Plan brewing to save old McDougall Church
City diminished if key building can’t be rescued
A compromise, a foundation, a designation, a business plan and a project leader.
These are the five elements needed to save what must be saved, McDougall United Church. None of those things is now in place, but the outlines of a plan to save the fantastic old church are coming together.
The 1910 downtown structure is on a short list of buildings that Edmonton can’t lose.
If we want to preserve our history and the city’s character we need to at least save it along with the High Level Bridge, the Fairmont Hotel Macdonald, Edmonton City Hall, Coronation swimming pool, the Gibson Block, Whyte Avenue’s core buildings, the Muttart Conservatory, St. Joseph’s Basilica and the Alberta legislature.
The only one in danger now is old McDougall, which for decades was the city’s largest Protestant church and a downtown social hub. It is still an excellent musical venue with acoustics second only to the Winspear.
The threat? The church needs $8 million to $12 million in repairs, but the congregation is aging and dwindling.
It can’t raise that money. If nothing is done, the church will fall into disrepair, be condemned and get knocked down, with the downtown land sold for as much as $10 million.
To save the church, and protect its own interest, the McDougall congregation suggested that the city buy the building for $1, do the costly repair work, and lease the building back to the church for $1 a year.
It was a far-fetched scheme, partly because city council is in no mood to invest millions in repairs, but mainly because the city is not in the business of subsidizing congregations to stay in old churches.
A number on council, including Mayor Don Iveson, made both points clear to church treasurer Glen Greenough, 83, the retired CEO of Maclab Enterprises.
When news of the church’s request was reported, Gre enough and the McDougall congregation took a bit of a beating. Some suggested they’d made a shameless money grab.
But let’s look at this from their perspective. The congregation is not able to keep the church going. It can’t raise the $10 million. Still, that land is worth around $10 million, and designating the church as a historic site or simply handing over the church to the city means the church would be out that $10 million. Plus, the congregation would have no place to meet.
The congregation’s goal isn’t a sweet deal, Greenough says.
“The connotation that we’re in it to get something for nothing couldn’t be further from the truth.
“What we’re trying to do is saying it can be used as a community centre ... We would be a minor player in the building.”
City council has now asked if a foundation can be set up to run the building, with the congregation to continue to meet there, but the foundation finding the money for the repairs and acting as the building manager, booking other community events.
One possible source of income is the adjacent parking lot, owned by the church.
Fifteen years ago, the congregation looked at building an office tower there, with profits from the tower paying for the church.
The economics weren’t right then, but perhaps this plan can be revived. Developer Irv Kipnes is proposing a similar model to build commercial properties and use the profits to pay for a major performing arts campus in the downtown.
Kipnes says the McDougall spot and the market is right for a 20-storey rental apartment.
One key would be finding a philanthropic project leader and contractor to do the work on a non-profit basis. “They need a champion,” Kipnes says.
Iveson says he’s already asked the city’s planning department to look at potential development scenarios.
“I thought it was worth exploring what could happen on the adjacent parking lot as a way of generating some revenue that could help support the long-term sustainability of the building.”
Greenough is skeptical the church itself could pull off an apartment development, but he’s open to all options.
“It’s not rocket science, frankly, it’s just how badly do we want to preserve the building,” he says. “I think it’s worth preserving. But maybe it’s not.”
Does he think that Edmontonians care enough to help save it?
“I think they’d like to see a business case for it,” Greenough says. That’s exactly right. At the same time, a demolition would be an outrage.
But if we’re too complacent, closed-minded, unimaginative or cautious to find a solution, we’ll get the diminished city we deserve.