HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-09-059 - Industrial Artifacts Project Program ReviewI
I~~c~~R.
Community Servrees
REPORT TO: Community Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: October 26, 2009
SUBMITTED BY: Pauline Houston, General Manager, Community Services
Department
PREPARED BY: Cheryl York, Arts/Culture Co-ordinator, (ext. 3381)
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: October 6, 2009
REPORT NO.: CSD-09-059
SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL ARTIFACTS PROJECT -PROGRAM REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION:
That the consultant report titled "Industrial Artifacts Project Program Review" by
Goldsmith Borgal and Company Limited, as attached to report CSD-09-059 be received;
and,
That staff be directed to investigate, with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, feasible
options of merging the Industrial Artifacts Project with the Regional Heritage program;
and further,
That staff report the results of such discussions to Council within the next six months.
BACKGROUND:
Kitchener's Industrial Artifacts Project (IAP) was conceived and initiated by artist Nicholas Rees
in 1996 in response to a Culture Plan I recommendation: "That City Council investigate the
creation of a series of public sculptures composed of old pieces of industrial machinery and
artifacts, and request the appropriate involvement of the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee,
Community Services, and the Public Art Committee".
As often happens in the life of a program, by 2001 the mandate had evolved to focus on the
salvaged machinery as heritage artifacts. The program's objectives were stated as follows:
• To conserve the industrial heritage of Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge;
• To collect and restore artifacts significant to the Waterloo region;
• To preserve the industrial architecture of the region; and
• To document the stories of working people.
After 13 years, the program had accumulated approximately 100 items of varying sizes and
materials. Nearly two dozen are on display in public locations, both indoors and outdoors. The
most significant item, the Goldie Corliss (Kaufman) steam engine was donated to the new
Regional History Museum in 2007.
3-1
Arts and Culture Unit program reviews were undertaken as a result of Culture Plan II,
recognising the need for ten-year assessments and future planning. The City commissioned
Goldsmith Borgal and Company Limited (GBCA) to review the IAP program and prepare a
report on the function, sustainability and future of this program.
The review steering committee consisted of Pauline Houston, General Manager, Community
Services, Councillor Kelly Galloway, Leon Bensason, Interim Manager, Long Range Planning,
Nicholas Rees, volunteer director of IAP, Ingrid Pregel, Manager of Cultural Development, and
Cheryl York, Arts/Culture Co-ordinator. Mr. Chris Borgal, principal of GBCA, led the study.
Extensive consultation with the community took place in preparation of the report.
REPORT:
The consultant identified the following key issues
Need for a clear oroaram vision
The purpose of the program appears to have been mixed from its beginning in 1996. There was
a dual mandate of heritage preservation and public art, as well as a regional mandate for a City
of Kitchener project.
Since then, the Region's heritage mandate has become well established, especially with the
development of the new Regional History Museum and its curatorial centre. One element of the
museum's collection consists of many industrial artifacts from the region including the Kaufman
steam engine which the City donated to the museum in 2007. Both curatorial and conservation
expertise are in place at the new museum.
In addition, Kitchener's public art program has focused on building a collection of site specific
commissioned artworks for its capital construction projects. The thrust of the public art collection
is artists' responsiveness to sites resulting in work that is freshly created, unique and engaging.
Recognizing these changes of context and community focus, the consultant examined the
Industrial Artifacts Project's dual mandate and it was concluded that the IAP should be first and
foremost a heritage program. It would thus be logical to open a discussion with the Region.
Need for a governance structure
Lack of clearly stated roles and responsibilities of the City and its volunteers for this program
has contributed to the perception that it is a volunteer-led and managed program.
Program Resources
Since 1998 an annual capital allocation (initially $10,000; currently $14,000) has supported the
program. Parks Operations staff and Community Services staff are responsible for artifact
maintenance and general operation of the program. Staff and fiscal resources are insufficient to
develop a program that has good collection management practices; promotion; a strong public
education component; and capacity for growth.
Policies and Collection Management
Standard practice for the management of a heritage collection includes record keeping, data
organization, and proper storage and preservation techniques. Record keeping has not been
consistent. Storage of metal objects at the Guelph Street facility has contributed to their
deterioration from damp. Maintenance treatments have consisted of sandblasting and painting
3-2
the large outdoor objects. There has been little historical interpretation of the objects that are
placed in public locations which would inform the public about the artifacts' origins and uses.
Recommendations
The consultant's report includes a number of recommendations under each `key issue' heading.
A final section of the report concentrates on options for the program's future with
recommendations and discussions of the implications of each one. The options were as follows:
1. maintain the current status of the program
2. encourage moderate or major growth in both the size of the collection and the
professionalism with which it is managed
3. transfer the program to other public or private bodies; or, create a partnership for
program delivery
~. close down the program.
Staff view the opening of discussions with the Region (no. 3) as a preferred place to start,
before investigating any of the other options. Since 1996 when the IAP was initiated, the
Region's heritage mandate has become well established, especially with the development of the
new Regional History Museum and its curatorial centre.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
COMMUNICATIONS:
The consultant's report has been distributed to the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee, the
Public Art Working Group and the IAP volunteer committee for information purposes.
CONCLUSION:
Public perception of the program is generally positive. The IAP is viewed as a tribute to the
region's industrial heritage. However, its challenges (described as `key issues' above) limit its
effectiveness as a compelling and easily recognized part of Kitchener's identity.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, General Manager Community Services
3-3
GBCR
goldsmith Borgal
~ Company Ltd.
4rchitects
110 Adelaide Street
Nest .Suite #500
Toronto .Ontario
VI5U 1S8 . Canada
f 416 929 6556
416 929 4745
Nww.ybca.ca
®r~ft t:o 17 5cpt;cmbcr 2®®9
b' . «`~
.~
~.
