HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-14-110 - Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study Staff Report
��c tl R Community Services Department wwwkitchene►:ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener Committee
DATE OF MEETING: November 4, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range & Policy Planning, 519-
741-2200 x7648
PREPARED BY: Leon Bensason, Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning, 519-741-
2200 x7306
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: October 15, 2014
REPORT NO.: CSD-14-110
SUBJECT: Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study
RECOMMENDATION:
That the findings and conclusions of the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study
dated October 2014 and prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd., be endorsed by
Heritage Kitchener.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Province of Ontario requires that significant Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHLs) be
conserved. In addition, the Regional Official Plan directs area municipalities to designate CHLs
in their Official Plans and establish conservation policies. As a result, the City must inventory
significant landscapes; list them on the Municipal Heritage Register; identify them in the
Kitchener Official Plan; and require that significant CHLs be conserved.
The City of Kitchener is progressive and widely recognized for its policies and programs to
conserve cultural heritage resources. In response to the provincial, regional and municipal
policy direction, the completion of an inventory of significant CHLs was identified as a divisional
priority in the Corporate Business Plan for 2014-15.
The City commissioned a team of professional heritage consultants led by the The Landplan
Collaborative Ltd. to identify, evaluate and document significant CHLs in Kitchener. Under the
guidance of a study team made up of representatives from the City, Region and Heritage
Kitchener committee, and in consultation with the public, the Kitchener Cultural Heritage
Landscape Study (CHLS) has identified 55 significant CHI-s.
A Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) is "a defined geographical area that may have been modified by
human activity and is identified as having cultural heritage value or interest by a community, including an
Aboriginal community. The area may involve features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites or
natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association". (PPS 2014)
4 - 1
BACKGROUND:
The proposal to initiate a study to identify CHLs in Kitchener was introduced to Heritage
Kitchener in May 2012. In 2013, terms of reference for the Kitchener Cultural Heritage
Landscape Study were prepared, and in November 2013 Heritage Kitchener/Council appointed
2 members of the Committee to the Study Team. Staff have provided verbal updates to Heritage
Kitchener throughout 2014, including making a presentation about the study at the September
30th Heritage Kitchener meeting.
REPORT:
The City of Kitchener has a diverse range of cultural heritage resources that provide an
important means of defining local identity, enhancing the quality of life of the community, and
supporting and promoting economic prosperity. The City, through its policies and programs, is
committed to conserving cultural heritage resources including cultural heritage landscapes.
Policy Context
The conservation of significant features of cultural interest is identified under the Planning Act
as a matter of provincial interest. Section 2.0 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2014)
recognizes that Ontario's long term prosperity, environmental health and social well-being
depend in part on conserving cultural heritage resources. In this regard, Policy 2.6.1 of the PPS
requires that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes be
conserved.
A Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL), as defined in the PPS, is "a defined geographical area
that may have been modified by human activity and is identified as having cultural heritage
value or interest by a community, including an Aboriginal community. The area may involve
features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued
together for their interrelationship, meaning or association" Examples of CH Ls include, but are
not limited to, heritage conservation districts, parks, cemeteries, trailways, neighbourhoods and
industrial complexes to name a few.
r
o �
r r
It�
mu
nuo
Bridgeport bridge and the
f !!' Walter Bean Trail adjacent
�j
the Grand River
2
4 - 2
The term "conserved" under the PPS means the identification, protection, management and use
of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a
manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained under the Ontario
Heritage Act.
The Regional Official Plan (ROP) adopted by Regional Council in 2009 contains specific policies
to ensure that CHLs will be conserved within the Region. This includes the policy directive that
area municipalities designate CHLs in their Official Plans and establish associated policies to
conserve such areas. In 2013, the Region of Waterloo prepared an Implementation Guideline
for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. The implementation guideline is a policy tool that
provides detailed guidance in the application of ROP policies, and in this case, direction to area
municipalities on how to proactively identify, document and recognize CHLs through their
designation in local area official plans, as required under the ROP.
