Culture and Recreation
400 University AvenueToronto ON M7A 2R9 / Ministère du Tourisme,
de la Culture et des Loisirs
400, avenue University
Toronto ON M7A 2R9 /
42-054C
Conservation Review BoardTel 416-314-7137
Fax 416-314-7175 / Commission des
Biens culturels
Tl 416-314-7137
Tlc 416-314-7175
CONSERVATION REVIEW BOARD
RE: THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BRANTFORD, ONTARIO;
INTENTION TO DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS "THE
COCKSHUTT BUILDINGS" AND MUNICIPALLY AS 66 MOHAWK
STREET, BRANTFORD, ONTARIO
Stuart W. Henderson, Chair February 20, 2002
Andrew S. Mathers, Member
Thomas F. McIlwraith, Member
This hearing was convened under Section 29(8) of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990,
c.O.18, for the purpose of reporting to the Council of the City of Brantford whether, in
the opinion of the Board, the property known municipally as the former Cockshutt Plow
Company Office and Timekeeping Building located at 66 Mohawk Street, Brantford,
Ontario, should be designated by By-Law under the Act, an objection having been raised
by Mr. Bruce Dinsmore.
Notice of this hearing was given under the Act and published in The Brantford Expositor
on February 13, 2002, by the Conservation Review Board. The relevant affidavit by a
member of the Board's staff is Exhibit #1.
The Board, in accordance with its customary practice, had the opportunity to inspect the
site and view the surrounding area prior to the hearing.
The Board met in the Council Chamber, Brantford City Hall, on Wednesday,
February 20, 2002.
Present:Larry Tansley, Solicitor, City of Brantford
Matt Reniers, Senior Planner, Policy & Programs, City of Brantford
Thomas Oldham, Canadian Industrial Heritage Foundation, Brantford
William Cockshutt, Citizen, Brantford
Bruce Dinsmore, Objector, St. Thomas, Ontario
1
In this report the "Cockshutt Buildings" is the term used to describe a connected three-
part structure appearing in a photograph in Exhibit #9, Section 1, and labelled there as
consisting of "Office Building," "Remaining Warehouse" and "Timekeeper’s Building."
Other buildings standing on the full 33-acre parcel, and at one time part of the Cockshutt
enterprise are, for the purposes of this hearing, not considered relevant.
The Board was informed that the land on which the Cockshutt Buildings stand is a
portion of a 33-acre parcel owned by Mr. Paul Doyle, President of bankrupt Go-Vacations
Limited, and in arrears $686,000 in municipal taxes. The Cockshutt Buildings
themselves are purportedly owned by Mr. Bruce Dinsmore, owner of a building salvage
business.
Case for the City of Brantford
Mr. Tansley stated that the Cockshutt Buildings are of overwhelming historical and
architectural significance and should be designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Mr. Tansley took some time to explain the ownership situation (Sections 23 to 25 of
Exhibit #9) of the Cockshutt Buildings.
On questioning by the Board, Mr. Tansley reported that the land is eligible for municipal
tax sale or city seizure for unpaid taxes, but that the City has postponed acting on this
option pending the results of an environmental rehabilitation study. The City could
become owner of the site, but it is not clear whether it would also become the owner of
the Cockshutt Buildings.
Mr. Tansley introduced the City's one witness, Mr. Matt Reniers, who the Board qualified
as an expert, without objection, in the area of heritage policy and planning.
Witness - Matt Reniers
Mr. Reniers reviewed for the Board the voluminous background of the Cockshutt family
enterprise and the City's efforts in designating the property in question. He led the Board
through the binder (Exhibit #9) section by section, without interpretation and with little
comment. Contents included photographs, company history, and site plans (Sections 1 to
6); documents regarding the current arrangements for removal of buildings (Sections 7 to
11); the Heritage Designation process (Sections 12 to 18); objection to the proposed
Heritage Designation (Sections 19 to 22); and heritage planning objectives in the City's
Official Plan (Section 26).
2
In relationship to section 7.8.15 of the Official Plan (Section 26 of Exhibit #9, discussing
the Mohawk Street area, including the Cockshutt Buildings), he reported that the site of
the Cockshutt Buildings is "probably cleanest", environmentally, of any part of the overall
site, and that the City is monitoring wells along the front of the property. In the longer
run this area is planned for mixed uses, including open space and institutions.
Maintenance of the Cockshutt Buildings would appear to be consistent with City planning
objectives.
Mr. Reniers concluded that it would please the City to have the Cockshutt Buildings
retained, but that it had not evaluated their structural condition.
On questioning by the Board, Mr. Reniers stated that the residential context of the site
was not considered among the reasons for recommending designation. He also reported
that the architect for the Cockshutt Buildings is unknown, and that the City has made no
contact with Heritage Canada regarding the Cockshutt Buildings.