3-4
TALE ®~ CONTENTS
klcading I'agc
1 Vision 3
2 Mcthodology 5
3 ProJcet kli~tory 6
3.1 Mandatc 6
3.2 Govcrnanec and funding 6
3.3 Proec~~ 7
3.4 The Collcetion ~
4 Similar proJcet~ in othcr eommunitic~ 10
5 Kcy I~~uc~ 12
5.1 Nccd for a vision for the program 12
5.2 Govcrnanec 13
5.3 Adcquatc funding 15
5.4 Staffing 15
5.5 Polieic~ 16
5.6 Collcetion managcmcnt 19
5.7 Collcetion growth 19
6 A~~c~~mcnt and IZceommcndation~ ba~cd on 5takcholdcr Input 22
6.1 Mi~~ion 22
6.2 Govcrnanec 24
6.3 Staffing 26
6.4 Collcetion managcmcnt 26
6.5 Community Impaet 29
7 Options for the Futurc 31
7.1 5tatu~ Quo 31
7.2 Modcratc cnhanecmcnt~ 32
7.3 MaJor cnhanecmcnt~ 33
7.4 Ncgotiatc a tran~fcr of rc~pon~ibility to the IZcgion 34
3-5
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 2
7.5 Abandon the program 34
7.6 Abandon the program in favour of a privatc trust 35
~ Prcliminary Ovcrall IZceommcndation~ 36
9 Clo~urc 3~
GBCA Architects
3-6
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 3
1i1~1on
The City of Kitchener commissioned GBCA Architects (Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.
Architects) to prepare this report. The intent is to provide overview and advice about the
function, sustainability and the future of the Industrial Artifacts Project of the City of
Kitchener for the next five years.
A key issue related to a program such as this is the questions that may be raised.
Questions can be presented such as "Is this program important?" and "why is it
important?". These questions represent the "vision" of the program and whether that
vision is compatible with and suitable for continuation either by the City of Kitchener or
others or whether the vision is lacking in a manner that is to detrimental to the program's
continuation. It is best to deal with the "why" in advance of assessing whether the current
program is important.
In the English language, he word "civic" comes from the same Latin root as the word
"civilization". The implication of this association is that civilized society is derived not
from rural life but from urban life and that cities are directly associated with the
development of society. The development of urban life created a set of social conditions
that permitted the elevation of human experience beyond that of day-to-day existence.
The gathering of peoples into urban centres enabled the development of many things -
among which were the development of industry and art. Industry created new wealth,
which enabled the prosperity that permitted individuals and communities to develop new
viewpoints expressed in the form of music, literature, architecture and visual arts.
Indeed, the creation of machinery to make or process goods and materials is in itself an
act of artifice which, at its highest level, can be considered a form of art.
Therefore, the notion of celebrating the past creation of goods and of elevating the
appreciation of the machines used to create those goods in a manner allowing them to
be viewed as art can be seen as potentially tapping into some of the most fundamental
themes of civic society. By so doing, individuals living in such communities develop a
new perspective on their own surroundings, develop an invigorated sense of themselves
GBCA Architects
3-7
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 4
and their own potential, and may therefore have an enhanced view of their personal role
in the community and their community's role in the larger context of its provincial,
national and international context. In many ways, this is precisely what art is intended to
do and, as a result, the potential for the program that this report examines is potentially
profound. This represents a positive response related to "why" a program of this type
should exist.
The first question must then be addressed. It is the purpose of this report to determine if
this program of the City of Kitchener is important. If so, then a means should be found to
allow it to continue in line with the ability of the community to support it, develop it and
enhance it in line with the mandate of a city to enhance and enrich the lives of its
inhabitants. If not, then a means must be found to successfully and legally abandon the
program and disperse the objects collected and mounted in a manner that poses no
technical or legal liabilities.
GBCA Architects
3-8
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 5
2 Methodology
The program is described in the next sections which include an analysis of the project
and a description of some of the options available for consideration.
To prepare this report, we have performed a series of tasks which include:
• Touring the installed artifacts in the community
• Visiting the site where part of the City's collection is stored
• Reviewing documents pertaining to the Industrial Artifacts Project
• Consulting with relevant staff, volunteers, and community stakeholders. An interview
list is provided as Appendix A of this report.
• Researching comparable projects in other communities
• Evaluating the existing program from a variety of perspectives
• Production of preliminary options for the future of the IAP
• Preparation of a preliminary draft report
• Preparation of this current draft report for discussion
This Draft is intended as a basis for discussion and to obtain input from the steering
committee. We will take instruction at the next scheduled meeting and add to the
observations and recommendations as required to complete the mandate for this report.
The final report will include a table of contents, executive summary, and appendices
describing the list of interviewees, some of the installations and other background
material related to the program.
GBCA Architects
3-9
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 6
3 Project H15tory
3.1. Mandate
The Industrial Artifacts Project was initiated by the City of Kitchener at the
suggestion of Nicholas Rees (Kitchener's first "artist-in-residence") in October
1996 subsequent to the approval of "Cultureplan", a plan to strengthen arts and
culture in the community. Recommendation #11 in the Cultureplan read as
follows:
That City Council investigate the creation of a series of public
sculptures composed of old pieces of industrial machinery and
artifacts, and request the appropriate involvement of the Arts and
Culture Advisory Committee, Community Services and the
Public Art Committee.
By 2001, the mandate of the program was expanded:
• To conserve the industrial heritage of Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge
• To collect and restore artifacts significant to Waterloo region
• To preserve the Industrial Architecture of the region
• To document the stories of working people
3.2 Governanee and funding
The project is managed by City of Kitchener staff working with the project's
founder (Nicholas Rees). There is an informal working committee, the Industrial
Artifacts Committee.
Mike Price was the original City of Kitchener manager responsible for the
program. Staff changes resulted in the responsibility of the program falling
successively under M. Cummings, E. Harris and now Cheryl York, Arts and
Culture Co-ordinator in the Department of Community Services.
GBCA Architects
3- 10
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 7
Parks Operations staff have also been involved with the project from the
beginning. They are responsible for preparing the artifacts for display and for
undertaking repairs and repainting as needed.
In 1998, Kitchener City Council approved annual funding for the project in the
amount of $10,000. Government grants have been received in the past for
specific projects.
In the period around 2001 - 2004, the IAP committee discussed setting up an
incorporated not-for-profit organization called the "Kitchener Industrial Artifacts
Project"; the plan was not carried out. At the same time, collection management
guidelines and forms were developed and a collection inventory was established.
New installations continue to take place.
From 2005 to the present, there has been a drop in the number of installations
and the number of volunteers. This is partly due to the declining number of
artifacts available as the number of dismantled industrial sites diminishes.