In compliance with the ROP, the new Kitchener Official Plan adopted by City Council in June
2014, includes policies to ensure the conservation of cultural heritage resources (including
CHLs) which reflect and contribute to the history, identity and character of Kitchener. These
policies include:
• that the City will develop, prioritize and maintain a list of cultural heritage resources
which will include the following:
a) properties listed as non-designated properties of cultural heritage value or
interest on the Municipal Heritage Register,
b) properties designated under Part IV and V of the Ontario Heritage Act,
c) cultural heritage landscapes, and
d) heritage corridors;
(Policy 12.C.1.3);
• that the City, in cooperation with the Region and the Municipal Heritage Committee
(MHC), will identify, inventory and list on the Municipal Heritage Register, cultural
heritage landscapes in the city (Policy 12.C.1.8);
• that cultural heritage landscapes will be identified on Map 9 in accordance with the
Regional Official Plan and the Official Plan, and that Map 9, may be revised without
the need for an Official Plan Amendment at such time as cultural heritage
landscapes are identified (Policy 12.C.1.9); and,
• that the City will require the conservation of significant cultural heritage landscapes
within the city. (Policy 12.C.1.10)
The Ontario Heritage Act provides a framework for the conservation of properties and
geographic features or areas that are valued for the contribution they make to our
understanding and appreciation of a place, an event or people. In 2005, the Act was
strengthened to provide municipalities and the province with enhanced powers to conserve
cultural heritage resources, including enabling municipalities to "list" non-designated property of
cultural heritage value or interest on the municipal heritage register. The municipal heritage
register is the official list or record of cultural heritage properties and resources that have been
3
4 - 3
identified as being important to the community. The task of each municipality to identify,
evaluate and conserve cultural heritage resources begins with compiling an inventory of
properties and resources that have lasting cultural heritage value or interest to the community.
Since 2005, the City of Kitchener has focused considerable effort on formally identifying and
listing built heritage resources that are of significant cultural heritage value or interest. Until now,
no comprehensive inventory has been undertaken of CHLs located in Kitchener.
Cultural Heritage Landscape Study Parameters
The purpose of the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study is to identify, evaluate, inventory and
map significant CHLs in the City of Kitchener. Direction on how to proceed with the process was
taken from the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape
Conservation.
A project steering committee made up of a study team, consultation group and consulting team
was established to provide direction in terms of defining and interpreting the goals and
objectives of the study; in determining the level of detail necessary to make the cultural
landscape descriptions useful and meaningful; and in undertaking the work to complete the
study.
The study team provided advice and direction to the consulting team and was made up of
heritage planning staff from the City of Kitchener, the Cultural Heritage Specialist from the
Region of Waterloo, and two members of the Heritage Kitchener Committee. The consultation
group was established to provide input and comment at key stages of the study process and
included representatives from Planning, Development Engineering, Transportation Planning,
Operations, Information Technology, as well as Communications and Marketing. A Resource
Planner from the Grand River Conservation Authority was also part of the consultation group.
The Landplan Collaborative Ltd., assisted by Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd. Architects, and
Archaeological Services Inc., had the task of completing the study which was done in two
phases, as follows:
Phase One Phase Two
• Review list of preliminary candidate • Evaluate short-listed CHLs using criteria
CHLs identified by staff consistent with Regional Implementation
• Undertake historical research and Guidelines
conduct field surveys • Identify cultural heritage value, attributes
• Seek community input through a public and boundary of each CHL
engagement process • Document CHLs through photographs
• Shortlist candidate CHLs for further • Further public engagement and
evaluation in Phase Two. consultation
• Conclude by identifying significant CHLs
Study Process
Prior to the initiation of the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, heritage planning staff identified
57 sites in Kitchener as possible candidate areas worthy of further investigation. These areas
were identified based on City staff's experience, knowledge and familiarity of cultural heritage
4
4 - 4
resources in the city. The list included open space areas such as parks and golf courses;
residential estates; transportation corridors such as scenic roads; and larger areas that contain
a full range or concentration of resources that have previously been identified as being of
interest from a CHL perspective, such as the area traditionally known as the warehouse district
and existing heritage conservation districts.
The Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation require
that landscapes be classified into historical themes. Eleven historical themes are referenced in
the guidelines including Pioneer Settlement, Agriculture, Industry & Commerce and
Transportation to name a few. These themes were refined by the consulting team to address
Kitchener specific conditions by adding Early Residential Development to the thematic
classification, in recognition of the cultural contribution of several older residential
neighbourhoods to the character of the city.
