HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage - 2011-11-01HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:05 p. m.
Present: Mr. K. Kirby -Chair
Councillors F. Etherington, and Y. Fernandes, Ms. E. Young, and Messrs. J. Ariens, S.
Thomson and G. Zeilstra.
Staff: G. Murphy, Director of Engineering
B. Korah, Manager, Development Engineering
L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Resources
M. Drake, Heritage Planner
M. Parris, Landscape Architect
C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator
CSD-11-150 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-025
- 1021 DOON VILLAGE ROAD
- PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF 2 SHEDS AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
BARN
The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-150, dated
October 19, 2011, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application 2011-V-025,
proposing the demolition of two sheds and the construction of a barn at 1021 Doon Village
Road. Ms. M. Drake reviewed the report.
Ms. Margaret Lang, agent for the applicant, attended in support of the staff recommendation.
In response to questions, she confirmed that functioning cupolas have been incorporated into
the design of the proposed barn. She advised that at 2-stories, the proposed barn would be
higher than the existing farmhouse; however, the visual impact of this height difference is
diminished due to the setback of the barn from the farmhouse.
On motion by Mr. J. Ariens -
itwas resolved:
"That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA 2011-V-025 be approved, to permit the demolition of two existing sheds and the
construction of a new barn at the property municipally addressed as 1021 Doon Village
Road, in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the
following condition:
That the final building permit drawings be submitted and approved by
Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit."
DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS ON DESIGNATED
HERITAGE PROPERTIES
The Committee was in receipt of draft Guidelines for the Installation of Solar Panels on
Designated Heritage Properties, dated October 27, 2011. Ms. M. Drake presented the draft
Guidelines, advising that their purpose is to provide a consistent, fair and transparent process
for the consideration of proposals to install solar panels on cultural heritage resources. She
requested the members to provide comments/suggestions for potential inclusion in the final
version of the Guidelines.
In response to questions, Ms. Drake advised that in certain instances the installation of solar
panels on a front fapade may be permitted, providing the design is sympathetic to the
building's heritage attributes; such as, matching the shape and diameter of a roofline as well
as colour of existing shingles. She stated that in instances where the panels do not match
these features, preference would be given to avoiding the building's visible fapade(s). She
noted that some property's heritage attributes may not lend themselves to the installation of
solar panels.
Mr. J. Ariens commented that the term "public realm" should be defined in the Guidelines. He
suggested that installation on a front fapade should not necessarily be prohibited provided the
design of the solar panels complies with the other factors set out in the Guidelines. He added
HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
NOVEMBER 1.2011 - 38 - CITY OF KITCHENER
2. DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS ON DESIGNATED
HERITAGE PROPERTIES ICONT'D)
that a ranking system should be developed for those factors to assist in determining the
appropriateness of a proposed design.
Mr. G. Zeilstra questioned how heritage property owners would be notified of the new
guidelines. Ms. Drake advised that consideration had yet to be given to notification, noting
there are several communication tools that could be utilized; such as, the City's Twitter and
Facebook accounts as well as including a notice in the annual mail-out to heritage property
owners.
Several members expressed support for the proposed Guidelines and Ms. Drake advised that
staff intend to bring a revised version forward to the December 6, 2011 Heritage Kitchener
Committee meeting.
3. CSD-11-147 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-021
- 103 ST. CLAIRE AVENUE
- PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS
Mr. K. Kirby advised that he may have a perceived conflict of interest with respect to this item,
as 103 St. Clair Avenue was his childhood home. He requested that, in accordance with
Section 3 of the Advisory Committee Member's Code of Conduct, attached as Appendix `A' to
Council Policy I-70 (Code of Conduct for Members of Council, Local Boards and Advisory
Committees), the Committee make a determination as to whether he is in a conflict position
pursuant to the provisions of Section 2 of the Code.
Mr. C. Goodeve advised that Section 3 of the Advisory Committee Member's Code of Conduct
indicates that if a member is perceived or known to have a conflict of interest, it may be
brought forward for the Committee's consideration. He added that when such a matter has
been brought forward, the Committee, through a majority vote, would determine if the member
is in a conflict position. He clarified that where the number of members who, by reason of
conflict, are incapable of participating in a meeting such that the remaining members no longer
constitute a quorum; then the remaining members shall be deemed to constitute a quorum
provided there are not less than two members present.
On motion by Mr. G. Zeilstra -
itwas resolved:
"That Mr. K. Kirby was not in a conflict position with respect to Heritage Kitchener's
consideration of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-018 (103 St. Clair Avenue)
and would be permitted to take part in all discussion and voting regarding that matter."
The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-147, dated
October 27, 2011, recommending refusal of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2011-V-021,
proposing the installation of solar panels at 103 St. Clair Avenue, which is located within the
St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District (HCD).
