Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-02HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:00 p.m. Present: Mr. K. Kirby - Chair Councillors F. Etherington, Z. Janecki, Y. Fernandes and J. Gazzola and Messrs. L. Robertson, S. Thomson and G. Zeilstra Staff: L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Resources A. Golden, Heritage Planner C. Mahood, Heritage Planner D. Livingstone, Committee Administrator CSD-12-136 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2012-IV-019 1. - 5 MAURICE STREET - WINDOW REPLACEMENT The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-12-136, dated September 13, 2012, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2012-IV-019 to permit the replacement of the existing wood windows on the first and second storeys with new vinyl windows at 5 Maurice Street. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report, advising that although the windows are not specifically referenced in the designated by-law; three out of four elevations of the structure are identified as heritage attributes. He added that the subject windows are not original to the structure, with many having been replaced 1985; and therefore, have no historical value. On motion by Councillor F. Etherington - it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2012-IV-019be approved to permit the alteration of the building municipally addressed to 5 Maurice Street, in accordance with the supporting information submitted with the application.” CSD-12-135 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2012-IV-018 2. - 318 DUKE STREET WEST - REPAIR AND ALTERATION TO THE BUILDING The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-12-135, dated September 12, 2012, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2012-IV-018 to permit replacement of windows, installation of a metal guard on the hayloft door, and removal of the chimney with subsequent roof repair. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the report, advising that the window alteration and repair is specific to the laneway windows and those located on the east end of the structure. He elaborated that the window alterations on the elevation facing the laneway would include the installation of two new wood replacement three panel transom windows to match the existing and the installation of four new wood storm windows. He added that the upper windows on the east end of the structure would include two new wood replacement windows and frames to match the existing windows. He added that the installation of a metal guard on the Hayloft door way is required by the Ontario Building Code. To that end, the applicant proposed to install an exterior metal railing (painted black) across the lower portion of the hayloft doorway attached to the inside face of the door frame, with the top rail at 42 inches above the inside floor level. Mr. Brian Bee, Applicant, attended in support of the subject HPA. In response to questions, he advised that the current condition of the chimney is contributing to damage and water penetration. He indicated that any brick removed from the chimney would be salvaged for use elsewhere on the structure. He noted that the chimney does not define the character of the structure and may not be original to the building. On motion by Mr. G. Zeilstra - it was resolved: HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 - 37 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-135 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2012-IV-018 2. - 318 DUKE STREET WEST - REPAIR AND ALTERATION TO THE BUILDING (CONT’D) “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2012-IV-018be approved to permit the repair and alteration of the building municipally addressed 318 Duke Street West, in accordance with the supporting information submitted with the application.” MULTI-MODAL HUB HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 3. The Committee considered the Heritage Study and Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed Region of Waterloo Multimodal Hub at 16 Victoria Street North, 50 & 60 Victoria Street North, and 520 & 510 King Street West, Kitchener, dated April 5 and 9 2012. Ms. Kate Hagerman, Regional Cultural Heritage Principal Planner, spoke to the item advising that the Region of Waterloo purchased the lands located at the intersection of King Street and Victoria Street North in order to develop a new multi-modal transit facility. She indicated that applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments are being submitted in order to permit a broader range of land uses while establishing site-specific policies and regulations. Mr. Owen Scott, Landplan Collaborative, presented an overview of the proposal with specific reference to the Heritage Impact Assessment. He indicated the buildings of heritage interest are as follows: the Rumpel Felt Co. which is currently listed on the Heritage Kitchener Committee Inventory of Heritage Buildings; Kaufman Lofts which are Designated under Part IV Ontario Heritage Act; of the Breithaupt Centre, which is listed as a Non-Designated Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and, 283 Duke Street West which is also listed on the Heritage Kitchener Committee Inventory of Heritage Buildings. Mr. Scott outlined the recommendations related to new built form, noting the HIA proposes the demolition of 16 and 