3.3 Proec~~
The total number of artifacts in the IAP collection currently stands at
approximately 100. This number excludes archival materials. Collection of
artifacts has been primarily by Nicholas Rees. Artifacts have been acquired in a
variety of ways. Some were donated to the program at no cost. Others, which
were disposed of or abandoned by their original owners, were essentially
rescued from the scrap yard. Others were purchased in various manners
including at a liquidation auction (the Kaufman artefacts).
Of the industrial artifacts in the collection, several of the specimens have been
cleaned, painted and then prepared for displayed at various locations around the
community. Typically large and robustly constructed artifacts, including metal
GBCA Architects
3- 11
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 8
presses and cog wheels, have been displayed outside while smaller and more
delicate artifacts, such as sewing machines and some larger but complex
artifacts displayed in City Hall, have been mounted indoors. Approximately two
dozen artifacts are currently on display in public locations. The remaining
artifacts are stored in a City-owned storage facility.
From time to time, artifacts in the collection have been donated to other
institutions. For instance, as the Kaufman Footwear Company's horizontal steam
engine (the Corliss Engine) was donated to the Region of Waterloo in 2008 to be
exhibited in the new Regional Museum.
In 2001, an oral history was undertaken as part of the IAP. The stories of the
men and women who worked in Kitchener's industries were collected.
Archival material has also been collected by the IAP. This material, which
includes documents, photographs and oral history recordings, has been donated
to the Doris Lewis Rare Book Room at the University of Waterloo, the Grace
Schmidt Room at the Kitchener Public Library, the Corporate Records office at
the city of Kitchener, and the Doon Heritage Museum.
3.4 The Collcetion
The collection consists of industrial machinery originally installed in factories,
now closed and/or demolished, in the community. The collection includes
objects from the following categories:
• Tools (including stationary, hand, design, portable, power), moulds and
forms
• Appliances
• Engines
• Hydro Electric equipment, parts, and devices used to power factories and
other installations
• Office equipment
• Advertising materials
• Architectural components
• Commemorative items
GBCA Architects
3- 12
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 9
Many significant sites were the source of the collection, although the majority of
pieces come from Kaufman Industries. Of these many were industrial operations
but other sites and facilities are also represented and include:
• Blue Top Brewery
• Bonnie Stuart Shoes
• Canada Cordage
• Canada Pump/Canada Valve
• Clemmer Industries
• Cluett Peabody Canada Inc.
• Epton-Goodrich Factory
• Grand River Hospital
• Kaufman Footwear Inc.
• Kaufman Rubber Co.
• Kaufman Button Co.
• Mitchell Plastics Compression
• Ontario Power Generation, Niagara Falls
• Seagrams
There is a wide variability in the condition of the artifacts. Some of those already
on display are in very good condition although some components on some items
have unfortunately been lost to vandals (the solution to which is welding or
sealing of removable parts such as on the Seagram steam engine at City Hall).
Others, particularly those items displayed outdoors as artifacts, are in variable
levels of condition. The application of thick layers of paint to the outdoor exhibits
has served to protect the metal from corrosion but has also obscured and
covered the original surfaces, such as honed steel working surfaces, and may
have rendered the objects useless for detailed interpretation in future.
Some artifacts such as the Westinghouse transformer and the Niagara Hydro-
electric governor (on display at City Hall), as well as the Corliss steam engine,
are of exceptional significance as artifacts and in excellent condition. Other
artifacts are of importance ranging from limited to high while their state of
preservation and integrity ranges from high to very poor. Non-machinery artifacts
include design sketches and moulds. Paper artifacts, in particular, have not been
catalogued and are stored in non-museum quality conditions without benefit of
acid-free separation papers and appropriate storage equipment.
GBCA Architects
3- 13
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 10
4 similar projects in other communities
In an assessment of this type it is useful to examine other programs in place in other
locations. We note that the majority of industrial heritage programs in North America
revolve around buildings and sites. Industrial artifacts are generally found in museums
except in the case of oil derricks, cranes and other monumental objects or individual
objects, such as millstones, which form local features but are not part of larger
programs.
• Ladysmith, British Columbia has developed a Heritage Artifacts Route where
industrial artifacts from the town's history are placed along a downtown walking
route. The town of Ladysmith is responsible for maintaining the route. A Heritage
Revitalization Advisory Commission provides the Town Council with guidance and
community input on this and other heritage projects. Information and photographs
are available at the following website:
http://www.ladysmithhistoricalsociety.orq/artifactour/index.html
• Like Ladysmith's project, Pittsburgh's Riverwalk features industrial heritage as part of
a larger urban renewal project. Industrial artifacts are positioned along a walking
route that follows the Monongahela River's south shore.
• Cobalt, Ontario celebrates its industrial heritage in a number of ways. The Heritage
Silver Trail is aself-guided drive that brings visitors to tunnels, headframes, tailing
ponds, mining buildings and the Northern Ontario Mining Museum. This trail and
other features of the town's heritage are managed by the Historic Cobalt
Corporation. Through the support of its community, the Cobalt Mining District is now
a designated National Historic Site.
• A broader application of the Cobalt example can be found in places such as
Ekomuseum Bergslagen in Germany where a region has created an industrial
heritage network out of buildings, streetscapes, archaeological sites, museums and
monuments.
GBCA Architects
3- 14
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 11
http://www.ekomuseum.se/english/eng index.html
Individual sites can be managed by different organizations but connected under the
network name for the purposes of joint marketing, programming, etc. The
incorporation of natural history elements and public art that responds to the area's
natural, cultural and industrial heritage is also a possibility. Examples of this include
the Landmark Art and Industrial Heritage Trail in Gelsenkirchen, Germany.
http://www.gelsenkirchen.de/english/tourism/portrait of the city/city guide/The Lan
dmark Art and Industrial Heritaae Trail.aso
• An example of a city exploring its industrial heritage and connecting to its post-
industrial present and future is Richmond, BC with "Designing the Future: Richmond's
Industrial Heritage", an exhibition at the Richmond Museum (November 2005 to June
2006)
http://www. richmond.ca/culture/sites/museum/exhibit/designfuture.htm
• A few years ago, a $250,000 public art project was initiated and was won by artist
Alice Aycock who used existing riverside gantries as a base for her large scale
sculpture.
http://www.artsnashville.orq/pubartprolects/ebgw/ghost ballet handout.pdf
GBCA Architects
3- 15
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 12
5 Key 155ue~
5.1 Nccd for a vision for the program
Right from the beginning, the purpose of the program appears to have been
mixed:
• There was the dual mandate of heritage preservation and public art, and
• there was the small "r" regional mandate for a City of Kitchener project.