Following extensive fieldwork, historic research and public engagement, the consulting team
proceeded to evaluate the significance of the 57 candidate sites using criteria consistent with
the regional implementation guidelines and the PPS definition of a CHL. Specifically, the
evaluation measured significance based on indicators of cultural heritage value or interest,
historical integrity, community value; and finally Regional significance.
Study Results
The work resulted in the refinement of the list of candidates and the identification and
documentation of 55 sites as being significant CHLs, as listed in Appendix `A' of this report (and
shown on the map included in Appendix 4 of the CHL Study). The 55 sites are identified under
the following categories or types of CHI-s:
Residential Neighbourhoods - 12 CHLs
Parks, Natural Areas and Other Public/Private Open Space - 7 CHLs
Transportation Corridors and Streetscapes - 17 CHLs
Institutional Landscapes - 3 CHLs
Commercial, Industrial and Retail Landscapes - 2 CHLs
Agricultural Landscapes - 3 CHLs
Residential/Estate - 3 CHLs
Cemeteries - 7 CHLs
Grand River Valley Landscapes - 1 CHL
Of the 55 CHLs identified, 10 sites have moderate value or significance; 23 sites have
considerable value or significance; and 22 sites have considerable value and Regional
significance. In accordance with the methodology identified in the regional implementation
guidelines, CHLs scoring in 4 or more criteria under the heading Criteria for Regional
Significance were identified as having considerable value and Regional significance. CHLs
identified as having moderate value generally scored in fewer categories and criteria than those
with considerable value.
A copy of the evaluation matrix is provided in Appendix 5 of the study, and a more detailed
boundary and description of the cultural heritage value or significance of each CHL, is provided
in the data sheets in Appendix 6 of the study.
5
4 - 5
Additional Study Findings and Conclusions
The consulting team also identified a number of other recommendations and next steps within
the Findings and Conclusions section of the study. These include:
• the identification of other areas in the city meriting future examination and evaluation for
potential significance as a CHL;
• recommended improvements to the evaluation of residential neighbourhoods,
particularly in relation to the regional criteria;
• consideration of developing design guidelines as a conservation tool for older residential
neighbourhoods;
• continuing the City's practice of conserving the rural network of former pioneer roads,
protecting urban forest areas, and of assembling public open space land along the
Grand River's edge;
• investing in telling the heritage story of several of the CHLs identified in the study;
• understanding that maintenance of the CHL inventory is a continuing process, and that
some priority should be given to developing a more complete inventory of residential
neighbourhoods, landscapes associated with the Grand River corridor, and the
remaining agricultural areas within the city;
• making the information contained in the CHL study publicly accessible; and,
• using the inventory as a planning tool in the assessment and management of CHLs, to
include listing significant CHLs on the municipal heritage register, identification in the
official plan, as well as consideration of other conservation tools and practice in
consultation with property owners and the public.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The identification, evaluation and documentation of significant CHLs in Kitchener supports the
Quality of Life Community Priority of the City of Kitchener Strategic Plan by establishing a
greater public appreciation and understanding of cultural heritage resources and protecting
cultural heritage resources through the employment of various forms of conservation practice.
The Cultural Heritage Landscape Study also supports the Development Community Priority to
ensure that the conservation of identified cultural heritage resources is addressed in reviewing
development applications and planning for infrastructure improvements.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The study was completed within the budget established from an existing Capital account.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM and CONSULT:
In order to determine the community's understanding and appreciation of CHLs and generate
public interest and input, several engagement tools were utilized throughout the study.
A webpage was created specifically for the study and contained information on the study goals
and objectives, FAQs, notice of public information meeting dates, and copies of presentation
materials. A brochure providing information on the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study was
printed and made available at community centres, the Kitchener public library and at city hall.
