St. Francis Church - They just discovered the steeple was a step above dust?
I was called today to read about this “new” development in the restoration project of the Church. Here is a link to the story on Metroland.
“Repairs will cost Ajax an extra $250,000 on a multi-million dollar project”
“Mayor Parish said although he’d rather the problem didn’t exist, there was no way it could have been foreseen.”
hmmmm , not so fast.
You read about the Church Window issue here last year. I had asked some questions to a member of the Church Community, here is a small excerpt.
1a)Would the Town have purchased the Church without windows?
This is a question that should be asked of the Town.
We do know that the historical designation of the building highlighted the Stained Glass windows and the Steeple. This designation was declared after our Steering Committee began the design process and made it publicly known that our intent was to take the Stained Glass with us. In fact, we made the commitment to our faith community that the Stained Glass windows would be used as a testament to our heritage.
We also investigated with our architect the possibility of retaining the bell tower, but it was cost prohibitive, and the consultant said that so much of the old brick work would have needed to be replaced that essentially it would become a replica of the original.
We were not surprised. Why is the Town saying they are surprised. They were told. Cost Prohibitive is relevant to the money you want to spend, what is prohibitive to you may not be to someone else , the Church was aware the brickwork in the steeple was so bad it would have to be rebuilt.
If an architect who did not actually get on a scaffold know , why didn’t the sole source architect the Town of Ajax hired know the steeple would have to be rebuilt ?
This happens in so many projects, a bid is made then later it is amended due to unforeseen costs.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Well isn’t this a big surprise. The cost of this restoration will likely jump even higher before they’re finished. Has there ever been a project that didn’t go over budget?. The reality is that the money comes from the same taxpayer no matter which government is funding it.
I’m a history buff and I’m not against preserving old buildings. But you do have to wonder whether this particular building was worth saving based on the original assessment of things that needed to be done. To put this into simple terms… it’s a basket case!. It’s no wonder the Town purchased the property for $50,000. They’re now realizing that the steeple is beyond repair?. Wait till they start work on the floor and leaning walls.
I don’t know how long this church was designated as a heritage property but the Catholic church should have done more in the way of maintenance which may have prevented it from becoming so run down. I thought there were laws which required owners of heritage properties to keep them maintained?.
Church Street was originally part of Pickering before Ajax took it over in the 1970s. This whole area (Ajax included) was once known as Pickering Township and was in Ontario County (now Durham Region). By rights, that church has closer ties to Pickering then it does with Ajax.
I don’t think our track record for preserving history is a good one. Ajax has lost A LOT of old 19th century buildings within the past few decades. Most of which were in far better shape. Aside from the ones in Pickering Village (which never belonged to us originally) there’s very little left in the way of old buildings east of Church Street.
Karem: I recall reading in the paper quite some time ago about fundraising ideas, what is the status of this? They need to fundraise for these cost overruns! maybe Pickering should chip in some since it is their history also!
November 17th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
I wasn’t going to comment on this. Fact of the matter I, while many citizens of Ajax just don’t care enough to pay attention, I used to actually REALLY care. I have watched the colossal waste of our tax dollars on some of the “pet projects” and “marketing” that this council does and shake my head. It’s gotten to the point that I just throw my arms up in the air. In my opinion, it’s come to the point that idiocy is the norm with some of these people.
MANY people, myself included, stood before our council and highlighted this as a taxpayer funded boondoggle. I submitted a motion to be tabled to council to stop this insanity. I even highlighted that it was destined to go over budget.
If memory serves me correct, this was actually initially budgeted at $1.2 million. (This was before funds were committed under the Federal Stimulus Package). It appears that the Federal money was not used to offset this $1.2M but it seems to have been used to increase the budget (I may be wrong but last I checked this project was approaching $2 Million. This was BEFORE the steeple issue was “discovered”)
When I look at the cost overruns on town hall, the pavilion down at the lake and this latest boondoggle, I can only conclude a combination of three things:
1) With the HUGE gaps in estimated versus actual costs our estimating process is extremely flawed and needs to be addressed
2) Staff providing performing the estimates need to be retrained or replaced because they are not providing council with complete and/or accurate information
3) Council is purposely misleading the public as to the actual cost of projects and initially budgeting for what they feel the public will tolerate and adding on additional costs after the fact claiming “well, it’s too late to go back now”
If memory serves me correct, 100% of the citizens that spoke to council on the church restoration DID NOT WANT IT DONE. In it’s arrogance, council, with the exception of a couple of councilors who seem to actually CARE where our tax dollars go, charged forward and all that they were being told is now becoming a reality.
I would not be at all shocked if this project reaches the $2.5 Million - $3 Million mark.
Some times it’s lousy being right.
November 19th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Ajax should do what other organizations do when they need money. They sell lottery tickets!. The hospital tickets have been a great success. I would have no problem if the majority of this restoration was funded by the private sector.
Funny how they can find money to pump into a rundown building and yet they can’t do something to fix Kings Cres. Have you taken a drive along there lately?. It’s like driving on a washboard. Considering it’s one of the roads leading to the Town Hall, I think it’s disgraceful.
Maybe when the church is fully restored, Ajax council will start holding their meetings there. After all, we could use some help from the big guy up above.
Karem: Did you submit your fundraising idea to the Town? There has not been one fundraising idea that I have been aware of, not a fancy Ball to raise money at- nothing. I nominate you as head of the Fundraising for the Church! I am still driving over sinking manholes all over the place.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Actually, I think that SM has a point. By fund raising for “pet projects” like this, there would be a CLEAR message from the community (one way or the other) if this type of project is wanted by the community.
In the case of St Francis DeSales my guess would be that the project would be hard pressed to find donors. I’d have to verify but, if memory serves me correct, 100% of the letters sent to the News Advertiser at the time this boondoggle was blessed by the apparent “clique” on council were opposed to the expenditure. 100% of the people who appeared before council on this matter were opposed to the expenditure. Even the comments on your blog at the time were not exactly positive.
If council is there to represent US, the citizens of Ajax, and they ignore what we have to say then is it any wonder voter turn out is down? Is it any wonder people no longer care about municipal politics.
Responsibility for voter apathy lies with the voters but it also lies with the politicians that engender that apathy and the contempt