The ambiguity of the roles of Nicholas Rees, the Industrial Artifacts Committee
and the City of Kitchener's cultural staff have combined with the questions
around mandate to provide a breeding ground for the confusion that appears to
exist to this day in the minds of all stakeholders interviewed for the report. The
need for a vision is clear.
The fact that the IAP has always had two functions - as heritage memorial and
as public art -has undoubtedly created confusion about the nature of the
program. In the end, neither the heritage component nor the artistic value benefit
from this confusion.
The general consensus among those interviewed seems to be that:
• the heritage aspect of the program can be emphasized without losing the
sculptural impact of the artifacts.
• more historical information and more historically appropriate paint colours
should not significantly diminish the artistic value of these objects and may,
indeed, enhance their perceived value although original finishes (which were
absent in the case of some objects such as cog wheels) may not be robust
enough to allow the objects to survive exposure to weather.
GBCA Architects
3- 16
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 13
• if objects were to be relocated for a more visitor-friendly experience or for
better historical context, the positioning of the objects could be done with an
eye to artistic effect.
While it is essential to enhance the heritage aspect of the program to better
communicate the historical importance of industry to Kitchener's identity, there is
no reason why the IAP could not also enhance the community's artistic wealth.
This could be accomplished by:
• commissioning public art pieces inspired by the collection, perhaps using
non-accessioned material salvaged from the same industrial sites, or
• by deliberately incorporating the IAP artifacts into larger artistic installations
while still allowing the artifact to be interpreted as an individual heritage
piece. The port area of Hamburg, Germany, as an example includes huge
installations which are fabricated from portions of ship-building debris.
This kind of cross-cultivation could be a short-term vision, with alonger-term
vision being the development of a City-wide or Region-wide industrial heritage
network that could encompass landscapes, architecture, artifacts, streetscapes,
museums, archeological sites and public art akin to the Ekomuseum Bergslagen
example and other regional sites such as the (much larger) Ironbridge Gorge in
Shropshire, U.K.
One key question is who should be the guardians of the vision? Some of those
interviewed, particularly senior staff and some politicians in Kitchener suggest
that this program should be uploaded to the Region while others whole-heartedly
support a focus on Kitchener, including some regional representatives. This
political confusion should be resolved as it may contribute to a lack of funding
and support for the program which will attenuate its success.
Many feel that the program is one of the few unique features of Kitchener and
should be continued as a civic initiative as they feel that the "industrial heritage
GBCA Architects
3- 17
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 14
makes us special; hard-working people made this place and hard-working people
will keep us thriving; pride in our past, our present and our future". Down the
road, the concensus seems to be that those administering the program should
think bigger with a Regional tourism/marketing effort. However, for the short
term, it is desirable to improve the current effort with:
^ better management,
^ clearer governance,
^ more programming,
^ more community involvement,
^ more publicity.
^ integration of this program into arts, culture and heritage
master plans, economic development initiatives, youth
services, schools, etc.
These and potentially many more improvements present a vast potential for this
program to be effective and important across a broad spectrum of Kitchener's
sense of itself and its potential.
5.2 Govcrnanec
The IAP is a City program and the City of Kitchener must have the ultimate
authority. It will be easier to get volunteers, sponsors, and partners if it is clear
who is the responsible entity behind the program. Volunteers can do the work,
informed community members can advise the City on what needs to be done, but
the City must make the decisions if the program is to continue under the current
mandate.
Strong policies and Terms of Reference for the Committee will make the
responsibilities crystal clear. Currently, it appears to be the perception of those
who were interviewed (including the Arts and Culture administrator and
colleagues in Waterloo, Cambridge and the Region) that Mr. Rees does
"everything". He is the public face of the program and, although he cannot be
GBCA Architects
3- 18
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 15
faulted for driving the program ahead, it is essential that the City step to the fore,
improve the program, and put the City's name on it.
5.3 Adcquatc funding
Adequate funding is required to operate an appropriate program. This would
have to include sufficient funding for staffing, acquisition, maintenance,
promotion, educational development, and community development as well as
housing of both staff and collections which are not out in the community. Such
funding would represent a sizeable increase from the present, remarkably
limited, funding for the program and would require a sizeable fiscal commitment
by council. To do so, the importance of the program must be understood and
weighed against other, equally vaild, demands.
In the event that fiscal commitment cannot be achieved to match the objectives
of the program, alternatives could be examined. The current process is such an
alternative and one option may be to maintain the status quo (which we discuss
later in this report). Other alternatives include the establishment of a trust or
foundation (such as the Ontario Heritage Trust, or English Heritage) which is
endowed by the City at the outset and which could then accept donations of
objects, bequests and donations as an arm's length operating agency of the City
subject to an acquisitions policy which governs the nature and intent of such
donations.
5.4 Staffing
The City does not have the staff resouces to properly run the program -
additional resources are required. A significant amount of work is required to fix
the current problems re. donor records, acquisition policy, preservation decisions,
etc. If the City continues the program, the work should be done in a timely
manner which would require afull-time employee or contractor. If the City is
constrained by resources, or unable to immediately maximize the program's
potential but wishes to show some improvement in its services to the community,
GBCA Architects
3- 19
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 16
the position could be part-time. Such a new hire should be qualified in the area
of collection management and programming and should probably report to the
Arts & Culture Co-ordinator.
The IAP does not need a conservator on staff. However it should have access to
the advice of a conservator who has experience with industrial collections. The
most obvious source for this expertise is the Waterloo Regional Curatorial Centre
although there are also private conservators available. Preservation of many of
the most robust artifacts in the collection could be carried out by non-
conservators following instruction from a conservator. From time to time, objects
might require treatment by a private conservator or by the Region's conservator
under some kind of agreement.
