Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: Provincial Historic Resources and Municipal Historic Resources

Editor’s note: Welcome to the final post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will discuss how the evaluation of a historic resource at the provincial and municipal level may result in complimentary or differing heritage values. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Fraser Shaw, Heritage Conservation Adviser and Ron Kelland, Historic Places Research Officer, Historic Resources Management Branch


Complementary and differing values

Alberta’s Historical Resources Act empowers both the Government of Alberta and municipalities to designate, or recognize and protect, a range of historic resources whose preservation is in the public interest. These resources can be places, structures or objects that may be works of nature or people (or both) that are of palaeontological, archaeological, prehistoric, historic, cultural, natural, scientific or aesthetic interest. Albertans value these historic resources because our past, in its many forms, is part of who we are as a society and helps give our present significance and purpose.

As of July 2020, there are currently 390 Provincial Historic Resources (PHR) and 413 Municipal Historic Resources (MHR) in Alberta, some 60 of which are designated both provincially and municipally. These resources merit designation for various reasons, from their association with significant events, activities, people or institutions; as representative examples of architectural styles or construction methods; for their symbolic and landmark value; or their potential to yield information of scientific value.

Heritage values are described in short Statements of Significance, which are listed on the Alberta Register of Historic Places. In this post, we look at examples of heritage values that municipal and provincial governments recognize and how local and provincial values may align, differ or complement each other.

Plaques or markers are often used to identify designated historic resources. These plaques, affixed to Strathcona Public Library in Edmonton, show that it has been designated as a Provincial Historic Resource and a Municipal Historic Resource. PHRs are identified by a blue, enamel button or marker. MHRs can be identified by a variety of plaques and markers depending on the procedures of the municipality. Source: Historic Resources Management.

Shared heritage value

Some historic resources are municipally and provincially designated for essentially the same reasons. The people, events or themes that give these places heritage value are of such significance that they merit designation by both levels of government. A good example of this type of site is the Nellie McClung House, a 1907 Tudor Revival style house with Arts and Crafts design elements on the interior, located in Calgary’s Beltline neighbourhood. The property was designated as a Provincial Historic Resource in 1978 and as a Municipal Historic Resource by the City of Calgary in 2009. Both the provincial and municipal designations value the residence for its association with Nellie McClung, the author and member of the Famous Five who successfully helped fight for the legal recognition of women as persons.

Nellie McClung House, Calgary. Source: Historic Resources Management Branch.

Nellie McClung, ca. 1930. Source: Provincial Archives of Alberta, A3354.

Differing heritage values

Other resources are designated municipally and provincially for completely different reasons. This does not mean that the designations are somehow in conflict or disagreement; rather, different values or meanings come into play when the historic place is considered locally and provincially. Annandale, a large residence in the London Road neighbourhood of Lethbridge, was municipally designated in 2008 for its association with two figures significant to the city’s development. Lewis Martin Johnstone, founder of an important local law firm, built the house in 1909 and resided there until 1935. George Graham Ross, a prominent local rancher and founder of an auctioneering company, lived in the house from 1937 to 1940.

Provincial designation of the house in 2015, on the other hand, celebrates the house’s distinctive blend of Queen Anne Revival and Arts and Crafts styles reflected in the dramatic arched porch entrance, wide eaves, and other design features. It considers architectural qualities rather than associations with individuals. As a PHR, Annandale represents the development of Alberta’s rising professional class and that group’s eagerness to adopt emerging residential design trends from other parts of North America. Lewis Martin Johnstone and George Graham Ross belonged to the business elite in Lethbridge; their importance as individuals is meaningful and relevant municipally rather than provincially. In this way, provincial and municipal heritage values are distinct but of equal merit. Together they tell a richer story.

Annandale, Lethbridge. Source: Historic Resources Management Branch, 2009.
The funeral of William Henderson, Mayor of Lethbridge, proceeds along Dufferin Street, now 4 Avenue South, Lethbridge, 1909. Annandale at the extreme left. Source: Peel’s Prairie Provinces. University of Alberta Libraries, PCO12276.

Complimentary heritage value

Elsewhere, municipal and provincial heritage values may align closely and differ mainly in nuance and emphasis, as they do at the Maccoy Homestead in High River. Established in 1883 by Andy Bell as a fishing lodge and guest house near the Highwood River, this former rural property is now enveloped by the growth of the town. The site consists of a whitewashed log cabin with a frame addition, a guesthouse, garage, root cellar and other elements that speak to its former agricultural use. The property was municipally designated in 2009 as the Sheppard/Maccoy House for its heritage value as one of the town’s oldest residences, for its ties to the settlement of the High River region, and as the home of notable High River families and individuals. These include Clydesdale breeder William Ikin, subsistence and dairy farmers Henry and Evelyn Sheppard and, especially, the Sheppards’ daughter Ruth Maccoy, who owned and ran the farm for many decades until 1995.

