19 replies to this topic

[Ms. B. Havin]

I think someone already brought these houses up in another thread (Holden?), but I can't find it, hence a new thread: [url=http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/capital_van_isl/story.html?id=6bb6dd2f-0596-4588-be33-bc2e46bf5dbc&k=22251:fb03f]A new frontier of heritage[/url:fb03f], subtitled "Push to preserve Victoria's first postwar subdivision is sparking debate about the neighbourhood's future," by Carolyn Heiman in today's T-C. It's about the neighbourhood of around one hundred ~900sq.ft. houses built after the war in the area near Mayfair Mall, now under consideration for heritage conservation. It's also renamed from what some residents called "Glasgow Heights" to "Topaz Heights." From the article:

Doug Rhodes, chairman of the neighbourhood association, takes a cautionary approach on the topic. Creating a heritage conservation area "might be a good idea," but the proposed location is sizable. As well, it includes homes not within the style the researchers describe.

"Who would be the winners and losers?" Rhodes wonders.

"I bought the book (published by UVic and including a chapter on the neighbourhood). It is a very academic approach that doesn't seem to involve the people here now.

Another (IMO) choice quote is this, since it relates to the question of what's the city, what's downtown, where are the boundaries:

High school teacher Brian Whitmore still visits his childhood home on Glasgow Avenue where his parents have lived since 1952.

It would make him a little sad to see it redeveloped. "I walk my mother now, and up and down the streets it is becoming a family neighborhood again. I see these kids running down from Quadra school. It is a great place for kids to grow up again even though it is practically inner-city now, as opposed to rural."

And finally, this little story at the end:

It was also the kind of neighbourhood that defined the '50s family ideal. Kids were sent out the door to play with instructions to be back by suppertime. Play might not have been any safer. It just seemed that way.

Ireland said he spent time playing on railway flatcars, "I wouldn't dare do that nowadays."

Whitmore called it a neighbourhood "run by the children. No one got in the minivans and went to various adult-organized activities. We lived and played in our children's world. It was an incredibly imaginative world."

So imaginative that he recalls building a straw house among the trees. "We made a wonderful house. Then we created a kitchen. Then we added an oven. And then we decided to cook in it. ... I've never seen anything burn so fast in my life. The whole field was on fire before we could run home."

There are 3 other heritage-related articles in today's paper, but they're locked. They're in the Capital & Van Isle section, p.B03.

[G-Man]

If they wanted to allow the houses that qualify in that hood to be part of it but there are many houses in there that are both older and newer than the period that want to consider and would these owners than be stuck having to speak to some board to alter there house? Would they have to alter in a way that was favourable to some 1950s ideal? I don't know. Personally while I think that preservin a couple of houses there might be a good idea. The whole car suburb that this represents was the beginning of an ugly time in our society that continues today. I mean should we do the same for Broadmead or Bear Mountian in forty fifty years? Plus I eman Fairfield James Bay and such have managed not to get broad sweeping designations like this do we need this here?

[Holden West]

Interesting. I'm going out to buy a paper now.

Yes, folks--if you give a store clerk $1.48 they will give you your own copy of the Times-Colonist! Let's support those hard working reporters (at least once a week!)

Yes, this was discussed a little earlier in the Increasing interest in 1950s homes thread way down in the Core forum:

http://www.vibrantvi...topic.php?t=502

[Ada]

Here's another from the TC, B03: (I included the typos and wacky writing - ah, the TC...)

[quote]Subdivision result of postwar crisis

The drive by Topaz Heights along Blanshard Street is an unmemorable experience.

The backs of little homes that line Alder Street, once at the far reaches of Victoria, are barely visable.

The homes in the area were built in 1946 to 1947 by Housing Enterprises, an agency that pre-dated Central Mortgage & Housing Corporation which later become Canada Mortgage & Housing Corporation. A solution to a national housing crisis, the homes were to be offered for rent to returning Second World War veterans and then to others.

The neighbourhood was considered one of the first examples of "modern" town planning because of the curved streets, interconnecting paths and a park.

In a letter to city council about the subdivision, the UVic group wanting to save the area wrote: "It is the cohesiveness of this post-war neighbourhood that is significant. While other houses and subdivisions were built in Victoria at this time, none have the characteristics of Topaz Heights: planned, large number of houses built all at the same time, styles with related design, specific demographic [married veterans with children] , partial non-grid street plan, and enclosed location."

Carolyn Heiman [/quote][/quote]

While I was reading this I was thinking... if we are preserving one of Victoria's first cookie cutter, car-orientated subdivisions does that mean we aren't going to make them anymore? Because if that's the case, preserve away!

[G-Man]

HAHA totally with you there!

[Holden West]

If we stop making cookie-cutter sub-divisions, University Grad students and ironic hipster musicians of the future won't have any material.

[D.L.]

I lament the demise of the grid city layout. Look at a map of Greater Victoria and you can see this Topaz Heights area (just east of Mayfair Mall) is starting to go the suburban style of road design, as well as a few other areas in Victoria proper. Then look at Saanich and the municipalities further out, where they are virtually all a deliberatly confusing jumble of winding roads and cul-de-sacs. I'd love to sit down with an urban planner and grill him over the merits of the grid layout versus winding roads.

[Ada]

I was thinking while I was re-grouting my bathtub (New Year's Eve Fun), that it's not only the houses that are to be preserved but the actual planning itself. This is why an entire subdivision is necessary, even though (edit)not(/edit) many of the original homes exist.