5.5 I'olieic~
The program has been operating on an ad hoc basis. For example, Mr. Rees
salvaged whatever he could and then, typically, made decisions as to where to
install the objects and their management. This initial ad hoc process is typical of
many programs which culminated in major museums and collections - an
individual or individuals perceive the importance or value of objects and salvage
them when the implications of their loss to the community's heritage is not
understood by the general public. The maturing of such programs results in a
need for a process for disposition or management of collected objects and the
refinement and codification of procedures is typically developed when the
programs are transferred to a corporate (usually municipal or county) entity.
Likewise, the IAP requires more rigorous policies and procedures to ensure it is
legal, ethical and well-managed. The most urgently needed are policies related
to collection development and management.
Collection Development Policy -Acquisitions (what to collect).
Prior to acquisition, it must first be decided if the program should colelct an
object. If the object fits someone else's mandate, they should be contacted. For
GBCA Architects
3 - 20
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 17
example, artifacts from a Kitchener factory would be referred to the City of
Kitchener's IAP Committee; artifacts from a Waterloo factory would be referred
to the City of Waterloo Manager of Culture; archives from a Cambridge business
would be referred to the City of Cambridge Archives. An artifact of regional
significance (and one which may require major conservation treatment) might be
referred to the Region of Waterloo Museum. The policy does not have to spell
this process out in detail but it should include comments on how this has
traditionally been handled within the IAP.
There is also a required commentary on how collection is actually executed. This
includes what is required for transfer of ownership, should the object be
purchased, and if so how. The policy should also include the methodology for
processing donations, issuing (if appropriate) tax receipts, etc. Most importantly,
there must be clear authority invested with the person or committee that has the
final say regarding an agreement to acquire an artifact. It is our opinion that this
should be the City, not the Committee.
We provide below a listing from the Standards for Community Museums in
Ontario (2000) which could serve as model for a policy for the IAP program (IAP
should be substituted for "museum"):
The museum has a written collection development policy stating that it will:
• Ensure that the scope of collection is consistent with the museum's
statement of purpose
• Establish priorities for collection development
• Demonstrate a commitment to ethical behaviour in collection development
(e. g. repatriation, human remains)
• Meet municipal, provincial and federal legislative requirements that have
an impact on collecting activities (e. g. illicit materials)
GBCA Architects
3-21
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 18
Collection Management Policy: what to do with the collected materials
The Collection Management Policy deals with the programs commitment to and
guidelines for organizing things, tracking things, storing things, lending things,
borrowing things, documenting things, etc.
The Standards for Community Museums in Ontario state that:
The museum has a written collections management policy stating that it will:
• Ensure appropriate procedures and documentation for the acquisition,
use and de-accessioning of artifacts in the collection
• Ensure appropriate procedures and documentation for incoming and
outgoing loans
• Ensure appropriate procedures for the management of collections records
• Demonstrate a commitment to conservation standards in the labelling,
care and handling of artifacts
• Distinguish between artifacts in a research (or study) collection and
artifacts in an education (or hands-on) collection
• Meet municipal, provincial and federal legislative requirements that have
an impact on collections management and documentation (e. g. firearms,
hazardous materials).
These are considered to be minimum standards. Although some relate more to
museums, most of them apply to the IAP and the City of Kitchener as the
custodian of the IAP collection. These include:
• Conservation: our commitment to and guidelines for preserving the collection -
facilities, environment, security, treatment, etc.
• Research: addresses priorities for research, means of dissemination,
accommodation of outside researchers, etc.
• Interpretation and Education: addresses themes, audiences, evaluation, etc.
• Display: addresses type of display, locations, accessibility, accuracy, safety, etc.
GBCA Architects
3 - 22
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 19
• Community: addresses identifying and meeting community needs, involving the
community, volunteers, publicity, accessibility, etc.
5.6 Collcction managcmcnt
The written policies and procedures that guide collection management should be
developed by staff with input from the IAP committee and they should be
approved by Council. Those who are using them should know what these
policies and procedures mean. The guidelines must be applied actively and
consistently.
In addition to the collection policy elements listed above, the Standards for
Community Museums in Ontario require that:
• The museum assigns the duties of a registrar to an appropriately trained staff
member and provides adequate time, workspace and funding for collections
management activities.
• The museum uses an effective collection documentation system, which may
be paper-based, electronic, or a combination. The system will include a
standardized numbering system, an accession register, a master catalogue
file, and signed donor and loan forms.
• The museum keeps a periodically updated paper or electronic copy of the
collection records off-site in a secure location.
• The museum's collection records are current.
5.7 Collcctian growth
At this point in the IAP's history, there is an issue concerning the quality and
availability of industrial artifacts and the associated research to inform program
development.
The IAP was initiated at a time when factories in the region started closing down
at a great rate. The situation now is different -few industries remain. A question
therefore arises about the future availability of relevant artifacts for the program.
GBCA Architects
3 - 23
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 20
Some may continue to appear as they are unearthed from warehouses or
garages, or as objects in private hands come up for auction. Nevertheless,
unless its collecting mandate changes, the IAP collection is bound to experience
very low growth in the future. This must be taken into consideration when
developing a plan.
The acquisition of new artifacts for the collection has until now been the focus of
the program. The focus will ineveitably shift to working with an existing collection,
such as creating new programming, public education, and dealing with the items
in storage.
The excitement generated by new acquisitions currently forms the principal
publicity for the IAP. This will have to be replaced by the excitement of new
public programs, educational tools or research findings if the program is
developed or increased in size.
There remains another possibility - to expand the mandate of the IAP to include
post-industrial artifacts. The existing industrial artifacts and their relationship
between the past and the new "high-tech" industrial base in Kitchener may point
the way to long-term success of a program such as this. The contracst between
the creation of past artifacts with the present and future creation of new objects
and artifacts, and therefore civic wealth, can be seen as having rich potential for
the future of this current program. This could have a number of benefits:
^ Connecting Kitchener's past to its present in a very tangible way
^ Allow for interesting connections to be made between then & now machinery,
workers, markets, etc.
^ Attracting both the "wired" generation and today's workers to the IAP
GBCA Architects
3 - 24
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 21
^ Increasing partnership opportunities by making connections with new
industries
^ Keeping the IAP collection "open" as opposed to ending up with a collection
that is, to all intents and purposes, "closed"
An example of this potential can be seen in the Digital Media Centre proposed for
the Lang Building downtown which as attracted several partners.