In 2015, the province designated the Maccoy Homestead as an excellent example of the development of agricultural farmsteads in the foothills region and for the site’s association with the contribution of women’s labour to homesteading and agriculture in Alberta. Where the municipal significance is rooted in individuals and the role of the place in local and regional history, provincial designation references province-wide themes of agricultural development and the role of women in agricultural society.

Maccoy Homestead, High River. Source: Historic Resources Management Branch, 2018.

Conclusions

PHRs and MHRs share a Canadian, “values-based” heritage framework based on widely adopted significance criteria. Differing values, where they occur, often reflect differences of context rather than degree of significance.  For example, MHRs are more likely to be locally recognized historic landmarks, where as on a provincial level, designation with heritage value as landmarks are applied more rarely and only to resources, places and landscapes widely recognized across  the province, such as the Frank Slide or the Legislature Building, or metaphorically to regional icons with widespread provincial recognition like grain elevators. Whether they align, differ or complement each other, municipal and provincial heritage values are equally protected when sites are designated under the Historical Resources Act. In both cases, the objective is the same: to conserve heritage value recognized by Albertans for future generations.

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: Statements of Integrity

Editor’s note: Welcome to the seventh post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will talk about the importance of developing Statements of Integrity, and how they help to both increase understanding and manage change to historic resources over time. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Carlo Laforge, Heritage Conservation Adviser and Tom Ward, Manager, Heritage Conservation Advisory Services, Historic Resources Management Branch


Statements of Integrity

The process for evaluating if an historic place merits designation under the Historical Resources Act (HRA) starts with determining if and why it is significant. Then, determining whether it retains sufficient physical integrity to convey that significance. Earlier blog posts described how to develop a Statement of Significance (SOS). The next step works through whether enough of the physical features that relate to the heritage values exist, and are in acceptable condition to convey heritage values. Not all places merit designation as historic resources, especially if integrity is in question.

Below is an outline of what goes into determining integrity and how to summarize findings in a Statement of Integrity (SOI). It is important to remember that the development of an SOS and SOI are complementary processes. The information and facts discovered by each related investigation help to compliment, influence and improve each document to enable the best decision possible in terms of proceeding with a designation.

Understanding what is of value

A review of the heritage values expressed in the SOS provides the person analyzing the integrity of a place with a reminder of why it is potentially of historic significance and what details may be important. The heritage values and the period of significance are critical to keep in mind when observing and evaluating the historic place.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: period of significance

Editor’s note: Welcome to the sixth post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will introduce the concept of a “period of significance” and explain why it is important to establish as part of the designation process. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Stefan Cieslik, Heritage Conservation Adviser and Rebecca Goodenough, Manager Historic Places Research and Designation


Period of Significance

Simply put, the period of significance of a historic resource is the time frame when the place acquired its significance. The heritage value section of the Statement of Significance (SOS) articulates why the place is historically significant, such as an association with an event, person, theme, institution, style of design, etc. Each of these heritage values will have an associated time frame, which informs the period of significance.

Some associations will have start and end periods while others will still have the association today. The period may be very specific if the resource is significant for a single event, or it may span hundreds of years if it is a prehistoric cultural landscape. A period of significance is specific to a site—it is not a general era of development for a community or other reference point. Where the historic place is a building, it should never predate the date of construction.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: character-defining elements

Editor’s note: Welcome to the fifth post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will continue to discuss Statements of Significance as the primary tool for summarizing the significance of designated historic places. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Dorothy Field, Heritage Survey Coordinator, Sandy Aumonier, Heritage Conservation Adviser and Allan Rowe, Historic Places Research Officer, Historic Resources Management Branch


As previously mentioned, a Statement of Significance (SOS) is a one- to two-page summary document written as a clear, concise and brief narrative of a historic resource. It is written for a broad audience that is not familiar with the resource. The SOS has three sections: description of historic place, heritage values and character-defining elements.

An SOS is central to understanding a resource and any of its elements that might be protected and why.

