Hotels Addition to Heritage Registry On Hold

Monday, March 16, 2009 08:36 PM

The Prince George Hotel, as it was circa 1915 photo courtesy Exploration Place

Prince George, B.C.- There are eight new sites The Prince George Heritage Commission wanted to have added to the Heritgae Registry, but that won't happen until Administration has a chance to see just how such a designation would impact other projects.

The eight sites are hotels:

1201 First Avenue -National Hotel - built 1923-24
1007 Third Avenue -Central Hotel - built 1947
1479 Third Avenue -London Hotel - built 1920
1168 Fourth Avenue -Croft Hotel (Corning Hotel) – built 1929 (shown in photo at right, photo courtesy Exploration Place)
487 George Street -Prince George Hotel – built in 1914, (it is one year older than the City of Prince George)
171 George Street -Spruce Capital Hotel (Keller House) – built 1926
160 Quebec Street -Akron Hotel (Ketso Yoh) – built 1920
197 Quebec Street -Chee Duck Tong Society – built 1923

There are five other sites already on the heritage registry:

the Cameron Street Bridge,
the Nechako Crossing,
the first school house (located in Fort George Park)
the old Post Office at 1294 Third Avenue, and
the old liquor store at 1188 Sixth Avenue.

All of the hotels were noted for their role in housing a transient work force as Prince George started to grow. They were, for the most part, the first place new workers stayed, and the site of social interaction. "These are non descript buidings" says Heritage Commission Chair Jo Graber but that is because Prince George never had the kind of building that people normally associate with "heritage". There was the Alexandra Hotel which was said to be a fine building, but it no longer exists. Graber told Council the social history is as important if not as important as the architectural history.

The Prince George Hotel was the premier hotel of the City, hosting guests such as the Duke and Duchess of Devonshire who stayed at the hotel in 1919. It was the place where visiting judges and government workers would stay. Purchased in 1919 by John H. Johnson, (who would later serve as Mayor of the City 1922 - 23) the hotel saw its first renovation at that time, as “modern” plumbing and heating were added.

The Columbus Hotel was supposed to have been one of the hotels on this list of special hotels, but it burned to the ground just before the research was getting underway.

Having the hotels added to the register doesn’t mean they are protected in any way , if Council would want to see them protected, a special bylaw would have to be introduced.

Development Services' Grant Bain says the review of the Official Community Plan is expected to bring forward some policy pertaining to heritage sites.

Councillor Cameron Stolz says there are some of the buildings which have been kept up to current codes and standards "But there is at least one which I understand has been stripped of everything inside, including the copper wiring, what do we do about a building like that?" Stolz wanted to know what kind of funding would be available to repair or update the building. Graber says the first step is to have the building on the Heritage Registry, "Yes there is some assistance available, for instance the owner of the Columbus might have been able to get up to date sprinkler systems had the Columbus been on a registry."

Councilor Shari Green says she is having some difficulty supporting adding the Croft hotel to the list "I am struggling with adding a building that has flourescent green cut outs of naked women on the front of it, so I am having trouble with that one personally."

The report has been referred to City Administration for comment on what adding these buildings to a Heritage Registry might have on the Smart Growth on the Ground project for Downtown. Administration is expected to come back with some answers in time for the April 6th meeting.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 08:36 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Harbinger on March 16 2009 8:53 PM

I wouldn't park my truck in any of them. They're dumps first. Difference between an antique and an old piece of junk? Perception. Better have big bucks to coincide with yer perceptions if needed.

Posted by: Palopu on March 17 2009 8:25 AM

Note. The Cameron St., bridge was on the Heritage Registery. Where is it now?? Gone the way of the Doo Doo bird.

You will never have many people who are concerned about Heritage in this City, because most of the people who work at the City or for the different areas of Government came from other areas of the Country, and they dont know, or dont care what the History of the City is. A lot of people leave town as soon as they retire.

One of the first acts of the New Boss of the local paper who arrived from back East was to get rid of the Valerie Giles Column that dealt almost specifically with History of this area.

Maybe Opinion 250 could get her to do a column, God knows there are enough people on this site that could use a little History education.

Posted by: laketrout on March 17 2009 10:32 AM

These are really ugly buildings! I am embarrassed that the city considers these as heritage sites... Just because it's old, doesn't mean it's beautiful!

Posted by: beesknees on March 17 2009 12:57 PM

If you go to Europe, you see how people value their heritage, look at the houses, churches, and city buildings still standing, either as a testament to the builders quality control, strict building codes of the day, or the fact they hadn't been destroyed during one of the several wars that have swept over that continent in the past 500 or more years, because people respected the work done by others before them.

And here we don't have grand churches, nor stately homes, nor imposing civil structures. Let's face it, most of the stuff we build doesn't outlast the wrecking ball (either literally or figuratively) because the value of the land goes up quicker than the improvements on it. And the builders and developers of the day did not build them to last. They were built to maximize the flow of dollars into their pockets, knowing that the cyclical nature of the economy of the day meant lots of wealth one year, just as easily as it could mean poverty the next.

So why are we trying to preserve these crappy old buildings? I say, take a few pictures, or a lot if there is a desire to do so, and then knock those firetraps down. If private money wants to finance the restoration of these buildings, using the present day building codes, then fly at it. I don't want a nickle of my tax dollars going to this venture though.

And furthermore, there should be a time limit on how long these heritage societies have to raise the money. For instance, if they want to restore that old liquor store on 6th, give them a year. If there's not enough money in the bank after that, call in the D8 cat.

Now that's downtown revitalization we can all understand. Puts a bit of pressure on the people who want to preserve this old crap. And will finally quieten the voices of all the people who complain that nothing positive is ever done downtown.

Posted by: laketrout on March 17 2009 8:53 PM

I'm with you beesknees!

Posted by: Blurb on March 17 2009 9:21 PM

Hey lets take pictures of them all ,doctor them using photoshop to make them look like something to be proud of hang them in the museum. Then burn the eyesores down and call it downtown revitalization

Posted by: travism on March 18 2009 11:27 AM

Wow.. good heritage two strip clubs, a crack house, a half way house that lost its designation, AND THE ROADHOUSE!!! God I hope noone asks for a historical tour of Prince George.