I'm not up in the ways of heritage preservation but wouldn't it be possible to preserve the street plan and only those houses built within a certain time frame? - leaving the newer homes out of the deal?

It is worth discussing the heritage status. After all, our New! and Improved! cookie-cutter, car-orientated homes are quite different than these. It was the start of an era - not an era I would like to see gain further momentum, but still...

[G-Man]

Well I am sure the roads will stay because to change them back would be expensive and an endless amount of lawsuits. But I agree with Dylan I too mourn the death of the grid. Even places like Selkirk seem to think the winding road is best.

[FunkyMunky]

Personally while I think that preservin a couple of houses there might be a good idea. The whole car suburb that this represents was the beginning of an ugly time in our society that continues today. I mean should we do the same for Broadmead or Bear Mountian in forty fifty years?

This discussion of perserving Topaz Heights is not about whether you think car oriented communities are good or bad or whether you think the neighbourhood is pretty or ugly. The issue is about the historical significance of the neighbourhood to both the city and country. Topaz Heights (not a new name just the rediscovery of an old name) represents one of the first post war subdivisions in the country and the activities of HECL (later CMHC). The houses also mark a shift from the architecturial designs used prior to WWII. These houses follow the modernist design principles that were being explored at the time.

And, no, no one is ever going to want to preserve Bear Mountain or View Towers because they are without historical significance. They are simply bad ideas.

[G-Man]

I would say that in design terms Topaz Heights was a bad idea that has perpetuated itself to today.

[VicHockeyFan]

Interesting. I'm going out to buy a paper now.

Yes, folks--if you give a store clerk $1.48 they will give you your own copy of the Times-Colonist! Let's support those hard working reporters (at least once a week!)

Yes, this was discussed a little earlier in the Increasing interest in 1950s homes thread way down in the Core forum:

http://www.vibrantvi...topic.php?t=502

They get paid well for their work...

http://www.vving.ca/...l#_Toc111879342

This is PER WEEK, folks:

Reporters

1st year $920.17

After 1 Year $1,069.42

After 2 Years $1,102.02

After 3 Years $1,194.02

After 4 Years $1,235.64

After 5 Years $1,388.37

[Galvanized]

One of the unique things about "Topaz Heights" is that it surrounded by a grid but the subdivision itself is not in a grid pattern. The roads curve in the middle area and hardly any are dead end, it has sidewalks and a built in park. I like the modern design of the modest sized houses in it too.

Recently Surrey simply changed the zoning in a similar type of neighbourhood limiting the size of house that can be built in order to keep the rancher style alive since many are being demolished and are being replaced with monster homes. Perhaps they could consider something like that instead or just allow additions that are in keeping of the style of the home so the home owner still has the option of updating.

[G-Man]

3 letters this morning.

Preserving neighbourhood costs owners

Published: Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Re: "A new frontier of heritage," Dec. 31.

Residents of Topaz Heights must be wary of young academics with visions of central planning dancing in their heads.

Their idea of suspending in time the wondrous delights of living in 900-square-foot heavens in Victoria's first post-Second World War subdivision is utter nonsense.

Property owners opposed to this idea should expect a rough ride from these putative urban planners. For example, "heritage" and "conservation" are words that could easily be used against those who oppose this proposed top-down edict.

Other words to watch for include "insensitivity" and "greed" because owners want their homes to be "marketable."

John Stanton,

Victoria.

Other neighbourhoods have wartime housing

Published: Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Re: "A new frontier of heritage," Dec. 31.

Topaz Heights is neither the first post-war subdivision in Victoria nor endowed with an unusual geography.

The researchers are encouraged to widen their study to include other wartime housing built between 1946 and 1950.

Examples include the area bounded by Haultain and Belmont Streets and Shelbourne and Hillside avenues, as well as the Belmont Park neighbourhood in Colwood.

If the researchers were to interview residents, they would learn that they are not much concerned about the land values under them or academic perceptions of the benefits of residing within a heritage conservation area.

Bill Hamilton,

Courtenay.

Post-war housing could help today
Times Colonist
Published: Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Re: "A new frontier of heritage," Dec. 31.

This article didn't explain the reason for this development or how the land was acquired and the municipal changes that had to be made.

In 1945 and 1946 Canada was faced with the return of thousands of people who had given up a substantial portion of their lives in wartime service.

There was a deep feeling of gratitude and, in response, the wartime housing program was started by the federal government.

These small but adequate houses were built across the country to meet the needs of returning veterans

The academics' study could lead to a sensible way of dealing with the homelessness problem. Three bedrooms and one bathroom ain't the end of the world.

John McBride,

Saanich.

[ressen]

Take some pictures and make a diorama of the neighbourhood. Put it in a museum then tear down the houses and start fresh.

[G-Man]

That is about how I feel too.

Sorry but if this is something to be preserved then maybe we should be putting heritage designations on places like 800 Johnson I mean it is one of the earlier renditions of post-modern office space.

We cannot keep everything that is "the first" "the best example of" or "the oldest".

There has to be an inherent quality beyond all of these things that this neighbourhood does not have.

There numerous examples of heritage architecture and design in this city that are far more important than this neighbourhood. I would be much more likely to accept heritage designations for many of the modernist buildings at UVic than this shoebox suburb.

[Caramia]

I'd be interested in keeping "the best example" of most things. But that would be one house rather than a neighbourhood.

[G-Man]

The best example of a post-modern Colwood SFD?

I guess it would have to be a light salmon with tuquoise trim.

[Rob Randall]

True.