If a historic resource is designated, the SOS will thereafter be an important planning and property management tool and essential for developing a conservation plan for ongoing management of the resource.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: heritage value

Editor’s note: Welcome to the fourth post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will continue to discuss Statements of Significance as the primary tool for summarizing the significance of designated historic places. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Dorothy Field, Heritage Survey Coordinator, Sandy Aumonier, Heritage Conservation Adviser and Allan Rowe, Historic Places Research Officer, Historic Resources Management Branch


As previously mentioned, a Statement of Significance (SOS) is a one- to two-page summary document written as a clear, concise and brief narrative of a historic resource. It is written for a broad audience that is not familiar with the resource. The SOS has three sections: description of historic place, heritage values and character-defining elements.

An SOS is central to understanding a resource and any of its elements that might be protected and why.

If a historic resource is designated, the SOS will thereafter be an important planning and property management tool and essential for developing a conservation plan for ongoing management of the resource.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: Statements of Significance

Editor’s note: Welcome to the third post in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. In this post, we will introduce Statements of Significance as the primary tool for summarizing the significance of designated historic places. You can read the previous post here.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.


Written by: Peter Melnycky, Historian and Gary Chen, Heritage Conservation Adviser, Historic Resources Management Branch


A Statement of Significance (SOS) is a one or two page summary document written as a clear, concise and brief narrative of a historic resource. It is written for a broad audience that is not familiar with the resource.

The SOS is comprised of three sections:

  • Description of Historic Place – concisely describes the resource
  • Heritage Values – explains the reasons why the resource is valued
  • Character-Defining Elements – lists the physical elements of the resource that are central to the site`s significance, features which would be essential for preservation upon designation

An SOS is central to understanding a resource and any of its elements that might be protected and why.

If a historic resource is designated, the SOS will be an important planning and property management tool, and essential for developing a conservation plan for ongoing management of the resource.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resource designation refresher series: Determining eligibility

Written by: Peter Melnycky, Historian, Historic Resources Management Branch

Editor’s note: Welcome to the first in a series of blog posts developed with municipalities in mind who either have or are considering undertaking Municipal Historic Resource designation. This series is intended to serve as a refresher on how to evaluate sites, develop Statements of Significance, determine periods of significance and develop Statements of Integrity.

For more information, please review the “Creating a Future” manuals available here or contact Rebecca Goodenough, Manager, Historic Places Research and Designation at rebecca.goodenough@gov.ab.ca or 780-431-2309.

Determining eligibility

In our first post, we will be discussing how to determine if a historic place is eligible for designation.

Historic resources include structures, buildings, landscape and archaeological features, all of which can be considered for protection by a municipality. Under the Historical Resources Act, municipalities have the ability to designate historic resources under a bylaw to ensure their protection.

historic-resources-act
The Historical Resources Act (Source: Historic Resources Management Branch).

In order to be considered for protection as a Municipal Historic Resource, a site needs to:

  • Be an eligible resource type
  • Possess historical significance
  • Have sufficient material integrity

If a site meets all three of these of these criteria, it can be considered for Municipal Historic Resource designation.

Read more

Revival of a Prohibition-Era Landmark in the Crowsnest Pass

Editor’s note: You can read more of Fraser Shaw’s series on heritage conservation on RETROactive.

Written by: Fraser Shaw, Heritage Conservation Advisor

Gunshots shattered the stillness of 18 Avenue in Coleman on the afternoon of September 21, 1922.

Local bootlegger Emilio Picariello and his accomplice Florence Lassandro sped off in a cloud of dust as Constable Stephen Lawson lay dead outside the Alberta Provincial Police barracks, a cottage-like office and residence where he worked and resided with his family. Hours later, “Emperor Pic”—as he was known locally—and Lassandro were apprehended and charged with Lawson’s murder. Both were later convicted and hanged. Lassandro became the first woman to be executed in Canada since 1899 and the only woman to be hanged in Alberta.

The Alberta Provincial Police Building as it appeared in late 1922 after the murder of Constable Stephen Lawson. Source: Crowsnest Museum.
The Alberta Provincial Police Building as it appeared in late 1922 after the murder of Constable Stephen Lawson. Source: Crowsnest Museum.

The Alberta Provincial Police (APP) Building, a Provincial Historic Resource within the Coleman National Historic Site, is significant for its association with the infamous murder of Constable Lawson and, more generally, with its role in the maintenance of law and order in the mining communities of the Crowsnest Pass during Prohibition until the 1930s.

