Heritage Impact Assessment

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
13007 | James St Baptist (98 James St. S)
Issued: 2013.09.13
Prime Consultant
Table of Contents Executive Summary
PART 1
BACKGROUND 1.1 Purpose.............................................................................................1 1.2 Methodology.....................................................................................2 1.3 Contact Information. ..........................................................................3
PART 2
ARCHITECTURE & CONTEXT 2.1 Cultural Context and Historical Background....................................4 2.2 Site Analysis ...................................................................................10 2.3 Zoning Overview ............................................................................20 2.4 Statement of Significance...............................................................23
PART 3
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Architectural. ....................................................................................26 3.2 Structural.........................................................................................32 3.3 Recommendations..........................................................................41
157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906
James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 4
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPENDICES A- MSA: Architectural Drawings. ...........................................................68 B- City of Hamilton: Zoning Verification................................................72 C- Quinn Dressel Structural Engineering: Structural Report. ...............76 D- Quinn Dressel Structural Engineering: Shoring Drawing................95 E- Quinn Dressel Structural Engineering: Heritage Experience. ..........96 F- Lions Group Inc: Procedures and Safety Plan (Demolition)..........100 G- PJ Materials Consultants: Condition Assessment Report.............102 H- James Street Baptist Church Chronology.....................................114 4.1 Development Options & Resulting Impact. .....................................42 4.2 Mitigation Strategy..........................................................................50 4.3 Case Studies ..................................................................................54 4.4 Heritage Experience........................................................................57 4.5 Proposed Design Concept. .............................................................62 4.6 Benefits of Redevelopment............................................................65 4.7 Preferred Development Schedule...................................................66
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Prime Consultant
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of the report is to eval uate the impact of the proposed development on the James Street Baptist site will have on the cultural heritage of this designated property and to suggest a mitigation strategy for possible changes to the original building. In our research, both archival and primary, we have validated that the building is significant to Hamiltons cultural heritage however, it has numerous structural challenges throughout its history. In this report we have balanced the desire to respect history, with the need to remain relevant. As such, we have recommended a solution that addresses the buildings cultural value, development potential and structural challenges. We recognize that James Street Baptist Church is prominently situated in Hamiltons historic fabric, thus the proposed redevelopment will help preserve its most essential features by structurally reinforcing the east tower which will be tied into a new addition. We see the James Street redevelopment as a potential catalyst for urban renewal that has all the ingredients to be a landmark building in the downtown core. The proposed design will not only leverage its historical value for prospective stakeholders, but may also contribute to the downtown regeneration through the addition of a diverse and energetic program, and increased density to the Art District on James Street. Our preferred schedule recommends to swiftly stabilize the portion of the building that shall remain and remove structure that is unsound or presents issues with public safety. The building in its present state will continue to deteriorate resulting in a loss of cultural heritage, and increased life safety and financial risk given the advanced stages of structural degradation. We recommend a partial demolition and the stabilization of the James Street Bay for Fall 2013 to ensure public safety and the successful restoration of what is to be preserved in a final redevelopment. We suggest working concurrently with the City of Hamilton Planning and Building Departments to expedite the development process.
Prime Consultant
Adaptive Reuse: Cultural Change and Identity of JSBC

The term adaptive reuse refers to the process which re-invents buildings and sites for a different purpose from which they were originally intended. While there are relatively few examples of conversions of places of worship in Hamilton, this more nuanced approach to preserve heritage has gradually been gaining popularity across the globe - one which balances the cultural value of these buildings with a need to change and evolve over time. Churches in particular have been prominent within the trend to convert and adapt historic buildings. Churches such as James Street Baptist have faced massive challenges in the maintenance and preservation of their beautiful, yet expensive buildings because shifting demographics and increased secularization have had led to declining membership and financial support. While the James Street Baptist congregation has chosen to worship elsewhere, the development proposed intends to save this cultural fragment by repurposing it for modern use. In adapting such a building, first understanding the opportunities presented by the existing architecture is needed to determine what should be remembered and therefore preserved, and what principles can be derived to inspire any new additions. The powerful quality of light, the public and private experience of gathering and community, and its accessibility to the public are characteristics that are important to preserve in order to successfully adapt and respect the Churchs former role within the community. The uniqueness of the site allows the re-development of James Street Baptist to provide much needed density to Hamiltons Downtown Core and has the opportunity to directly contribute and benefit from regional cultural activities both past and present, which currently define its location. In the following development options, summarized in Figure I (page vii), we have explored a range of possibilities for the future of James Street Baptist. While each decision has a significant impact on the heritage attributes and streetscape found on James Street, they represent varying degrees of financial feasibility and sensitivity to historical context.
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FIGURE I: DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Option Status Quo (Do Nothing) Impact of Displacement (Direct)

Impact of Disruption (Indirect)
Other Impacts
No financial investment from tax payers or private developers No Tax Revenue Vacant Lot & Associated Social Issues
Building deterioration resulting in structural failure and demolition Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of stained glass windows Loss of slate roof Loss of details (columns, pinnacles etc) Assuming the restoration process occurred early enough there would be no negative impacts of displacement. Supporting the north wall would require the temporary removal of the roof to relieve structure loads. Damage could occur to both the roof and walls in this process
Possible damage to adjacent buildings with uncontrolled / unmitigated demolition and collapse Loss of urban relationships along James and Jackson Streets Loss of relationship to Bell Building and St Pauls Presbyterian Loss of public use and access Assuming that the restoration process could be completely controlled, there would be no indirect negative impacts to the streetscape or urban fabric.
Maintain James Street Baptist (Retain and Support Existing Structure)

High Development Cost High Maintenance and Operational Cost High Investment Risk
Tabula Rasa (Full Demolition)
Full Demolition resulting in: Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of stained glass windows Loss of slate roof Loss of details (columns, pinnacles etc) Partial Demolition of the Central Portion and West Tower resulting in: Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of some stained glass windows Loss of some slate roof Loss of some details (columns, pinnacles etc)
Loss of urban relationships along James and Jackson Streets Loss of relationship to Bell Building and St Pauls Presbyterian Loss of original use (place of worship) Loss of some urban relationships along Jackson St Loss of original use (place of worship)
Increased Flexibility Increased Efficiency Increased Accessibility Reduced Cost
Adaptive Reuse (Stabilize, Partial Demolition and Build New Addition)
Respect for Heritage: New awareness of historical fragment through new urban relationships Sustainable Investment Opportunity for Innovation Downtown Revitalization
vii
Prime Consultant
PREFERRED OPTION: ADAPTIVE REUSE AND CONVERSION
To b To b eR
eR
em
ov
eta
ed
ine
(Sa se
d(
lva
Pre
ge
an
rve
dD
,R
oc
es
um
tor
en
ea
t) t)
nd
Ad
ap
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Option 1: Status Quo (Do Nothing)

To do nothing would accept the eventual structural collapse of the church with the added risk of harm to the public and potential damage to adjacent properties. This would be an unfortunate loss to the architectural and cultural fabric of Hamilton, therefore we do not consider this to be an option worth further investigation.
Option 2: Maintain James Street Baptist (Preserve and Restore)

The small scale of the development due to the sites constraints will also stress the reserve fund for such a development and as such, would not be a sustainable development. We consider the option to redevelop the entire building in its current state to be both unrealistic and infeasible given the changing cultural urban landscape, ongoing massive financial investment and health/comfort challenges presented by the building.
Option 3: Tabula Rasa (Fully Demolish and Redevelop)

We recognize that a full demolition would destroy the cultural value of this building and its impact to the downtown. It would also change the character of the streetscape including the relationship between James Street Baptist and St Pauls Presbyterian, and to the massing and height of the Bell Building. To fully demolish James St. would dismiss many of the characteristics which was the initial draw to the developer.
PREFERRED OPTION Option 4: Adaptive Reuse and Conversion (Partially Demolish, Stabilize and Restore, Build New Addition)
The James St (east) Bay is considered for retention because it is in the best structural and architectural condition, is well supported, is the most public facade and contains the most well preserved examples of Gothic Revival detailing. Additionally repairs can be made utilizing portions of the building undergoing demolition allowing for authentic and accurate restoration and preservation. This option best balances the need for cultural continuity, with economic, environmental and social concerns.
ix
Prime Consultant
BACKGROUND
1.1 PURPOSE
MSA has been retained to prepare a Heritage Impact Assessment to eval uate the impact of the proposed development on the cultural heritage of James Street Baptist. The purpose of this study is to ultimately recommend an overall approach to both the conservation and adaptation of James Street Baptists resources through out the design process and facilitate a partial demolition / retention strategy. Historical analysis, design recommendations and coordination are required to address both the existing property and the resulting impact of the proposed demolition and construction using the City of Hamiltons planning requirements and the Ontario Heritage Act for guidance. This relationship will be based on a thorough understanding of the significance and heritage attributes of James St Baptist, and identifies the impact of the proposed development on its status as a cultural heritage resource. In the report, both conservation and mitigation options will be considered, where appropriate, in order to approach the development which best conserves, adapts and adds to its existing cultural resources. The adaptation strategy will apply conservation principles balanced with new construction techniques to mitigate any potential negative impacts to both the original structure and decorative features. A balanced approach to conservation and adaptation should guide the development design in all areas. The adaptive reuse strategy recommendations will be specific and detailed in order to inform decisions and direct James Street Baptists re-development throughout the process. It should be noted that Stanton Renaissance has proven their commitment to the project by allocating significant financial investment to retain a large portion of the building. Through this substantial financial investment, Stanton Renaissance clearly asserts that this development is not simply responding to the draw of location and property values, but by the unique cultural significance of the site. While the building will not be retained in its entirety, a substantial effort has been made to strategically salvage areas of the greatest heritage value and impact to the City of Hamilton.
1
Prime Consultant
1.2 METHODOLOGY
The research methodology requires gathering relevant data from the city archives (maps, photos, publications, primary source etc), input from former members of the church and community, and first hand analysis of the site from all relevant stakeholders and consultants (Developer, Architect and Structural Engineer). In doing so, we intend to shed light on the following questions: What is the historical and cultural value of the building? What is the current condition of the building? What physical or referential aspects of the building are most crucial to maintain to conserve its cultural value? What is the structural condition of the building? If a partial demolition is required for life safety and economic reasons, what are the best mitigation strategies to protect aspects of the building to be retained and reused in the new development? What are the opportunities to make the building more accessible to the public? The Heritage Impact Assessment will utilize both contemporary and historical accounts to develop an approach that balances conservation, urban densification and adaptation to achieve the mutual goal of sustainability among the public, city, developers and designers.
BACKGROUND
1.3 CONTACT INFORMATION

Stanton Renaissance
93 Skyway Avenue Suite 104 Toronto, ON M9W 6N6 Louie Santaguida (416.704.9571) Richard Ramos (416-854-7419)
MSA (McCallum Sather Architects)

157 Catharine St. N Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T. 905.526.6700 F. 905.526.0906 Drew Hauser (drewh@msarch.ca) Christina Karney (christinak@msarch.ca)
Quinn Dressel
Quinn Dressell Associates Ltd. 890 Yonge Street, Suite 300 Toronto, ON M4W 3P4 T. 416.961.8294 F. 416.961.7434 Grant Milligan (gmilligan@quinndressel.com)
Prime Consultant
JOSEPH CONNOLY AND THE GOTHIC REVIVAL IN SOUTHERN ONTARIO
TORONTO
GUELPH
HAMILTON
ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT
Image Reference: 2.1.0 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 St Birgids, Ireland St Patricks, Hamilton ON (1875) Church of Our Lady Immaculate, Guelph ON (1877-1826) James St. Baptist Hamilton ON (1875) St Marys Church, ON (1889)
2.1 CULTURAL CONTEXT & HISTORIC BACKGROUND

Gothic Revival in Ontario
Beginning in England during the 1740s, the Gothic Revival intertwined with the High Church movement, sought to bring back a Gothic style which flourished in Europe in the medieval period. Common in church buildings, the style spread throughout North America in the mid- to late 19th century, and coincided with European settlement when Ontario cities (such as Hamilton), began to boom. Joseph Connolly, an Irish Canadian Architect who trained under J.J McCarthy, designed many of the great Gothic Revival buildings in Ontario, including James St Baptist in Hamilton (built over 1878-1882). While it is his only non-Catholic work, it shares many characteristics with the following buildings: St. Patricks Roman Catholic Church, Hamilton, Ontario, 1875. Church of Our Lady Immaculate, Guelph, Ontario, 1877-1926. St. Marys Church, Toronto, 1889. Under Joseph McCarthy1, a famous Gothic Revival architect in Ireland, Connolly learned how to interpret rather than directly copy the rudiments of Medieval Gothic design. His Irish influence is apparent in St. Patricks Catholic Church - his first church in Hamilton- which was adapted from St. Birgids of Kilcullen in the use of materials (rough hammered stone), proportion (the front facade divided into three vertical units
After completing training with James Joseph McCarthy, the 'Irish Pugin', Joseph Connolly advanced to become McCarthy's chief assistant in the 1860s and subsequently went on a study tour through Europe [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Joseph_Connolly_(architect)]
by stepping buttresses) and composition (a central nave with flanking aisles). Given the notoriety that Connolly was gaining after St. Patricks and the cathedral-like edifice of the Church of Our Lady in Guelph (2.1.2), it is not surprising that the growing Baptist congregation in Hamilton would seek his design to elevate their status as a major spiritual force in the community through a new building on James Street.
Cultural Context & Historic Background
Prime Consultant
Constructing James St Baptist (1878-1882)

As the congregation grew out of its first building on Park Street in the mid 19th century, it became apparent that a larger space was needed to accommodate its expanding size. Buildings of this stature are never conceived in isolation, thus the emergence of James Street Baptist reflects the attitudes and concerns of both its time and place. It emerged out of a climate of denominational and civic one-upmanship
2
St. Pauls Presbyterian Church
where the
design of James Street needed to be on the same level of significant works of the era such as St Patricks of Hamilton, the Church of Our Lady of Guelph, and St Pauls Presbyterian across the street to the north.
James St Baptist
Given their proximity, James Street Baptist and St Pauls have both had a long standing relationship and rivalry. Before they built their own building across the street, the Baptist congregation briefly occupied St Pauls while the Presbyterians were experiencing some financial difficulty. In 1876, after several years of occupation, the Baptists decided to sell the church back to former owners in the attempt to be good neighbours. However, they also saw this as an opportunity to solidify their presence architecturally within the community. A building committee was formed in 1876 to select an architect who could put forth his powers to accommodate the congregation conveniently, and, at the same time, to give the building a thoroughly ecclesiastical and artistic treatment of St. Pauls. As the Baptists influence grew within Hamilton, they also attracted the endorsement of several celebrated figures in including Sir Alexander Mackenzie, the former Prime Minister of Canada. Mackenzie participated in the corner stone ceremony as referenced on the plaque at James and Jackson. The construction of the church was not without its share of difficulty. The first incident occurred on September 10,1879, when a labourer who was carrying stone by wheelbarrow to a stonemason, misjudged the stability of scaffolding which caused a fall that resulted in both mens death. This tragic accident called into question the management of the construction. The jury overseeing
3
and one that could compete with the architectural grandeur
Image Reference: 2.1.5 2.1.6 2.1.7 2.1.8 James St. looking North (1930) Portrait of Hon. A. MacKenzie, M.P . Cornerstone laid May 25,1879 Heritage Designation
the case required the appointment of a competent building inspector to replace Mr Joseph Harold, a church member who was previously overseeing the operations with no professional training. In spite of this solution, rumours continued to circulate about the poor workmanship and defective construction. Much speculation was made with respect to James Street Baptists sinking foundations and shoddy masonry work and many critiqued its attractive street presence as merely a facade for poor workmanship. Unfortunately, the critics were proven right when the second set of misfortunes occurred. On December 1, 1879, only two months after the first tragedy, workers detected sounds of crumbling and cracking emanating from the building and were immediately ordered to evacuate. Shortly after the work was stopped, a large mass of material crumbled inside the church tower, followed by the complete collapse of the tower, walls and roof which came down in a thick cloud of dust and a loud bang. Miraculously, the collapse did not result in loss of life or limb. The Spectator reporter on the scene was shocked at the appearance of the buildings walls after the collapse: a glance at the standing portions of the wall and at the mass of stones on the ground revealed a state of things which deserves the severest condemnation. Instead of being firmly placed in good mortar, the stones composing the walls were laid in sand [...] looking at the crumbled mass one does not wonder how the walls gave way, but how they came to stand long enough to have the top stone put on them. Practical men who have been examining the building for several days past assure us that in many places they could remove the interior stones with their hands. 4 Disheartened but not discouraged, the Baptists were able to raise more funds to clean up the site and rebuild by 1882. Over the years the building would continue to establish itself in the community through urban missions, charity work and events in spite of other minor incidents (the bell tower fire of 1884). James Street was the Baptists first monumental building in the city, and the Mother 5 of several Baptist Communities.
Thurlby, (2006, april 21) Two churches by Joseph Connolly in Hamilton. retrieved july 3, 2013, from http://www.raisethehammer.org/ article/306
3 4
Ibid.
Barone, D, (2011, sept 10) Baptist Church - 1879. retrieved july 3, 2013, from http://1870shamilton. blogspot.ca/2011/09/baptist-church-1879. html?spref=tw
5
Keith Anderson and John B MacMillan, A History of James St .Baptist Church 1844-1969 (Hamilton: Hamilton City Press,1969), 147.
Prime Consultant
Garwood-Jones Renovations (1988)

It would appear that in spite of all the issues during construction, the building continued to have maintenance issues which would result in a large scale renovation of the Church. The main highlights include the following architectural and structural work. 6 Creation of an entrance to the basement via the removal of the fill against the north basement wall and creation of a sunken exterior zone. Use of 3 insulation to prevent frost heave to north wall. Addition of a new elevator within the James St. tower. Removal of various structural posts within the basement area to accommodate more open space Re-frame entry area of James St. tower. Install new confining jacket around basement columns ment posts and accommodate the new baptismal. Re-use and elevate Sanctuary floor close to James Street tower. supports and access stair. Repair of broken and cracked roof slates Repair improperly fitted wood doors Repoint exterior walls and roof coping stones and refinish stucco and stonework at entrance Refinish interior finishes paneling) Although not noted on the drawings, in review of archived photographs taken during the renovation, it would appear that stone replacement on the James Street tower was also included within the ultimate scope of work. In discussions with the present congregation members, it appears that the 1988 renovation initial costs increased by more
8
Install new structural steel support beams below Sanctuary floor to eliminate base-
Re-frame mezzanine level of the James St tower including new lobby stairs and
Repair and finish windows casements in basement, main floor and north tower.
(re-painting, re-touching plaster and refinish wood
than 100% tender values mainly on the strength of what were described as unknown and presumably hidden conditions after the start of work.
Masonry Restoration of South-East Facade (2001)

This work seems confined to the exterior stone of the James Street Tower at the southeast corner. Significant reworking of exterior stone wythe with tie backs of specific bull-nose and slopped section of buttress. Also, some restraining and injection grouting of the mortar/rubble zone was specified as was portion of the exterior wythe removed and re-built. This occurred north of the most southerly large window. This work was initiated it would seem due to concerns expressed by the City of Hamilton as a result of falling mortar and masonry in the summer of 2000. Water infiltration, successive freeze-thaw cycles and the 1998 earthquake were mentioned as potential causes. 6 South Transept: An undated repair to the exterior face of the south transept. Work is obvious as galvanized steel restraining plates are visible. Slate roof: various repairs to the roof slate were mentioned in the November 2011 report. Interior plaster repairs: numerous locations are evident where plaster repairs have been undertaken over the years, probably pointing to past cracking issues. We have been unable to find information on the products and types of mortars used for the repairs. We would advise that during the next steps of the restoration / preservation component of the project to investigate the means / methods and products. We have concerns that concrete mixes may have been used where a lime mortar mix would
5
Grant Milligan (March 8, 2013), Structural Assessment Report for James Street Baptist Church.
6
have been more appropriate.
Ibid.
Prime Consultant
LOCAL GEOGRAPHY
10
2.2 SITE ANALYSIS

