As plans to demolish the historic University of Guelph conservatory move forward, a growing collection of alumni, community members and at least one retired school program director not only want the building saved, but restored in some fashion and put to use.
They’re calling on school officials to reconsider plans to tear down the D.M. Rutherford Family Conservatory – located at 37 Christie Lane, beside the University Centre – and replace it with a commemorative garden, with the stated intent of using some of the building’s materials in the garden’s design.
“I would like to see the whole subject opened up for public debate and discussion … because that’s how we bring people together as a community,” said Walter Kehm, retired professor and director for the school of landscape architecture at the U of G, who continues to provide periodic lectures there.
“There's been no discussion (about the demolition plan) on campus,” he continued. “I've never seen such unilateral decision-making without really good public participation.”
Kehm believes there should be a “democratic, public conversation” held to help university officials decide what to do with the conservatory, with consideration of private fundraising opportunities and alternative uses for the space.
He believes there’s potential to rent it out for weddings and other special events, as well as host student concerts and exhibits.
“I've been a landscape architect for 55 years. I know greenhouses,” Kehm said, pointing to his involvement with the recent relocation of Allen Gardens Conservatory from the University of Toronto site.
That project was privately funded, he said, noting that could happen here too.
Efforts to reach U of G officials for comment weren’t immediately successful. University offices are closed for the holidays until Jan. 6.
After learning of the university’s plan to demolish the 1930-built conservatory, city council moved in November to designate the structure for protection under the Ontario Heritage Act – well, sort of. Based on the wording of the designation, the only aspect of the building to be saved for reuse is “salvageable steel” from the frame.
University officials have filed a notice of objection with the city, which will be considered by council during an upcoming meeting. That objection stems from council’s decision earlier this month to approve a demolition permit for the building, which was issued on Dec. 24.
Since the demolition permit was issued, university officials argue there is “no purpose” to the heritage designation.
Council will need to decide whether it moves ahead with designation, potentially facing an appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal, or halt the conservation process and let university officials do as they wish with the building.
Kehm is far from alone in wanting to see the plan scrapped. An online petition to save the conservatory has garnered more than 1,7000 signatures.
“The concern is that the institution was moving to demolish it, and there was a lack of public discussion or consultation,” said petition author Betsy Puthon, who identified herself as a U of G alumni.
“The objective is to stop the demolition so the conversation can be had. And we believe from things we've heard that there's a great deal of interest to preserve the campus history, which the community feels is also their own history.
“It's part of celebrating the community's history, having that glass greenhouse on campus.”
During previous steps in the process, university representatives pointed to cost as a major factor in the decision to demolish the conservatory. They’ve said it would cost upward of $5 million just to bring the building back to a state of good repair, allowing it to be opened once again, with the cost of demolition pegged at $250,000.
A commemorative garden is expected to cost about $750,000.
“We have a duty to ensure the institution is financially sustainable,” Rene Van Acker, acting-U of G president, told city council, acknowledging the greenhouse is “an extremely popular site” on campus. “We are projecting our fifth consecutive operating budget deficit due to increasing expenses, the limited and constantly limited tools to generate revenue.”
However, going forward with the demolition at this point could end up hurting the school financially, Puthon believes. She claimed numerous alumni who signed her opetition have said they would stop making donations to the school, including one who was in the midst of setting up a scholarship fund.
“I'm sure … (U of G officials) will find such goodwill is eroding under their current manner and likely fundraising would bring in sufficient funds to make it a private rehabilitation of the structure,” Puthon said.
“I think the real focus is there's a facility – it's historic, it's emblematic of the communities here. Guelph loves its history and Guelph loves participation.”