Case for Mr. Bruce Dinsmore
Witness - Bruce Dinsmore
Mr. Dinsmore introduced himself as a Brantford native and one-time Cockshutt employee
who has had a 40-year career in building demolition, reclamation, and materials
recycling. He believes he is the owner of the Cockshutt Buildings. He laid out the
complex legalities of the case, in particular the demolition permit that included, and
apparently authorized, removal of the Cockshutt Buildings in question. It was his
intention to profit from the sale of the reclaimed materials. He spoke of the yellow pine
timbers and hardwood flooring as particularly attractive recyclable elements (although
less so in recent markets), and of customers for such materials in Canada and Europe.
Mr. Dinsmore described the Office and Timekeeper's buildings as structurally sound and
easily restorable. He characterized the Remaining Warehouse behind as being "in rough
shape ... it’s junk." Some of the roof has caved in, removal of drainage downspouts has
allowed water to run inside, and the floors have heaved. Regarding restoration of the
Remaining Warehouse, his view was that "you can do anything for a price."
Mr. Dinsmore claims that he tried to sell the Cockshutt Buildings to the city before the
demolition permit was issued. He believes that there is little or no toxicity in the soil
around the buildings, but that adequate testing has not been done.
Mr. Dinsmore told the hearing that he now wishes to remove himself from a complex
legal situation, exacerbated by the bankruptcy of the owner of the property. He is
prepared to back off from his claim to the Cockshutt Buildings, and is sympathetic to
3
their continued existence. He is content with the process of Heritage Designation
proceeding, noting that, in fact, he "has no say if designation occurs." He wants the City
to benefit from whatever happens, and believes that the Cockshutt Buildings could be a
Museum; he added that "the museum would be good for the city" and "could be
something really beautiful."
Mr. Dinsmore invited the Board to see inside the Cockshutt Buildings, but changed his
mind when the issue of liability was raised.
Statements from the Public
Thomas Oldham, Canadian Industrial Heritage Foundation
Mr. Oldham described the Foundation, formed in 2000, as a rapidly growing organization
committed to refurbishing the Cockshutt Buildings for use as a museum of industrial
history. The CIHF is actively raising funds for such a project at this time. His
organization favours Heritage Designation of the Cockshutt Buildings. He described the
Office building as "a memorial to the workers."
Mr. Dinsmore asked Mr. Oldham if it was proper to be collecting money to be applied to
a building over which the organization has no current authority. Mr. Oldham replied that
the money was for the industrial museum project, regardless of the building in which it
might ultimately be housed. Mr. Dinsmore cautioned that donors are, nevertheless, likely
to believe that their money is going towards preservation of the Cockshutt Buildings.
William Cockshutt, Citizen
Mr. Cockshutt, grandnephew of James George Cockshutt (founder of the plow works),
was eloquent in his comments on the role of workers and citizens in making the
Cockshutt firm a renowned Brantford institution. He recognized the significance of the
worker housing neighbourhood across Mohawk Road from the factory. He spoke of the
Remaining Warehouse as an integral part of the Cockshutt Buildings, with the Office
section at the front.
Findings of the Board
Based on the testimony before it, the Board concludes that there is essentially no dispute
between the parties on the architectural and historical significance of the Cockshutt
Building.
Opinions differed as to whether the Remaining Warehouse should be included in any
proposal for designation. Mr. Tansley posed the question more than once, which
4
prompted others to make specific reference to the Remaining Warehouse in their
recommendations.
In addition to architectural details described by the City, the Board notes that the Office
Building has tapered bricks in the archwork and coloured mortar between the bricks –
detailing of an extraordinary sort showing this to be a finely crafted edifice.
An industrial heritage museum is the only use proposed for the Cockshutt Buildings.
The Board is unable to make any judgment of the viability of such a proposal in the
absence of a thoroughly developed plan of action.
The Board was struck by Mr. Dinsmore's commitment to the well being of the city. His
willingness to forego the proceeds from salvage and to recognize the value of the
Cockshutt Buildings to the Brantford civic fabric is extraordinary, and to be
complimented.
Recommendations of the Board
The Board recommends that the Cockshutt Buildings be designated by By-law under Part
IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
The Board suggests that the residential neighbourhood adjacent to the Cockshutt
Buildings be cited as a contextual reason for recommending designation. Cockshutt
employees undoubtedly lived there and walked to work. Their landscape is part of the
Cockshutt story.
The Board notes the urgency inherent in this recommendation for designation; the
buildings have been vacant and without heat for 10 or 12 years, and frost action is
beginning to take its toll. Still, the Board believes that the buildings are recoverable, and
is cautiously optimistic that there is sufficient good will by the City and the buildings'
owner for the Cockshutt Buildings to have a secure future.
The Board urges that the City of Brantford and those promoting the museum project
display a passionate interest in the Cockshutt Buildings, as a splendid anchor in a
multiple-use area.
(original signed) by:
______
Andrew S. Mathers, Member
5
42-054C