Read more

Burdett-Coutts: Aristocracy, Activism, Railway Investing and Alberta Place Names

Written by: Ron Kelland, Historic Places Research Officer

Back a few weeks ago, in the early days of COVID-19 pandemic response, I, like many Albertans, was closely watching news coverage. One news story that caught my attention was about the lines of traffic of returning Canadian travelers at the Coutts/Sweet Grass International Border Crossing. The story really jumped out at me because I had just read about novelist Charles Dickens’ involvement with the philanthropic work of Baroness Angela Burdett-Coutts. Being the geographical names guy, I was aware that the village of Coutts and the hamlet of Burdett were named for the Baroness Burdett-Coutts, so I started to think about how was it that these two communities ended up with names honouring and commemorating a Victorian-Age, aristocratic philanthropist and social reformer.

Angela Burdett-Coutts. Baroness Burdett-Coutts, artist unknown, oil on panel, ca. 1840.  Source: National Portrait Gallery, London, NPG 6181. Used under Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
Baroness Burdett-Coutts, artist unknown, oil on panel, ca. 1840. Source: National Portrait Gallery, London, NPG 6181. Used under Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Angela Burdett-Coutts, the 1st Baroness Burdett-Coutts was born Angela Burdett in 1814, the daughter of radical reformist politician and anti-slavery advocate Sir Francis Burdett and Sophia Burdett (née Coutts). In 1837, upon the death of her step-grandmother, the actress Harriet Mellon, Angela inherited the entire Coutts estate of £1.8 million ($191 million in 2020 Canadian dollars) including a substantial interest in the Coutts Bank, making her the second-wealthiest woman in the United Kingdom after Queen Victoria. In accordance with the conditions of the will, Angela Burdett sought and received royal license to combine her ancestral names to become Angela Burdett-Coutts.

Read more

Municipal Historic Resources spotlight: Westmount, Edmonton

Editor’s note: The image above is of the famous Roxy Theatre on 124 St. Opened in 1938, the theatre was destroyed by a fire in 2015. The theatre is currently being rebuilt. The image is courtesy of the Edmonton Historical Board.

Written by: Jared Majeski, Historic Resources Management Branch

Continuing along in our series spotlighting Municipal Historic Resources (MHRs) around the province, we move along to the historic Westmount neighbourhood in west-central Edmonton.

Thought to have been named after a suburb in Montréal, Westmount is known for many Craftsman-inspired single family detached houses along tree-lined boulevards between 123 St. to 127 St. and 107 Ave. to 111 Ave. You get the feeling of being transported back in time when you’re walking or riding your bike down one of these streets. And since the City of Edmonton officially recognized the historic significance of this, the Westmount Architectural Heritage Area (WAHA), the heritage value of this important Edmonton neighbourhood will hopefully be supported for decades to come.

Let’s take a look at a few properties in the area that make this neighbourhood unique.

Marshall Hopkins Residence

The Marshall Hopkins Residence is valued for its association with the early development of the Westmount neigbourhood during Edmonton’s population boom in the pre-war period
The Marshall Hopkins Residence is valued for its association with the early development of the Westmount neigbourhood during Edmonton’s population boom in the pre-war period.

Built in 1912, the Marshall Hopkins Residence on 126 Street is significant as an early example of wood-framed, Foursquare construction. This architectural design was popular at the time for its simple design and efficient floor plans.

The two-storey residence is significant for its association with Marshall W. Hopkins, Chief Land Surveyor for the Alberta Land Titles Office, who was the first occupant of the residence from c. 1913 to 1914. In addition, the Marshall Hopkins Residence is also significant for its association with the Canadian National Railway as it was home to a number of occupants who were employed by the company after the Canadian National Railway arrived in Edmonton in 1905.

The residence was officially designated an MHR in May 2019.

Ellen Elliot Residence

ellen-elliot
The Elliot Residence is significant as an early example of a front gabled dwelling with Craftsmen design elements influences, and for its associations with an early owner and builder.

The Ellen Elliot Residence on 125 Street is unique in a number of ways, least of all due to the fact that the first resident and owner of the building was a woman. Mrs. Ellen Elliot, widow of Thomas Elliot (who may have been a builder), purchased the property which would have been rare and unusual at that time. She lived in the residence until 1932.

Design elements of the two-storey building include the original wood frame construction, with horizontal wood siding on the lower level and wood shingle siding in gable peaks, and a front gabled-roof addition and porch. Fire insurance maps of the area show the original structure with a veranda in 1913. However, city records indicate that the house was built in 1920. The 1920 date may have come from when the front porch was captured and brought into the house as an extension of the living room and the mudroom.