Regional Overview
The city of Hamilton is situated at the west end of Lake Ontario in the geographic centre of an area referred to as the Golden Horseshoe. Its most prominent topographical features include the Hamilton Harbour, delineating the northern edge of the city, and the Niagara escarpment, which runs across the breadth of the community bisecting the area into upper and lower parts. Hamiltons location makes the city an ideal transportation hub, with water, rail and air connections, as well as three major highways (the 403, Lincoln Alexander Parkway, and Queen Elizabeth Way). The port town, conceived by namesake, George Hamilton, in the northern portion of Barton Township shortly after the War of 1812, achieved official city status on June 9, 1846. The Toronto-Hamilton region is the most industrialized area in the country: manufacturing being its primary economic activity. Stelco and Dofasco, the nations leading steel manufacturing companies, formed in Hamilton in 1910 and 1912. Procter & Gamble and the Beech-Nut Packing Company opened their first Canadian manufacturing plants in Hamilton in 1914 and 1922, respectively, and a Studebaker assembly line was established in 1948. The city is also home to the second Canadian Tire in the country and the very first Tim Hortons. Known as the Steel Capital of Canada, Hamilton produces sixty percent of Canadian steel. However, since the 1960s, many of Hamiltons large industries have moved or ceased operations. Dofasco, now ArcelorMittal, remains active while Stelco, bought out by US Steel, is dormant. This has caused an economic shift toward the service sector, most notably providing transportation, education and health services. The city of Hamilton is currently home to a large immigrant population. The 2006 Canadian census noted that more than 20 percent of the local population was not born in Canada, making Hamilton the third highest Canadian city of such proportion, after Toronto and Vancouver. Of the 20,800 immigrants that arrived in Hamilton between
Site Analysis
11
Prime Consultant
NEIGHBOURHOOD OVERVIEW
James St Baptist
12
2001 and 2006, half were born in Asia and the Middle East and almost one quarter had emigrated from Europe. Hamilton is also home to a high proportion of residents claiming Scottish, Italian, English, German and Irish ancestry. The most prominent religious denomination in Hamilton is Christianity, although minority religions, including Islam, have seen growth with the immigrant population. In addition, the city houses a number of notable attractions, including the Bruce Trail, Royal Botanical Gardens, Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, Dundurn Castle, Art Gallery of Hamilton, Canadian Football Hall of Fame, and Ivor Wynne Stadium. Recently, Hamilton has seen significant growth in the arts and culture community, most prominently in facilities that have sprung up along James Street, Locke Street, and King Street, with secondary activity beginning to evolve along Barton Street and Concession Street.
Neighbourhood Overview
The James Street Baptist Church is located within the Durand Neighbourhood, an inner-city district bounded by Main Street West, James Street South, the Escarpment and Queen Street South. The Durand neighbourhood association has taken on issues of crime, heritage protection, parkland, traffic, community services, property standards, pedestrian safety, development and housing as their main priorities. 7 The area surrounding the church consists of several notable architectural and topographical elements, including: Hamilton Escarpment The Niagara Escarpment, to the south of James Street, provides views to the city below, and is a significant orienting feature in the city.
7
Durand Neighbourhood Association (20072013) About Durand. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.durandna.com/
Hamilton Harbour While the Harbour is north of James Street Baptist, residential units in a tower would provide excellent views to the water.
Site Analysis
13
Prime Consultant
HERITAGE LANDMARKS IN DOWNTOWN HAMILTON
2 3
KIN GS
T. N
JAM
ES S
T. E
MAI
1 4 5
NS
T. E
JAC
KSO
NS
T.
James St Baptist
14
JAM
ES S
T. S
Image Reference: 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 St Pauls Presbyterian Bank of Montreal The Pigott Building Whitehern Manor The Bell Building
Historic Downtown
For the most part, the Church can be seen to lie in a relatively stable area from a development standpoint. This condition is exemplified by the types of neighbours - St. Pauls Presbyterian Church to the North; the Downtown YMCA across James Street to the East, Bell Canada, The Pigott Building, and the YWCA to the West. Other Designated Heritage Buildings in the Area are: St. Pauls Presbyterian: St. Pauls Presbyterian Church / Former St. Andrews Church National Historic Site of Canada is an elegant stone church with a soaring stone spire. Built during the mid-19th century in the Gothic Revival style, it is located in the heart of downtown Hamilton. Official recognition consists of the building on its legal property. 9 The former Bank of Montreal: This Hamilton landmark has been leased by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce for use as its temporary headquarters. The exterior of the building, excluding the western faade, and the interior features of the main banking hall are protected by an Ontario Heritage Trust conservation easement. The property is also designated by the City of Hamilton under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. 10 The Pigott Building: This Art Deco/Gothic Revival style building was designed by Hamilton architects Bernard and Fred Prack and is designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. Built for $1,000,000, The Pigott Building was originally an office building and was Hamiltons first skyscraper. 11 Whitehern Manor: This stately mansion is a finely crafted and well preserved example of Hamitons early stone architecture. Despite changes dictated by time and fashion, the house grounds retains much of its original appearance.
12
Canadas Historic Places (1990, March 23) St Pauls Presbyterian Church. retrieved July 27, 2013, from www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/ place-lieu.aspx?id=12774&pid=0
10
Canadas Historic Places (1987, October 30) Bank of Montreal. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/placelieu.aspx?id=8330
11
Emporis (2000-2013) Pigott Building. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.emporis.com/ building/pigottbuilding-hamilton-canada
12
On site plaque
The former Baker Exchange Building: The Art-Deco style Bell Telephone exchange was built here in 1929. It is named after Hugh Cossart Baker Jr., who established the first telephone exchange in the British Empire (and the second in North America) in the Kronsbein building on Main Street.
13
13
Historical Hamilton (2000-2013) Bell Telephone Baker Exchange. retrieved July 27, 2013, from:http://historicalhamilton.com/Durand/ bell-telephone-baker-exchange
Site Analysis
15
Prime Consultant
CULTURAL LANDMARKS AND JAMES ST REVITALIZATION IN DOWNTOWN HAMILTON
9 7
KIN GS T. E
JAM
MAI NS T. E JAC
James St Baptist
ES S
KSO NS T.
16
JAM
ES S
T. S
T. N
10
Image Reference: 2.2.6 2.2.7 2.2.8 2.2.9 2.2.10 2.2.11 City Hall Hamilton Art Gallery and Centre for the Perfomring Arts Copps Coliseum Jackson Square Library and Farmers Market Super Crawl and James Street
Cultural Revival and Urban Revitalization of James Street

While James Street Baptist is south of Main where James Street changes from North to South, it is in close proximity to the area of James St North where the street is experiencing a cultural revival. James Street North is located in the heart of downtown Hamilton, comprised of the Italian, Portuguese and Vietnamese communities - and most recently a burgeoning arts community. Every Second Friday of the month there is an ArtCrawl and, all the galleries of the area have their new art openings on the same night.14 The following buildings in daily programming and cultural value. City Hall Hamilton Art Gallery and Centre for the Performing Arts Copps Coliseum Jackson Square Library + Farmers Market AGH Annex the surrounding neighborhoods are not historically designated, but they remain significant landmarks in the region for their
11
10
14
Jason Leech (2005, April 21) Signs of Life on James North. retrieved July 27, 2013,http://www. raisethehammer.org/blog/061
Site Analysis
17
Prime Consultant
TRANSPORTATION
11
18
Image Reference: 2.2.12 2.2.13 2.2.14 Go Station on Hunter Street between James and John Street Clock Tower on James Street Gore Park Fountain at James and King Street.
Transportation and Roads

Bus Routes James Street Baptist is exceptionally well located with respect to the existing Hamilton Street Railways bus network. Eleven bus routes, serving the western and southern sections of the City, stop almost at its front doors. Another ten routes, generally serving the northern and eastern sections, stop at Gore Park within five minutes walk. The Hamilton Bus Terminal, which services the entire Hamilton-Wentworth Region, is located within five minutes walk. GO Transit The GO Transit system currently extends both Rail and Bus service from Toronto to Hamilton via the station on Hunter Street. This connection to intracity transit has increased land values and office rental rates for property within a short walking distance of the station. Highway 403 To reach James Street Baptist from the east by car, one would generally take Highway 403 to its Main Street exit. The 403 in this area is composed of three to four lanes in both directions (east and west). Traffic may be heavy at times, as the highway is frequently used for commuting to and from Toronto. James Street James Street is a two-way arterial street with 1 lane of traffic in each direction and street parking. The streetscape is varied and composed of a combination of commercial buildings 1-2 storeys high, commercial towers of varying heights, landmark buildings and Gore Park -a significant landscape / public space which extend east of James and King Street.
12
13
14
Site Analysis
19
Prime Consultant
2.3 ZONING OVERVIEW

Municipal Land Use Regulations
The existing James Street Baptist church property is located within the City of Hamilton Zoning I District (Central Business District). A variety of land uses are permitted here, including residential, institutional, commercial and public uses. The fulfillment of one, or a combination of more than one, of these permissible land uses create a variety of development potential.
Development Potential
The Hamilton Zoning By-law permits a building within an I District to have a Gross Floor Area (GFA) of eleven times the area of the property on which the building sits. In the case of the James Street Baptist Church, this floor area ration may be increased to 11.455, because of the particular dimensions of the property in terms of area frontage. (This additional amount of floor area ration would be subject to verification by the City of Hamilton planning department). Given the approximate lot area of 17,000 square feet, a total of 194,000 square feet of the building gross floor area could be constructed on the property. This is to be compared with the approximate 20,0000 square feet of existing Church building. In addition, a maximum building height of 30 storeys is allowed, provided certain restrictions regarding the obstruction of light are met.
Setbacks
Side yard setbacks are required only for residential developments. The dimension of such would vary with the number of dwelling units provided. Rear yard setbacks are required in all developments.
20
Residential Development
The City of Hamilton Character Zone design Guidelines applies to the James Street Baptist site. These areas, identified as the Heritage Character Zone in the Zoning By-law, contain Downtown Hamiltons most intact traditional building fabric and streetscapes. Because of this, development has a specific relationship to built form, streetscape, character and building features or characteristics.
15
Parking
The City of Hamilton requires that on-site parking be provided only for residential developments in the I district. Refer to Bylaw and Zoning on the City of Hamiltons website. 16
Easements
There is an existing light easement on the property to the south preventing any future developments from shadowing this site.
15
City of Hamilton (2013) Downtown Heritage Character Zone Design Guidelines. retrieved July 31, 2013, http:// www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0C6598AADC64-43F1-901F-C6907DF43F41/0/ Section5ParkingSeptember12012.pdf
16
City of Hamilton (2012) Section 5: Parking. retrieved July 04, 2013, http://www. hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0C6598AADC64-43F1-901F-C6907DF43F41/0/ Section5ParkingSeptember12012.pdf
Zoning Overview
21
Prime Consultant
22
2.4 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

Hamilton Heritage Volume 5: Reasons for Designation Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act REASONS FOR DESIGNATION
CONTEXT The James Street Baptist Church, constructed in 1878-1882, is located in the Central Area of Hamilton at the south-west corner of James and Jackson Streets. Situated to the south of St. Pauls Presbyterian Church, the Baptist Church has long been recognized as an important downtown landmark in its own right as well as a major component in the James-Main historic streetscape which includes St. Pauls, the former Bank of Montreal, the Sun Life and Pigott building, all of which are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE The Church is designed in the Gothic Revival Style; its massive stone construction and complex, monumental composition are indicative of a later, High Victorian phase of the style. Unique among Hamilton churches, the James Street church is particularly distinguished for its use of rock-faced masonry walls, dominant corner tower and heavily buttressed facades. At ground level, the building is characterized by the solidity of its raised stone basement penetrated only by the central and tower entrances and by the small openings of lancet windows and circular quatrefoil decorations (the basement windows were a later addition). In contrast, on the second story where the tall sanctuary is located, the pointed arch, tracery windows are the dominant features. Of special interest is the elaborate rose window at the west end of the nave and the immense six partite, Decorated Gothic
Statement of Significance
23
Prime Consultant
Window of the front faade. The exterior displays a vigorously articulated composition of projecting transepts, aisles, narthex, pinnacles, buttresses and corner tower. Likewise the surfaces continue the richly modeled effect in the rock-faced texture of the masonry, the contrasting cutstone decoration, ornamental moulding and stepped profile of the buttresses. The architect of the church, Joseph Connolly, is well known as the designer of a number of Roman Catholic churches in Ontario including St. Patricks in Hamilton (1877); Church of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception in Guelph (designed in 1863; built 1876-1926); St Marys and St. Pauls (1887-89) in Toronto; and St Peters Cathedral (Basilica (1885)) in London, Ontario. James Street Baptist Church is considered to be Connollys only protestant church design in Ontario. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE The James Street Church is the oldest, surviving Baptist church in Hamilton. Their first church had been erected on Park Street North in 1846 and enlarged in 1862, but the James Street structure marks the construction of the Baptists first major, monumental building in the city. During its 107 year history, the James Street Baptists have founded as many as 15 missions, a number of which have developed into the permanent church including Wentworth, Stanley Avenue, Trinity, King Street, Bethel, MacNeill Memorial and Westmount. In 1930, when McMaster originally a Baptist University relocated to Hamilton from Toronto, the James Street Baptist Church donated funds to move the university and welcomed the faculty into their membership. DESIGNATED FEATURES Important to the preservation of the James Street Baptist Church are the original
24
features of the exterior facades, including the slate roof, masonry walls and detailing, all windows including the stained glass, and the door openings, but excluding the recent alterations of new doors and the glazing of the front entrance.
Statement of Significance
25
Prime Consultant
Exterior Features
1
2a
3a 4 3
4a 5
LEGEND
5a
Numbers correlate photographs to their locations on the 3D Model. Numbers with a and b notation refer to the same feature within the church, but relate to the exterior in a and the interior in b. These features are described in their associated image reference.
26
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
Interior Features
2b
Image Reference: 3.1.1 3.1.2a 3.1.2b 3.1.3a 3.1.3b 3.1.4a 3.1.4b 3.1.5a 3.1.5b View of James Street Facade Exterior: Slate Roof Interior: Wood Paneling on ceiling and pink granite columns support the interior arcade. Exterior: Stone buttressing and side lights with stained glass. Interior: stained glass removed from this north wall location. Exterior: three round windows at North-west bay Interior: three round windows at North-west bay Exterior: Main portal around entrance. Elaborate stone detailing, pink granite columns and rose window above doorway. Interior: Rose Window in main portal from the inside
3.1 ARCHITECTURE
*NOTE: JSBC interior spaces are not noted as part of the heritage designation. Walls Heavy masonry random coursed exterior stone with rubble stone and brick back up, finished on the side with lathe and plaster. Portions of the exterior walls are subject to water penetration. This is mainly due to the lack of a properly maintained rainwater drainage system and to a number of roof leaks and has resulted in cracking and deterioration. Interior wall strapping for new drywall wall has failed due to rust. Roof Assembly Heavy timber roof trusses over the main Sanctuary with braced rafters over the side aisles. Roof covering is slate tiles over timber boards. Wood paneling is the interior finish. Exterior - General Re-pointing is required in several places on the exterior walls. This is especially noticeable around the Main Entrance where, in addition to re-pointing, repairs are required to the stucco and stone work on either side of the Entrance doors. Minor repairs are required to all exterior steps.
JAMES STREET
3b
4b
JACKSON STREET
Roof Coping stone and sloped stone sills require repointing All flashings, rainwater leader and soffits require review and general repair / replacement. Flashings appear to be copper / leaded copper and metal.
Roof Turret on the southeast portion of the tower is missing and requires replacing.
5b
Windows Basement: Single glazed casement windows, general in need of minor repairs and painting. Many do not open. They are not part of the buildings heritage designation. Main Floor: Many double glazed with combination of glass and plastic. In some
27
Prime Consultant
11
7 9 10 8
28
Image Reference: 3.1.6 3.1.7 3.1.8 3.1.9 3.1.10 3.1.11 Main door on James: to be retained in place Side door on Jackson: to be retained in place Side door on Jackson: to be removed and preserved in full (window, door and all hand wrought iron hinges and hardware) South east corner - broken stone turret to be restored Pink granite column supporting arcade and clerestory windows above. Interior: West facacde with organ and rose window.
cases extensive repair work is required to the decorative wood details; this is particularly noticeable where windows have not been recently painted or protected with plastic sheeting and sustained water and freeze / thaw damage. Doors Wood doors in wood frames. Most doors are improperly fitted and in need of minor repairs or replacement. Interior - General Most of the problems of blistering plaster, peeling paint and delamination of wood panelling within the interior are due to roof and wall leaks. As noted in the Heritage Statement of Significance of James Street, the designated elements are: Exterior facade: Slate roof Masonry walls Exterior detailing Windows: feature windows with stained glass but excluding the recent alterations of new doors and the glazing of the front entrance. It should be noted that while the stained glass contributes to the overall character of the building, not all pieces are in equally good condition. Doors: all original doors
JAMES STREET
10
JACKSON STREET
11
Areas not under designation include: Glazing as part of the new addition Doors as part of the new addition No part of the interior is designated
Architecture
29
Prime Consultant
12
Architectural Style & Features of the Building