GBCA Architects
3 - 25
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 22
6 A~~eS~ment end Recommend~tlon~ b~~ed on stakeholder input
6.1 Mi~~ion
The 1996 mission statement, derived from Recommendation 11 in Cultureplan 1
continues to drive the program:
"That City Council investigate the creation of a series of public sculptures
composed of old pieces of industrial machinery and artifacts, and request
the appropriate involvement of the Arts and Culture Advisory Committee,
Community Services and the Public Art Committee. "
While attempting to incorporate both the notion of preservation of heritage and
the development of the objects as public art works, the IAP has, in fact, saved
many interesting industrial artifacts from the scrap yard. Can the program serve
two functions; that is, as a heritage preservation program and as a public art
program?
The IAP appears to have been developed in its earliest stage with a regional
mandate. However, the vast majority of artifacts have been sourced from
Kitchener. Waterloo has three objects, only one of which is installed. Cambridge
has not participated in the program.
The IAP has attempted, with limited success on a very modest budget, to
awaken the community's appreciation for its industrial heritage and to encourage
respect for the workers whose lives gave form and meaning to the cities.
IZccommcndation~
^ If the IAP is to remain a Kitchener initiative, we recommend that the
mission statement be re-written so that the primary emphasis is on the
preservation and sharing of artifacts representative of Kitchener's
industrial heritage.
GBCA Architects
3 - 26
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 23
Although conservation, museums and heritage lie primarily within the
Region's mandate, if Kitchener is to be the prime location and identified with
this program, the small "r" regional mandate should be removed as Waterloo
and Cambridge are responsible for their own industrial heritage. Waterloo is
in the process of writing a new Collections Policy that will, among other
things, guide the acquisition of industrial artifacts for its own collection.
Cambridge is currently studying its mandate for public art and does not have
industrial heritage on its agenda.
^ Participation in joint industrial heritage initiatives could, and should, be
explored in the future provided there is co-operation among the
municipalities and with the Regional government.
This implies separate programs, perhaps under the regional umbrella, but
locally run in a manner to the benefit and desires of each individual
community.
^ Remove the references to sculpture and art.
Although it can be legitimately argued that these three-dimensional objects
can be viewed as sculpture, and the process of creating them was also a
form of artistic creation (but not necessarily expression -their attributes,
mass and meaning come from their intended original function, not a
predetermined artistic metaphor) they are also legitimate historical objects
with their meaning attached to their function, and the history of the community
and its people through the industry which these objects represent.
The artistic value of the industrial artifacts is not clear to the public, to local
artists or to the City of Kitchener's Public Art Working Group. Perhaps more
importantly, any artistic value should now be considered to be secondary to
the heritage value of the objects.
GBCA Architects
3 - 27
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 24
The general consensus seems to be that the heritage aspect of the program
can be emphasized without losing the sculptural impact of the artifacts. More
historical information and more historically appropriate paint colours would
not inherently alter the sculptural quality of these objects. If objects were to
be relocated for a more visitor-friendly experience or for better historical
context, the positioning of the objects could be done with an eye to artistic
effect - as stated earlier, there is no reason why the IAP could not also
enhance the community's artistic wealth.
6.2 Govcrnanec
The City of Kitchener manages the IAP through its Community Services
Department. However, its involvement in most aspects of the project appears to
be limited to basic administrative tasks and installation and maintenance of
artifacts sited outdoors. In 2008, $14,800 was allocated to the IAP; the actual
expenses were $10,000.
The Industrial Artifacts Project Committee consisting of City staff and community
volunteers is the primary means for community input into the IAP. The Project
Director, Nicholas Rees, chairs this committee.
The Director does not have a written job description and is not an employee of
the City of Kitchener. However, he occasionally receives an honorarium or
contract fees for his work.
The IAP Director identifies artifacts, liaises with donors, arranges for the
acquisition of artifacts by the City, selects the sites for the artifacts, and advises
City maintenance staff on how to prepare the artifacts for display.
There are no regular reporting procedures in place for the Director or the
committee. City employees respond to requests from the Director. Clear City
GBCA Architects
3 - 28
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 25
authority in the management of the IAP appears to be lacking and the City could
therefore be seen to need more accountability in this area.
Although the program is small, as custodian of this collection the City has an
obligation to protect the public trust and ensure that the objects are taken care of
from the legal, ethical and preservation viewpoints. The heritage of the
community is in the City's hands.
IZceommcndation~
• Draw up and approve Terms of Reference for the IAP Committee and
including roles and responsibilities for the Chair and other members.
• IAP Committee to meet regularly, at least twice per year.
• Schedule regular meetings between IAP Committee Chair and Arts &
Culture Co-ordinator. At least twice per year after IAP Committee
meetings and whenever there is atime-sensitive matter.
• IAP Committee to be consulted on the development of collection
policies and procedures, particularly with regard to acquisition
guidelines. IAP Committee to follow internally approved collection
policies and procedures which must be defined by staff and the
Committee.
• IAP Committee makes recommendations regarding acquisitions, to the
City through the Arts & Culture Co-ordinator.
• Approve an honorarium for the IAP Committee Chair to reflect his
contributions to the City.
• Define any issues which may reference the roll of the IAP and its
Committee in relation to other departments. Discussion will be required
GBCA Architects
3 - 29
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 26
to formalize these roles as a part of the outcome of recommendations
adopted
6.3 Staffing
The IAP is one of four programs managed by the Arts and Culture Coordinator.
The other three are the Rotunda Gallery, Public Art and the Artist in Residence.
These three programs receive community oversight through the Public Art
Working Group (PAWL), a volunteer advisory committee.
Considering this work load, there is simply not the staff to do this work.
IZccommcndation:
• If the program is to continue, provide the budget to hire resources to
undertake essential improvements in collection management and to
develop programming initiatives.
6.4 Collcctian managcmcnt
There are no approved policies or procedures associated with the IAP. The
absence of an official acquisition policy, standard acquisition procedures and
indeed any collections management procedures is problematic.