50 Victoria Street North and 520 King Street West, with no loss of heritage resources expected from these demolitions. He added that alterations are proposed to the remaining heritage resource, 60 Victoria Street North (Rumpel Felt Co.), through an adaptive re-use. He stated that conservation measures recommended are embodied in the adaptive re-use of the Rumpel Felt building through the preservation of the façades and the conservation of its heritage character and attributes. He added that measures are being proposed to ensure that new built form is designed to communicate to the public streetscape a sense of the heritage buildings interwoven into the new Multimodal Hub. He noted that the HIA further recommends commemorating the industrial heritage of the Multimodal Hub site by creating an interpretive display in a prominent location, to explain its history and the people involved. Mr. L. Robertson commented that the proposed building would be located tight to the street and inquired as to the layout of the design; and, whether a provision would be made for a public space in the area of Victoria Street and King Street.Mr. Scott responded that the proposed building is in keeping with the context of the area and confirmed that a public square is being contemplated at Waterloo Street.Mr. L. Bensason indicated that the Urban Design Brief would make reference to the design and space delineation as well as the square promenade at King Street and Victoria Street. He added that site specific height regulations would be considered during the zoning by-law amendment process. Councillor Y. Fernandes inquired as to the timeline for the designation of the Rumpel Felt Co. building as a cultural heritage resource. Mr. Scott recommended that designation take place post development; however, listing on the City’s Municipal Heritage Register could be pursued during the site plan phase. Several members expressed a desire to see the 1913 portion of the Rumpel Felt Co. building protected with designation prior to the site plan review. Mr. Bensason reviewed that process, noting that the Committee could recommend that Council designate the property prior to development; however, this would mean that a Heritage Permit Application would be required at each stage of alteration or repair. He added that completing the 4-Step Listing process is preferable since having the property listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as a non- designated property of heritage interest provides sixty days to designate should demolition be a concern. Mr. Bensason confirmed that the 4-Step Listing process is underway for the HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 - 38 - CITY OF KITCHENER MULTI-MODAL HUB HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) 3. Rumpel Felt Co. building, which is currently at Step-2 in the process. He acknowledged that it is anticipated to remain at Step-2 until the Heritage Impact Assessment has been completed. Mr. L. Robertson suggested that direction should be given to have staff immediately proceed with the 4-Step Listing process for the Rumpel Felt Co. building, and not wait for the site plan review process. The Committee resolved to direct staff to proceed with the 4-Step process, without delay, to list 60 Victoria Street North (Rumpel Felt Co.) on the Municipal Heritage Register (MHR), as a non-designated property of cultural or heritage interest. REGIONAL DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES FOR CULTURAL HERITAGE 4. LANDSCAPES The Committee was in receipt of correspondence from Ms. Kate Hagerman, Cultural Heritage Principal Planner, Region of Waterloo, dated August 30, 2012 attached to which was the Draft Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL). Ms. K. Hagerman presented the draft Implementation Guidelines, noting Regional staff are in early stages of development and are seeking input from local area municipalities. She indicated that the Guidelines are policy tools intended to provide detailed guidance in the application of Official Plan Policies. She stated that currently, the conservation of CHL’s is being informal addressed during the heritage review process, adding the implementation Guidelines would direct area municipalities to identify and document CHL’s, which would be formalized through designation in the municipality’s Official Plan. She advised that designation of a CHL does not change the permitted uses for a property, but would require that the impacts of any proposed development be assessed through the existing heritage review process. She noted that the Guidelines provide direction on effectively documenting each CHL to ensure landscape information is available during the heritage review process and on how to undertake a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (CHIA) for a CHL. Ms. Hagerman reviewed the available tools to help identify and evaluate CHL’s contained in the appendices to the Guidelines. In response to questions, Ms. Hagerman advised that the locations identified for consideration as CHL’s could be brought forward by Heritage Kitchener or staff. She noted that it would be up to the area municipalities to decide on procedure, depending on available resources. Accordingly, Mr. L. Bensason suggested that once the Guidelines have been approved, staff would identify criteria for evaluation of CHL’s and conduct a training