James Street is designed in the style of Gothic Revival which is defined by the following characteristics: Structure: The Pointed Arch The pointed Gothic vault is used to channel the weight of the roof onto the bearing piers or columns at a steep angle to allow for greater height and to carry the roof
13
of irregularly shaped plans. The steep angle which finish with a point differentiates Gothic arches from the rounded arches of the Romanesque. James Street Baptists fenestration is characteristic of Gothic and Gothic Revival as structural arcades, doors and windows are pointed in the ogival manner. Height A characteristic of Gothic church architecture is its height, both absolute and in proportion to its width, the verticality suggesting an aspiration to Heaven. The nave of Gothic / Gothic Revival buildings are also considerably taller than they are wide. While James Street Baptist is currently overshadowed by taller buildings in the downtown
14
such as the Pigott building, Stelco Tower and Landmark place, it has always been distinguished in the citys skyline. Vertical Emphasis While the pointed arch lends itself to a suggestion of height, the verticality of these structures are further enhanced by architectural features such as towers, spires, turrets and by strongly projecting vertical buttresses, long narrow windows, and vertical mouldings - all of which are present in James Street. However, the original impact of James St verticality has diminished due to the cracking and deterioration of its rough stone, the loss of roof pinnacles on the south east bay and north east tower and competition from other taller structures in the downtown.
30
15
Image Reference: 3.1.12 Pointed Arches on the James Street (East) Facade - a typical Gothic Revival feature 3.1.13 Tower on the James Street (East) Facade emphasizes height. 3.1.14 Buttresses, height, pointed roofs and gables all work to emphasize the buildings verticaility 3.1.15 Large stained glass panel in north west bay, using a geometric pattern 3.1.16 Play of light in the nursery 3.1.17 Majesty of the East Tower related to the towers of St. Pauls and the Pigott Building.
Light One of the most distinctive characteristics of Gothic architecture is the expansive area of the windows. The increase in size between windows of the Romanesque and Gothic periods is related to the use of the ribbed vault, and in particular, the pointed ribbed vault which channels the weight to a supporting shaft with less outward thrust resulting in less mass. Large rose windows at the east and west in addition to side lights and clerestory windows allow light to dramatically fill the building. These windows are also filled with stained glass which adds a dimension of colour to the light to the interior spaces. The stained glass in James Street Baptist does not have the narrative subject matter typical to many Gothic, and Gothic Revival buildings, instead, it utilizes geometric patterns and natural motifs. The existing site has a light easement affecting the property to the south. Majesty The faade of a large church or cathedral, is generally designed to create a powerful impression on the approaching worshipper, demonstrating both the might of God and the might of the institution that it represents. Central to the faade is the main portal where there is often a significant piece of sculpture, most frequently Christ in Majesty and Judgment Day. However, James Street Baptist lacks much of this specific Christian Iconography. Instead, the main entrance has pointed arch on polished granite shafts and set within a projecting gable and above the main portal there is a large pointed window with six lower lights and an elaborate pattern of geometric bar tracery.
JAMES STREET
16
17
JACKSON STREET
The tower, also expressing majesty, is designed to complement the existing structures in the neighborhood. Care has been taken in designing the tower of the Central Baptist church, so as not to mar the effect of the spire of St. Pauls, and at the same time giving the former a striking character of its own. The photo to the right also illustrates that more recent buildings such as the Pigott share similar characteristics in the design of more modern towers.
Architecture
31
Prime Consultant
3.2 STRUCTURE
Introduction 17
Quinn Dressel Associates were retained by Stanton Renaissance to undertake a review of the structure for the James Street Baptist Church. Stanton Renaissance has recently completed a successful purchase of the property from the Churchs Trustees. Quinn Dressel had previously been retained by the Trustees to conduct an initial review of the north Sanctuary wall which is displaying significant inward bowing. This review follows up and extends that initial visual observations with a more in depth review of the wall and other selected locations within the balance of the Church.
Summarizing Observations
On the second site visit, Quinn Dressel received permission from the Trustees to remove isolated sections of the plaster to ascertain the construction of the north wall and other areas of interest within the Church. For Detailed Observations, the full report is in Appendix C Exterior The slate roof is in a state of deterioration. A close examination reveals many instances of split and damage shingles (Ref. 3.2.1). Many of these have already become dislodged and are free to slide to the ground below. Winter and early spring are of considerable concern as many of the sliding incidence are prompted by sliding snow. Under certain circumstances, and in specific accelerated wind zones, the slate may also fall due to high wind episodes. Air-borne debris, such as sharp edge slate can pose a fatal hazard.
17
The following information is extracted from the Structural Assessment Report for James Street Baptist Church for Stanton Renaissance by Quinn Dressel Associates Consulting Structural Engineers, March 8, 2013. The full report is attached in Appendix C;
32
Image Reference: 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.3 Deteriorating slate roof Buttress at the north wall showing signs of movement Buttress at the north wall showing signs of separation - indicates either poor construction or stone fracture. Buttress at the north wall: deterioration due to environmental conditions (movement in the freeze thaw cycle)
The exterior stone face is for the most part in reasonable condition, and would appear for the most part plumb. There are numerous locations, particular at the re-entrant corners at wall-buttress intersections where a clear separation of the buttresses from the balance of the wall is evident (Ref. 3.2.2). A properly constructed exterior wall would have ensured that the wall-stone and the buttress-stone were toothed together. Given the fact that the separation does exist, leads us to the conclusion that the intersection either was constructed incorrectly, or that stone fracture along the interface has occurred. Neither is a satisfactory result. The buttresses provide both vertical support to the clerestory roof but more importantly provide horizontal restraint to the upper roof trusses and act as bracing to the supporting interior granite columns. The buttresses are meant to act integrally with the adjacent walls and the cracks separating the two are of structural concern. Virtually all of the re-entrant corners of all the Churchs buttresses have been remortared at some time in the past. Of particular concern would be areas where signs of continued movement in these corners is present. The photo to the right (Ref. 3.2.3) is fairly typical of most re-entrant corners. In the north-west area of the Church, as shown in the photo on the right, signs of continued outward and vertical movement at this interface is clear. In some locations as much as . The relatively new creation of the basement access to the Churchs basement along
JACKSON STREET
the north wall has exposed the original foundation wall to environmental conditions not intended when constructed. The exterior stone used here has deteriorated due to freeze-thaw cycle to a point where a loss of buttress section has now occurred. Also along the north wall, issues with the other buttress have been noted above, but at this particular location, there are signs that the buttress is also being split vertically along its axis in an east-west direction. The neighbours alley along Churchs west wall was constructed approximately 1-4 above the basements upper windows. This has in effect created a well where snow and ice is trapped (Ref. 3.2.4). Repeated melting cycles effectively trap water and force
JAMES STREET
Structure
33
Prime Consultant
it to drain down the side and into the basement wall. Separation of the walls inner and outer wythe has created an easy channel for the melt and rain water to gain access to the walls fabric. The foundation wall immediately below this area is in an advanced state of deterioration (Ref. 3.2.5). The west wall of the Sanctuary is dimensionally quite significant. With an unsupported vertical plane area of approximately 2,000 ft2 (38 x 53), and an intermediate, partial height buttress centred below the large window has had structural issues. This is the area behind the organ and very difficult to access. However, a large arching crack was observed in the interior plaster starting low and arching to intercept the window. A clear vertical and horizontal deformation of the wood window frame is clearly evident,
suggesting some degree of movement of likely the inner wythe wall. Given the large un-braced area, the structural integrity of this wall is of concern. The outer stone face does not appear to show any significant cracking in the area, but a closer investigation, at some height would be required to verify this. Through stone cracking of many exterior stones is clearly evident. Many of these incidences are likely the result of thermal strains, perhaps compounded with improper repair mortars used in the past. Interior
7
The inner wythe of the north sanctuary wall (Ref. 3.2.7) is in a state of near collapse. The potential to de-stabilise the entire north wall construction and the resulting loss of support to the lower roof and bracing to the interior main roof support columns is a real possibility. Removal of numerous sections of interior plaster in the north-west area of the church indicate underlying issues with the inner stone wall wythe. In all but a few locations, cracks in the plaster revealed corresponding cracks in the inner stone wythe wall. Approximately 5 10% of the inner stone wythe is constructed of stone material which has become friable over time.
34
Image Reference: 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 3.2.9 3.2.10 Cracking wythes from freeze-thaw cycles Window separation from both the interior and exterior frames Inner wythe in the north sanctuary wall Clear crack in plaster walls indicates that the plaster had been applied directly to this inner wall. The inner wall displayed a series of near vertical cracks through both the weak mortar joints and also through stone as well. Wall in northwest staircase: through stone cracks and loose mortar. Friable stones are loose and fractured mortar are present. Wall in northwest staircase: The stone is common to both walls and is clearly fractured and has displaced horizontally approximately 5/8
The lime mortar layer is weak although generally intact, yet with little effort removed. Some areas of the inner wall are constructed with fairly small stone units. As a result, much of these wall areas are composed of a high percentage of mortar rather than stone. The result is a very weak wall that is easily prone to damage due to thermal or structural strains. In these damaged zones, the mortar is heavily cracked and free to fall clear of the wall. Displaced mortar is weak enough to be crushed by hand. Mortar joints display a wide range of widths. Wide mortar joints result in a weaker wall construction. Some joints were measured at 1 to 2. Joints of 3/8 to would be considered appropriate for this type of construction. The fairly regular shaped stone with reasonable width mortar joint in the east bay (Ref. 3.2.9) contrasts with those in an advance state of deterioration (Ref. 3.2.10) found throughout the rest of the building. We have not been able to view, for reasons mainly of access, the critical bearing points of the Churchs roof truss structure. Our experience with structures of this vintage suggest that while many portions of the timber trusses are capable of continued service, bearing points, particularly those in the vicinity of changes in roof profile (hips, valleys, eaves etc) where damage to the skin of the building has allowed for the ingress of water, that timber structures are prone to rot and decay. The church is known to have in the past and in the present, significant issues with the roof slate and proper collection and removal of rainwater through properly maintained gutters. The potential for damage to the truss bearing points cannot be ruled out at this point
JAMES STREET
JACKSON STREET
10
Overall Conclusions
In general it is observed that the Church was constructed with less than quality materials.17 In some locations, the original workmanship is questionable and has likely contributed to the present diminished and deteriorated state of the buildings wall structure. The foundation walls on the north and west faces of the building are
Structure
35
Prime Consultant
STRUCTURAL ZONES
WEST TOWER (LEAST STABLE)

The east tower square sub-towers are have relatively small door and window openings over their height and their general shape and plan dimension provide for good restraint to lateral forces. The roof trusses between the sub-towers are buttressed by these towers and provide excellent restraint.
CENTRE ZONE (UNSTABLE) EAST TOWER (MOST STABLE)

While the east tower has some structural issues, it provides the best opportunity for stabilization and retention for future use.
36
structurally compromised, the west wall in particular. Apart from the obvious issues of the north wall, the structural integrity of the existing stone walls in general is questionable, particularly when considering the future and the possibility of extended service life of the building structure. Certainly it is believed that the existing walls are not capable of providing continued service in their present condition. Further, any considerations of adding additional dead or live loads to the existing structure should not be considered. To summarize from a structural point of view, there is little merit in utilizing or attempting to utilize the existing building structure for any form of continued use. While the east tower of the church to remain is in better overall condition than the balance, and even though this portion has undergone repair as recently as 2011, it should be understood that significant cost will be required to repair sections of the east tower in order to provide this part of the future development with a reasonable extension of useable life.
Structural Recommendations & Development Options 18

From a structural perspective the James Street Baptist Church can be viewed a three distinct zones above grade. The east tower, facing James Street, the west tower, facing the laneway and the centre zone, between the two towers.
NORTH WALL (JACKSON ST)
In each of the two east and west towers, are sub-towers in each corner. These subtowers are square or near square in plan, have relatively small door and window openings over their height and their general shape and plan dimension provide for good restraint to lateral forces. The roof trusses between the sub-towers are buttressed by these towers and provide excellent restraint. The centre sections in contrast, relies upon the inner row of slender columns, and the outer north and south wall to act as the buttress to restrain the vertical and horizontal forces imposed by the long span trusses. It is this difference in construction that is of
18
The following information is extracted from the Amendments to the Structural Assessment Report for James Street Baptist Church for Stanton Renaissance by Quinn Dressel Associates Consulting Structural Engineers, August 22, 2013 The Recommendations were made in response to the comments from James Street Baptist Heritage Meeting on August 14, 2013
EAST WALL (JAMES ST )
WEST WALL SOUTH WALL
Site Analysis
37
Prime Consultant
major concern here. As pointed out in our report, the north wall is in a state of near collapse. Should the north wall be lost in a sudden manner, the entire roof over the centre section would collapse as well. As the long span roof is common over all three sections, a good portion of the roof even in the east and west towers would likely be dragged down and collapse as well. The south walls would also collapse as well, potentially outward on to neighbouring property. The west tower displays significant defects in both workmanship, materials and ultimately structural integrity due to the deterioration of the foundation wall. Some repair work was done to the south sub-tower in the past, but the north sub-tower displays significant separation of inner and outer wythes as indicated in our report. The same defects are visible in the east tower, just not to the same degree. The following table explores the range of development options from a structural integrity perspective : Option Do Nothing Comments
Not a viable or safe option. The near-state of collapse of the north wall precludes this option as the building in its present state is a hazard to the public. Not a viable option. The load presently bearing on the north wall both vertical and horizontal must be removed before work could begin. The north wall displays significant deterioration to the exterior stone itself. These are original flaws within the stone fabric exacerbated by the 1980 renovations. The state of the north wall would require full removal and re-construction. To accomplish this safely would require the removal of the roof in order to relieve the structural loads on the wall.
Retain and Support Existing Structure
38
Structure
Full Demolition
A case could certainly be made for the removal and demolition of the entire building from an economic perspective. This would remove the need to effect further repairs on the East Tower and allow for the footprint of the new development to be designed without the loss of area adjacent to the James Street property line. This would allow for a less expensive construction of the new building. Again, the material and workmanship of the original construction, coupled with issues of poor maintenance over the years has led to the deterioration of the building as a whole This approach is viable, although not without significant cost. Demolition of the centre including a portion of the south and north walls and west towers would not compromise the east tower. No specific bracing of this remaining portion would be required, although any adjacent excavation would need to ensure that the towers foundations were either not undermined or restrained in some fashion. (i.e. caisson wall etc). The towers walls do require some restorative work however. Some of the same issues of poor material and workmanship exist here as well. Displaced and removed turrets and other repair work here in the past are testaments to the likelihood of additional restorative work still necessary. The benefit of keeping a portion of the original Church building, particularly that facing a major roadway is seen as a plus to the project as a whole.
Retain East Tower
Structure
39
Prime Consultant
40
Structure
3.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
While the James Street Baptist Church is prominently situated in Hamiltons historic fabric, the proposed redevelopment will help preserve its most essential features by structurally reinforcing the east tower which will be tied into a new addition. The proposed design will not only leverage its historical value for prospective investors, but will also contribute to the downtown regeneration through a mixed used addition, and increased density to James Street North. The development also ensures proper maintenance and repair to the remaining heritage structure through the condominium agreement. As this Gothic Revival-style church has a heritage designation for its rough hammerdressed stone exterior, stained glass, pink granite arcade columns, we wish to retain as many examples of these features as possible. Due to the number of structural issues, some of them major - including the north and west exterior walls which are structurally unsound, a strategy which combines demolition, refurbishment and new construction is proposed for its re-development. Where parts of the building envelope are replaced, we will look for opportunities for their adaptive reuse so that historical fragments will both highlight and be highlighted by a contemporary design. The layering of architecture will be reflected by the layering of program which will include a mix of commercial and residential. We believe that because James Street Baptist is architecturally interesting and beautiful, its historic character must be respected; given the challenges of its existing state, it also requires major revitalization through new relationships to program, structure and materials. The proposed solution to resolve the structural deficiency and historical value is to retain the portion of the church which fronts on James Street, and to seek opportunities to reuse its dismantled architectural features in the new construction, where possible. It is also noted that support systems along with other protected accommodation will be required to hold up the remaining portion of the existing building to avoid total collapse during the demolition process.
Recommendations
41
Prime Consultant
FIGURE I: DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Option Status Quo (Do Nothing) Impact of Displacement (Direct)

Impact of Disruption (Indirect)
Other Impacts
No financial investment from tax payers or private developers No Tax Revenue Vacant Lot & Associated Social Issues
Building deterioration resulting in structural failure and demolition Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of stained glass windows Loss of slate roof Loss of details (columns, pinnacles etc) Assuming the restoration process occurred early enough there would be no negative impacts of displacement. Supporting the north wall would require the temporary removal of the roof to relieve structure loads. Damage could occur to both the roof and walls in this process
Possible damage to adjacent buildings with uncontrolled / unmitigated demolition and collapse Loss of urban relationships along James and Jackson Streets Loss of relationship to Bell Building and St Pauls Presbyterian Loss of public use and access Assuming that the restoration process could be completely controlled, there would be no indirect negative impacts to the streetscape or urban fabric.
Maintain James Street Baptist (Retain and Support Existing Structure)

High Development Cost High Maintenance and Operational Cost High Investment Risk
Tabula Rasa (Full Demolition)
Full Demolition resulting in: Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of stained glass windows Loss of slate roof Loss of details (columns, pinnacles etc) Partial Demolition of the Central Portion and West Tower resulting in: Loss of some masonry walls & stone buttressing Loss of some stained glass windows Loss of some slate roof Loss of some details (columns, pinnacles etc)
Loss of urban relationships along James and Jackson Streets Loss of relationship to Bell Building and St Pauls Presbyterian Loss of original use (place of worship) Loss of some urban relationships along Jackson St Loss of original use (place of worship)
Increased Flexibility Increased Efficiency Increased Accessibility Reduced Cost
Adaptive Reuse (Stabilize, Partial Demolition and Build New Addition)
Respect for Heritage: New awareness of historical fragment through new urban relationships Sustainable Investment Opportunity for Innovation Downtown Revitalization
42
Structure
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
4.1 DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS & RESULTING IMPACT

The following development options sumarized in Figure I, explores the range of possibilities and their resulting impacts: the status quo option does nothing to the structure leaves the building as is with no investment, the preserve and restore option retains the building intact as a church or a small scale development and requires a large and high risk financial investment, the demolition option loses the cultural heritage but has the most flexibility for future development, the adaptive reuse option retains and stablizes the east bay and develops the east side with a new building with significant but a more sustainable investment. The full analysis of these options are as follows:
Option 1: Status Quo (Do Nothing)

Due to the structural and life safety issues found in Section 3.2: Structural Assessment and Appendix C: Structural Report by Quinn Dressel, and studies previously done by others, to do nothing would accept the eventual structural collapse of the church with the added risk of harm to the public and potential damage to adjacent properties. This would be an unfortunate loss to the architectural and cultural fabric of Hamilton, therefore we do not consider this to be an option worth further investigation. Impact of Displacement and Disruption: No Public Access: The building in its current state cannot accommodate public use and can only be experienced from the street at a distance. Building Deterioration: Because James St is presently unoccupied, its state will only continue to fall into disrepair. The building suffers from water damage due to drainage issues, poor building envelope and a deteriorating roof which will only worsen in time. The penetration of water is also a concern - particularly during the winter months when freeze-thaw cycles will continue to widen the cracks and
Development Options and Resulting Impact
43
Prime Consultant
advance the structural problems already present in the building. Structural Failure: Partial or complete structural failure will ultimately result in full demolition with the associated loss to all remaining architectural and cultural heritage. Loss of Tax Revenue: Without sustained occupation, the City of Hamilton is unable to benefit from a potential tax base and/ or densification and revitalization of the core. Vacant Lot: The lack of official use can encourage squatting, graffiti and crime. and St. Pauls is eliminated. Loss of Context: The existing relationship between James Street, the Bell Building
Option 2: Maintain James Street Baptist (Preserve and Restore)

While maintaining the church in its entirety may be desirable, it is impractical due to the changing demographics of the downtown, financial investment, and structural deterioration. Firstly, the shift in demographics coupled with growing secularization have resulted in an underutilized building in a Hamiltons urban core. Though it was formerly used as a place of worship, the needs along James street have shifted towards a greater demand for economic growth and revitalization coupled with a substantial decline in church attendance and congregation financial support. Additionally, the church has poorly executed renovation of floors, walls and finishes (See Section 3.2: Structural Assessment and Appendix C: Structural Report) which has been layered on top of poor original construction contributing to its degraded state. The separation of the exterior wall construction and faulty roof in many areas makes for a poor building envelope to support new or renovated construction. Establishing a reasonable level of comfort for new occupants would come at a high energy cost and continual maintenance debt which creates another significant financial risk. The small scale of the development due to the sites constraints will also stress the reserve fund for such a development and as such, would not be a sustainable development. We consider the option to redevelop the entire building in its current state to be both unrealistic and infeasible given the changing cultural urban landscape, ongoing massive financial investment and health/comfort challenges presented by the building.
44
Challenges: High Development Cost: To structurally stabilize and repair the building in its current state would require a restrictively high financial investment that is not predictable. High Maintenance and Operational Cost: The building restoration would require restrictively high ongoing costs to heat, cool, ventilate and stabilize the building. Additionally, it does not meet standards for residential use in a new building and may be unsustainable from an environmental perspective. The challenges presented by cost is verified by the fact that James Street Baptist Churchs had to sell the building because of these financial burdens. High Investment Risk: Given the issues of cost, coupled with the structural instability of the building, there is no guarantee that the building could be kept intact during a lengthy restoration process. The dangers presented by the building also increases health risks and issues of liability. Benefits: Building is Restored: Existing massing and architectural characteristics would remain intact on all sides. There are relatively few negative impacts of displacement or disruption to the historical characteristics of the building and to its surrounding context. Public Access: The building will once again be used and accessed by the public (currently it is inaccessible).
Option 3: Tabula Rasa (Fully Demolish and Redevelop)

The property value of this location coupled with the structural issues of the existing building makes the prospect of a complete demolition desirable from a purely economic point of view. It is clear that any degree of retention and repair of the existing structure would be costly and face several challenges due to the uniqueness of both the site and building. However, this option is also undesirable because it would eliminate all existing aspects of cultural and architectural value. We recognize that a full demolition would destroy the cultural value of this building and its impact to the downtown. It
Development Options and Resulting Impact
45
Prime Consultant
would also change the character of the streetscape including the relationship between James Street Baptist and St Pauls Presbyterian, and to the massing and height of the Bell Building. To fully demolish James St. would dismiss many of the characteristics which was the initial draw to the developer. Impact of Displacement and Disruption: Total Loss of Built Heritage and Collective Memory: Removing the building in full would eliminate all historic reference to the site. This includes the loss of the building itself including the Gothic Revival characteristics of mass, materials, scale and architectural detailing, as well as the cultural reference the building has to adjacent buildings including the Bell Building, the Pigott Building and St Pauls Presbyterian. The building has resided in Hamiltons downtown core for over 130 years and has been both the backdrop and destination for various events (individual and communal) and would also have a significant negative impact on the collective memory of the public. Benefits: Increased Flexibility: Allows a new building footprint which is conducive to the proposed program (retail, commercial and residential). The design can maximize site and below grade parking potential. Increased Efficiency: A new building envelope with the design of integrated systems would meet current codes for building design and energy consumption and better suited to its purpose overall. Increased Accessibility: A new building can be designed to be fully accessible. combination of retention methods due to the structural instability of the building. Reduced Cost: The full demolition of this building would cost much less than any
46
PREFERRED OPTION: Option 4: Adaptive Reuse and Conversion (Partially Demolish, Stabilize and Restore, Build New Addition)
Given the challenges of the previous options from a structural, life safety, economic, aesthetic, cultural and historical point of view, we consider the strategy for adaptive reuse and conversion of the James St Bay to the east, coupled with a new addition to the west, to be the best solution because it is both sensitive to its cultural heritage, and is financially feasible for the developer. The James St (east) Bay is considered for retention because it is in the best structural and architectural condition, is well supported, is the most public facade and contains the most well preserved examples of Gothic Revival detailing. Additionally repairs can be made utilizing portions of the building undergoing demolition allowing for authentic and accurate restoration and preservation. At this point, the design concept is very high level and conceptual, but will utilize Gothic Architecture principles derived from the original building to guide its future development. Impact of Displacement and Disruption: Some Loss of Built Heritage: Demolition of the church behind the James Street Bay will include the loss of the north and south buttressing on the exterior, the affected windows in those bays, the stonework of the walls and the slate roof tiles spanning those walls. It should be noted that while partial demolition will remove aspects of the original built heritage, a full restoration project would result in a delay which would make all preservation attempts more challenging due to the advancement of deterioration. The proposed demolition process will take care to protect, catalogue and salvage as many components of the original building as possible, however the instability of the existing structure will limit preservation to the James Street Bay. Given these impacts of displacement, the new design should made attempts to address the current relationships as detailed on the site in this report including massing, materials, rhythm and composition.
Preferred Option and Impacts
47
Prime Consultant
IMPACT OF THE PREFERRED DEVELOPMENT OPTION
To b To b eR
eR
em
ov
eta
ed
ine
(Sa se
d(
lva
Pre
ge
an
rve
dD
,R
oc
es
um
tor
en
ea
t) t)
nd
Ad
ap
48
Change of Use: James Street Baptist will no longer be a place of worship but instead become a mixed use building with space dedicated to retail, commercial and / or residential.
Benefits: Respect for Heritage: The remaining James St Bay still addresses the historical character along James St including St. Pauls Presbyterian and the Pigott Building. The new development will also be similar in size, height and proportion in the first four floors to address the former building and adjacent sites. Some interior space may enclose former volumes of the church in an effort to address the original design intent of James St. Baptist. Sustainable Investment: This option is able to utilize the more well preserved aspects of the building to make use of the existing fabric and cultural reference, and is also able to add density to the site which is required to ensure that the development is financially viable. Additionally, the new construction will benefit from contemporary building science practices to minimize both operational and maintenance costs and addresses all code issues. Opportunity for Innovation: The challenges brought by connecting the new to the old has potential for creative building solutions and a cultural dialogue that can make the site more vital and responsive to its context.
JACKSON STREET
Downtown Revitalization: This option also can contribute to the urban renewal taking place in the downtown. The opportunity for added program and density responds to the growing needs of the downtown core.

