Every year, as part of its annual meeting, Héritage Montréal adopts resolutions on issues that are important to it and considered priorities. This year, the organization adopted four resolutions, including one on the future of the Old Port and another on the effects of COVID-19 on heritage. Today, I present our resolution onthe maintenance of built and landscaped heritage ( 2020-03).
After several years of waiting, we were recently informed that the technological laboratory project for teenagers at the former Bibliothèque Saint-Sulpice (BSS) had been abandoned. I will not hide the fact that this news saddened me greatly. I remember very well the first time I entered the library... moved by this real architectural jewel: its façade, its remarkable entrance, its interiors, its furniture. The place, designed by the architect Eugène Payette in 1914, was classified as a historical monument in 1988.
Several questions arise when such news is announced. First, why abandon the technology lab project? If the technologies being considered are already outdated, why not simply modify the equipment? Perhaps this century-old library was not the ideal place for this digital literacy facility, but why not tell us more, especially those who were involved in the development of the project.
What I find most outrageous about this case, however, is elsewhere. In the days following the publication of the article, we learned from both sides that, since the closure of the Library, its condition had continued to deteriorate and that the situation was critical in several respects. How is it that a recognized and even classified heritage can be treated in such a way, left to its own devices and abandoned to its own sad fate? Why is it that the various owners of the establishment have not guaranteed the maintenance of the monument over time? It is often said that when it comes to heritage, funding is the lifeblood and that is probably true, but maintenance is certainly on the front lines.
Political indifference and lack of exemplarity
And yet, very little attention is paid to this issue. For example, even as this decision for the BSS was being made, ministère de la Culture and Communications (MCC) tabled a bill on cultural heritage(Bill 69) in which there was no mention of preventive maintenance for heritage buildings. Yet the Auditor General of Quebec's report on real estate heritage, published in May 2020, was highly critical in this regard. It stated, among other things, that the MCC had taken no steps to raise owners' awareness of the importance of maintenance, that the heritage building inspection process was haphazard, that few coercive measures were planned, and that the ministry had no information on the condition of many classified heritage buildings or those located in a classified heritage site (VGQ, 2020). It seems obvious to me, though: if we don't take care of what already exists, it's bound to fall into disrepair!
It should be remembered that the lack of maintenance gradually leads to a degradation of the premises and their abandonment. This has the effect of weakening the building and putting it at risk (degradation, fire, demolition, etc.). The impact is not only financial and is not limited to the well-being of the occupants either. Vacant buildings or buildings in poor condition also lead to a devaluation of the neighbourhood and the urban landscape.
The duties and responsibilities of the MCC could be discussed at length, but it is far from being solely responsible for this lack of interest in maintenance. In recent years, the media have been reporting stories of old houses that have fallen to the ground and are being demolished. Every time, the buildings have been abandoned, without any maintenance. One could certainly decry the insensitivity of a few ignorant owners, but many of these houses were municipal properties, such as the Boileau house or the Mascouche manor house. Obviously, not all municipalities have the same way of perceiving and managing their heritage. While some lack sensitivity and perhaps especially knowledge, many are also innovative, developing programs and tools for the benefit of citizens, such as maintenance or renovation guides. It is important to salute these efforts, all the more so since Quebec municipalities have many responsibilities with regard to heritage, but it would be important that these efforts be concentrated and implemented in all municipalities and boroughs. Last spring, we conducted a survey in which 62 of the CMM's municipalities told us about their municipality's main heritage issues. The maintenance deficit emerged as a priority issue for 77% of the participants. This shows just how glaring and widespread the problem is. Lack of maintenance and abandonment is a systemic problem that affects both public and private/institutional properties and needs to be addressed urgently.
Maintenance and sustainable development
As the QAG report rightly mentioned, it is also a question of sustainable development:
"Environmental protection" is also an issue since the maintenance and renovation of existing buildings can, in some cases, have less environmental impact than the demolition and construction of new buildings. Finally, the principles of "prevention" and "precaution" are relevant, since several known or potential risks threaten real estate assets. »
QAG, 2020: 2
While the QAG report addressed the issue of sustainable development with great sensitivity, the new Bill proposed by the MCC does not take into account climate change and the fundamental link between heritage and sustainable development. Yet, as we recently mentioned in our brief for the Bill 69 specific consultations, the very desire to preserve heritage is fundamentally a desire to pass on a legacy to future generations. It is more than that,
"Heritage is an ecological asset because, as experts confirm, the greenest building is the one that already exists. We must therefore try to make the government aware of the long-term profitability of reusing and requalifying our heritage buildings rather than demolishing them and starting over with new ones. »
Héritage Montréal, 2020: 18
When will we finally move away from the biased analysis of the short term to a long term approach?
International recommendations and good practices
At the international level, many institutions such as UNESCO and ICOMOS recognize the importance of a preventive system in which maintenance must be ensured and well-monitored. Closer to home, the Government of Canada, with its Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, published in 2010 as a result of federal-provincial-territorial collaboration, also insists that "the best long-term investment in a historic place is appropriate and ongoing maintenance" (Parks Canada, April 2020).
To ensure and facilitate this maintenance, it is necessary to know the condition of the heritage in question. In this regard, monitoring vulnerable heritage and tracking ongoing damage can be invaluable tools. For example, the inclusion of a site on the list of endangered heritage sites published annually by UNESCO requires, first and foremost, the development and adoption of a program of corrective measures and monitoring of the site's condition. Steps are thus taken to ensure the maintenance and quality of the sites. In Montreal, it is in this spirit thatHéritage Montréal set up the Memento citizen platform, which allows citizens, property owners, and decision-makers to monitor the evolution of vulnerable heritage sites in the Montreal metropolitan area.
What Héritage Montréal is asking for
In addition to observing and documenting the vulnerability of Montreal’s heritage, Héritage Montréal concerned about the lack of maintenance that affects, and even seriously threatens, many heritage buildings and sites in the metropolitan area. We therefore believe that all public bodies, starting with Montreal's boroughs, the Ville de Montréal other municipalities in the metropolitan community, should adopt preventive maintenance as a basic principle, lever, and practice of sustainable development. Therefore, if they have not already done so, they should develop tools to raise awareness of the importance of maintenance, adopt more restrictive regulations, and implement programs and tools that provide owners with the necessary resources and expertise. They should also create monitoring mechanisms with targets and indicators.
Finally, let us reiterate here the positive impact that funding strategies and tax incentives would have in supporting the ongoing maintenance and conservation of heritage buildings and facilities by their private, community and public owners.
We can never say it enough, heritage is at the heart of our collective identity. It is therefore necessary, indeed essential, to ensure that it is maintained and passed on to future generations. To do so, we must recognize the importance of ensuring its maintenance, protection, enhancement and requalification, whether it is classified or not.
