Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-04 HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 4, 2014 CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:03 p.m. Present: Mr. G. Zeilstra - Chair Councillor F. Etherington, Ms. M. Heath, A. Hooykaas, E. Rudland, B. Glenn-Graham, and Messrs. S. Burrows, S. Thomson, J. Stevens. Staff: L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Resources M. Drake, Heritage Planner J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner D. Livingstone, Committee Administrator HPA-2014-V-001 - 68 SCHNEIDER AVENUE 1. - DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF FRONT PORCH AND REAR ADDITION The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-14-015, dated January 31, 2014, recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2014-V-001 to permit the demolition and construction of a front porch and rear addition at 68 Schneider Avenue. Ms. M. Drake presented the report, advising that the subject property is within the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District (VPHCD). She stated that building demolition policies within the VPHCD discourage demolition of original buildings and heritage attributes and indicated that the existing front porch and rear addition are not original to the house and have no historical value. She reviewed the merits of the application and stated that the new front porch and building addition detailed within the Report conform within the policies outlined in the VPHCD. On motion by Councillor F. Etherington- it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2014-V-001 be approved to permit the demolition and construction of a front porch and rear yard addition at the property municipally addressed as 68 Schneider Avenue in accordance with the supporting information submitted with the application.” HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - ROBERT FERRIE DRIVE 2. - OFFICIAL PLAN (OPA) / ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) The Committee considered the Background Report and review of Heritage Properties and Heritage Policy for Robert Ferrie Drive Alignment Alternatives prepared by MHBC Planning, dated February 2014. Ms. M. Drake introduced the Study by stating that the City is currently processing an Official Plan Amendment under the Planning Act and Environmental Assessment (EA) under the Environmental Assessment Act to determine the location of the westerly extension of Robert Ferrie Drive. As part of the process, the submission of a background report identifying all cultural heritage resources within and in close proximity to the study area was required and an assessment of the alignment alternatives similar to a heritage impact assessment was required. Ms. Drake indicated she is a member of the project team responsible for reviewing and evaluating the various alignment alternatives with the role to represent the heritage interests associated with each alignment alternative. Ms. J. von Westerholt provided an overview of the process to date indicating that an initial evaluation of alternatives has resulted in a number of alignment alternatives having been removed from further consideration due to environmental, agricultural, planning, road geometric/design and/or heritage impact considerations. She reviewed the short-listed alignment alternatives indicating that those which are to receive further evaluation are: 1a, 2, 4, 7 and Combination Alternative 4/7. Ms. Lashia Jones, MHBC Planning, presented the Background Report and Review of Heritage Policy for Robert Ferrie Drive Alignment Alternatives. She advised that the purpose of the study is to research the identified heritage resources within or in proximity to the study area; HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 4, 2014 - 7 - CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - ROBERT FERRIE DRIVE 2. - OFFICIAL PLAN (OPA) / ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) (CONT’D) review background information related to the identified heritage resources and relevant planning legislation, policies or guidelines relating to the conservation of cultural heritage resources; and, assess the impacts of the various alignment alternatives proposed for Robert Ferrie Drive on identified cultural heritage resources and as input to recommending a preferred alignment alternative. She identified the cultural heritage resources in the study area, namely: 500 Stauffer Drive, Residence at 271 Reidel Drive, Stauffer Drive (between Tilt Drive and Reidel Drive), identified as a Scenic Heritage Road, and Reidel Drive (between Stauffer Drive and edge of the ESPA) identified as a Scenic Heritage Road. She then reviewed the assessment methodology and evaluation criteria as well as the levels and types of impacts considered. Ms. Jones then gave a summary of the Shortlisted Alignment Alternatives, stating that Alignment 1a remains for consideration because it is preferred from a traffic perspective. She stated that 1a poses many direct and indirect impacts to the heritage attributes of 500 Stauffer Drive, notably bisecting the designated cultural landscape (including agricultural fields and topography) and impacting the relationship and views between the farm buildings and the woodlot and is therefore not preferred from a Cultural Heritage Perspective. She stated that Alignment 7 poses some direct impacts to cultural heritage resources which are generally low level and limited to the northeast portion of the property which could potentially be mitigated. She noted that there is potential for the construction of the road to increase development pressure alongside the right-of-way which could also be mitigated with larger impact not limited to the right-of-way. She concluded that Alignments 2/3 and 4 are the most preferred options from a cultural heritage perspective, as they are located north of all identified cultural heritage resources, and do not adversely impact the cultural heritage resources. Ms. Drake indicated that the next steps for the project are to examine all interests and present the findings to Council. She noted that if the preferred alignment does present an impact to a cultural heritage resource, additional approval will be required through the Heritage Permit Application process. She stated that the meeting this date is to receive comments to consider during the EA and Planning Act application process. In response to questions from the Committee, Ms. von Westerholt indicated that MHBC has been retained by the applicant and clarified that the City of Kitchener is the lead on the EA and is working with the landowners to determine the preferred alignment for Robert Ferrie Drive through an integrated planning process. The Committee generally expressed opposition to any alignment alternative that would have an impact on cultural heritage resources, particularly Alignment Alternative 7. ADJOURNMENT 3. On motion, this meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m. Daphne Livingston Committee Administrator