This property was designated an MHR in June 2019.

Walton L. Smith Residence

walton-smith
The Smith residence is one of many similar Craftsman Influenced houses built in the neighbourhood in the first quarter of the 20th century, and demonstrates the popularity of this style in the early days of west Edmonton and other prestigious neighbourhoods.

The 1914 two-storey Walton L. Smith Residence is a wood frame construction with strong Craftsman design influences. It has horizontal wood siding on the lower level, and wood shingles on the upper levels and façade. The roof is a slightly bellcast, medium pitch gable, with exposed rafters and decorative brackets on the front-facing gable. An offset closed porch with a slightly bellcast gable roof is on the right hand side of the façade.

As interesting as the design of this property is the story of its original building applicant, who ironically, never actually lived in the house at all.

This residence was constructed following application for a building permit at the site on May 14, 1914. Robert W. Hedley, the applicant, was prominent in Edmonton affairs. Born and educated in Ontario at the University of Toronto and Hamilton Normal College, he then taught until moving to Edmonton in 1912. Hedley was Art Supervisor for the Edmonton Public School Board from 1914 until 1929. He designed the art course for Alberta high schools in 1922. Hedley taught art at University of Alberta summer sessions, and was appointed to the Normal School staff in 1929, serving as a lecturer in art and math. Hedley retired in 1937, but remained active in the local art scene, becoming director of the Edmonton Museum of Arts from 1943 to 1951. Hedley organized the western Canadian art circuit, adult and children’s classes and a women’s society to support the Edmonton Museum of Arts. He received an Honourary LLD from the

University of Alberta in 1953, a citation from the College Art Association of America in 1955, and became the first Albertan to receive a Fellowship from the Royal Society of Arts. He was an arts critic for the Edmonton Journal for many years. Hedley died on November 16, 1965, having never lived in the house he originally applied to build in 1914.

This residence was designated an MHR in June 2019.

Griffin Residence

The house is located within the Westmount Architectural Heritage Area. Throughout history the neighbourhood of Westmount has retained a strong sense of architectural character, and is noted for its large collection of single detached homes, that were built between 1911 and 1925.
The house is located within the Westmount Architectural Heritage Area. Throughout history the neighbourhood of Westmount has retained a strong sense of architectural character, and is noted for its large collection of single detached homes, that were built between 1911 and 1925.

Built in 1922, Griffin Residence on 125 Street is significant for its Arts and Crafts influences, in particular, Craftsman style elements. This design style first appeared in the last years of the 19th century and remained popular until the 1930s.

The residence features a medium pitched gable roof, with projecting eaves, exposing original wood rafters, soffits, fascia, and brackets. It is clad with wood clapboard siding on the upper portion, and wood shingles on the lower portion of the residence, and in all the peaks of the gables. The enclosed front veranda has a hipped roof with an offset medium pitched gable over the entrance. Both the east and west elevations feature pitched gables, with bay windows. The residence is located on a residential street in the Westmount neighbourhood, one of Edmonton’s most mature neighbourhoods, where the majority of lots still maintain their original structures.

Griffin Residence was designated an MHR in August 2018.

Street Railway Substation No. 600

Street Railway Substation No. 600 is significant as a rare and well preserved example of the Art Deco Style of architecture in Edmonton.
Street Railway Substation No. 600 is significant as a rare and well preserved example of the Art Deco Style of architecture in Edmonton.

Constructed in 1938, Street Railway Substation No.600 is a one storey brick and concrete building designed in the Art Deco Style, located on a commercial portion of 124 Street in the neighbourhood of Westmount.

This substation is significant for its association with the development of the Westmount neighbourhood. Westmount is one of the oldest residential subdivisions in Edmonton. After 1911, residents of the neighbourhood could commute downtown on the electric streetcar that ran south from 110 Avenue along 124 Street before turning east along Jasper Avenue. As the neighbourhood grew and demand placed on the west end section of the street railway increased, it was necessary to build Street Railway Substation No. 600 to house equipment which reduced the loss of electricity from the lines, allowing the street railway to operate more efficiently.

The substation was designated an MHR in May 2017.

These recently designated Municipal Historic Resources join seven other Westmount neighbourhood resources previously designated by the City of Edmonton:

By designating these properties as Municipal Historic Resources, the City of Edmonton is ensuring the preservation of the heritage character of the Westmount neighbourhood.

Sources:

Edmonton Historical Board

Historic Places and Designation, Heritage Division, Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women

Heritage Resources Management Information Systems