JAMES STREET
For a complete description of potential benefits, see Section 4.6 (page 65)
See Architectural Drawings of Existing and Demolition Plans and Elevations in Appendix A for more detail.
Preferred Option and Impacts
49
Prime Consultant
MITIGATION STRATEGIES
1
50
Image Reference: 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 South east bay: Rebuild roof pinnacle and patch any slate tiles on adjacent roof surfaces that require repair. Side door on Jackson: to be removed and preserved in full (window, door and all hand wrought iron hinges and hardware)and repurposed in the new addition. Copy of A History of James St. Baptist Church 1844-1969 given to MSA by Fran Poleto. The process of preservation, demolition, restoration and adaptation will be documented and will supplement this existing document. It could also potentially be made into an Exhibition to educate the public about Gothic Architecture (in general), James St Baptist Church (more specifically) and about adaptive reuse in architecture.
4.2 MITIGATION STRATEGIES

While the preferred use of a heritage place of worship is its original one as per Ontarios Heritage Toolkit Heritage Places of Worship: A Guide to Conserving Heritage Places of Worship in Ontario Communities, the character of the original building, coupled with the degree of structural deterioration makes James Street Baptist a good candidate for adaptive reuse and conversion. In spite of the substantial investment made by the congregation to improve interior programming and layout, dwindling membership has meant that maintaining James Street Baptist in its current condition has become too great of a financial burden. After a structural report was issued and declared the building unsafe, the remaining members decided to put the building on the market in 2012 to be purchased by Stanton Renaissance in early 2013. The structural report outlines the buildings numerous deficiencies, and has initially recommended that the entire structure be dismantled. However, recognizing the buildings historical and cultural significance, Stanton Renaissance has committed to retain as much of the building as possible. A large investment has been made to restore and reuse the eastern bay fronting on James Street because this facade is the most public, is in the best condition, and contains many character defining elements such as the use of rock-faced masonry walls, the dominant corner tower, stone buttresses, tracery windows and the pointed arch. Additionally, parts of the proposed demolished sections may be used to make authentic repair, restoration and preservation. The following outlines five key strategies that will be used to mitigate the developments impact on the buildings cultural heritage:
JAMES STREET
JACKSON STREET
1. Document and Catalogue Existing Building: While the overall character of the building is well recognized, its details are not. Prior to demolition, the existing features will be photographed and recorded by a qualified professional. Ideally well crafted doors and stained glass will be preserved, but due to the uncertainty presented by the buildings structural instability and challenges of demolition, thorough documentation will ensure that the public will have access to a visual and verbal description of the buildings cultural heritage.
Mitigation Strategies
51
Prime Consultant
Gothic Revival Principals which will help guide the new development: Truthfulness of Materials
Stone should look and behave like stone, wood like wood etc (wood painted to look like stone does not celebrate its inherent qualities).
The documentation process also has the opportunity to supplement the existing publication by Keith Anderson: A History of James Street Baptist Church in Hamilton 1844-1969 (Image Reference 4.2.3), and could be used to create an Exhibition about the Churchs history as part of the publicly accessible portion of the proposed addition. Additionally, the documented material could also support an educational component describing the process of adaptive reuse and conversion of historic buildings.
Asymmetry
Complex and irregular shapes which are derived from the natural landscape andthe use of pointed arches and window traceries in openings.
2. Retain and Stabilize East (James Street) Bay: Retaining the East Bay fronting on James Street and wrapping the corner on Jackson Street represents the primary and most ambitious strategy for preservation. The retention of this fragment also presents the greatest opportunity to preserve original materials, features and details and to maintain the physical and associative relationship between James Street Baptist the streetscape and adjacent buildings. While the East Bay itself is the most resilient structurally, it is critical that this stabilization process start as soon as possible given the deteriorating conditions of the rest of the building and the additional challenges brought on by winter conditions. A professional with heritage experience (Quinn Dressel) has been retained for this scope of work. First, shoring to support the foundation will be put in place to protect and stabilize the East Bay. Because the East Bay is self supporting, it does not require a temporary structure. During demolition, a physical barrier will be put in place to protect the public from the demolition process.The building which will remain, will be isolated by hand from the building being demolished to protect it from damage including the areas where the buildings are joined such as flooring and joists. All openings will be covered throughout the demolition and construction process. MSA shall provide further details on protection for Demolition Permit / Tender. . 3. Salvage and Store Materials: The excavator will dismantle the building systematically section by section. In general, all non-structural building component are removed first and sorted based on material type. Following this, the remaining structural components will be removed (for a full description of the demolition
Verticality
A vertical emphasis is achieved through additional height, proportional relationships in massing, and through the use of structural and decorative elements which elongate and draw the eye up.
Majesty
The proposed development will celebrate the existing impact of the James street facade, and will use the integration of program, massing, the manipulation of light and materials to celebrate the drama of Gothic Revival architecture. The building will continue to address its role as a prominent landmark in the downtown.
52
process see Appendix D). Materials of historical value leaving the site will be documented, and any item(s) of historical value which can be salvaged, will be kept for future use. Stanton Renaissance will provide a climate controlled storage facility for these items and will provide adequate instruction to ensure that they are properly stored, maintained and protected for the duration of the project. Protection will also utilize skids to store historical components off the ground, and protect them with rigid insulation and / or plywood during transportation. 4. Repair and Restore East Bay: If any remaining portion of existing roof, windows or doors can be removed with minimal damage, they may be kept for restoration and reuse in the remaining East Bay. An example of this reuse would occur to repair the broken pinnacle on the south east tower with the material from the dismantled pinnacles of the south west tower. 5. Continuity in Conversion: The new addition also plays a significant role in maintaining a relationship between the adjacent historical building context. While the addition will be modern in aesthetic materials and construction, it will be designed to work in harmony with the character and proportion of the remaining church. It will also be designed to relate to the Bell Building and St. Pauls Presbyterian to ensure that the former relationship between these buildings will be maintained using the Gothic inspired principles of height, asymmetry, verticality, light and majesty to guide the development of the design in terms of massing, materials and details. The proposed development will be a mixed use building that will primarily be residential, but will also have a retail and commercial component that will provide publicly accessible amenity to contribute to the character and history of the neighbourhood. For the purpose of the Heritage Impact Assessment, we have identified the need to carefully document, dismantle, stabilize, store, preserve / restore and reintegrate designated features and materials where structural conditions permit, and will provide more detail throughout the development process
Mitigation Strategies
53
Prime Consultant
4.3 CASE STUDIES

The following examples show how adaptive reuse can successfully reintegrate and reinvigorate historical buildings from their original function into a contemporary context. The term adaptive reuse refers to the process which recycles buildings and sites for a different purpose from which they were originally intended. The range in both timeline and geography illustrates that adaptive reuse is neither new nor necessarily radical, but reflects a natural process of buildings that change with their surroundings. Examples of such conversions are common in Europe because of an abundance of history combined with limitations of space. Romans have been converting and adapting their most prominent buildings for centuries including such beloved and well known examples such as the Pantheon (Ref 4.4.1) and the Trajan Markets (Ref 4.4.2). In Canada, our attitude to adaptation seems to be an either / or approach: buildings that are seen to be historically relevant, must be preserved in their entirety, and those which are not, are quickly slated for demolition. However, a more nuanced approach has gradually been gaining popularity - one which balances the cultural value of these
buildings with a need to evolve with the changing times. Churches in particular have been prominent within the trend to convert and adapt historic buildings. Because shifting demographics, population decline and increased secularization have had devastating consequences for large parish churches as well as small rural chapels in the West, there has been a need to save these beautiful buildings by repurposing them for modern use. The following examples show the broad range of such conversions:
54
Image Reference: 4.4.1 Originally built by the Emperor Hadrian, the Pantheon has been converted from a pagan temple to a Catholic church through altered and adopted iconography. It also functions as a museum for tourists. 4.4.2 The Trajan Markets, a significant public building in the ancient Roman forum, was once a market but has been since converted into a modern art gallery. This image shows an exhibition of William Kleins stark photography contrasted by the rich and ruinous building. 4.4.3 The dramatic atmosphere is maintained in the Pitcher and Piano, a recently converted bar. 4.4.4 Steel scaffolding and book shelves highlight and contrast the rich detailing of the original architecture of the Selexyz Domincanen. 4.4.5 St Nicholas Church House has adopted and celebrated the buildings original Gothic detailing into its new domestic context. 4.4.6 St Nicholas Church House has adopted and celebrated the buildings original Gothic detailing into its new domestic context. [Next Page] 4.4.7 4.4.8 4.4.9 The White Rabbit in Singapore is a converted garrison church. The new addition of St. Pauls harmoniously contrasts new and old. Light penetrates more deeply into St. Pauls through its modern addition.
PITCHER AND PIANO BAR Nottingham, UK

From Church to Bar / Restaurant Established in 1687 and rebuilt considerably by 1876, Nottinghams cathedral of drinking served as a Unitarian chapel until 1982 when it was converted to the Nottingham Lace Museum. After that venture proved financially unviable, the chapel which looks more like a traditional parish church became the popular Pitcher and Piano. It may be one of Nottinghams most inspired pubs, but Ye Olde Trip to Jerusalem, where Richard the Lionheart is said to have called in for a pint en route to the Holy Land, is certainly the most famous.
SELEXYZ DOMINCANEN Maastricht, Germany

From Church to Bookstore The fortunes of this glorious 800-year-old Dominican church have been decidedly mixed since closing its doors to the congregation. Sitting abandoned and overgrown for years before a spell as a bicycle storage facility, the church was overhauled by Dutch architects Merkx+Girod to become what the Guardian newspaper called: A bookshop made in heaven.
ST. NICHOLAS CHURCH HOUSE Kyloe (Northumberland), UK

From Church to Single Family Residence This Grade II listed Georgian church dates from 1792 and features a west tower with battlements and ornate stained glass window. With spectacular views over the Northumberland coast and Holy Island, the historic building is a perfect combination of modern open-plan living and old English heritage.
Case Studies
55
Prime Consultant
THE WHITE RABBIT 39C Harding Road, Singapore

From Church to Restaurant Located in a restored old chapel near the Dempsey area in Singapore, the long abandoned garrison church was reopened as the White Rabbit, a restaurant and bar serving up Euro comfort food. After extensive renovations, its lofty interiors are now a mood-lit bolt-hole that heaves with tout le monde.
ST PAULS ANGLICAN CHURCH Toronto, Ontario

Church Restoration and Addition The objectives of the St. Pauls Anglican Church renovation was universal access, security and flexibility will be achieved by the addition of buildings that physically connect the three historic buildings: Church, Old Church and Cody Hall. The internal refurbishment will clarify and reveal the level of fine historical items,
such as wood and truss ceilings, stained glass and stonework that were hidden for decades. The proposal of the proportion of additional surfaces consists of three additions, including a glass entrance subtle in an alley of the former to be used as a second narthex and atrium. One of the main objectives of the proposed design is to integrate the existing buildings into a coherent installation, while maintaining the historic architectural expression. Currently, the integrity of the church facilities are suffering because of the path of vehicles, changes in floor levels and insensitive interior renovations.
56
Case Studies
Image Reference: 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 92 Carlton, Toronto Community Housing highlights the historic podium by contrasting it with a residential tower. The retained facade brings human to the project at street level. Structural supports designed by Quinn Dressel: supports the facade in front of the new construction.
4.4 HERITAGE EXPERIENCE

While we at McCallum Sather Architects (MSA) are most well known as leaders in sustainable design, we also have a passion for heritage and historic buildings. The following projects demonstrate our work with preserving and adapting heritage buildings while providing quality architectural, interior, and environmental design services through an interdisciplinary perspective and integrated design approach. We believe in an approach that is both rooted and based in local communities, and since we operate out of Hamilton, we are also very knowledagble about its historical and cultural context.
TORONTO COMMUNITY HOUSING 92 Carlton Street,Toronto ON (2010)

from commercial - to community housing While with Stanford Downey Architects Inc., Drew Hauser was the Partner in Charge for this community housing complex, located on the corner of Mutual and Carlton Streets, Toronto. Although not certified, the complex was designed to meet LEED Silver. The level of incorporation of green initiatives in this project were a first for TCHC and this project helped inform their current standards for green building in their new projects. Located in the heart of downtown Toronto, this 12 storey project incorporates walk-up townhomes, family units and terrace units (total 110). The existing facades of 88-90 Carlton were preserved with the tower setback, thus preserving the streetscape and pedestrian experience while obtaining the required density to make the project feasible.
18
It is worth noting that Drew Hauser, Louie Santaguida and Quinn Dressel represent the same team working on the James Street Baptist re-development
Details in supporting the structure were done by Quinn Dressel and the Contractors for this stage included Louie Santaguida, president of Stanton Renaissance. 18
Heritage Experience
57
Prime Consultant
McMASTER UNIVERSITY PHEONIX PUB Hamilton, ON (2012)

The Graduate Student Association (GSA) owns and operates the Phoenix Restaurant/ Pub at McMaster University. Previously, both the restaurant and the GSA offices were in a building that was slated to be demolished. In 2007, we were hired to develop a plan and construction budget for the relocation of the two facilities. In 2010, after many iterations, the design was moved forward and the offices and restaurant were relocated to the Refectory Building. 19 The Refectory Building is one of five historically designated Collegiate Gothic style brick and stone buildings located on the campus. Originally opened in 1930, it was first a dining hall and then in its later years became an exam hall. The Refectory was deemed a property of Cultural Heritage Value in 2008, which specifies that certain building features (such as the slate roof, stone work, grounds, and interior vaulted ceiling) cannot be altered without Heritage overview.
5
The design concept was to create a space that highlighted the beautiful heritage architecture with a modern multi-functional dining/pub experience. The work included an entire interior renovation with a new commercial kitchen, new mechanical and electrical systems, and an updated exterior patio. The Phoenix Restaurant is a Gastropub - a pub which is slightly more upscale serving high-end food. The Phoenix is predominantly known on campus for their 25 craft draught beers. The restaurant requirements included general seating, meeting space, stage area, a casual study environment for both students and professors, and to provide seasonal outdoor seating. Also to be included in the design was a barrier-free accessible GSA office/meeting space on the second floor of the building. This was achieved with the installation of a pit-less elevator at one entrance.
58
19
This project is currently being considered for an Arido Award for Design Excellence in Adaptive Reuse (2013)
Image Reference: 4.5.4 4.5.5 4.5.6 4.5.7 4.5.8 4.5.9 4.5.10 The Pheonix Pub: Main Hall displaying restored and refinished ceiling, lights, and wood flooring. The Pheonix Pub: Entrance - all wood detailing is original, surfaces were cleaned with non-abrasive detergents and refinished. The Pheonix Pub: The Bar / Servery had to be designed and installed to incorporate mechanical, structure in a way that did not intrude on the buildings original features Alumni Memorial Hall: Main Hall Alumni Memorial Hall: New windows and doors to match the existing character of the building Dundas Museum: The new entrance mediates the building complex showcasing the sites architectural variety The interior space is modern, but complements and referes to the existing building through materials and details
McMASTER UNIVERSITY - ALUMNI MEMORIAL HALL AND FACULTY CLUB RESTAURANT RENOVATIONS Hamilton, ON (2004)
The McMaster University Alumni Memorial Hall was constructed in the 1950s and has a historic look to the building which is similar to the other older buildings on the McMaster University campus. MSA was retained to create an expansion as well as update the existing building to meet current building standards. The expansion involved the construction of a new entrance vestibule and a wing extension to house a new elevator, stairway, and offices all of these new features had to blend with the historical nature of the existing building. Interior renovations included a new dining room in the lower level as well as renovations to the Faculty Club Restaurant / Bar.
DUNDAS MUSEUM Dundas, ON (2013)

The Dundas Museum and Archives contains three historical buildings including the Dundas Museum, Pirie House and Doctors House. The goal of the project was to simultaneously update the existing buildings in function and finishes and to build spaces that would create a stronger relationship between each unique element. The main device to connect the museum to the street and to make the building complex more accessible was the new recessed central entry, including a ramp and a new elevator that connects the three levels of the existing buildings. While this new addition is modern to contrast the character of the existing buildings, through the use of materials and details, the addition evokes the spirit of Dundas Ontarios industrial history. The Dundas Historical Society Museum was originally opened to search out, collect, preserve and record historical records and artifacts that told the story of the region,
10
Heritage Experience
59
Prime Consultant
11
the design sought to establish new relationships that would help bring its history to life. While original display cases, historical artifacts, were donated by the Royal Ontario Museum, the renovation was meant to showcase these items in a way that would better engage the public. One strategy was to showcase special items in the faade to give the buildings a strongly visual presence from the street especially after hours when the building is illuminated. Several pieces were also placed within the landscape to bring the history outside of the building to the public. Additionally, the planting selection of the gardens where based on clippings and native plants from the original homesteads. The original 1956 building was designed to be fire resistant so it was constructed of poured concrete and steel joists, faced in brick. The education centre which was previously in the basement of the Museum was moved into the Pirie House to create stronger spatial relationships. The design retained some of the original features of the home yet modernized where appropriate to achieve greater user flexibility. IThe floors were repaired to show where the existing walls would have been in order to
12
explain to school and educational groups the concepts of the Victorian home and its planning. Additionally two fine examples of cast iron radiators were retained in situ and the museum is in the process of repainting and repairing the original plate glass windows and associated storm coverings. While the Doctors House has not yet been fully restored, updating its historical features and systems is planned for the long term development of the site. Its existence on the site is a testament to the dedication of the Dundas Historical Society because this house was relocated to the site to save the building from demolition. The exterior site plan design has allowed for greater accessibility for this important building.
13
McCallum Sather Architects employed preservation and rehabilitation practices in the design of the new and old spaces at the Dundas Museum and Archives resulting in a modern-day user-friendly and aesthetically-pleasing facility.
60
4.5.11 4.5.12 4.5.13 4.5.14 4.5.15
The new atrium: bridging between new and old and creating a new focussed point of entry. The interior space utilizes materials consistent with the original buildings, while creating an open and airy atmosphere. The new walkway and gardens creates a feeling of arrival while making the museum more open and accessible to the public. The original stone facade of the Custom House The interiors simultaneously respects the heritage of Custom House build in while updating finishes and systems for a more comfortable, beautiful and functional space.
ONTARIO WORKERS ARTS & HERITAGE MUSEUM Hamilton, ON (1996)