exercise. ROCKWAY HERITAGE STUDY - UPDATE ON STUDY AND ASSESSMENT 5. Mr. L. Bensason advised that the City has retained MHBC to complete a cultural heritage resource study and assessment of the Rockway Centre and surrounding lands, including the Rockway Gardens and parts of the Rockway Golf Course. He indicated that this study and assessment is divided into two phases; Phase I identifies the cultural heritage value of the Rockway Centre and includes a contextual analysis of the lands surrounding the Rockway Centre to determine merit in designating them as cultural heritage landscapes either separately or together. He added that Phase I would be considered by the consultants in preparing a feasibility study and business case analysis for the Rockway Centre. In addition, Phase II of the heritage study would evaluate the potential impact of various options for the long-term use of the Rockway Centre site and recommend measures to avoid or limit negative impacts on identified cultural heritage resources. He noted that Phase I is now complete with the following recommendations being put forward in the draft Phase I Report: •That staff consider both the Rockway Centre and the Rockway Gardens for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, as they meet all three of the major criteria of Regulation 9/06; •That the Rockway Centre and Rockway Gardens be considered for designation as separate sites, as there is not a contextual relationship between the two sites to warrant their designation as a single cultural heritage landscape; and, HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 - 39 - CITY OF KITCHENER ROCKWAY HERITAGE STUDY - UPDATE ON STUDY AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) 5. •That staff consider undertaking a separate cultural heritage assessment of the entire Rockway Golf Course to determine if it may warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Mr. Bensason advised that no action is required by the Committee at this time as the study is being circulated for information. He added that the consultants are expected to have the finding for both Phase I and II of the heritage study early in November; and, a presentation is anticipated for the November 6, 2012 Heritage Kitchener meeting. He further advised that any recommendation to Council to proceed with designation should only be considered after Phase II of the heritage study is complete and that any such recommendation be concurrent with Council’s consideration of the final report on the Rockway feasibility study and business case analysis. Councillor F. Etherington inquired as to why the two sites, Rockway Centre and Rockway Gardens, are being considered separately. Mr. Bensason responded that the sites contain different characteristics for evaluation, notably being from different eras as well as one being a building and the other a landscape. He noted that the consultant has determined that both elements are deserving of designation as cultural heritage resources. Councillor Y. Fernandes commented that there are two different focuses related to the site; heritage and feasibility. She questioned how the heritage component would remain a priority, when consideration is being given to the long-term viability of the sites. Councillor J. Gazzola expressed similar concerns that the heritage component could be lost, or lose importance, if it is dealt with at the same time as the feasibility study and business case analysis. He noted that the issues related to feasibility, such as how the building will be used in the future, seem unrelated to whether these sites warrant designation. Mr. L. Robertson expressed agreement that feasibility and heritage are two separate issues. He stated that accordingly, consideration should be given at this time to designating the Rockway Gardens as well as the Rockway Centre and ancillary buildings as cultural heritage Ontario Heritage Act resources under Part IV of the . Mr. Bensason cautioned that as an advisory committee to Council, it is important that Heritage Kitchener should have the benefit of all available information prior to taking action on this matter. He added that the consultants have been invited to attend the November 6, 2012 meeting and suggested that the Committee listen to that presentation before making a recommendation. Carried Unanimously The following motions were by all members present. On motion by Mr. L. Robertson - it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to designate the property known as 7 Floral Crescent (Rockway Gardens), as being of cultural heritage value and interest, with specific recognition given to Rockway Gardens being identified as a cultural heritage landscape.” On motion by Mr. L. Robertson - it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to designate the property known as 1405 King Street East (Rockway Centre), and 736 Charles Street East (ancillary buildings), as being of cultural heritage value and interest.” HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 2012 - 40 - CITY OF KITCHENER END OF TERM COMMITTEE GATHERING 6. Mr. K. Kirby extended an invitation to Committee members to attend an end of term gathering at 7:00 p.m. at the Boathouse immediately following the November 6, 2012 Heritage Kitchener meeting. ADJOURNMENT 7. On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Daphne Livingstone Committee Administrator