Save 100 Stanley Street

A Letter to City Hall:

Photo with much tree cover, May 2021

To: City of London Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) - Councillors S. Lehman, S. Lewis, P. Cuddy, S. Stevenson, and S. Hillier. 

September 22, 2026 

Re: Proposed demolition of the heritage-designated home at 100 Stanley Street, London. 

Dear Councillors: 

I understand that PEC will review a demolition request by the City of London for this designated property on the southeast corner of Wharncliffe Road South and Stanley Street. I urge you to turn down this application. 

For years, I have read about the CN Rail Bridge expansion project and the apparent need to demolish the heritage home at 100 Stanley Street. It’s good to learn that there is now a less invasive plan for the bridge, reducing the need to dismantle the nearby house. 

This 1893 house should be preserved. Its heritage attributes include: the largest keyhole window in London; working pocket doors with bevelled glass; rectangular newel post topped with a chess piece; elaborate woodwork on corner fireplace; ceramic tiles on either side of the fireplace featuring musical instruments; original light fixtures; three stained glass windows; upstairs oriel window with wood embellishments. All these features are well-preserved. What a pity if London’s city councillors were so short-sighted as to lose these treasures, or to decide that a “commemoration” of the building with an historic plaque is an adequate tribute. 

 I would point out that other heritage buildings in this city, such as Central Cat Hospital at 596 Adelaide Street North, have been retained in situ despite extensive construction nearby. Surely the same can occur at 100 Stanley. 

 If, despite arguments to the contrary, you decide that saving this house at its current location is impractical, please consider a creative solution: moving the house to a safer, less busy location on a nearby side street and offering it for sale to a private buyer. 

 Future generations of Londoners will thank you for your foresight in saving 100 Stanley Street. 

Jennifer Grainger

For my remarks about 100 Stanley five years ago, see here.

The Ontario Government Demolishes by Neglect

A letter I sent today:

April 20, 2026

The Hon. Rob Flack, MPP Elgin-Middlesex-London

Re: Proposed demolition of former St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital, 467 Sunset Drive

Dear Minster:

Recently Infrastructure Ontario has given notice that it intends to demolish all the buildings of the former St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital. I am writing to state my objection to this destruction of our local heritage.

Please note the following:

 ·         These buildings, constructed of Queenston limestone, were designed by noted architect William Lyon Somerville (1886-1965) who also designed the original McMaster University buildings in Hamilton, restored historic forts such as Fort Henry and Fort George, and designed other hospitals such as St. Joseph’s in Brantford.

·         The complex is designed in Art Deco, the twentieth-century style that emerged between the First and Second World Wars. The sculpture on the buildings’ exterior is by Jacobine Jones (1897-1976) and represents examples of Ontario wildlife.

·         Shortly after completion, the buildings became No. 1 Technical Training School, used by the RCAF as part of the Commonwealth Air Training Program in World War II. Note that another facility under the Commonwealth Air Training Plan, that in Fingal, Elgin County, has been demolished.

·         These buildings are a provincial Heritage Property of Historical Significance and St. Thomas has designated some of the buildings under the Ontario Heritage Act.

According to individuals interviewed by the media, the buildings are not reusable due to asbestos, lead paint, and mercury. No one wants tiny rooms and the concrete walls cannot be removed. Fire escapes and other modern safety features need to be added. I’m unclear as to whether these are “reasons” or “excuses” for demolition. I have asbestos in my own home, but it’s covered up and does no harm unless uncovered.

I understand some may say the cost of preservation and renovation is too high. However, I have been unable to find any numbers online. Is the public to take Infrastructure Ontario’s word for it that refurbishment is unaffordable?  Has I.O. determined if there are local developers or contractors who see a way to repurpose these architectural and historically significant buildings? Is the government aware that demolition is also expensive? Will the building materials go into a nearby landfill? According to Carl Elefante, former president of the American Institute of Architects, “The greenest building is the one that already exists.”

My suggestion is as follows:

The nine designated buildings on the west of the site, especially the administration building, are the most historically significant and should be preserved. The interiors may be antiquated but it should be possible to keep the outer shell and redevelop the insides. Undesignated buildings may be demolished and the rest of the property developed.

The designated buildings could be repurposed by corporate offices, the local tourist board, a community centre for the housing development, and a museum about the history of psychiatric treatment. Part of the site could provide temporary shelters for the homeless and/or mentally ill, doctors’ offices, or urgent care. This would be in keeping with the site’s medical history. However, these are my ideas and I’m sure there are many others.

Please use your position as an MPP to allow for public consultation on this demolition and to determine local interest in refurbishment and repurposing.

Sincerely

Jennifer Grainger, London

Update, April 22: Having performed a partial demolition by neglect, the Ontario Government intends to complete the rest of the demolition this spring. In other words, letters like the above don't mean much to them. An important part of Elgin history is about to disappear.

Save Beth Emmanuel Church

2022 photo

 A letter sent to London City Clerk's office last week:

Notice of Objection

RE: Request by Trustees of the London Congregation of the British Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada to Repeal the Heritage Designating By-law for the Property at 430 Grey Street (Beth Emmanuel British Methodist Episcopal Church).

I wish to voice my objection to the repeal of the heritage designation for the Beth Emmanuel Church located at 430 Grey Street, London.

As a general rule, when the owners of a building apply to have its heritage designation removed, it is because they wish to demolish the building. The demolition of this church would be a mistake for the City of London.

First, Beth Emmanuel Church dates to ca. 1868 and is one of Canada’s oldest “black churches.” The building has been a place of worship for London’s black community since its construction. Some of its first congregants escaped from slavery in the United States via the Underground Railroad.  Many of us are proud of the role our region played in providing a haven for the victims of American slavery. To allow this building to be demolished implies a lack of respect for its founders.

Currently, Beth Emmanuel is leased by a congregation of primarily African ethnicity. Arguably, the church still has important ties to London’s black community, which is as worthy of consideration today as it was in the nineteenth century. The SoHo neighbourhood is growing rapidly, with multi-storey towers either built or in the planning stages, so it is likely this congregation will grow.

Beth Emmanuel is also one of the most important landmark buildings in SoHo. Since the original Fugitive Slave Chapel has been preserved at Fanshawe Pioneer Village, it would be appropriate for its sister church to be saved in situ. Not all heritage buildings require moving to make way for “progress.”

While not the most important consideration, I would also point out that Beth Emmanuel is one of London’s traditional yellow brick buildings in the Gothic Revival style. The building’s name in stained glass over the front door is a charming aspect of its appearance.

In summary, the removal of this heritage designation is likely to lead to the demolition of a significant London landmark. Allowing the flattening of Beth Emmanuel would be a massive failure of the City of London and a huge loss for Londoners of every background, culture, and tradition.  

Sincerely,

Jennifer Grainger, London, Ontario

Update, August 6, 2026: Good news on the heritage front for a change. Pastor Sandie Thomas of Spiritual Blessing Lighthouse Ministries has purchased this building. Not only does this mean the church is still used by London's black community, but affordable housing and other amenities have been added to the site.