Ms. M. Drake reviewed the report, advising that the current proposal to install solar panels on
the east (front), south (side) and west (rear) rooflines of the subject property has been
evaluated against the guidelines and policies of the St. Mary's HCD Plan as well as the draft
guidelines for the installation of solar panels on cultural heritage resources. She stated that
the design and location of the proposed solar panels on the front and side rooflines would be
conspicuous and would alter the appearance; and therefore, does not comply with the draft
Guidelines. She indicated that the hip roof is identified as a heritage attribute in the St. Mary's
HCD Plan and the solar panel installation does not match its shape; and therefore, does not
respect the exterior form of the building. Accordingly, Heritage Planning staff are
recommending refusal of the proposed installation of solar panels on the front and side
rooflines of 103 St. Clair Avenue. She further advised that staff understand the importance of
both heritage conservation and energy conservation and believe that care must be taken to
ensure that one is not achieved at the expense of the other. She stated that, although it has
been recommended that HPA 2011-V-021 be refused, the owner was encouraged to consider
other opportunities, including:
HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
NOVEMBER 1.2011 - 39 - CITY OF KITCHENER
3. CSD-11-147 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2011-V-021
- 103 ST. CLAIRE AVENUE
- PROPOSED INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS (CONT'D)
• the proposed installation of solar panels on the rear roofline of the house;
• the proposed installation of solar panels on the roof of accessory buildings in the rear
yard;
• the proposed installation of solar panels on the ground in the rear yard; and/or,
• the proposed installation of solar panels on the front and side rooflines that are
consistent with the draft guidelines for the installation of solar panels on cultural heritage
resources, such as matching the colour, shape and proportion of the roof, or installing
flush to the roof.
Ms. Drake indicated that with respect to colour, shape and proportion, new products, such as
solar shingles, can be installed to match the colour, shape and proportion of the roof.
Ms. Beverley Allan, Applicant and Mr. Stuart Watt, Agent for the Applicant attended in
opposition to the staff recommendation. Mr. Watt indicated that the alternative products
displayed by staff are not currently available in Ontario. He advised that 103 St. Clair Avenue
currently has grey shingles; however, solar panels only come in black. He added that while
the intent is to align with the draft Solar Panel Guidelines as much as possible, the Applicant is
unwilling to incur a major financial burden by replacing a functional roof. Ms. Allan commented
that it is not financially feasible for her to replace a roof she had installed less than 12 years
ago, just to match the appearance of the solar panels. She added that she was happy when
her home was included as part of the St. Mary's HCD; however, she is pursuing this initiative
to help off-set the increase in hydro rates. She advised that the Ontario Power Authority
microFlT Program will only provide funding for products that can be purchased in Ontario; and,
solar panels that are shaped to fit the dimensions of her roof are not available in Ontario.
Mr. Kirby expressed concerns regarding visibility of the solar panels on the front fapade, and
questioned if consideration had been given to installing the panels on a ground mount in the
rear yard. Mr. Watt advised that using a ground mount instead of the front and side fapades
would mean a reduction in the overall number of solar panels. He explained that due to the
rules established as part of the microFlT Program, the return on investment for any system
smaller than what has been proposed would not be capable of covering the cost of installing
the system.
Mr. J. Ariens inquired if triangular panels could be used to match the roofline, thereby negating
the need to replace the shingles. Mr. Watt indicated that while it might be feasible to make a
false triangular panel, it may not be possible to completely match the left side roofline.
On motion by Ms. E. Young -
itwas resolved:
"That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA 2011-V-021 to permit the installation of solar panels at the property municipally
addressed as 103 St. Clair Avenue, be refused as submitted."
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) SOUTH SECTION OF THE STRASBURG ROAD
EXTENSION (NORTH OF STAUFFER DRIVE TO NEW DUNDEE ROAD)
The Committee was in receipt of excerpts from the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
South Section of the Strasburg Road Extension from North of Stauffer Drive to New Dundee
Road, dated June 1, 2011. In addition, the Committee was in receipt this date of
correspondence from Mr. Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group, dated October 28, 2011 and
correspondence from Ms. Monika Ruttkowski, dated October 31, 2011, speaking to the impact
that the proposed alignment of the Strasburg Road Extension would have on 500 Stauffer
Drive; which was identified in the EA as a cultural heritage resource.