After a lengthy Needs Study and search for an appropriate city and location, it was proposed to locate the Workers Arts and Heritage Centre in the existing historically designated Custom House building, located in Hamilton Ontario. Designed in the Renaissance revival style, the building is one of the finest examples from the Citys brief period of stone architecture dating from the 1840s to the 1860s. In the Fall of 1994, a Master plan for the proposed building was completed to accommodate the programmatic requirements of the Workers Arts and Heritage Centre as identified in the Needs Analysis. Architectural, mechanical, electrical and structural audits were completed on the building and schematic concepts were developed which accommodated a variety of programmatic requirements including office space, archival storage and exhibit space. The design, completed in 1996, respected the historical context of the existing building, yet modernized the facility to accommodate environmentally appropriate building systems which will allow for future conversion to museum quality display space. The unique combination of old and new provides for a dynamic juxtaposition of elements which shows off the existing attributes of the building volume, light and materials to their best advantage. The existing heritage structure was renovated and adapted for its new use as a multi-purpose Cultural Centre focusing on conveying the history of Workers through exhibitions, performing arts and outreach programs. Extensive research provided the basis for developing the concept for building systems and materials selection that reflected sustainability principles and allowed for future adaptation of the new building systems to provide museum quality environmental controls. Energy-efficiency is combined with the use of building materials with minimal HCFC components, nominal off-gassing and the integration of maximum daylighting with the overall lighting system.
14
15
Heritage Experience
61
Prime Consultant
+/- 80 m (262-6)
(6
21 9
.2 )
-6
(2
7.
-o
) (2 8. 1 ) m
(74-6)
6 -6
62
22.7m
To restore an edifice is not to maintain it, repair or rebuild it, but to re-establish it in a complete state that may never have existed at a particular moment. Eugne Viollet-le-Duc Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings. Jane Jacobs In other words, keeping the building the way it is not a good solution. We should take advantage of these present opportunities and re-establish James Street Baptist as a new landmark for Hamilton - one that responds to the changes already happening in the city. Christina Karney, MSA 2013
4.5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Understanding elements of the existing architecture and embracing the opportunities provided in the future with a new function sets the tone in finding what needs to be remembered (and therefore preserved) about church architecture in general and James Street more specifically that can be valued for todays needs. The powerful quality of light, the public and private experience of gathering and community, and its accessibility to the public are three characteristics that are important to preserve in order to successfully adapt and respect the Churches former role within the community. The proposed James Street Condos is the southern end of James Street, where Hamiltons burgeoning art community and where the monthly art crawl takes place. Given the uniqueness of the site, James Street Baptist is a development which not only provides much needed density to Hamiltons Downtown Core, but also has the opportunity to directly contribute and benefit from the cultural activities both past and present which currently define its position on James Street. At grade, the podium provides connection to public activities on the street but also provides a connection to its history through the retention of the existing James St and a portion of the Jackson Street Faade. Additionally, it will reference its history through the use of proportion, materials and details where appropriate. Bridging between the existing James Street Baptist Facade and the new tower is a connection zone. Here, selected examples of stained glass removed from the original structure will be re-installed into a light filled space which connects the existing facades to the new tower structure. This space could function as a gallery with the potential to incorporate an educational component for the public. While the design at this stage is preliminary and purely conceptual, we are using the Heritage Impact Assessment as a tool to establish principles and guidelines to develop the project in a way that celebrates and respects the buildings history.
JACKSON STREET
JAMES STREET
Residential Tower & Commercial Podium
Proposed Development
63
Prime Consultant
64
4.6 BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Economic Improvement of existing building stock Revitalize neighbourhood Increased revenue from renewed area Increased local activity, employment and downtown living Increased tourism Increased taxes Development on site w/ existing city services / infrastructure Development in existing mass transportation zone Cultural Demonstrates historical continuity (appropriate / compatible addition while retaining part of James and Jackson facade) Educational experience for both tourists and residents Source of civic pride Draw for larger events Demonstrates merits for adaptive re-use and modern construction Access to City Grants Social Improvement of neighbourhood appearance Retention of human scale streetscapes An improvement of the quality of life within the building as the development will provide new retail, commercial and public programming Environmental Utilize part of the existing building to reduce the demand on natural resources New addition adds higher standards of energy performance Reclaim as much of the material as possible
Benefits
65
Prime Consultant
4.7 PREFERRED DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

The Preferred Development Schedule presents a preliminary timetable and order of operation for implementation. It also attempts to put into order of priority the steps that both City Officials and the develop will need to take in reviewing, and eventually deciding to proceed with the project. The Schedule is a flexible tool used to set priorities, establish a process and procedure for the re-development and protection schedule. 1. Heritage Permit & Heritage Impact Assessment Review: Once the HIA with Heritage Application is submitted, the HPRS meeting will review the document before it goes to the Municipal Heritage Committee by October 17, 2013. The Heritage Permit will be required in order to apply for a partial demolition / stabilization permit in October - November 2013. 2. Demolition Permit & Preliminary Site Plan Consultation: We hope to have a demolition permit by November 2013 to begin the stabilization process before the next freeze-thaw cycle. We also intend to engage the Preliminary Site Plan Consultation process early to review of issues that may affect the project design and schedule at a high level for better project integration. 3. Demolition & Stabilization Complete: Provided that the Demolition Permit is granted in October, we anticipate all stabilization, demolition and repairs will be complete by November / December 2013 prior to severe winter conditions. 4. OPA, Rezoning & Minor Variance: As the demolition and stabilization efforts are underway, it is our intent to maintain a dialogue with the City using the Site Plan Consultation process to identity issues and requirements for Site Plan Approval. Changes proposed to the site which will affect zoning such as land use, density and parking will require rezoning and variance approvals before SPA. We anticipate 6 months for this process and a full resolution to arrive by Spring / Summer 2014.
66
Schematic Design will be running in a parallel process to determine massing, materials and space planning with coordination and input from consultants. 5. Site Plan Approval: We anticipate to submit for SPA once Schematic Design is complete and we have received all approvals for rezoning and variances. We anticipate 4 months including time to make any necessary changes and revisions. 6. Building Permit: We anticipate to have a Building Permit and to begin construction
13007 | James St Condos
by Fall 2014.
Proposed Schedule McCallum Sather Architects September 2013
Dates
2013 Aug X
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
2014 Jan
Feb
March
April
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Authorities
Heritage Impact Assessment (Grant Application) Heritage Permit Application Due Heritage Permit Review Meeting Municipal Heritage Committee Planning Committee Council Heritage Permit & Demolition Permit Site Plan Consultation OPA & Rezoning Site Plan Agreement/Review Building Permit
06-Sep 16-Sep 25-Sep 17-Oct 05-Nov 19-Nov
4 - 6 months
Schematic Design
Schematic Design Review Meetings Refine design concept, plans and elevations with market research feedback from database Develop preliminary Mech/Electrical/ Structural System Concepts Coordinate Building Design with M&E, Structural and Civil Develop preliminary Costing Prepare Outline Specifications Schematic Design Signoff by client
Preferred Development Schedule
67
Prime Consultant
68
James Street Condos Heritage Impact Assessment
APPENDIX
Existing and Demolition Drawings
69
Prime Consultant
70
APPENDIX
Existing and Demolition Drawings
71
Prime Consultant
SECTION 6: DOWNTOWN ZONES

6.2 DOWNTOWN PRIME RETAIL STREETS (D2) ZONE
THE CITY OF HAMILTON
ZONING BY-LAW
No person shall erect, or use any building in whole or in part, or use any land in whole or in part, within a Downtown D2 Zone for any purpose other than one or more of the following uses, or uses accessory thereto. Such erection or use shall also comply with the prescribed regulations: 6.2.1 PERMITTED USES Beverage Making Establishment Catering Service Commercial Entertainment Commercial Parking Facility Commercial Recreation Commercial School Conference or Convention Centre Craftsperson Shop Day Nursery Dwelling Unit(s) Educational Establishment Financial Establishment Home Business Hotel Laboratory Lodging House Medical Clinic Multiple Dwelling Office Personal Services Place of Worship Printing Establishment Private Club or Lodge Repair Service Restaurant Retail Studio Tradespersons Shop Veterinary Service
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006) (By-law 11-276, November 16, 2011)
1/31/2012
72
6.2-1
APPENDIX
ZONING BY-LAW

b) Building Height i)
ZONING BY-LAW
6.2.2
PROHIBITED USES
Notwithstanding Section 6.2.1, the following uses are prohibited, even as an accessory use: Drive-Through Facility Dry Cleaning Plant i) 2.0 metres for the first storey, except where a visibility triangle shall be provided for a driveway access; 0.5 metres for the second and third storeys; 6.0 metres for that portion of a building providing an access driveway to a garage. Where a building(s) has been constructed and complies with section 6.2.3 c) ii) below, additional buildings constructed on the subject property shall not be subject to section 6.2.3 a) i) above, as it relates to the setback from a front lot line. Rooftop mechanical penthouse, stair tower and elevator bulkhead shall not be subject to section 6.2.3 a) i) above. Accessory buildings and structures shall not be subject to 6.2.3 a) i) above.
Minimum 7.5 metres faade height, for any portion of a building along a street line;
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
ii)
6.2.3
REGULATIONS
a) Maximum Building Setback from a Street Line
Maximum building height shall be in accordance with reference to the lot location and applicable building height maximum indicated on Figure 1 of Schedule F Special Figures.
(By-law 07-321, November 14, 2008)
c) Built Form for New Development
ii) iii)
In the case of buildings constructed after the effective date of this By-law or for alterations to buildings existing as of the effective date of this By-law: i) Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located and/or screened from view of any abutting street; The minimum width of the ground floor faade shall be equal to 75% or more of the measurement of the front lot line; For the lots delineated as a Heritage Character Zone on Figure 2 of Schedule F Special Figures, the following regulations shall also apply: 1. A minimum of 80% of the area of the ground floor faade shall be composed of windows and doors; 2. A minimum of 25% and a maximum of 40% of the faade of the second and third storeys shall be composed of windows; 3. The ground floor storey shall be no less than 3.6 metres in height and no greater than 4.5 metres in height. The second and third storeys shall each be no less than 3.0 metres in height and no
iv)
ii)
iii)
v)
vi)
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006, By-law 08-227, September 24, 2008)
1/31/2012
6.2-2
1/31/2012
6.2-3
Zoning Verification
73
Prime Consultant
ZONING BY-LAW
ZONING BY-LAW
greater than 4.0 metres in height; and, 4. Exterior building cladding, except decorative architectural features/ accessories, for the first 3 storeys shall be of either one or a combination of no more than two of the following materials: brick; concrete panels; stone block, stone veneer or artificial stone; stucco; or, metal and metal panels, excluding aluminum siding or any metal variant thereof.
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
except for access, accessory office and utility areas: Dwelling Unit(s) Multiple Dwelling
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
iv)
Notwithstanding the above, for properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, any alternative building design or building materials approved through the issuance of a Heritage Permit shall be deemed to comply with this Section.
d) Parking
(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
In accordance with the requirements of Section 5 of this By-law. The following uses shall not be permitted in any portion of the building except within the ground floor facing the street: Beverage Making Establishment Commercial Entertainment Commercial Recreation Place of Assembly Repair Service Veterinary Service
e) Restriction of Uses within a Building
i)
(By-law 07-321, November 14, 2007, Bylaw 10-076, April 14, 2010)
ii) 1/31/2012
74
The following use shall only be permitted above the ground floor,
6.2-4
1/31/2012
6.2-5
APPENDIX
ZONING BY-LAW
f) Outdoor Storage
No outdoor storage of goods, materials or equipment shall be permitted. This shall not, however, prevent the display of goods or materials for retail purposes. In the case of a commercial parking facility developed after the effective date of this By-law, such facility: i) ii) Shall only be contained within a building; and, With the exception of an access driveway to the parking facility, the ground floor of the facility which faces any street shall only be used for permitted uses, other than parking.
g) Commercial Parking Facility
h)
Home Business Regulations Accessory Buildings
In accordance with the requirements of Section 4.21 of this By-law.

(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
i)
In accordance with the requirements of Section 4.8.1 of this By-law.

(By-law 06-324, October 25, 2006)
1/31/2012
6.2-6
Zoning Verification
75
Prime Consultant
James Street Baptist Church
Structural Condition Overview March 2013
Introduction
Quinn Dressel Associates were retained by Stanton Renaissance to undertake a review of the structure of the James Street Baptist church. Stanton Renaissance has recently completed a successful offer to purchase the property from the Churchs Trustees. We had previously been retained by the Trustees to conduct an initial review of the north Sanctuary wall which is displaying significant inward bowing. This review follows up and extends that initial visual observations with a more in depth review of the wall and other selected locations within the balance of the Church.
History
The Church was constructed between 1878 and 1882. From historic information available and in discussions with present church members, it would appear that the construction of the Church was not without difficulties. In fact, newspaper accounts detail the collapse during construction of the portion of the church fronting on James Street. Poor materials and workmanship were blamed for the collapse. We are aware of a number of specific renovation and/or repair projects undertaken in the Church since its inception and there are likely others initiated prior to the 1980s.
STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR JAMES STREET BAPTIST CHURCH

FOR
STANTON RENAISSANCE
1988 Renovation This was a large scale renovation of the Church. The main highlights include the following structural work. Creation of an entrance to the basement via the removal of the fill against the north basement wall and creation of a sunken exterior zone. Use of 3 insulation to prevent frost heave to north wall. Addition of a new elevator within the James St. tower. Removal of various structural posts within the basement area to accommodate more open space Re-framing of the entry area of James St. tower. Install new confining jacket around basement column bases. Install new structural steel support beams below Sanctuary floor to eliminate basement posts and accommodate the new baptismal. Re-use and elevate the eastern portion of the Sanctuary floor close to James Street tower.
March 8, 2013
2
76
APPENDIX
James Street Baptist Church Structural Condition Overview March 2013
Re-frame mezzanine level of the James St tower including new lobby stairs and supports and access stair.
Although not noted on the drawings, in review of archived photographs taken during the renovation, it would appear that stone replacement on the James Street tower was also included within the ultimate scope of work. In discussions with the present Church members, it would seem that the initial costs of the 1988 renovation increased by more than 100% of the tender values, mainly on the strength of what were described as unknown and presumable hidden conditions after the start of work. 2001 Masonry Restoration of south-east facade According to the drawings available to us, this work seems confined to the exterior stone of the James Street Tower at the south-east corner. Significant re-working of exterior stone wythe with tie backs of specific bull-nose and slopped section of buttress. Also, some restraining and injection grouting of the mortar/rubble zone was specified as was portion of the exterior wythe removed and re-built. This occurred north of the most southerly large window. This work was initiated it would seem due to concerns expressed by the City of Hamilton as a result of falling mortar and masonry in the summer of 2000. Water infiltration, successive freeze-thaw cycles and the 1998 earthquake were mentioned as potential causes. South Transept An undated repair to the exterior face of the south transept. Work is obvious as galvanised steel restraining plates are visible. Slate roof Various repairs to the roof slate were mentioned in the November 2011 report. Cracked and loose slate is visible to-day. Interior plaster repairs Numerous locations are evident where plaster repairs have been undertaken over the years, probably pointing to past cracking issues. Detailed Observations As noted above, we had previously attended the church to review the interior condition of the north wall. This review was based solely on the physical appearance of the inner face of the wall. On this our second, we had received permission from the Trustees to remove isolated sections of the plaster to ascertain the construction of the north wall and other areas of interest within the Church.
Our main concern is the condition of the exterior walls and the extent of the deterioration in general. Whereas the north wall displays significant deterioration d and near failure conditions, the balance of the buildings walls, while displaying similar effects but not to the same extent. The purpose of this investigation is to establish to what degree the balance of the church is similarly deteriorating. Our initial report to the Trustees is appended to this report. A total of ten (10) opening s where made in the interior walls and are noted on the attached diagrams. 1 North Wall Sanctuary most westerly wall of a group of four. The interior face of the wall had displaced laterally 4 1/2 inward. An opening in the interior plaster surface was made. It indicated that the present day plaster wall was plaster on metal lath. Some evidence that the original wood back-up had been increased to aid in presenting a smoother surface . The inner wythe was composed of shale stone and much of it is in an advanced state of deterioration. Brick masonry had been used around the perimeter of the window to aid in creating the window form. The inner wythe displays significant inward bowing. A gap of at least 6 was measured at this location. When stone debris was removed between the inner wythe and the window frame a river of sand debris flowed out between the gap. In our estimation the wall is clearly buckling under its own, the roof weight and the continued build-up of debris between the wythes creating addition horizontal
Structural Report
77
Prime Consultant
pressure. There is little doubt that the wall is no longer stable and should be temporarily supported. 2 North Sanctuary Wall easterly section. Here the inward deflection of the inner plaster surface had been measured at 6 . Upon removal of the plaster, the same buckling of the inner wythe was prevalent. And as noted by the measured deflection, displayed a much worse condition that location #1. In this instance, a metal furring channel was used to support the plaster instead. A review of photographs compiled by the Church membership indicates that the plaster in this portion of the wall was removed during the 1988 renovation and reinstated. Given the extent of the wall movement, the furring channel it was now acting as a tension strap member and helping to stabilise the wall from collapse. This portion of wall should be temporarily braced.
3 Clear crack in the plaster was removed and indicated that plaster had been applied directly to this inner wall. The vast majority of the wall is interior with only the most northerly section exterior. The exposed inner wythe displayed a series of near vertical cracks through both the weak mortar joints and also through stone as well. There is a general weak zone within the approximately Plaster thickness varied greatly but would average around 1 . Total wall thickness would appear to be in the 22 range. Some of the stone units themselves displayed significant weathering, and were friable. The mortar was very loose and easily removed.
5
78
APPENDIX
4 Located within the northwest staircase, similar to area #3. Through stone cracks and loose mortar. Friable stone and loose, fractured mortar present. This area is somewhat opposite to the cracks noted in Location #3.
displacement, estimated at 3/16 is also evident.
Of interest is that as large as the crack and displacement is within the stone, the interior plaster displays on the most minor of crack width.
5 West wall of Church, @ 3rd mid-landing The above photo is taken looking at the south wall of the northwest staircase parallel with the exterior west wall. The stone in the centre is common to both walls and is clearly fractured and has displaced horizontally approximately 5/8. Some vertical
6 West wall of Church in basement washroom
Structural Report
79
Prime Consultant
Summarising Observations Exterior The slate roof is in a state of deterioration. A close examination reveals many instances of split and damage shingles. Many of these have already become dislodged and are free to slide to the ground below. Winter and early spring are of considerable concern as many of the sliding incidence are prompted by sliding snow. Under certain circumstances, and in specific accelerated wind zones, the slate may also fall due to high wind episodes. Air-borne debris, such as sharpedge slate can only be considered as a dangerous possibility. The exterior stone face is for the most part in reasonable condition, and would appear for the most part plumb. There are numerous locations, particular at the re-entrant corners at wall-buttress intersections where a clear separation of the buttresses from the balance of the wall is evident. A properly constructed exterior wall would have ensured that the wall-stone and the buttress-stone were toothed together. Given the fact that the separation does exist, leads us to the conclusion that the intersection either was constructed incorrectly, or that stone fracture along the interface has occurred. Neither is a satisfactory result. The buttresses provide both vertical support to the clerestory roof but more importantly provide horizontal restraint to the upper roof trusses and act as bracing to the supporting interior granite columns. The buttresses are meant to act integrally with the adjacent walls and the cracks separating the two are of structural concern. Virtually all of the re-entrant corners of all the Churchs buttresses have been remortared at some time in the past. Of particular concern would be areas where signs of continued movement in these corners is present. The photo below on the left is fairly typical of most re-entrant corners. In the north-west area of the Church, as shown in the photo on the right, signs of continued outward and vertical movement at this interface is clear. In some locations as much as .
A complete breakdown in the mortar within this wall is evident. Ground water seepage has been occurring over a long period of time. Large sections of mortar debris are easily removed by simple touch alone.
9
80
10
APPENDIX
The relatively new creation of the basement access to the Churchs basement along the north wall has exposed the original foundation wall to environment conditions not intended when constructed. The exterior stone used here has deteriorated due to freeze-thaw cycle to a point where a loss of buttress section has now occurred.
11
12
Structural Report
81
Prime Consultant
crack was observed in the interior plaster starting low and arching to intercept the window. A clear vertical and horizontal deformation of the wood window frame is clearly evident, suggesting some degree of movement of likely the inner wythe wall. Given the large un-braced area, this wall integrity is of concern. The outer stone face does not appear to show any significant cracking in the area, but a closer investigation, at some height would be required to verify this. Through stone cracking of many exterior stones is clearly evident. Many of these incidences are likely the result of thermal strains, perhaps compounded with improper repair mortars used in the past.
Interior The inner wythe of the north sanctuary wall is in a state of near collapse. The potential to de-stabilise the entire north wall construction and the resulting loss of support to the lower roof and bracing to the interior main roof support columns is real possibility. Removal of numerous sections of interior plaster in the north-west area of the church indicate underlying issues with the inner stone wall wythe. In all but a few locations, cracks in the plaster revealed corresponding cracks in the inner stone wythe wall.
Also along the north wall, issues with the other buttress have been noted above, but at this particular location, there are signs that the buttress is also being split vertically along its axis in an east-west direction. The neighbours alley along Churchs west wall was constructed approximately 1-4 above the basements upper windows. This has in effect created a well where snow and ice is trapped.. Repeated melting cycles effectively trap water and force it to drain down the side and into the basement wall. Separation of the walls inner and outer wythe has created an easy channel for the melt and rain water to gain access to the walls fabric. The foundation wall immediately below this area is in an advanced state of deterioration. The west wall of the Sanctuary is dimensionally quite significant. With an unsupported vertical plane area of approximately 2,000 ft2 (38 x 53) with an intermediate, partial height buttress centred below the large window. This is the area behind the organ and very difficult to access. However, a large arching

