Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage - 2011-09-06HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:03 p. m. Present: Councillor Z. Janecki -Vice-Chair Councillors F. Etherington and Y. Fernandes, Ms. A. Oja, Ms. E. Young, and Messrs. S. Sindile, G. Thomas, S. Thomson and G. Zeilstra Staff: M. Selling, Director of Building G. Murphy, Director, Engineering Services J. Sajkunovic, Municipal Building Official III L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Resources W. Sleeth, Landscape Architect M. Ryan, Design/Construction Project Manager C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator CSD-11-116 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-015 - 142 WATER STREET SOUTH - PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PORCH Councillor F. Etherington declared a conflict of interest as he lives in the vicinity of the subject property and accordingly he did not take part in any discussion or voting regarding this matter. The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-116, dated August 22, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-015, proposing the replacement of the existing front porch at 142 Water Street South. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report. Mr. Mario Chilanski, Applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the staff recommendation. Mr. Bensason noted that any recommendation arising from the Committee regarding this matter would be processed through delegated approval. On motion by Mr. G. Zeilstra - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-015 be approved, to permit the demolition of an existing porch and the construction of a new porch at the property municipally addressed 142 Water Street South, in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following condition: i) That the final building permit drawings be submitted and approved by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit." CSD-11-114 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-013 - 215 OLD CARRIAGE DRIVE - PROPOSED NEW BUILDING The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-114, dated August 15, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-013 to permit the construction of a new building at 215 Old Carriage Drive; which is located within the Upper Doon Heritage Conservation District (HCD). Mr. L. Bensason gave an overview of the proposed building, presenting an analysis of how its design corresponds with the eight policies contained in the Upper Doon HCD Plan that must be considered for new construction in the District. He expressed the opinion that the construction of the proposed new residence at 215 Old Carriage Drive would not impair or negatively impact the significance of the Upper Doon HCD or the Doon Village Road streetscape. Ms. Karen Spencer and Mr. John Czako, Applicants, and Mr. Rob Hunsperger, Robertson Simmons Architects Inc., attended the meeting and spoke in support of the staff recommendation. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6. 2011 - 28 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. CSD-11-114 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-013 - 215 OLD CARRIAGE DRIVE - PROPOSED NEW BUILDING (CONT'D) In response to questions, Mr. Hunsperger advised that the proposed new building would be constructed in the same general location as the existing residence on the site; however, it will be shifted slightly south from the rear yards on Old Carriage Drive. He stated that the new residence would be in the low lying area of land located in the middle of the property outside of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) regulation limit. Ms. Spencer indicated that the proposed design complies with all relevant City By-laws, and the GRCA has already issued a permit to allow the construction of the new building. Concerns were raised regarding the size of the proposed new building and Mr. Hunsperger advised that it would be smaller than an average duplex and less than double the size of the existing building. Ms. Spencer added that due to the slope of the lot, the lower level would be visible, noting that this is not unlike other homes that have walkout basements. Mr. Hank Stronks attended the meeting and addressed the Committee in opposition to the proposal outlined in Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-013. Some members of the Committee expressed concerns related to the increased floor space of the new building in comparison to the original residence. It was suggested that the number of windows makes the design appear too contemporary and the style seems to be similar to a commercial office/medical building; rather, than an old mill. Concerns were also raised regarding the proposed roof being relatively flat, which was seen as being inconsistent with the other buildings in the District. In addition, from the community trail running along Schneider's Creek, the basement level would be visible giving the impression of a full three-storey building. It was put forward that without any other buildings in the vicinity to help soften its impact, this would create the appearance of a large imposing structure that did not fit into the surrounding landscape. In response to questions, Mr. Bensason advised that the proposed residence would comply with the City's Zoning By-law in relation to height and lot coverage. Further, the roof's shallow slope was used to maintain a height similar to the original building; though staff did not believe height to be a factor, given the property is isolated and far removed from the historic streetscape of Doon Village Road. Other members spoke in support of HPA 2011-V-013 and the Applicants' willingness to revise their design based on feedback given by the Committee. This includes adjusting the height to align with the original building, as discussed at the June 7, 2011 Heritage Kitchener meeting. On motion, Ms. E. Young brought forward the recommendation contained in Report CSD-11- 114 to approve Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-013; which was voted on and Lost on a tie vote. On motion, Councillor Y. Fernandes brought forward a recommendation to refuse Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-013; which was voted on and Lost on a tie vote. Mr. C. Goodeve advised that as the members could not reach a consensus, Heritage Kitchener would not submit a recommendation for Council's consideration on this matter. Accordingly, staff would prepare a report outlining what occurred at this meeting, which would go forward to the September 19, 2011 Council meeting. 3. CSD-11-115 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-014 - 25 COURTLAND AVENUE - PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PORCH The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-115, dated August 16, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-014, proposing the replacement of the existing front porch at 25 Courtland Avenue. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report and noted that any recommendation arising from the Committee regarding this matter would be processed through delegated approval. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6. 