It is not clear whether the City of Kitchener is the legal owner of all artifacts in the
IAP collection. There is no comprehensive registry and records are incomplete.
Objects that have been purchased are most likely legally owned as funds for
each object have been approved by Council and receipts were probably required.
GBCA Architects
3-30
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 27
Some donated objects have signed donor forms associated with them. However,
records are inconsistent and it is not clear whether this is the case with all of the
items in the collection.
The potential absence of legal title to these objects means that the City could be
devoting resources towards a program that could vanish should claims be made
upon the artifacts by other parties.
Among the records should be documentation of the techniques and materials
that have been used in the preparation and maintenance of the artifacts. It is not
known whether the techniques and materials are appropriate for their
preservation.
Another preservation issue is the choice of paint colours for the artifacts. At first
glance, they do not appear to be representative of historic colours or finishes.
With their current colours, the machines appear to be quite different from those
used by men and women at the time.
The exact number and location of all the artifacts in storage is not clearly
documented -most are stored in municipal storage in a former reservoir building
(which due to high humidity levels poses risk of corrosion to the objects). This is
of serious concern for many reasons. Perhaps most importantly, the City cannot
know if items have been stolen, lost or damaged. As custodians of a collection
that belongs to the people of Kitchener, the City is putting this public trust at risk.
IZceommcndation~:
• Compile, organize and update all collection records according to
museum standards.
• Develop necessary forms and procedures.
• Verify and perfect legal title in favour of the City for all artifacts in the
collection as soon as possible.
GBCA Architects
3-31
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 28
• Engage a conservator to undertake a survey of stored and displayed
artifacts and to make recommendations regarding standard and custom
treatments.
• Have the conservator undertake urgent treatments on those artifacts
where inaction will lead to serious damage.
• Develop storage requirements and/or display methodology for each
artifact based on condition, integrity, heritage importance and other
criteria which should be used to establish a level of care and potential
for exhibit.
6.5 Community impaet
Many community members who are interested in industrial heritage have
welcomed the opportunity to participate in the IAP or simply to enjoy the artifacts
on display.
The artifacts are visible to the community, whether outdoors on public land or
inside city buildings.
Casual passers-by may occasionally stop to read the interpretive plaques
identifying the machinery. However, a number of stakeholders were unaware that
there was any interpretive information on the installation site.
The IAP could be said to be Kitchener's best-kept secret. It could be made more
conspicuous by creating a common logo or branding that would identify all the
objects as part of the same program. The bronze plaques in place now are not
highly visible. Having information at each site about the IAP as a whole, including
a map showing the location of other objects, would help to raise understanding
and awareness of the project.
GBCA Architects
3-32
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 29
No formal studies have been undertaken to discover what individuals learn from
the artifacts or what impact the artifacts have on the viewers. For example, it is
not known whether most viewers of the machinery have any understanding of the
relationship of the artifacts to former industries on the same (or nearby) sites.
Except for the self-guided walking tour, there are no public programs associated
with the display. There are no links to the local education system or other
community programming.
Publicity for the program is generally restricted to press releases and invitations
on the occasion of new installations.
The IAP has a small web presence. The City's website has a description of the
program and a map of installations on its website at
http://www.kitchener.ca/city hall/departments/community services/community pr
ogram/industrial heritage.html. The Industrial Artifacts self-guided walking tour
guide is also one of four such guides on another City website at
http://www.downtownkitchener.ca/things/performing arts/. We note, however,
that this guide is somewhat outdated.
The IAP has considerable untapped potential for increasing community
awareness of Kitchener's heritage. Such awareness is generally understood to
assist in the formation of community identity and makes communities more
attractive to new industries, potential residents and tourists.
IZceommcndation~:
• The city could arrange and publicize public tours by Nicholas Rees or
other volunteers.
• Working with local schools, links to the educational curriculum could be
developed.
GBCA Architects
3-33
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 30
• Events could be held to coincide with popular heritage-related events
such as Doors Open Waterloo Region and Cruising on King.
• The City could hold a Media Day to raise awareness of Kitchener's
heritage and tourism resources, including the IAP.
• The IAP would benefit from an increased web presence with a catalogue
of artifacts, tours, photographs, stories from the oral history project,
reproductions of archival documents, etc.
• Phased drawings, models and/or archival photographs representing the
area at different periods of its use could be displayed on the web page
or alongside artifacts to show changes to the sites over time.
• At some sites, operational scale models could be used to show how the
machines worked and how they worked in context with the rest of the
machinery. Development and maintenance costs would have to be
factored into the program budget.
• On the web page, combining oral history and a video animation of
someone using the machine would add tremendously to the educational
value of the IAP.
• The City may also wish to consider the potential for corporate
sponsorship of individual artifacts. A company would pay for the
restoration and mounting of the object and in return it would be
acknowledged on the information panel. This would assist the City with
funding the project and also create valuable ties to corporate Kitchener.
GBCA Architects
3-34
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 31
'7 Optlon~ for the future
Several options are presented as recommendations in the following sections of which
some build on the status quo while others are departures based on the result of the
research for this report.
7.1 5tatu~ quo
• The project continues in the present form with the following
implications:
City continues to provide maintenance for displayed artifacts and storage
space for stored artifacts.
The project continues to have a low profile.
Fewer objects are collected as the remaining factories close.
Volunteers retire, burn out or lose interest.
Funding remains at the current level. Currently, the program is funded at a
rate of $14,000 per year with additional hidden costs in the form of mowing
and minor maintenance at each installation.
Staff time devoted to the program remains at the same (unacceptable) level.
With no plan for the future, the project peters out.
GBCA Architects
3-35
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 32
7.2 Modcratc cnhanecmcnt~
• More historical interpretation: more historical information on site,
enhanced self-guided tour brochures, and a website with downloadable
versions of the brochures and more information about the program and
the artifacts.
Collection items should be treated more as historical artifacts than
contemporary art pieces. More historically appropriate paint colours are
chosen. Conservator's advice is sought to ensure treatments are ethically and
technically sound.
There should be a clearer reporting structure through the City's management
hierarchy.
A minimum of %2 FTE (full time employee) would be devoted to the
management of the program plus additional volunteers and, possibly, a
summer staff person.
