely will, be visited upon the landscape of this province should the Ford government’s Bill 5 be passed into law,” writes Brian Marshall.
“The scale, massing and, as mentioned earlier, the height of the proposed design are acceptable, particularly given the break-up of the building’s faces into smaller staggered elements,” writes Brian Marshall.
Brian Marshall details the introduction of Bill 17, the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, introduced this spring, which, Marshall writes, contains provisions around development and home construction that are helpful, and others that present serious concerns.
Describing the newly introduced Bill 5, Brian Marshall writes, “Quite simply, the proposed legislation seeks to gut environmental protection, continuing Ford’s earlier assaults in 2020 and 2022.”
“Any review panel composed of members from outside the municipality will lack “skin in the game” and a personal understanding of the history, built character and design vision necessary to ensure their recommendations are not simply an academic expression unaligned with the wishes and desires of the established community,” writes Brian Marshall.
“It is a fundamental mistake for a municipality to assume that urban planners and urban designers are interchangeable. A city or town must draw upon the expertise of both professions to successfully realize urban development that serves the needs of its residents,” writes Brian Marshall.
“The loss feels like a death — not of a person, but a part of a person vested in a physical symbol of shared heritage. There’s simply no excuse,” writes Brian Marshall.
Analyzing the presence of a new home in Old Town NOTL, Brian Marshall writes, “This building is almost a textbook case demonstrating that even good architecture, when built in the wrong place, diminishes both its own qualities and the neighbouring streetscapes.”
The new heritage conservation district study, a plan will create “a tool to manage change, the policies and guidelines accept the evolution of buildings and structures over time,” writes Brian Marshall, “while ensuring that any such change complements, rather than detracts from, the district’s unique character.”
“This particular bylaw is … remarkably flexible — almost to the point of raising the question of whether it will accomplish the protection necessary for a successful study,” writes Brian Marshall of a new bylaw meant to halt development in a portion of Old Town for one year.
“A given piece of architecture, whether modest or grand, is a physical representation of the architect’s (or the property owner’s) creative expression, defined by its purpose, and set within — or sometimes in contrast with — the prevailing political, economic and cultural conditions of society,” writes Brian Marshall.
In examining a 2023 study from McMaster University that looked at the corelation between heritage designation and property value, “The authors concluded that heritage-designated properties ‘were associated with a positive increase in sale value’ and resulted in ‘an increase in sale price of residential properties,'” writes Brian Marshall.
“On occasion, satisfying the criteria contained in this category can be straightforward, in cases wherein the facts are already established … or self-evident — however, far more often a significant amount of research is required,” writes Brian Marshall.
“At a juncture in history wherein climate change initiatives are generally considered by both governments and voters to be a high priority, most of the members of Niagara-on-the-Lake’s elected council apparently don’t give a damn — only if it stands in the way of development,” writes Brian Marshall.
“Sometimes the easiest way to determine the importance of a property to the character of its area is to consider what would happen to that character if the property were to be demolished or significantly modified,” writes Brian Marshall.
“Sure, the premier and his local sycophants may point to grandiose promises of investments in Niagara’s infrastructure — most of which have not, to date, materialized — but, how does that translate to the health of your family’s pocket book?” writes Brian Marshall.
Writing about the stormwater infrastructure management plans for hte upcoming Parliament Oak hotel, Brian Marshall writes, “Should the municipality construct and own that pipe, legal experts opine that the town could bear all or a part of that liability.”
“For over a decade now, this once gracious stone home has been owned by a developer and allowed to deteriorate in a fashion that can only be described as a textbook case of demolition by neglect,” writes Brian Marshall of Secord’s historical home on Paxton Lane, built circa 1799.
© All Rights Reserved, Niagara Now.