2011 - 29 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. CSD-11-115 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-014 - 25 COURTLAND AVENUE - PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PORCH (CONT'D) On motion by Councillor Y. Fernandes - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-014 be approved, to permit the demolition of the existing porch and the construction of a new porch at the property municipally addressed 25 Courtland Avenue West, in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following conditions: i) That the final building permit drawings be submitted and approved by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit." CSD-11-120 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-017 - 60 PARK STREET - PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-120, dated August 22, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-017, proposing the installation of solar panels on the roof of 60 Park Street. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report, noting that any recommendation arising from the Committee regarding this matter would be processed through delegated approval. In response to questions, Mr. Bensason advised that the method of affixing the solar panels to the roof could be reversed. Accordingly, the solar panels would not permanently alter the shape or style of the roof. He pointed out that unlike the Planning Act, the Green Energy Act does not take precedence over the Ontario Heritage Act. He stated that the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Plan does not contain specific guidelines on the installation of solar panels on existing buildings. He added that the Plan does contain guidelines on roofs, and property owners are permitted to install new roofs; including alternative finishes that do not detract from the architecture of the building. He noted that while the proposed solar panels would be visible from the street, they are not likely to have a much greater visual impact than some alternative roof finishes that already exist in the District. He requested the Committee's feedback as to how proposals of this nature might be handled in the future; such as, considering each one on its own merits, or developing an all-encompassing policy. Mr. Robert Ross, EfstonScience Inc. attended in support of the staff recommendation. In response to questions, he advised that astand-alone solar panel structure, located in a less visible portion of the property, would not be feasible due to the orientation of the house. He stated that the solar panels will be limited to the east and south facing slopes of the roof and an effort has been made to minimize their visual impact. Councillor F. Etherington suggested that a policy should be developed to govern the installation of solar panels, and other similar changes to the roofs of heritage buildings. Ms. E. Young spoke in support of considering the installation of solar panels on a case-by- case basis as a means of reviewing all possible options. On motion by Councillor F. Etherington - it was resolved: "That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-017 be approved, to permit the alteration of the property municipally addressed 60 Park Street, in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following condition: i) That the final building permit drawings be submitted and approved by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit." HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6. 2011 - 30 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. CSD-11-117 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-IV-016 - 10 SIMS ESTATE PLACE (FORMER GARDENER'S COTTAGE) - PROPOSED ALTERATIONS & CONSTRUCTION OF 1'/2 STORY ADDITION The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-117, dated August 19, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-IV-016, proposing alterations and the construction of a 1 '/2 story addition at 10 Sims Estate Place (former Gardener's Cottage). Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report, advising that staff are requesting, as a condition of approval, an engineer's report be provided to address the protection and structural stability of the existing house and smoke house. He pointed out that while the conceptual drawing circulated with the meeting agenda shows multiple parking spaces, in accordance with the City's Zoning By-law, only two parking spots would be permitted. He noted that the proposed addition was taken into account when this property was designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Mr. Sean O'Neill, Agent for the Owner, attended in support of the staff recommendation. On motion by Councillor Y. Fernandes - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-IV-016 be approved, to permit the alteration of the property municipally addressed 10 Sims Estate Place, in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following conditions: i) That the final building permit drawings be submitted and approved by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit; and further, ii) That an Engineer's report addressing the protection and structural stability of the existing house and smoke house be submitted and approved by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit." HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - VICTORIA PARK LAKE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT - IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR POTENTIAL INCLUSION IN FUTURE HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION The Committee considered excerpts from the draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), Victoria Park Lake Improvements prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., dated August 15, 2011. Mr. L. Bensason advised that the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District (HCD) Plan makes a distinction between the type of work that could be undertaken in the Park that would require a Heritage Permit Application (HPA) and those items that have to align with the Victoria Park Conservation Guidelines. He requested that members provide feedback to assist in scoping the issues and identifying the proposed work to be included in the HPA expected to come forward to the October 4, 2011 Heritage Kitchener meeting. Ms. M. Ryan provided an overview of the work proposed to be undertaken in Victoria Park, as outlined in Sections 5 and 6 ofthe HIA, which includes: • sediment removal; • outlet configuration; • forebay improvements; • shoreline modifications; • addition of a wetland feature along the south shore of Schneider Island; • reconstruction of the Heritage Bridge piers; • addition of a new pedestrian bridge west of Schneider Island; • reconstruction of the boathouse dock and patio; • removal of the flagpole and light; • potential installation of a fountain; and, • decommissioning of the old pump station. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6. 