Approximately 5 10% of the inner stone wythe is constructed of stone material which has become friable over time. The lime mortar layer is weak although generally intact, yet with little effort removed. Some areas of the inner wall are constructed with fairly small stone units. As a result, much of these wall areas are composed of a high percentage of mortar rather than stone. The result is a very weak wall that is easily prone to damage due to thermal or structural strains.
13
82
14
APPENDIX
In these damaged zones, the mortar is heavily cracked and fee to fall clear of the wall. Displaced mortar weak enough to be crushed by hand. Mortar joints display a wide range of widths. Wide mortar joints result in a weaker wall construction. Some joints were measured at 1 to 2. Joints of 3/8 to would be considered appropriate for this type of construction. Note the vastly different appearance of the two photos below. The photo on the left displays fairly regular shaped stone with reasonable width mortar joint and contrasts with those in the photo on the right.
Overall Conclusions In general we find that the Church was constructed with less than quality materials. In some locations, the original workmanship is questionable and has we believe contributed to the present diminished and deteriorated state of the buildings wall structure. The foundation walls on the north and west faces of the building are structurally compromised, the west wall in particular. Apart from the obvious issues of the north wall, the structural integrity of the existing stone walls in general is questionable, particularly when considering future and the possibility of extended service life of the building structure. Certainly it is our view that the existing walls are not capable of providing continued service in their present condition. Further, any considerations of adding additional dead or live loads to the existing structure should not be considered. In short, from a structural point of view, we can see little merit in utilising or attempting to utilise the existing building structure for any form of continued use. While we acknowledge that ways and means of effecting some degree of repairs to the walls either through attempts to re-establish the walls integrity or through wholesale replacement in areas does exist, it is our opinion that the degree and extent of such reparations would be extremely widespread and at an enormous financial cost. Furthermore, these repairs would only stabilise the present configuration and maintain existing loading requirements. The repairs would do nothing to enhance or increase the load-carrying ability of the structure, should its future use so require.
We have not been able to view, for reasons mainly of access the critical bearing points of the Churchs roof truss structure. Our experience with structures of this vintage suggest that while many portion of the timber trusses are capable of continued service, bearing points, particularly those in the vicinity of changes in roof profile (hips, valleys, eaves etc) where damage to the skin of the building has allowed for the ingress of water, that timber structures are prone to rot and decay. The church is known to have in the past and in the present, significant issues with the roof slate and proper collection and removal of rainwater through properly maintained gutters. The potential for damage to the truss bearing points cannot be ruled out at this point.
QUINN DRESSEL ASSOCIATES
_________________________
Grant Milligan, P.Eng. Principal
15
16
Structural Report
83
Prime Consultant
Appendix A Quinn Dressel Associates letter dated February 4, 2013 to The Trustees of James Street Baptist Church
February 4, 2012 The Trustees James Street Baptist Church 96 James Street S. Hamilton, ON L8P 2Z2 Attention: Re: Ms Maggie Steele Project 1-12-202
James Street Baptist Church North Wall Structural Review
Dear Ms. Steele: Quinn Dressel Associates were requested to attend the church on January 30th, 2013 to ascertain the physical condition of the Churchs north wall and to comment upon any safety concerns that we may have. We understand the property has recently been sold, but that the transaction will close sometime in the spring. We have been provided with a copy of a condition assessment report prepared by PJ Material Consultants Ltd. The report is dated November 2011. Our review and observations are entirely visually based. We have also been provided with copies of drawings produced for the 1988 renovation and restoration work in 2001. According to a number of records, the church was constructed over a period of time, construction presumably began in 1878, the cornerstone was placed in spring 1879 and after some construction setbacks, finally occupied in the spring of 1882. The church is of a conventional layout for the time with the entry narthex and stair towers fronting on James Street, the nave oriented in an east-west direction and ending in a crossoriented transept and fairly shallow sanctuary. A clerestory is developed to either side of the nave above the single level aisles. It is the wall adjacent to the north aisle that is of concern. The church exterior is constructed entirely of cut limestone stone, likely quarried nearby. The various sloped roofs are covered in slate. A series of stone buttresses aid in the support of the walls and vaulted roofs above. Consistent with construction techniques of the day, and as mentioned in the condition assessment, the wall composition would consist of the outer stone, mortar and rubble zone, inner masonry or wall and plaster & lathe. It is clear from our visual observations of the north wall that significant movements of one if not multiple elements of the exterior wall have taken place. The inner surface of the wall has clearly buckled and bowed inwards. A laser reference line was established at a height of 5 +/- above the floor and virtually the entire north wall between the transept and the north-east tower displays some amount of movement. The magnitude of the inward movement was generally
18
84
APPENDIX
measured at 4 but was in one location as great as 6. It is our general impression that the magnitude of the movement is even greater higher on the wall. The outer stone wall does not display any signs of bowing at this point and hence the movement is understood to be confined to the buckling of the inner masonry wall or the plaster & lathe or most likely a combination of both. The obvious gaps between the window frames and either the stone or inner wall along the north wall highlight and confirm that movement of the inner masonry has occurred, and at significant magnitudes as well. This would confirm in our opinion that the mortar/rubble zone has indeed become unstable and is expanding laterally. This is further evidenced by the debris noted at the circular window sill within the north-west transept and substantiates we believe, the opinions expressed within the condition assessment. It is interesting to note that during the major renovations of the church in the late 1980s and the restoration work done on the James Street elevation in 2001 the obvious issue of the north wall was not addressed, thus leading us to believe the condition has only become obvious within the past ten years and should be considered active. Based upon our observations, it is our opinion that the north wall of the church is unstable and the potential for collapse of portions of the wall construction is a real possibility in the short term. We understand that the congregation has already ceased conducting services in the building and this is certainly a positive step. We would however recommend that the existing inner wall be braced laterally to prevent any further movement and to at least temporarily stabilise the wall until such time as the ownership of the property is transferred. While not connected to the interior buckling wall, the exterior stone below the original grade level is becoming weathered and is deteriorating. The original below grade stone has been exposed to the elements since the 1988 renovation re-graded the area and created a direct exterior entrance to the churchs basement through the north wall. The stone used below grade is of a different type than above and its exposure to constant wetting and drying, not to mention freezing and thawing is clearly the cause for this deterioration. While not of immediate concern, the only viable solution to this issue would be containment or removal and replacement of this section of the wall and buttresses. During our visit, we had the opportunity to review the balance of the churchs exterior. We found other instances of similar signs of deterioration although perhaps not to the same degree. Specifically on the west wall in the basement level a portion of the exterior foundation wall was open to view and large portions of wet sand were easily dislodged from the inside face. At the same location at the exterior grade, sand was again visible pouring from between the exposed mortar/rubble void and again points to significant failure of the walls construction. And at other locations on the south and east faces, there are obvious instances of separation at the windows. All of this would seem to indicate that the walls of the church as a whole have been compromised.
It would be our recommendation that the future property owner undertake a thorough assessment of the condition of all of the Churchs exterior walls, above and below grade to ascertain the extent of deterioration and to aid in the assessment of the walls structural long-term integrity. Should you have any questions or care to discuss the contents of this report, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, QUINN DRESSEL ASSOCIATES
Grant Milligan, P.Eng. Principal GM/l
Structural Report
85
Prime Consultant
North Wall Window Frame Showing Clear Separation of Window Frame and Outer Wall
Interior and exterior views of NW transept window. Note window frame separation from both inner and outer wall
North Wall Clerestory Window

86
APPENDIX
North Wall Buttress with Obvious Deterioration of Rock And Cracking
Same buttress, looking south
Structural Report
87
Prime Consultant
Exterior And Interior Views Of West Wall. Note Significant Amounts Of Sand Debris
James Street Window
Southwest Transept and Previous Repairs
88
10
APPENDIX
West Wall Through Stone Crack
11
Structural Report
89
Prime Consultant
21
90
22
APPENDIX
23
24
Structural Report
91
Prime Consultant
25
92
26
APPENDIX
James Street Baptist Church Structural Condition Overview March 2013 James Street Baptist Church
27
28
Structural Report
93
Prime Consultant
AMMENDMENT TO STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT
AUGUST 22, 2013
AMMENDMENT TO STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT
AUGUST 22, 2013 required, although any adjacent excavation would need to ensure that the towers foundations were either not undermined or restrained in some fashion. (i.e. caisson wall etc). The towers walls do require some restorative work however. Some of the same issues of poor material and workmanship exist here as well. Displaced and removed turrets and other repair work here in the past are testaments to the likelihood of additional restorative work still necessary. The benefit of keeping a portion of the original Church building, particularly that facing a major roadway is seen as a plus to the project as a whole. A case could certainly be made for the removal and demolition of the entire building from an economic perspective. This would remove the need to effect further repairs on the East Tower and allow for the footprint of the new development to be designed without the loss of area adjacent to the James Street property line. This would allow for a less expensive construction of the new building. Again, the material and workmanship of the original construction, coupled with issues of poor maintenance over the years has led to the deterioration of the building as a whole
We understand that the City of Hamilton has requested some clarifications and further details concerning both the James Street Baptist Church and our overall experience with heritage buildings. From a structural perspective the James Street Baptist Church can be viewed a three distinct zones above grade. The east tower, facing James Street, the west tower, facing the laneway and the centre zone, between the two towers. In each of the two east and west towers, are sub-towers in each corner. These sub-towers are square or near square in plan, have relatively small door and window openings over their height and their general shape and plan dimension provide for good restraint to lateral forces. The roof trusses between the sub-towers are buttressed by these towers and provide excellent restraint. The centre sections in contrast, relies upon the inner row of slender columns, and the outer north and south wall to act as the buttress to restrain the vertical and horizontal forces imposed by the long span trusses. It is this difference in construction that is of major concern here. As pointed out in our report, the north wall is in a state of near collapse. Should the east wall be lost in a sudden manner, the entire roof over the centre section would collapse as well. As the long span roof is common over all three sections, a good portion of the roof even in the east and west towers would likely be dragged down and collapse as well. The south walls would also collapse as well, potentially outward on to neighbouring property. The west tower displays significant defects in both workmanship, materials and ultimately structural integrity due to the deterioration of the foundation wall. Some repair work was done to the south subtower in the past, but the north sub-tower displays significant separation of inner and outer wythes as indicated in our report. The same defects are visible in the east tower, just not to the same degree. Option Do Nothing Comments Not a viable or safe option. The near-state of collapse of the north wall precludes this option as the building in its present state is a hazard to the public. Not a viable option. The load presently bearing on the north wall both vertical and horizontal must be removed before work could begin. The north wall displays significant deterioration to the exterior stone itself. These are original flaws within the stone fabric exacerbated by the 1980 renovations. The state of the north wall would require full removal and re-construction. To accomplish this safely would require the removal of the roof in order to relieve the structural loads on the wall. This approach is viable, although not without significant cost. Demolition of the centre and west towers would not compromise the east tower . No specific bracing of this remaining portion would be Full Demolition
Retain and Support Existing Structure
Retain East Tower
94
APPENDIX
Shoring Drawing
95
Prime Consultant
Quinn Dressel Associates
Corporate Relevant Projects
MaRS Discovery District Parcel B, Toronto

The Medical and Related Sciences (MaRS) Discovery District Building B involves the integration of an existing heritage building, the College Wing, with the new state-of-the-art office and laboratory space. The College Wing has been subjected to partial demolition and extensive renovation and will be linked the new10-storey facility by an atrium, located directly behind the College Wing. The College Wing will be predominantly an office space with the bulk of the new south Tower devoted to laboratories. The 38,000 m building design will incorporate high levels of electrical and mechanical support services to facilitate new research and development programs. The building was specifically designed to allow for a mobile and fluid end client, thus necessitating ways and means of tailoring both structural loading and air-supply requirements on an on-going basis.
2
Established in 1979, Quinn Dressel Associates is widely recognised for its major buildings throughout North America, Europe, the Middle East and China. We have earned the respect and recognition of our peers in the industry for consistent production of sound and creative designs of structural systems for all types of buildings across the globe. Though relatively modest in size, we have undertaken very many large and complex projects, often simultaneously. We have maintained the integrity of quality design by our dedication to each and every project, by having partners involved at all stages of the project, by careful selection of bright and talented team of staff, and by our unique team approach. We pride ourselves on the hands -on approach by our partners, a very important aspect in the overall cohesiveness of a major project. The principals, with a collective experience of over seventy years of engineering practice backed by accumulated knowledge and wisdom, lead the project teams from inception to completion. The fundamental ideology of our firm is to provide the client with the best possible project produced within budget and on schedule. Our philosophy actively promotes the development of a bond of trust and co-operation between all members of the project team. It is this commitment to our clients, to engineering, and to the science - and art - of building that has given us a name for excellence. We have extensive experience in working co-operatively with all levels of government, institutions, banks, major corporations, developers and international and local architects. We have successfully completed many projects of large scope and complexity and justified our designs through peer review, value engineering and cost comparisons. Our office dynamics are deliberately characterised by a flexible, intense interaction as a team. The resulting frank and open exchange results in maximum creativity, with idea begetting idea, thereby promoting alternatives and optimum solutions. Our team approach is particularly suited to exciting, challenging and unique projects demanding innovative and original structural design. Specifically, we offer: Quality work on complex projects Ability to handle large projects Creative and inclusive problem-solving approach Can do positive approach to challenges Partner hands-on involvement throughout Application of Quality Control Guidelines Team approach internally and externally
MaRS Discovery District, Toronto
Christ Church Cathedral, Montreal

Christ Church Cathedral, in the heart of downtown Montreal, was pointed to, gaped at and discussed by thousands of Montrealers morning, noon and night. Resembling a giant ship in dry-dock, passers-by were arrested by the church's "floating" appearance; some were even heard to say "You wouldn't catch me going in there!". Key to the success of the underground shopping mall which was part of Cathedral Place high-rise office development in the heart of downtown Montreal was the feasibility of building a two storey shopping mall and one level of parking under Christ Church Cathedral. The church foundations, which had a history of settlement, were masonry spread footings supported on a layer of clay with glacial till and bedrock about 45 feet to 50 feet below grade. Completing the support of 128 years old Cathedral to allow for a five basement deep retail and parking development below without interrupting services during the construction period was a considerable challenge.
Rosebrugh, Fitzgerald and Mining Buildings, University of Toronto
Rosebrugh Building, University of Toronto

Detailed Pre-construction Condition Study and Structural Evaluation of three predominantly masonry buildings atthe University of Toronto. Each of the three buildings were constructed in the early 20th century. Emphasis on the long-term history of cracking in the masonry structure of the Rosebrugh Building formed a major part of the study. The dilemma of the underground Taddle Creek, although beyond the scope of work, was investigated and recommendations made for likely solutions.
We have won a reputation for outstanding work on projects requiring specialised engineering responses. High quality, innovative engineering and superior service are the values which are reflected in the diversity and scope of our practice. Quinn Dressel Associates has been honoured by awards for our contributions to a number of projects, including Royal Bank Plaza, Toronto, Baltimore Harbor Place, Scotia Plaza, Toronto, Liberty Place, Philadelphia, the Raymond F. Kravis Center for the Performing Arts in West Palm Beach, Florida, and the Ernst & Young Tower in Calgary. We also played a major role in many university projects such as University of Toronto, McMaster University, Hamilton, McGill University, Montreal. We are confident in our ability to provide all of our clients with the same level of service that has earned us our reputations and repeat clients. We look forward to demonstrating our commitment to quality.
96
APPENDIX
Toronto Old City Hall, Toronto

The historically significant building, constructed from 1891 to 1899, underwent extensive renovations in the past five years under a repair program of four (4) phases. This major project required sensitivity, care and attention in finding solutions compatible with the original materials. The roof exterior has been recovered in copper, and repairs carried out to the roof trusses where required. Stabilisation of the dormer stonework gables was constructed. Replacement of deteriorated stonework was undertaken under the aegis of the architect. Quinn Dressel Associates was responsible for the repairs to the roof structure and the stabilisation of the dormer gables. The main challenges were the repairs of trusses spanning over 80 ft and over 50 ft high in places, in those areas where water damage due to water ingress had occurred. These areas were mainly at masonry wall supports and at roof valleys. Replacement of members often required detailed design of temporary works sometimes more complex than the final design of the permanent work. Ninety percent of construction under Phase I occurred at night. Quinn Dressel Associates has also undertaken the Justice of the Peace Office Suites project and the replacement of the gargoyles at Toronto Old City Hall. Our detailed knowledge of the structure of the building has been augmented accordingly. Prior to refurbishment of a portion of the copper roof, a detailed condition survey was carried out of the roof trusses and masonry supports affected by the anticipated roofing replacement program, to ascertain the current condition with respect to deterioration and determine capability of safely supporting the loads imposed on them during the roof refurbishment construction and during their service life.
St. Michaels Cathedral, Toronto

For the St. Michaels Cathedral project, we identified distressed masonry elements such as pinnacles and designs for their stabilization. We designed the infrastructure and anchorage to support the new gargoyles from the massive masonry stonework of Toronto City Halls main tower. W identified the causes for the parapet deformations at both 620 University Avenue and the McLennan Building. We are currently about to work on a further project at the Ontario legislature at Queens Park to investigate cracking at the rose window on the Centre Block tower.
88 - 90 Carlton Street TCHC Architectural Services, Toronto, Ontario

The existing buildings at 88-90 Carlton were acquired by Toronto Community Housing to redevelop social housing in the downtown core. The new 12-storey apartment structure is of reinforced concrete construction incorporating many green initiatives including a ground source heat pump for heating and cooling, a solar domestic hot water preheat system, and a green roof, among others. The design also incorporates the existing brick facades along Carlton Street to preserve the urban fabric of the city. A temporary steel structure was designed to support the facades during demolition and construction.
Queens Park, Toronto

The Queenston limestone cladding of the Hepburn and Ferguson Buildings was deteriorating and was pointed with mortar containing lead. There was minor deterioration of the polished granite of the MacDonald Block as well as lead in the mortar pointing. The work on the Hepburn Building was executed from swing-stages including the lead abatement. This approach while reducing the disruption of construction activities on the complex presented challenges for the lead abatement which were successfully overcome. The dwindling supply of quality Queenston limestone challenged the team to affect repairs with minimal impact of the aesthetics and heritage character of the buildings.
Quinn Dressel Structural Engineering: Heritage Experience
97
Prime Consultant
Demolition Methodology Safety Plan
68 James Street South
Table of Contents
Procedures and Safety Plan Partial Building Demolition 68 James Street South, Hamilton
DEMOLITION METHODOLOGY / SEQUENCE ................................................................................................ 3 SITE SAFETY .............................................................................................................................................. 5 DUST CONTROL PLAN................................................................................................................................ 6 FIGURE 1.................................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 2.................................................................................................................................................... 8
Submitted By
Lions Group Inc.

