 Imperial Warehouse(Updated: 2007.02.12 11:13:18 AM) |
Above: The Imperial Warehouse in October 2003.
Above: The red arrow points to the Imperial Warehouse.
Above: This 1951 aerial view of Anglin Bay, facing west, underscores the industrial character of this corner of the inner harbour. Scows and dredges belonging to Canadian Dredge and Dock lie around Anglin Bay. All of the area below the rail lines running across the photograph is landfill; this encompasses earlier wharves, quays, and buildings (Queen’s University Archives). The red arrow points to the Imperial Warehouse.
Above: This 1924 air photo captures the industrial character of Anglin Bay. Notice the Davis Drydock, and the remains of the Grand Trunk Railway embankment to the right (National Air Photo Library). The red arrow points to the Imperial Warehouse.
The warehouse is a designated historic building. It was built in or before 1908 for the Queen City Oil Company. The exact date of construction could not be found. It is one of only a few industrial buildings left in Kingston from before WW1. The others that come to mind are the former Bajus Brewery (now a condominium), the Morton brewery and distillery (now the Tett Centre), the Dominion government drydock and adjacent buildings (now. the Marine Museum), and the cotton mill (now usually called the “woollen mill”). Another historic structure, the Davis Drydock, is very near the Imperial Oil Warehouse. The drydock is still in use, but the original structure is no longer visible.
The oil company warehouse has an entrance on the west side of the upper level that is the reason for it’s street address - 9 North Street. A stable used to stand nearby for the firm’s horsedrawn delivery wagons.
The first petroleum product that was widely used was kerosene, or “coal oil” for lamps. Unless your home or business was hooked up to the city’s coal gas generating works, you used kerosene for light.
By the time the warehouse was built kerosene was being shipped in tin cans enclosed by wooden cases. The "case" was a wooden frame holding two large tins (often five US or “Queen Anne’s” gallons) each. Needless to say, there was always leakage. Because of the danger of fire, stone or brick were preferred to build oil storage buildings in those days.
When automobiles first began to appear they used kerosene or gasoline that was still shipped in five-gallon tins. It was only when railway tank cars began to appear, and tank ships were built for use on the lakes, that gasoline could be shipped long distances in bulk.
When bulk shipments became possible Imperial Oil (Standard Oil, or “S.O.” or “Esso”) built storage tanks on the property to hold heating oil and gasoline. But even then, kerosene and lubricating oil continued to be shipped in tins and the warehouse probably continued to be used for those.
The warehouse has been owned by the city for some time, although nothing has been done to protect the structure. The city has not repaired the roof and the remaining internal wooden structures are now presumed to be damaged by water. The proposed 2007 city budget includes $100,000 for its demolition.
The 2004 city Building Conservation Master Plan estimated the cost of rehabilitating the building at $1,467,070.31 including an allowance of $370,195.31 for contingencies. This was to be divided between $450,000 of urgent work and $1,050,000 of future costs. Despite the inclusion of the figures down to the last cent, the assessment of the building was necessarily restricted in scope. Nobody has been inside since because the city boarded it up for safety reasons rather than try to stabilize it.
The deterioration is presumably the reason the city wants to tear it down, exactly the tactic that they object to developers using who want to get rid of an old building. “Let it decay until rehabilitation is no longer economic and then ask for permission to get rid of it.” The property standards bylaw does not seem to have been applied for some reason.
According to the consultants, Morrison Hirschfield, the Wellington Street extension poses no danger for the warehouse. The street will pass the warehouse on the east side and then curve slightly to the west, roughly following the old railway right of way.
In 2004 the city rated the warehouse as of medium historical significance, low operational significance, and low public visibility. Certainly the city should know, in light of the work done on the Tett Centre and the work that a private contractor is now doing on the John Mark’s house, that even a severely damaged building may be rehabilitated as long as most of the support structure remains sound. In the case of the warehouse, the walls are the main support structure, and they still appear to be firm, although needing maintenance.
In the past there has been some interest in the building from the private sector. Brownfields funding may be available for it, and it will be much more visible to the public and more valuable when the Wellington Street extension brings increased automobile and pedestrian traffic past it. The $100,000 the city wants to spend to tear the building down would be better spent on a realistic assessment of its condition, its stabilization, and plans for its future.
by John Duerkop with much assistance from Helen Finley.