Ms. Lindsay Popert, Archeological Services Inc. and Messrs. Ian Upjohn, SNC-Lavalin Inc. and
B. Korah presented the EA. Mr. Korah advised that this is an opportunity for Heritage Kitchener
to provide comments and feedback, which will be considered as the EA process moves
HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
NOVEMBER 1.2011 - 40 - CITY OF KITCHENER
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) SOUTH SECTION OF THE STRASBURG ROAD
EXTENSION (NORTH OF STAUFFER DRIVE TO NEW DUNDEE ROAD) (CONT'D)
forward. He added that the purpose of the proposed Strasburg Road Extension is to provide
for approved development and future growth in Doon South and other areas in southwest
Kitchener, including traffic and municipal services. In addition, this is intended to relieve future
demand on Homer Watson Boulevard, Huron Road and Fischer Hallman Road. He pointed out
that one of the project objectives is to minimize impacts to natural heritage features and other
important environmental resources. Mr. Upjohn indicated that they are currently in Phase 3 of
the EA process, and consideration is being given to alternative design concepts for the
preferred solution. He reviewed of the proposed alignment, which was selected based on a
number of natural environment, socio-environmental, cultural environmental, transportation
and financial considerations.
Ms. Popert provided an overview of the identified heritage resources, advising that field
reviews were undertaken in July and August 2011 to confirm the location and condition of the
previously identified cultural heritage resources. She noted that these field reviews were also
utilized to identify cultural heritage resources that were not included in federal, provincial, or
municipal databases. She stated that although Alignment E4 Modified was the third best
choice from a cultural heritage perspective, it represents the most balanced choice over the
range of all evaluation criteria. She outlined the following as the measures being
recommended to mitigate the impact of the Strasburg Road Extension on the identified cultural
heritage resources:
• Maximize setbacks between identified cultural heritage resources and proposed road
alignment.
• Develop a vegetative screening/ buffering plan to minimize impacts on the setting of the
two farmsteads and roadscapes and to ensure the long-term viability of the residential
heritage resources.
• Undertake a conservation strategy to ensure that suitable measures are taken to
minimize negative impacts to the property/buildings during construction activities and to
develop an appropriate landscaping plan.
• Document the overall agricultural landscape of the study area (roadscapes/
fields/topography) in advance of alteration and submit to the local municipality and
appropriate archive.
Ms. Monika Ruttkowski, Ms. Allison Jackson as well as Messrs. Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group
and Vaughan Bender RBJ Schlegel Holdings Inc. were in attendance to request the
Committee's assistance in undertaking an additional Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) on
500 Stauffer Drive. Ms. Jackson reviewed the correspondence circulated this date from Ms.
Ruttkowski, which provides an overview of the property's history and the renovations
undertaken by the owner to enable the property to serve as a functioning farm as well as a bed
and breakfast. She suggested that as a means to help preserve the property, it could be listed
on the Municipal Heritage Register or designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Mr. Pidgeon advised that the proposed alignment would bisect the subject property in close
proximity to a heritage dwelling and could make the farm operation unviable. He stated that on
behalf of Ms. Ruttkowski, Heritage Kitchener is requested to form asub-committee to assist in
the preparation of terms of reference for the proposed HIA to assist in informing the outcome
of the Strasburg Road EA.
Mr. K. Kirby advised that it is not within the Committee's jurisdiction to form asub-committee to
assist a private landowner in developing an HIA for their property.
In response to questions, Mr. L. Bensason advised that an evaluation of 500 Stauffer Drive
was conducted in 2005 and at that time, it was indicated that no action should be taken to
designate the property under the Ontario Heritage Act. He added that in 2005, the property
evaluators suggested that too many alterations had been made to the original farmhouse to
warrant it being considered for designation. He suggested that in light of the information
presented by Ms. Popert identifying the property as a cultural heritage resource, a further
examination could be conducted to determine its potential for designation. He noted that even
if the property was designated this would not impact the Strasburg Road EA. He stated that if
designated the key question would be does the proposed alignment meet the necessary
HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
NOVEMBER 1.2011 - 41 - CITY OF KITCHENER
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) SOUTH SECTION OF THE STRASBURG ROAD
EXTENSION (NORTH OF STAUFFER DRIVE TO NEW DUNDEE ROAD) (CONT'D)
cultural heritage objectives. He added that based on what has been presented the proposed
alignment does seem to afford an appropriate level of conservation to ensure that the heritage
resource are maintained.
Mr. Pidgeon asked to be provided copies of the information compiled by Archeological
Services Inc., which could be used to develop a statement of significance; thereby potentially
expediting the designation process.
Mr. Bensason stated that Archeological Services Inc. would need to consent to the release of
the information they collected. He cautioned that the research conducted by those Heritage
Consultants was done with a focus on developing the HIA and may not have the same level of
detail that would be needed in order to identify all of the property's heritage attributes. He
added that if the Committee was of the opinion that 500 Stauffer Drive merited consideration
on the Municipal Heritage Register, then it could potentially be included as part of the next
round of property evaluations.