April 22, 2013
98
APPENDIX
DEMOLITION METHODOLOGY / SEQUENCE

1. The building at 68 James Street South, Hamilton shall be partially demolished keeping the front faade / tower section in-tack (Figure 1.). 2. All services will be disconnected and made safe and will be re-checked by our site supervisor prior to starting. (Gas, Water, Hydro, Cable, Phone, Mechanical) 3. A physical barrier shall be erected between public area and the buildings being demolished. The barrier fence facing public areas shall be covered with a fabric trap which shall act as a dust barrier between construction area and public space. The parking lot to the south of building shall be closed during demolition as well as a lane along Jackson Street West(permits by others) 4. All hazardous materials identified within area being demolished shall be removed prior to structural demolition. (Asbestos, Mercury, Lead, PCBs) All materials leaving site shall be documented on weigh bills & submitted with billing. 5. Any shoring required to support the building that remains shall be completed prior to demolition and shall be completed by others. An engineer licenced to practice in Ontario shall sign off the building is capable of standing on its own. Any and all weather proofing of building which remains shall be completed by others. 6. The building which remains shall be isolated by hand from the building being demolished. This includes all materials that are joined between the two areas such as flooring and joists. This work shall be completed prior to structural demolition or during the hand demolition process(Figure 2.) 7. The main roof & structure shall be removed by hand using aerial lifts to carefully strip the structure down to the lower roof. From this point down the structure shall be brought down using a hydraulic excavator. 8. A hydraulic excavator equipped with multiple attachments (grapple, bucket, shear, hammer, pulveriser) will be used to selectively pick the building apart. The excavator will dismantle the building systematically section by section. Once demolition starts workers shall not be permitted inside building. 9. In general all non-structural building components are removed first and sorted based one material type. Then any remaining exposed structural components are removed. This will occur in small areas and will be complete prior to moving to another area. All un-stable building structures will be removed immediately once identified. 10. The operator will take appropriate caution with weather conditions and will adjust or stop work accordingly. High winds, heavy rain fall which would create a significant hazard to workers or public safety will be cause for work to stop.
11. Demolition will be completed in a controlled manner. At no time will the building be demolished in a manner which will endanger any ones safety. The chimney shall be carefully knocked down in small sections using equipment capable of reaching the top. 12. All materials (wood, concrete, brick and steel) will be separated during the demolition and placed aside for loading in to trailers and containers that will be transported off site to be recycled or dumped at landfill. 13. The demolition debris will be left in a safe and secure state at the conclusion of each day. Debris will be removed frequently as it accumulates via trailers. 14. Our Monsoon Turbine automated misting system is the ultimate dust control solution which uses a turbine gyratory atomizing nozzle to throw water particles up to 125 feet which can cover over 7,000 square feet. 15. All workers shall wear reflective vests while working around heavy equipment. 16. All workers shall abide by Company Health & Safety Policy at all times.
Demolition Procedures and Safety Plan
99
Prime Consultant
SITE SAFETY
Our operators will leave the site in a safe and structurally secure state at the end of each day. In regards to the above site lions will make every possible effort to adhere to our Safety Philosophy outlined in our safety handbook and particularly the section titled Responsibilities. In addition to our encompassing safety protocol we must adapt and personalize it to each site and the above project is no different the following are a number of Health and Safety issues we will encounter during the demolition of this site. Fire protection: During our demolition when required we will be cutting steel members by means of oxy-propane torches, though this processes we must have a fire watch person in the area of cutting equipped with a water fire extinguisher to suppress any burning that might occur during the cutting. Activities producing sparks shall be restricted to 2 hours prior to leaving site. Working in the area of demolition equipment: During demolition at this site we are always within close proximity to building components that remain other equipment and other workers. This makes the job of the equipment operator very important and sensitive, from a safety standpoint the operator must me aware of the location of every worker on site and the site must remain controlled to keep others out of the area of demolition. We also are making use of an excavator equipped with a grapple/shear for better control of materials Safety equipment and worker protection: Lions site labours, Torchmen and foreman will all be equipped with reflective vests, hard helmets, safety glasses and steel toed work boots. Lunch Box Meetings: Each morning before commencement of demolition our site foreman outlines the days work and possible hazards on the site that day. In closing we at Lions put the utmost value on our workers and the publics health and well being and will continue to strive to fulfil our commitment to Zero Accidents on all our projects. Thank you and if you should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me personally.
DUST CONTROL PLAN

The daily, or more frequently if required, wetting of all soft and hard surfaces and any excavation face on the site, with the addition of calcium chloride or other recognized materials as a dust suppressant, if required; The daily cleaning of the road pavement and sidewalks for the entire frontage of the property to a distance of twenty-five (25) metres from the property line; The designation of truck loading points to avoid trucks tracking potentially contaminated soil and demolition debris off site. Such loading points should be on a gravel base to minimize tracking of soil onto the sidewalk and the street. If the loading point becomes contaminated it should be cleaned and replaced; All trucks and vans leaving the site should be cleaned of all loose soil and dust from demolition debris including the washing of tires and sweeping or washing of exteriors and tailgates by a designated labourer. A daily log of each truck leaving the site will be kept noting when the truck was cleaned and by whom; Tarping all trucks leaving the site which have been loaded with indigenous soil or demolition debris; An air monitoring program, if necessary, as determined through consultation with the Medical Officer of Health; A Monsoon Turbine automated misting system will be used to keep dust from leaving the construction area into public spaces. Supervision of the dust control measures by a qualified environmental consultant if necessary, as determined through consultation with the Medical Officer of Health.
100
APPENDIX
feet meters
300 100
feet meters
20 9
Demolition Procedures and Safety Plan
101
Prime Consultant
P J
PJ Materials Consultants Limited James Street Baptist Church
MATERIALS CONSULTANTS
Limited
11 Wagoners Trail Guelph, Ontario CANADA, N1G 3M9 Tel: (519) 767-0702 Fax: (519) 821-2870 E-Mail: pjeffs@pjmc.net Web Site: http://www.pjmc.net
CONDITION ASSESSMENT REPORT
Hamilton, Ontario

James Street Baptist Church, Hamilton, Ontario
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction 2.0 Terms of Reference 3.0 Background 4.0 Summary ~ Overall Condition Assessment 5.0 Observations & Comments 6.0 Summary ~ Opinions 7.0 Recommendations 8.0 Cost Estimates 9.0 Conclusions Appendix One ~ Glossary of Terms Appendix Two ~ Grouting Destabilized Core Rubble Masonry Page 1 Page 1 Page 2 Page 7 Page 8 Page 19 Page 20 Page 22 Page 22
Appendix Three ~ Extract from Hamiltons Heritage Volume 5; Reasons for Designation Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Presented for Dalhousie Universitys Professional Development Courses
DISTRIBUTION
Steve Kennedy ~ Co-Chair, Building Repair Committee (For distribution as required)
Prepared for: James Street Baptist Church Building Repair Committee Project Ref: C-201125 November 2011
Specialist Consulting Services for the Construction, Restoration and Protection of Concrete & M asonry Structures
102
APPENDIX
Page 1 of 22 Hamilton, Ontario
1.0 1.1
INTRODUCTION This Condition Assessment Report has been prepared at the request of Steve Kennedy, Co-Chair for the Building Repair Committee, to confirm observations, comments and recommendations following exterior masonry inspections of the James Street Baptist Church in Hamilton, Ontario. Using an elevated boom truck, the inspections were carried out on 17th November 2011 with the objective of establishing future potential restoration needs. It should be noted that the inspections were limited to visual inspections only. It was not intended that each defect or deficiency should be documented in terms of its location. Rather, the intent was to identify the overall extent and nature of defects, damage or deficiencies to facilitate the development of a restoration strategy which may address not only the results but also the cause of the deterioration. The observations, comments and recommendations made within this report have been formulated as a result of the visual examinations - without any scientific testing being carried out. In addition, a limited amount of historical research was carried out subsequent to the visit and, when appropriate, this has been incorporated into the Background information detailed in Section 3.0. Further, additional information was provided to the author and this has been utilized to develop the authors opinions and in part to provide justification for some of the recommendations. The owner of the contractor hired to provide the boom truck and operator, Philip Hoad, was present at the beginning of the condition assessment and so - in view of his considerable experience and expertise in historic roofing - the opportunity was taken for him to view the condition of the roof. Following his review, photographs and comments were provided to the author and some of these have also been incorporated within this report. To assist the reader who may not be familiar with masonry terminology, a Glossary of Terms is included with this report as Appendix One. As indicated later, one of the recommendations is that the masonry should be stabilized using grouting techniques. To assist the reader who may not be familiar with the proposed stabilization method, a copy of a presentation prepared by the author for use at professional development training courses is also included as Appendix Two. TERMS OF REFERENCE Visit the church and carry out a condition assessment of the exterior masonry. Access to upper portions of the masonry to be provided by others. Provide a Condition Assessment Report, complete with photographs, which confirms observations, comments and recommendations for appropriate restoration work indicated by the visual inspections. Include an estimate of the potential cost for carrying out the restoration work.
3.0 3.1
BACKGROUND Constructed during the period 1878 - 1882, the James Street Baptist Church is located in the central area of Hamilton at the south-west corner of James and Jackson Streets. The church was designed by a well-known architect of the time, Joseph Connolly. The church is believed to be the only non-Catholic church in Ontario designed by Connolly; some of his other designs included the Church of Our Lady Immaculate in Guelph, St. Patricks in Hamilton and St. Pauls Basilica in Toronto. The church building has been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, leading to the City of Hamilton Planning and Development Department to make the following statement regarding its Architectural Significance:Photo 1: Aerial view of the church to indicate its location and layout. (Image obtained from Google Earth.)
1.2
1.3
3.2
1.4
... The church is designed in the Gothic Revival Style; its massive stone construction and complex monumental composition are indicative of a later, High Victorian phase of the style. Unique among Hamilton churches, the James Street church is particularly distinguished by the use of rock-faced masonry walls, dominant corner tower and heavily buttressed faades .... Under the heading Designated Features, the City also states .... ... Important to the preservation of the James Street Baptist Church are the original features of the exterior facades, including the slate roof, masonry walls and detailing, all windows, including the stained glass, and the door openings, but excluding the recent alterations of new doors and the new glazing of the front entrance .... Further information concerning the Reasons for Designation may be viewed within Appendix Three. 3.3 The primary masonry units were fabricated from Eramosa Dolomitic Limestone (calcium magnesium carbonate), a building stone characterised by its irregular bedding, its variable texture, and particularly for the presence of cavities (vugs) and fissures, the latter two features becoming more pronounced over time from the effects of natural weathering. The cavities and fissures, are typically formed when minerals such as calcite and quartz - present in the fabricated masonry units as naturally formed inclusions within the rock matrix - subsequently become removed by erosion or dissolution processes. (See Photograph 2)
1.5 1.6
2.0 2.1 2.2
Photo 2: Eramosa Dolomitic Limestone was used to fabricate the masonry units - the arrows highlight cavities known as vugs.
Condition Assessment Report
103
Prime Consultant
Active dimension stone quarries existed in the Hamilton, Waterdown and Ancaster areas during the late 1800s; the actual source of the stone used in the construction of the church is not known by the author at the time of preparation of this report, but it is known that the Waterdown quarry contained more clay and weathered more rapidly. 3.4 Two important events are recorded as having occurred before the church building was completed. In September 1879, scaffolding erected around the tower collapsed, causing the death of two workers after they fell sixty feet to the ground. Shortly after this event, the Weekly Times reported rumours that there were severe defects in the workmanship used for the construction of the church. It was reported that some persons suggested ... the foundations had sunk, others that the masonry was defective, and others that the church though presenting a handsome appearance was a mere shell .... The second event occurred on Monday, December 1, 1879, after a subcontractor apparently heard sounds of crumbling and cracking emanating from the building and immediately ordered his men to leave the project site. Shortly after, a large mass of material was heard to fall inside the church tower. The Hamilton Spectator subsequently reported that ... a glance at the standing portions of the wall and at the mass of stones on the ground revealed a state of things which deserves the severest condemnation. Instead of being firmly placed in good mortar, the stones composing the walls were laid in sand .... An editorial later severely condemned the construction practices used in erecting the church, stating: .... looking at the crumbled mass one does not wonder how the walls gave way, but how they came to stand long enough to have the top stone put on them. Practical men who have been examining the building for several days past assure us that in many places they could remove the interior stones with their hands. 3.5 The history of conservation of the exterior fabric of the building after construction was completed in 1882 remains largely unknown to the author at the time of preparation of this report, until the late part of the last century. However, from photographic records, it seems likely that the basement windows were installed sometime during the first two or three decades. (See Photographs 3 & 4) More recently, previously below grade portions of the North basement walls were uncovered and a walk-out basement door was installed. (See Photograph 5)
3.6
The lower (nave) roof on the south was evidently re-slated some relatively short period of time ago. (See Photograph 6) Although the style of the slate was replicated, the contrasting colour of the scalloped bands was not. It is understood that the interior of the church was completely restored during 1988/1989. Concerns were raised by City of Hamilton building officials during the Summer of 2000, when it was reported that pieces of mortar and masonry had Photo 6. The lower nave roof to the south was re-slated in ????. spalled and fallen from the south end of the east faade to the streets below. Apparently, cracking and deflection of the wall was also detected. The following statement was included in the City of Hamilton Planning and Development Department Recommendation document dated 10th August 2001:.... As a result of water infiltration, freeze-thaw cycles and likely the 1998 earthquake considerable cracking and out-of-plane deflection has occurred. The exterior wythe of the southeast corner around the principle window has bowed outwards allowing rubble fill to fall in to the newly created gap. As a result the structural integrity of the faade has been compromised and it is now proposed to undertake works that remediate the situation .... As a result of these concerns, a professional engineering firm was retained to investigate the structural implications and advise on appropriate remedies. Accordingly, in 2001, restoration of the south-east corner was carried out which was cited to included the following:.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 removal, repair and re-installation of large stained glass window; replacement of plexiglass covering and replacement with vented lexan covering; removal, marking, photography, storage and re-installation of masonry units; repair of lintel; installation of masonry wall ties (interior and exterior); installation of buttress ties, countersunk plates and colour-keyed epoxy topping to buttress north of window; repointing of masonry units and fine grouting of cavity; and, placement of vertical and horizontal reinforcement in cavity.
3.7
3.8
Photos 3 & 4 (Top) Evidence that basement windows were subsequently installed. Photo 5. Current day view of exposed basement walls.
It is unclear at this time whether or not additional work was included in the project.
104
APPENDIX
3.9
In addition to the other previous restoration work that was observed during the inspection visit and reported within this report, it is understood that, since the 2001 project, repair work has been carried out to the roof, including the tower roof, as well as to windows. The date when the south clerestory stained glass panes were removed and boarded in is not known by the author at the time of preparation of this report. (See Photograph 7.) However, it is understood that the Copp window stained glass on the north nave elevation was removed in 2010, pending conservation work and reinstatement.
by modern cement based mortars - even when the latter contain a proportion of hydrated lime. The most important property was a softness that enabled the mortar to absorb stresses created by gravity load distribution and, in particular, from differential movement between adjoining components during times of extreme temperature change and the resulting natural expansion and contraction of the masonry materials. It was the softness of pure lime-based mortars that permitted traditional structures to be designed and constructed without the movementaccommodating joints that are so essential to the more rigidly designed and constructed buildings today. .4 Hydrated lime mortars gain their hardened properties by a carbonation process; the lime (calcium hydroxide) reacts with carbon dioxide from the surrounding environment to produce a much tougher compound - calcium carbonate. The process naturally commences from the exterior and gradually advances as the carbon dioxide diffuses through the mortar. Therefore, the pointing mortar hardens from the exterior first - then the bedding mortar - almost certainly taking many years for the complete process to take place, although the outer skin would form quite rapidly. (As carbonation occurs, the pore structure becomes more dense as it is filled with the products of reaction - thereby progressively slowing the process.) Ultimately, the inner core rubble mortar also becomes progressively harder - but, as there is very little carbon dioxide available within the masonry, it could take decades for the inherent soft characteristics of the lime mortar to be lost. However, as the lime hardens, its ability to accommodate movement diminishes and, eventually, cracks form from the increasing development of stress. Although, once cracks have formed, they can provide the function of a joint, thus limiting any further stress development, they unfortunately facilitate the ingress of moisture into the masonry assembly. The major disadvantage with hydrated lime is that - until it sufficiently hardens - it is vulnerable to being leached out of the mortar by any water that penetrates the masonry assembly, particularly the inner core rubble. When water enters cracks it naturally gravitates within the masonry to lower levels - dissolving whatever poorly carbonated lime is available in its path. Thus voids are formed as more and more lime passes into solution and percolates the mortar, leaving behind a granular debris - which, when dry, can subsequently filter downward, following the path formed by the lime solution.
Photo 7. The south clerestory window glazing has been removed and boarded .
3.10
To appreciate the current serious condition of the masonry recorded in this report, it is considered important that the basic design, method of construction and the materials used are understood. These understandings are also essential to the successful development of conservation strategies that can restore adequate long term durability to the exterior fabric - and prevent re-occurrence of damage. .1 Until the 20th Century and the commercialisation of cavity wall construction techniques, brick and stone masonry exterior walls were traditionally built as thick mass assemblies. This was not just to ensure adequate structural load-bearing integrity, but also to provide interior insulation from hot and cold weather extremes. Additionally, the thick sections of masonry ensured that rain saturated walls could dry between rainfall and moisture thereby prevented from reaching the interior. For churches and similar types of buildings constructed using natural stone masonry, the most common method of economically achieving adequate wall section thickness was the construction of an exterior wythe using the most affordable fabricated material, typically in an ashlar coursed style. A gap was then formed as the interior wythe was built using a less expensive material, such as random coursed field or rubble stone, brick or speed tile. As the wall was assembled, the inner space was filled with off-cuts of an even cheaper material, such as stone off-cuts, broken brick, rubble, etc., typically bound with a weak lime mortar or grout. (The filled centre of the masonry is typically referred to as inner core rubble.) Although the section thickness varied considerably from building to building, a rule of thumb guide was 8-inches for each of the exterior and interior wythes and the inner core. Until the availability of Portland cement in Canada - the first manufacturing facility began operation in Quebec in 1889 - the mortar used for masonry constructions was typically produced on site using hydrated lime and sand, blended in the approximate proportions of 1:3 by volume. The physical properties provided by the hydrated lime were inherently different to those provided
.5
.6
.2
.3
105
Prime Consultant
.7
The next stage of the deterioration process can best be described by quoting from Decanini et al.1 .... Failure of these walls can result from outward pressure on the outer wythes from the compacted material in the inner core, combined with the transfer of the vertical loads to the now inadequately stabilized and supported outer wythe ..... In other words, with the natural expansion that takes place during warm weather, the debris within the inner core space settles and becomes compacted within the additional space created by the expansion. Then, when temperatures fall, the exterior wythe cannot return to its original location in the areas where the debris has compacted - thus placing lateral loads on the masonry, which in turn can result in bulging (out-of-plane deflection/displacement) of the masonry. The resulting over-loading also creates cracks within the exterior wythes, which further weakens the masonry assembly and provides additional points of ingress for more water to add to the deterioration process. The cracks can occur through the mortared joints or, under the worse case scenario, through the dimension stone masonry units.
5.0 5.1
OBSERVATIONS & COMMENTS The inspections from the boom truck by both the author and Philip Hoad confirmed that the slate roofs are in a seriously poor condition. Mr Hoad reported that severe delamination of many slates was observed with evidence of additional material failure due to cracks along ribbons. In some areas, slates were missing and the underlying roof boards were clearly visible, indicating that water infiltration to the interior, as well as rotting of wood roof boards and the underlying roof support structure, can be expected. There was evidence of advanced nail sickness within many areas - ie: corrosion of nail shanks and heads, resulting in slate slippage and loss of slate. There was also evidence that snow events had caused bending of both slate hooks and copper bibs such that previously repaired slates - including those from the re-slated lower south nave roof - are liable to become dislodged and potentially fall from the roof. One slate was observed that had obviously become previously dislodged and had been reinstalled by turning and inverting it in such a way that the holes were now visible and subject to water ingress. Some loose slates were temporarily resecured during the inspections and one dislodged slate was removed to prevent it falling to the ground. Examples of some of these deficiencies are illustrated by Photograph 8. As indicated within the Introduction to this report, the condition of the roofs was considered to be sufficiently serious to warrant the implementation of emergency repairs and this is currently under investigation.
.8
Thus it can be seen that, unless deteriorated inner core rubble is re-stabilized - and ongoing differential movement of the buildings components accommodated - more stress can continue and the deterioration processes can thereby continue unabated and often at an exponential rate.
4.0 4.1
SUMMARY ~ OVERALL CONDITION ASSESSMENT The roofs were observed to be in a serious poor condition and at the time of preparation of this report emergency repairs were strongly recommended and under investigation. The masonry was also observed to be in an extremely poor condition, with urgent action required on a major scale to prevent more serious deterioration from occurring.
Decanini, L., De Sortis, Goretti, A., Langenbach, R., Molliaioli, F., and Rasulo, A., Masonry Building Performance in the 2002 Molise Earthquake http://www.conservationtech.com/RL's%20resume&% 20pub's/RL-publications/Eq-pubs/2003-EE RI(Molise)/Molise-MASONRY.pdf
Photo 8 with inset photographs: Examples of some of the many observed deficiencies.
106
APPENDIX
5.2
It was observed that, where the boards had become uncovered by a missing slate on the upper south nave roof, water had penetrated and gravitated to saturate the upper portions of the masonry assembly below. (See Photograph 9) This had resulted in the deposition of soluble salts, including lime, on the exterior surface as they were drawn to the surface from inside the masonry and the moisture evaporated. A par t fr o m the unattractive appearance this effect creates, the removal of the salts means that voids are being created within the assembly. Photo 9. The masonry below the missing slates are becoming saturated by rainwater. (Most of the lime becomes washed from the surface by rainfall and so the effect is typically worse than it appears.)
Photos 10 ~ 13: Examples of some of the damaged sections of eavestroughs.
5.4
5.3
It was observed that the eavestroughs were badly damaged and/or distorted at some locations, most likely due to snow-load. (See Photos 10 ~ 13) It is obvious that a considerable amount of the roof drainage water overflows onto masonry and will eventually lead to more severe deterioration. It was also observed that the eave drip edges were steel and that they were badly corroded.
It was observed that flashings at roof to masonry junctions had typically failed or have been incorrectly installed and water is able to saturate the adjacent masonry and/or penetrate the roofing system. (See Photograph 14 with inset photographs)
Photo 14 with insets: The flashings have failed and water can by-pass them.
Prime Consultant
Hamilton, Ontario
5.5
It was observed that many of the buttresses had cracked and that the cracks were typically wider than normally observed on most other buildings inspected by the author. (See Photograph 15) The cracks had the appearance of having been caused by an overload condition or lateral movement - which was sufficient to fracture stone units rather than follow the typically weaker path of least resistance through mortar joints. Many of the vertical joints between buttresses and the walls were also badly cracked, the width of the cracks indicating that considerable movement had occurred. (See Photograph 16) Note that the inset photograph indicates that the joints had been previously repointed and further movement has since occurred.
Photos 17 & 18 with insets: Example of areas of foundation walls evidently suffering from the effects of saturation. Evidence of distress to the inner core rubble is evident.
5.7
Photos 15 & 16. Examples of some of the damage that has occurred to buttresses.
5.6
It was observed that the nave foundations walls on the north elevation (previously below grade) had suffered from the effects of freezing and thawing in a saturated condition. (See Photographs 17 & 18 with inset photographs) It was also evident that the saturation of the masonry was throughout the full assembly - inferring that rainwater is penetrating at higher levels and gravitating to the foundation portions though the inner core rubble. There was also evidence of considerable water ingress on the interior in several places. (See Photograph 18 inset photograph for an example) It is inconceivable to the author that this ongoing condition has not caused major deterioration to the inner core rubble and that this in turn is the major cause of the exterior masonry distress that has been and will be reported.
Debris from the inner core r ub bl e was observed on the window sill of the round window on the north-west stairwell wall for both the inte r io r and the exterior. (Photo 19.) It was evident that the debris had fallen through a gap that had opened up at the head of the window that had most likely been caused by lateral movement of the exterior wythe.
Photo 19 with insets: Evidence of debris that had fallen on the window sill ledge on both the interior and exterior.
108
APPENDIX
5.8
Considerable evidence of cr a ck i ng was observed within the north transept gable end masonry located above and adjacent to the large arched window. (See Photographs 20 & 21) There was evidence that the cracked joints had been repointed with hard cement mortars on at least o ne occasion in the past only to fail once more. The cracks were Photos 20 & 21 with insets: Considerable cracking of the masonry was observed within the observed to be very north transept gable end. wide, indicating a considerable amount of stress and movement had occurred. More cracks were observed within the north transept east facing side wall above the lower nave roof. (See Photograph 22 with inset photographs) It seems likely that the cause of these cracks is linked to that which influenced the development of the cracks on the north elevation. Certainly, the cracks had the appearance of having been caused by considerable movement, most likely from the effects of the destabilized inner core rubble.
5.10
It was observed that previous strengthening work had taken place on the south transept gable end wall. It is unclear when this work was done, but there is evidence of cracks which presumably have occurred since the strengthening work was carried out. (See Photographs 23 ~ 26 - some of the cracks are highlighted by the arrows.) The author believes it is reasonable to assume that the strengthening work only served to transfer stresses elsewhere, mainly because the cause of the original cracking was not adequately addressed in the restoration strategy and the techniques used produced a more rigid structure that was unable to absorb stresses.
5.9
Photos 20 & 21 with insets: Considerable cracking of the masonry was observed within the north transept gable end.
5.11
At many locations, vertically oriented crack patterns were observed - especially adjacent to window openings. (See Photographs 27 ~ 30)These patterns are typical of the existence of an overload condition within the exterior wythe of masonry which tends to concentrate at areas that provide a weak path of resistance, resulting in cracking. It was also observed that past cracked joint repair work primarily used inappropriate cement-based mortars. These mortars are too hard, providing very little accommodation for natural movement - particularly because of their very strong adhesion characteristics. They also do not readily transmit moisture vapour from within the masonry - a property otherwise better provided by lime-based mortars. Hard mortars therefore tend to slow down the rate of drying and can lead to accelerated deterioration during freezing and thawing conditions.
Photos 27 ~ 30: Evidence of overload conditions.
Photo 22 with insets: Considerable cracking of the masonry was also observed within the east facing side wall of the north transept.
109
Prime Consultant
5.12
Further evidence that an overload condition exists within the exterior wythe of masonry was also observed on the front elevation, where considerable cracking of the main entrance porch structure had occurred. (See Photographs 31 ~ 34)
5.14
A potentially dangerous condition was observed to exist within the turret masonry supporting a spire on the south east corner of the church building. (See Photographs 36 ~ 38) It appears likely that the missing piece of stone at the turrets south-east corner was part of the debris reported to have fallen during the Summer of 2000. However, as can be observed from Photograph 38, (lower right of the three photographs) the north-east corner stone is in a Photos 36 ~ 38: Evidence of a potentially dangerous condition on the south east serious condition and appears corner of the building. to be at the end of its service life. Further degradation of the stone is likely to cause the spire to topple. This should be considered to be a condition warranting urgent attention. It was observed that the turret spire and supporting masonry on the east end of the south transept gable end has the appearance of leaning. (See Photograph 39) It is not clear whether this is an optical illusion, whether it has been leaning since it was constructed, or whether it is the result of the destabilization that has been evident. In any event, further investigation is justified, although it should be noted that there were some nominal signs of cracking immediately adjacent to the turret which may possibly be the result of a reaction to some movement. (See inset photograph)
Photos 31 ~ 34: Further evidence that an overload condition exists.
5.15
5.13
It appears that severe deterioration must have occurred in the past at the upper east end of the south nave - probably due to inadequate roof drainage resulting in excessive saturation of the masonry. This obviously required rebuilding work and - presumably in the interests of economy - this was done using clay brick, which was then parged with a sand/cement mortar. However, water is entering through open flashings and joints and saturating the brick - to cause failure of the parging mortar from the actions of freezing and thawing. (See Photograph 35 with inset photographs) A portion of the parging was removed during the inspection since it was clearly in danger of becoming completely dislodged and falling to the ground.
Photo 35: Damage is occurring to the rebuilt masonry due to saturation from water entering above.
Photos 39: The turret appears to be leaning.
110
APPENDIX
5.16
As already reported, gaps that formed between window frames and masonry was observed. This was particularly in evidence on the north nave elevation windows where the gaps were considerable. (See Photographs 40 ~ 42) There was some evidence that this has been a long term problem that resulted in the west end window glazing being removed. The most likely cause of the problem has been out-of-plane deflection of the exterior wythe due to the inner core deterioration mechanisms as already described. It is certain that rainwater entering the observed gaps gravitates through the inner core to cause further deterioration and destabilization of the masonry walls. (It should be noted that the interior water damage to decorations adjacent to the windows is negligible compared to the large quantity of water that is ingressing the masonry, confirming the theory that the water is gravitating to the base of the foundation walls where it is causing the damage already illustrated by Photographs 17 & 18 on Page 12) It is also certain that any attempts to seal the gaps will fail until the inner core rubble problems have been addressed.
Photos 43 ~ 45: Further indications that out-of-plane deflections have occurred and continue to occur.
5.18
Photos 40 ~ 42: Evidence of gaps most likely caused by out-of-plane deflections of the exterior wythe of masonry. Rainwater can freely enter the gaps and gravitate through the inner core rubble to cause further damage.
5.17
Out-of-plane deflections of the exterior wythe of masonry were also observed on the north elevation. (See Photographs 43 ~ 45 for evidence of the gaps that have formed around basement window frames as a result.) From the evidence of previous repairs to infill the gaps, it is obvious that the movement has been ongoing for a number of years. From the evidence that further gaps have opened since the repairs were carried out, it is also obvious that excessive movement is still ongoing. It was observed that inappropriate hard cement mortars were used for repair of previous deterioration.
A final observation was that the exterior plexiglass is having an adverse influence on the actual window frames and potentially the glazing. In some cases, where there has been no venting of the space between the plexiglass and windows, there is evidence of accelerated deterioration. (See Photograph 46 with inset photographs.) It was observed that where there were no plexiglass covers or they were vented, the level of deterioration was considerably less. It is the authors Photos 46: The plexiglass covering is causing accelerated damage to the experience and opinion that windows. even vented covers can have an adverse influence. Current thinking based on studies carried out in the U.S.A. is that the amount of energy they save is negligible compared to the cost of earlier restoration - and that protection against vandalism can be provided with mesh/grill systems.
111
Prime Consultant
6.0 6.1
SUMMARY ~ OPINIONS Based on the background information, observations recorded in this report, and previous experiences, it is the authors opinion that the primary cause of the damage to the masonry has been deterioration of the inner core rubble portions resulting in destabilization of the walls. There is little doubt that the exterior wythe is acting independently and not as a composite part of the overall masonry assembly. Unless this condition is adequately addressed, it is highly unlikely that any future restoration work will be beneficial in anything other than the short term. The original quality of workmanship - and therefore the materials used - must remain in question and there is a very strong possibility that this contributed to the accelerated deterioration of the masonry. There is also a strong possibility that construction of buildings and infrastructure around the church has also contributed to the problems by causing underground reverberations that would have further destabilized the inner core portion of the masonry, resulting in gravitation of the poorly bound rubble. It is the authors opinion that previous restoration has not been effective due to the abovestated opinion, but in particular because they have not addressed the need for the buildings exterior fabric to adequately accommodate natural movement from the extremes of temperature change. Further, it is the authors opinion that the 2001 restoration work and the work on the south transept gable end which strengthened - rather than stabilized - the masonry has provided a rigid restraint to natural movement - and, of greater importance - to the excessive differential movement that is occurring within the masonry that was not included in the work. It is the authors opinion that other restoration/repair work carried out on the masonry over the years has primarily had a negative impact - particularly the use of hard repointing mortars. It is the authors opinion that deterioration of the masonry has advanced to a critical stage when serious and considerable intervention is required to ensure not only ongoing durability of the fabric but also the safety and security of persons and property. It is the authors opinion that the roofs are in a seriously poor condition and that emergency work is warranted on a top priority basis to secure loose slates and prevent them from becoming totally dislodged.
7.0 7.1
RECOMMENDATIONS A top priority project should be immediately implemented to secure loose roof slates. This work should ideally take place before the next significant snowfall. Although the roofs are badly in need of being re-slated, it is recommended that, after loose slate securement, re-slating work not take place until the masonry walls have been fully stabilized and can better resist the unloading and re-loading of the roof structure. When re-slating strategies are developed, it is strongly recommended that the work take place on both sides of the building simultaneously, to ensure that the unloading and re-loading takes place symmetrically. This will avoid causing a dramatic change in the dynamics of the wall stability. It is strongly recommended that the slate be replaced with similar slate and not shingle. Apart from the fact that the use of shingle would contravene the spirit of one of the reasons for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act, the lessening of the dead load on the roof superstructure may otherwise cause a change in dynamics that currently exists - in particular the resistance to uplift forces that exist under the current conditions of exposure may create. It is recommended that technical specifications be developed for the re-slating work and that only prequalified roofing companies experienced in historic roofing be invited to bid for the work. Flashing restoration should be included in the roof re-slating project, together with reinstatement of roof drainage. Consideration should be given to installation of snow guards on the roof and heat tracers along the eaves.
6.2
6.3
6.4 6.5
7.2
It is strongly recommended that the south-east turret structure spire be dismantled, the top course of stone replaced with new, and the spire rebuilt. This work should be considered to be a major priority, second only to the slate securement project, and it should be implemented as a separate project as soon as possible. It is recommended that the first stage of the primary restoration work should be the installation of stainless steel helical ties across the full section of the masonry assemblies. These ties, which should be installed on a predetermined grid following load-proving trials, are purpose-designed to provide some ultimate restraint to lateral movement between the inner and outer wythes. However, they still ensure a degree of ductility to the masonry - ie: they do not create a rigid structure. If at all possible, it is recommended that this work should take place as soon as possible as a separate project, working from boom trucks, moveable low-level scaffold systems, or scissor lifts. For economic logistical purposes, this work may be carried out as a separate stage from the primary restoration work, but it is required to prevent any further out-of-plane deflections of the exterior wythe, prior to any other work that may otherwise have a detrimental effect on the masonry.
6.6
7.3
112
APPENDIX
7.4
It is recommended that the entire masonry joints be cut out for at least 50-mm deep and a limebased mortar used to back-point the joints - leaving the final 12 to 15-mm to be repointed again with a lime-based mortar - at a later time. Removing all of the exterior portions of the mortar, particularly where hard cement mortar has been used, will assist in relieving some of the pressure on stone edges - created by the overload condition that almost certainly exists between horizontal courses. It will also subsequently allow the masonry to find a new more uniform equilibrium when later work takes place. While the back-pointing work takes place, 12-mm holes should be drilled horizontally through joints to intersect the inner core rubble and plastic tubes inserted to facilitate subsequent low pressure injection grouting work. Voids should then be filled using a lightweight cellular foamed cement grout that can provide further stabilization of the masonry without creating a rigid structure. (Further information regarding this technique and the benefits provided can be viewed within Appendix Two.) The installation of the stainless steel helical ties in advance of grouting is essential and the pump pressures should be strictly controlled during grouting. Following the grouting work, the tubes should be removed and the joints face-pointed using a lime-based repointing mortar. Only prequalified, specialist companies who have a proven track-record with the restoration of historic structures should be invited to bid for this work, including the installation of the ties, and technical specification should be prepared for the project. It is recommended that the vertical reentrant joints between the buttresses and walls be cut out as deeply as possible. The cut-out joints should then be sealed with an elastomeric joint sealant, selected to have a similar appearance and colour to the repointing mortar. The joint sealant should be installed over a foamed urethane backer rod. This recommended technique will better assist in maintaining a weathertight seal while accommodating a certain amount of natural movement that occurs between the buttresses and the walls. It is the authors experience with a considerable number of buildings that the vertical joints are particularly vulnerable to cracking, in which event water can ingress the masonry and cause accelerated deterioration to occur. Although there is a natural reluctance on the part of the heritage fraternity to accept the use of non-traditional materials, there is a growing realization within the industry that a compromise in this regard is essential if our vulnerable buildings are to be adequately preserved. The restoration project should also include ancillary work, such as millwork restoration, crack repair, resurfacing of the brick masonry infill area, etc.
8.0 8.1
COST ESTIMATES At the time of preparation of this report, an estimate of up to $10,000.00 has already been received for the emergency slate securement project. It is estimated that the cost for carrying out the rebuilding of the south-east turret is likely to be in the order of $50,000 to $60,000. It is estimated that the cost of carrying out the primary restoration work, is likely to be in the order of $1,500,000 to $1,600,000. It is estimated that the cost for re-slating the roofs and for installing new flashings and roof drainage is likely to cost in the order of $1,000,000 to $1,100,000. CONCLUSIONS The condition of the church building is considered to be poor and represents considerable risk to the safety of persons and property should the identified emergency work not be carried out. It is regrettable that the cost for restoring the building to a safe and durable condition is considerable but essential.
8.2
7.5
8.3 8.4
9.0 9.1
9.2
7.6
Prepared and submitted by:
Paul A. Jeffs PJ Materials Consultants Limited
26th November 2011