2011 - 31 - CITY OF KITCHENER 6. HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - VICTORIA PARK LAKE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT - IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR POTENTIAL INCLUSION IN FUTURE HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION (CONT'D) Ms. Ryan stated that an aggressive timetable has been set for this project and staff intend to move forward with the tendering process by October 6, 2011. She noted that there may be an additional opportunity to provide comments should any major issues come to light prior to the anticipated start of construction in November 2011. Concerns were expressed regarding the use of armour stones along the shoreline and Ms. Ryan advised that in recent decades the majority of shoring along the Lake and islands has been replaced with gabion baskets; which have deteriorated and require replacement. She stated that the design and materials chosen for the shoreline modification are consistent with the Conservation Guideline for Victoria Park Lake. She added that their intent is to provide a solution that would last for 50 to 75 years, which can be achieved with the armour stone. She indicated that as a replacement for the existing gabion baskets, the armour stone would not have a negative impact on the heritage character of the Lake. Questions were raised regarding the state of the heritage bridge piers and Mr. Steve Brown, Stantec Consulting Inc., advised that the bridge piers and abutments were identified as requiring repair in order to maintain their structural integrity. He commented that at some point the original stone abutments and piers were encased with a concrete facing. He stated that it is proposed that the existing concrete encasement be removed and refaced. He noted that this work would be undertaken in stages such that temporary support of the bridge would not be required. Responding further, Mr. W. Sleeth added that the work associated with the bridge railings, which was approved under a separate Heritage Permit Application, will be undertaken after the piers and abutment work is completed. At the request of Councillor F. Etherington, Ms. Ryan agreed to revise the wording for the "lay down area" in the HIA to indicate that it will be used to stage/store equipment and materials for this project. In addition, she encouraged members to forward any further comments they have to her at melissa.rvanCc~kitchener.ca 7. 4-30 KING STREET EAST -AMERICAN BLOCK STRUCTURAL CONDITION UPDATE - NOTICE OF INTENT TO DEMOLISH 24 KING STREET EAST Mr. L. Bensason advised that in accordance with Section 27.(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, an owner of anon-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest listed on the Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) is required to provide written notice indicating their intentions to demolish or remove said buildings. He stated that pursuant to this, on August 12, 2011 the owner of 24 King Street East submitted a Notice of Intention to Demolish, as a result of structural damage caused by a fire in March 2011. He noted that 24 King Street East is one of five buildings that make up what is commonly referred to as the American Block, which were added to the MHR by Council on September 7, 2010. He added that once a Notice of Intention to Demolish is submitted, Council has 60 days to consider whether it will pursue designating the subject building under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Mr. Bensason further advised that as part of the examination into the impact of the fire, a structural report was completed for 26 King Street East, which identified that building as being unstable. The report also indicated that the only feasible way to proceed would be to remove and completely re-build the front fapade, at an estimated cost of $600,000. He stated that given the condition of 26 King Street East, it is reasonable to expect that similar structural issues are present at 24 King Street East. He noted that the front fapades are key character defining elements of the buildings and the necessity of their removal, calls into question whether these buildings should be designated. He expressed the opinion that given the costs involved and the fact that whatever is constructed in the future would not be original to the site; staff are recommending that designation not be pursued at this time. He pointed out that failure to act on either of these two buildings at this time does not negate the City's interest in these properties. He suggested that designation could potentially be pursued for the remainder of the American Block that was unaffected by the fire, as a means of providing some control over the future re-building process. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6. 2011 - 32 - CITY OF KITCHENER 7. 4-30 KING STREET EAST -AMERICAN BLOCK STRUCTURAL CONDITION UPDATE - NOTICE OF INTENT TO DEMOLISH 24 KING STREET EAST (CONT'D) Mr. M. Seiling advised that the Building Division has not received demolition permit applications for either 24 or 26 King Street East. In response to questions, Mr. Bensason advised that while one is anticipated, a Notice of Intention to Demolish has yet to be submitted for 26 King Street East. He suggested that given the similar condition of that building to 24 King Street East, the Committee could also consider whether to pursue designation of that building at this time. Ms. Carla Inoque, representative for the owner, was in attendance and spoke to the structural damage the building incurred as a result of the fire. She stated that the owner is in support of staff's recommendation, noting that they are still in the process of determining the overall costs and the feasibility of re-building. Questions were raised regarding the remainder of the American Block, and Mr. J. Sajkunovic advised that 20 King Street East is stable and the owners have agreed to share the costs related to securing the wall that separates them and 24 King Street East. Mr. Seiling added that a Structural Engineer's report would be required for 24 King Street East and would need to show how the current interior wall would be made to perform as an exterior wall. He stated that if at any time 24 or 26 King Street East were to come into a state of imminent collapse, as the Chief Building Official, he would issue an Order to Remove an Unsafe Condition. Several members spoke in support of staff's rationale for not pursuing the designation of either 24 or 26 King Street East. The Committee agreed that it would not be appropriate to designate either building at this time and requested that staff update the Committee and Council when further information becomes available. 8. UPDATES -HERITAGE GRANT PROGRAM - HOMER WATSON HOUSE AND GALLERY - DOORS OPEN WATERLOO REGION - 2011 MIKE WAGNER HERITAGE AWARDS PRESENTATION Mr. L. Bensason advised that it was determined that the changes to the Heritage Grant Program, as presented at the June 7, 2011 Heritage Kitchener meeting, would be deferred for one to two years; depending on the state of the economic climate. He reminded members that Doors Open Waterloo Region was being held on September 17, 2011 and that the presentation of the Mike Wagner Heritage Awards was taking place on October 5, 2011. He noted that staff will be undertaking an inspection of the Homer Watson House and Gallery, which may result in changes to that property's Heritage Easement Agreement. 9. ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:34 p. m. ~~~~- Colin Goodeve Committee Administrator