5. FCS-11-197 -APPOINTMENT OF A NEW MEMBER TO HERITAGE KITCHENER
The Committee considered Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS-11-197,
dated October 14, 2011 regarding the appointment of a new member to Heritage Kitchener to
fill one of the architect sector-specific positions, as outlined in the Committee's Terms of
Reference. Mr. C. Goodeve reviewed the report.
It was noted that any recommendation arising from the Committee regarding this matter would
be considered at the November 14, 2011 Special Council meeting.
On motion by Councillor Y. Fernandes -
itwas resolved:
"That Graham Wolff, be appointed to Heritage Kitchener filling one of the architect
sector-specific positions for a term expiring November 30, 2012."
HIBNER PARK SIGN
The Committee was in receipt of concept drawings for the Hibner Park Sign, dated October 19,
2011, designed to fit into the existing iron frame in Hibner Park, which is located in the Civic
Centre Heritage Conservation District (HCD). Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the proposed park
sign.
Ms. Donna Kehul, neighbourhood representative, was in attendance and suggested that the
proposed design should include the term "Conservation" as well as the City's crest.
Questions were raised regarding the use of the City crest and Ms. M. Drake advised that unlike
the City's other Heritage Conservation Districts, at present the Civic Centre HCD does not
have a logo. Mr. Bensason suggested that a discussion could take place at a future meeting
to identify a specific symbol that captures the nature of the Civic Centre area.
Mr. K. Kirby commented that it may be premature to consider the design for the Hibner Park
Heritage Sign, suggesting that the Park sign should incorporate the HCD's logo.
2011 MIKE WAGNER HERITAGE AWARD NOMINATION - 4336 KING STREET EAST
(BOREALIS GRILLE & BAR)
The Committee was in receipt of correspondence from Mr. L. Bensason, dated October 26,
2011 as well as a 2011 Mike Wagner Heritage Award Nomination for 4336 King Street East
(Borealis Grille & Bar), dated May 6, 2011.
Mr. L. Bensason advised that the owner of 4336 King Street East had submitted a nomination
for a Mike Wagner Heritage Award and a City of Kitchener Urban Design Award in one
package addressed to Urban Design staff. He added that unfortunately, the Mike Wagner
HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES
2011 MIKE WAGNER HERITAGE AWARD NOMINATION - 4336 KING STREET EAST
(BOREALIS GRILLE & BAR) ICONT'D)
Heritage Award nomination was miss-filed in the Urban Design Award files and never made its
way to Heritage Planning Staff. He noted that this situation only came to light last week when
the Owner/Representative enquired with staff; who have since retrieved the original
submission and apologized for the error. He indicated to the Owner/Applicant that as the 2011
Mike Wagner Heritage Awards have already been celebrated, the nomination could be
considered when the Awards are presented again in 2013. However, the Owner/Applicant
advised that deferring consideration of the nomination to 2013 was unacceptable; and, has
requested that special consideration be made to consider the nomination now, even though
the Awards have already been presented. Mr. Bensason stated that given the
Owner/Applicant's preference and the unique circumstances, it was agreed to process the
nomination even though the 2011 awards have already been presented. He further advised
that Heritage Planning Staff are of the opinion that the nomination is worthy of consideration
for an Award. He added that, should Committee and City Council resolve that the nomination
of the Borealis Grille and Bar should receive a Mike Wagner Heritage Award, it would be
presented at a future Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting.
On motion by Mr. J. Ariens -
itwas resolved:
"That a 2011 Mike Wagner Heritage Award be approved to 4336 King Street East
(Borealis Grille and Bar), given the work undertaken to restore and adaptively reuse a
19th century school house into a casual fine dining venue."
4-30 KING STREET EAST -AMERICAN BLOCK STRUCTURAL CONDITION UPDATE
- NOTICE OF INTENT TO DEMOLISH 26 KING STREET EAST
The Committee was in receipt this date of a draft recommendation concerning the notices of
intention to demolish 24 and 26 King Street East. Mr. L. Bensason advised that, as discussed
at the September and October 2011 Heritage Kitchener meetings, the owners of 24 and 26
King Street East have submitted notices of intention to demolish those buildings, as a result of
structural damage caused by a fire in March 2011. He stated that given the costs involved and
the fact that whatever is constructed in the future would not be original to the site, staff
recommended that designation not be pursued at this time. He indicated that the proposed
recommendation is intended to formalize this position.
On motion by Councillor Y. Fernandes -
itwas resolved:
"That in accordance with Section 27.(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, no action be taken
to designate 24 or 26 King Street East in response to the written notices provided by the
owners regarding their intentions to demolish those buildings, as a result of structural
damage caused by a fire in March 2011."
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:36 p. m.
Colin Goodeve
Committee Administrator