Ref: WP14/Hamilton~JamesStreetBaptistChurch/Report01
7.7
113
Prime Consultant
114
APPENDIX
Historical Background and Chronology
115
Prime Consultant
116
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sources, Primary Materials housed in James Baptist Church Archives and material in the Canadian Baptist Historical Collection, McMaster University. First hand accounts from Trustees and on site observation. Newspapers Hamilton Spectator 1846 Hamilton Times 1858 - 1920 Hamilton Herald 1889- 1936 Publications Anderson, Keith and John B. MacMillan , A History of James St. Baptist Church: 18551960 Spectator Printing Company, 1969 Gilmour, George P . and Chester W. New, Centenary History, James Street Baptist Church (Hamilton) 1844-1955, Times Job Print, Hamilton, 1994 Shaw, W. J. A Century of Service, St. Andrew - St. Pauls, 1833 - 1933 (Presbyterian Church), J.G. Lowe Printing Company, Hamilton, 1933 Steinberg, A. Douglas, Our Churches The Hamilton Centennial, Hamilton, 1946 Stevenson, Robert C., Jubilee Souvenir 1844-1894, being a brief historical sketch of the James St. Baptist Church, Spectator Printing Company Hamilton, 1894
117
Prime Consultant
Vickers. Elizabeth Smith The Victorian Buildings of Hamilton , Wentworth Bygones, No 7, 1967 Wentworth Landmarks, The Hamilton Spectator, Hamilton, 1897 Websites Barone, D, (2011, Sept. 10) Baptist Church - 1879. retrieved July 3, 2013, from http://1870shamilton.blogspot.ca/2011/09/baptist-church-1879.html?spref=tw Emporis (2000-2013) Pigott Building. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.emporis. com/building/pigottbuilding-hamilton-canada Canadas Historic Places (1987, October 30) Bank of Montreal. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=8330 Canadas Historic Places (1990, March 23) St Pauls Presbyterian Church. retrieved July 27, 2013, from www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=12774&pid=0 City of Hamilton (2012) Section 5: Parking. retrieved July 04, 2013, http://www.hamilton. ca/NR/rdonlyres/0C6598AA-DC64-43F1-901F-C6907DF43F41/0/Section5ParkingSeptember12012.pdf City of Hamilton (2013) Downtown Heritage Character Zone Design Guidelines. retrieved July 31, 2013, http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0C6598AA-DC64-43F1901F-C6907DF43F41/0/Section5ParkingSeptember12012.pdf Durand Neighbourhood Association (2007-2013) About Durand. retrieved July 27, 2013, from h t t p : / / w w w. d u r a n d n a . c o m /
118
APPENDIX
Heritage Canada Foundation (2000-2013) Tivoli Theatre. retrieved July 27, 2013, from http://www.heritagecanada.org/en/issues-campaigns/top-tenLeech (2005, April 21) Signs of Life on James North. retrieved July 27, 2013,http://www. raisethehammer.org/blog/061 Thurlby, (2006, april 21) Two churches by Joseph Connolly in Hamilton. retrieved July
3, 2013, from http://www.raisethehammer.org/article/306
Site Analysis
119

Heritage Impact Assessment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heritage Impact Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

13007 | James St Baptist (98 James St. S)

Table of Contents Executive Summary

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

Adaptive Reuse: Cultural Change and Identity of JSBC

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

FIGURE I: DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Impact of Disruption (Indirect)

Maintain James Street Baptist (Retain and Support Existing Structure)

Tabula Rasa (Full Demolition)

Increased Flexibility Increased Efficiency Increased Accessibility Reduced Cost

Adaptive Reuse (Stabilize, Partial Demolition and Build New Addition)

PREFERRED OPTION: ADAPTIVE REUSE AND CONVERSION

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

Option 1: Status Quo (Do Nothing)

Option 2: Maintain James Street Baptist (Preserve and Restore)

Option 3: Tabula Rasa (Fully Demolish and Redevelop)

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

1.3 CONTACT INFORMATION

MSA (McCallum Sather Architects)

JOSEPH CONNOLY AND THE GOTHIC REVIVAL IN SOUTHERN ONTARIO

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

2.1 CULTURAL CONTEXT & HISTORIC BACKGROUND

Cultural Context & Historic Background

Constructing James St Baptist (1878-1882)

St. Pauls Presbyterian Church

and one that could compete with the architectural grandeur

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

Cultural Context & Historic Background

Garwood-Jones Renovations (1988)

(re-painting, re-touching plaster and refinish wood

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

Masonry Restoration of South-East Facade (2001)

have been more appropriate.

Cultural Context & Historic Background

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

2.2 SITE ANALYSIS

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

HERITAGE LANDMARKS IN DOWNTOWN HAMILTON

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

CULTURAL LANDMARKS AND JAMES ST REVITALIZATION IN DOWNTOWN HAMILTON

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment

ARCHITECTURE AND CONTEXT

Cultural Revival and Urban Revitalization of James Street

157 Catharine St. N., Hamilton, ON L8L 4S4 T 905.526.6700 F 905.526.0906

James Street Baptist Heritage Impact Assessment