There should be use of written and approved policies and procedures for
collections management (e.g. guiding acquisitions, donor forms, referral to
other organizations when object does not meet the collecting mandate).
There should be better publicity.
A modest increase in funding, which cannot be defined in this report, would
be made to permit acquisitions and provide for maintenance of artifacts.
Improvements in storage would be required, which may entail additional
funding support, to ensure the longevity of the collection.
GBCA Architects
3-36
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 33
7.3 MaJor cnhanecmcnt~
• In addition to the former suggestions, additional enhancements are
made:
Artifacts are relocated to create a more accessible and prominent heritage
walk. Positioning all of the artifacts along a more compact outdoor walking
route would attract more people to the city core.
Potential for a permanent indoor display space should be explored.
A minimum of 1 FTE would be assigned to manage the program plus
additional volunteers and summer staff.
Website should be expanded to more interpretive material, e.g. an overlay of
old factories on a current aerial view of the city. Changes to the urban
landscape could be animated to show the addition of new buildings and the
destruction of factories over time.
Ties to other downtown renewal and community development efforts should
be identified and promoted.
Greater community involvement should be encouraged and developed.
Better marketing would be essential to match the increased resources and
profile of the project.
Much improved storage should be developed to ensure the safety of the
collection and permit further acquisitions.
Based on the above, a significant increase in funding would be required.
GBCA Architects
3-37
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 34
7.4 Ncgotiatc a tran~fcr of rc~pon~ibility to the IZcgion
The question of transferring management of the IAP to the Region of Waterloo
comes up frequently in discussions with stakeholders. The rationale for Region
responsibility includes the fact that the IAP has a regional mandate and the
Region has the heritage mandate, facilities and expertise to manage the program
according to museum standards
• The feasibility of transferring the program to the Region should be
assessed through City-initiated discussions with the Region.
7.5 Abandon the program
• The program is shut down and the objects are de-accessioned as a
result of lack of adequate support from either level of government.
This would eventually save a modest annual amount related to the current
contribution by the City to the Program and would be considerably less costly
than the option to expand the program to operate under museum principles
on an annual basis. However, there would be a potentially significant cost to
execute an abandonment since the ownership of artifacts would have to be
assessed, the artifacts possibly returned (with attendant delivery costs). Other
objects would incur costs if auctioned or disposed of. Some objects could be
donated to other museums (assuming an investment is made to properly
determine ownership) but this process would also require staff time. The net
implication for this move could be 2 FTEs for a year to complete this
transition.
Artifacts currently mounted would also have to be assessed -should they
continue to be maintained or, if abandoned, would there be attendant
potential personal liabilities which the City may face as a result of injury? If
this latter argument is made, removal of exhibited pieces may be required
which could have significant costs for demolition of bases, repair of sites,
GBCA Architects
3-38
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 35
trucking of debris and - as noted above -establishing who owns the artifacts
and what should be their disposition (which may then require cranes, flat-bed
trucks and staff time to complete any transfers).
The program does appear to receive political and public support considerably
in excess of the current actual expenses. Loss of the program may result in
both political and community upset with unknown repercussions.
7.6 Abandon the program in favour of a privatc trust
• A variant of the abandonment option is the creation of a trust, endowed at the
outset by the City, to collect and manage the objects. The trust would be
able to receive donations in the form of objects, labour, storage facilities or
funds with the original endowment intended to produce interest funds to
support the on-going operations.
GBCA Architects
3-39
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 36
~ Prellminary Overall Recommendatlon~
(Subject to discussion at a meeting to assess the findings of this draft, the final
recommendations for the report are limited to the following. This section will be further
developed with input from the steering committee.)
• It must be decided by City staff and Council whether this program should
continue to be funded, transferred to the Region, or abandoned.
• It is the consultants' view that the program is valid and important, of benefit to
the City of Kitchener and realizes a large benefit for limited expenditure of
resources
In the event that the program is continued and expanded:
• Any direction from the present point will have either cost or political
implications. For instance, if the program is to be operated on a more formal
and professional basis, the costs of operation will rise considerably. The level
of support that may be available from Council will determine the level of
professionalism that can be brought to the program.
• Authority for the management and operation of the IAP should be formalized.
An advisory committee may still provide community input, ensuring that the
essential community contribution remains in place while leaving the final
decisions to those who are legally and financially responsible for the project.
• The City needs regular inspections to check on the security and condition of
the stored collection.
In the event that the program is transferred to the Region
• Proper professional level curation of the objects will be a requirement of the
Region although, based on our discussions, the Region does not have
resources in place to deal with this program. Therefore, cost considerations
applicable to the City will be equally so for the Region.
GBCA Architects
3-40
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 37
• A willingness on the part of the Regional Council to accept this program must
be developed by the City of Kitchener with the process initiated by the City.
In the event that the program is transferred to a trust:
• A workable means must be developed to establish ownership of the artifacts
as well as liabilities for any installations.
• On-going management policies and accountabilities must be established as a
part of setting up this arrangement. Models exist in other jurisdictions which
can be drawn on as examples.
In the event that the program is abandoned:
• Ownership and retention of artifacts must be established and objects disposed
of in accordance with appropriate guidelines.
• Installed artifacts must be considered in terms of on-going maintenance
policies, liabilities and potential dismantling.
GBCA Architects
3-41
Industrial Artifacts Project -Program Review
Draft Report
17 September 2009
Page 38
9 ~~05Uf G
GBCA (Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd. Architects) has written this report for the
benefit of the client to whom it is addressed. The information and data contained herein
represent the GBCA's best professional judgment in light of the knowledge and
information available to GBCA at the time of preparation. Except as required by law, this
report and the information and data contained herein are to be treated as confidential
and may be used and relied upon only by the client, its officers and employees. GBCA
denies any liability whatsoever to other parties who may obtain access to this report for
any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, or reliance
upon, this report or any of its contents without the express written consent of the GBCA
and the client.
Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd. Architects has prepared this report in accordance with
the Scope of Services agreed with the Client. If you have any questions regarding the
information contained herein, please contact the undersigned.
Yours very truly,
GOLDSMITH BORGAL & COMPANY LTD. ARCHITECTS
/ n
r. .-,
Christopher Borgal, OAA, MRAIC, CAPHC
Principal
GBCA Architects
3-42