1 - 2013-07-15 - marc aubin - letter re. union du canada

7/28/2019 1 - 2013-07-15 - Marc Aubin - Letter Re. Union Du Canada

1/3

(The views in this letter are not official views of the Lowertown Community Association)

1

Marc Aubin,

205-100 Boteler Street,

Ottawa, ON K1N 8Y1

Councillors,City of Ottawa,

110 Laurier Avenue West,

Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1

Monday, July 15, 2013

RE: Union du Canada Building Demolition Proposal Epic Fail

Dear Councillors,

In my capacity as the president of a community association, I have been privy to a lot of what is going on

at city hall. Rather than a clear, accountable, compassionate, and fair system, I see mixed messages

about our citys policies, lack of accountability, small-minded vision, backroom deals, conflict of interest,

political expediency, and just a plain failure of this citys democratic system. This most recent case

involving the Union du Canada building is a good example of how this city is failing to live up to its

potential and why so many people have grown cynical about city hall.

Development and Intensification EPIC FAIL

Todays intensification is nothing like many years ago when the city had a very positive restore the

core policy that encouraged reasonable and harmonious intensification in the downtown. Todaysintensification is on a whole other destructive scale. I see it being used now by developers and

politicians as a catch-all word for giving blanket authority to put up garbage developments that destroy

the urban landscape.

Even worse, we have developers who have no interest in engaging and working collaboratively with

communities where they have decided to build. Over and over again, I have seen certain developers

treat residents as an afterthought and like second-class citizens. Instead, many developers have sown

seeds of discontent and continue to bully politicians, city planners, and residents. There is no reason for

this. Developers need to grow up and realize that their business model of stripping the entire landscape

on the periphery of the city and remolding it for maximum profit does not work the same in the urban

area.

There are, no doubt, good examples of intensification, but there are also too many terrible examples as

well. Instead of destroying the well-planned and historic parts of this city, why do you not encourage

this brand of intensification in the ring of failed business parks circling the downtown (e.g. Conventry

Road)? Why not retrofit the failed suburbs instead of punishing the urban core?


2/3


2

In the case of the Union du Canada building, we are looking at one of the most sensitive historical,

touristic and residential/commercial assets that this city has the Byward Market. The two currently

proposed Claridge condos have absolutely no relation to what is valued in terms of architecture and size

in the Byward Market. Ottawa will likely be a city of 25 million people one day. Should we not be

planning this particular part of the city in way that we can not only preserve this asset that is the Byward

Market, but so that we can also extend it down George and York streets (i.e. to these sites wheredevelopment is proposed)?

Heritage EPIC FAIL

In Montreal, the serious developers would look at the Union du Canada building, which is in a heritage

district, and see its potential. We are in the middle of a mid-century modern revival of sorts. In

Montreal, developers would embrace the Expo 67 style building that is the Union du Canada building.

They would add special lights and other sympathetic features to the building and make it a hip example

of a mid-century modern building. They would design an interior that also revives the mid-century style

that we see appearing in so many metropolitan boutique hotels today. Instead, in Ottawas small-

minded vision and mentality, we are proposing tearing down yet another unique example of

architectural history. In its place, we are going to put up a boring glass office building that we are selling

as a hotel. I am saddened by the lack of vision demonstrated by this city.

Love it or hate it, the Union du Canada building is a monument to French-Canadians in Lowertown and a

testament to the struggles of small French-Catholic minorities in Canada. While most members of city

council will never be able to understand the significant persecution and emotional damage done to

French-Canadians in Ontario, this minority group did overcome. The Union du Canada building is an

example of the pinnacle of French-Canadian minority ascendency outside Quebec. This is a significant

and important layer in the story of Lowertown and the Byward Market. The lack of sympathy for that

story on the part of city council is astonishing and eye-opening. It is as if we are still in the Charlotte

Whitton anti-French-Canadian dark age of this city and province.

I am appalled by the lack of integrity in the application of the Heritage Act. The spirit of the Heritage Act

is to protect places of historical importance to people not politicians, not city planners, and certainly

not developers. While city planners can advise, politicians can have their opinions, and developers can

have their eyes on profit, heritage starts with the heart and it ends with assessment criteria. Instead of

assessing the Union du Canada buildings contribution as an important layer to the story of Lowertown

and the Byward Market, the developer and planners have made excuses and used loopholes to let the

building go. Even worse, the city is turning a blind eye to the fact that this building has not been

individually assessed for its heritage value under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Issues of heritage

should not be determined by political whim, but I believe that is the case in Ottawa.

I think there are really only three options for the Union du Canada building:

1) It should be refurbished and sympathetically improved with lighting and other features;2) If demolished, an exact replica of the faade should be built;


3/3


3

3) If demolished, consideration should be given to recreating the original architecture of the formerUnion du Canada building, which would be consistent with the architecture for which the Byward

Market is currently known.

Accountability EPIC FAILURE

In the past 3 years since the last municipal election, Lowertown has been without an accountable citycouncillor to represent its concerns on development files. The only three major development proposals

have been from Claridge. We are privileged to have Councillors Hume and Harder stepping in for

Councillor Fleury, with all their years of experience, but we continue to suffer greatly from lack of

accountability. Whether these councillors represent us well or not will not make a difference for them in

the next election. In addition, these councillors have their own wards and heavy responsibilities in

addition to Claridge files in Lowertown.

I think it has been very convenient that we do not have an elected official representing us and who is

accountable to us, working with us, and fighting for better development in our ward. Instead, I have

seen residents in Lowertown struggling to the brink of burnout to ensure that their concerns are

somewhat reflected in decisions at city council. Even as the president of their community association, I

have struggled significantly on these files while trying to focus on more positive community

development initiatives. It should not be this way.

Democracy EPIC FAILURE

There are rumours going around that this hotel is a pet project of powerful politicians at city hall and

that they are intervening in the backrooms of city hall. While I hope that this is not true, the general

evidence I have seen in the past few years is that everything is now done in the backrooms of city hall. I

seldom see any councillors presenting opposing values in public forums. What I see, from my vantage

point, is that we are losing the very basis of true democracy in this city. Important issues, like

intensification, like heritage, like the future of areas like the Byward Market, are being decided behindclosed doors, away from public scrutiny.

The promise of amalgamation saving money failed, and the fear that democracy would be damaged

has come true. Today, I see councillors struggling to represent downtown wards, because they are

completely overwhelmed with the demands of their constituents. Worse than that, we have some wards

in this city that have almost half the constituents of other wards. How is this at all democratic or fair? I

was told that there was no hope on Earth that a downtown councillor will ever be able to run a city

committee, because they have so much work to do. This imbalance is a threat to the democratic rights

of downtown residents and shows the epic failure of democracy in this city.

Yours truly,

Marc Aubin

1 - 2013-07-15 - marc aubin - letter re. union du canada

Documents