6
4 - 6
Posters advertising the date and time of public informationi,�� a/'
meetings were also circulated. ii /� � '�0j
Two public information meetings were held. The first public
meeting was on June 11, 2014 and included discussion on the
study objectives; what constitutes a cultural heritage
landscape; the variety of heritage resources that exist within
the City's candidate cultural heritage landscapes; and how the
public can provide input and feedback throughout the study ;
process. The second public meeting held on September 11,
44 60"
2014 described the outcome of the CHL evaluation process' MM
and the significance of each of the 55 CHLs identified. Both
�r� 1u�mwig� ,w99�y'rn�:r k�'F ar/�dw�ffmdY^�'tw rr'�r,��.
meetings were advertised in The Record local community
newspapers, and on the City's web a e. The public
�j'/�i r�rwa.JA'3 4' w✓tu Mr"r Gsx.ra f �ia�wY/ i
information meetings were well attended and featured a formal
�J�
presentation, display panels and a question and answer � r y
session. Ml,l
Notice of the study process, public meeting dates and ways in which to provide input and
feedback was sent by e-mail to various community and interest groups including all
neighbourhood associations, First Nations representatives, the Architectural Conservancy of
Ontario, and property owners who asked to be put on a mailing list. A number of private
property owners who own property identified as an individual property of interest in the study
(e.g. estate residential, institutional properties, etc.) were also circulated information by mail.
A questionnaire was provided at the first public meeting and was posted on the city's webpage.
The questionnaire asked respondents to rank their top ten CHLs; to identify sites they believe
should be added to the list of candidates; and to expand on what they value in a CHL. Sixty-
three responses were received on-line with several others submitted at the public meeting. See
Appendix 3 of the study for the online results of the questionnaire. Of the general comments
received, the overwhelming majority were positive and responded favorably to the study
objective of identifying and conserving CHLs.
While the majority of the feedback received regarding the study was very positive, two
objections were raised as follows:
• The Westmount Golf and Country Club submitted a formal response from its Board of
Directors requesting that the Westmount golf course be removed from the inventory of
cultural heritage landscapes. The basis of the objection related to the view that the Board of
Directors should have sole control over the future of the property; and,
• Objection over the identification of parts of the downtown and in particular the warehouse
district, was identified by the owner of the Huck Glove property on Victoria Street South in
the warehouse district, who expressed concern that such identification would impact
redevelopment potential and infringe on private property owner rights.
Both objections were considered and discussed by the study team and consulting team. The
opinion remained that the golf course, downtown and warehouse districts are important to the
culture of Kitchener and meet the criteria for being identified as significant CHLs.
7
4 - 7
Staff responded to both parties to explain why these areas should continue to be identified in
the study, citing the significance of the respective sites as identified in the study, and that the
conservation of significant cultural heritage resources is a matter of provincial interest that
requires the municipality to balance the rights of property owners with objectives that are in the
broader community and public interest. Further, staff advised that the objective of this study is to
establish an inventory only. How CHLs identified in the study should be conserved will be the
subject of further study and should reflect the combined level of heritage conservation desired
by the municipality, the public and property owners. A summary of the comments received
online to the questionnaire, and a copy of the correspondence with the Westmount Golf and
Country Club are provided in Appendix `B' to this report.
In addition to there being two members of the Heritage Kitchener Committee represented on the
study team, City staff provided regular updates to Heritage Kitchener regarding the study and its
findings. This staff report and a link to the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study document were
posted on the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study webpage and on the City's webpage with the
November 4th Heritage Kitchener agenda, in advance of the Heritage Kitchener meeting date.
An email advising of the staff report and study was also sent to those on the City's mailing list.
CONCLUSION:
In order to generate a more complete picture of the City's cultural heritage resources, the City
needs to expand its knowledge base beyond the recognition of built and individual heritage
resources to the identification and protection of important CHI-s. In completing an inventory of
significant CHLs in Kitchener, the City will establish a more complete picture and understanding
of the cultural heritage resources that are of value to the community and may be deserving of
some form of conservation.
It is important to note that the purpose of the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study is
one of establishing an inventory only. The study in itself will not designate property or impose
restrictions. Rather, the study provides a starting point from which the City will continue to
engage with property owners and the public on how significant CHLs in Kitchener should be
conserved in recognition of the City's responsibility to conserve its cultural heritage resources.
It is the recommendation of Heritage Planning staff that the findings and conclusions of the
Kitchener CHL Study be endorsed by Heritage Kitchener. With the heritage committee's
endorsement, staff would proceed to prepare a report to City Council to be considered in 2015,
seeking Council's acceptance of the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study and direction
on moving forward in identifying priorities and appropriate conservation strategies.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Brandon Sloan on behalf of Alain Pinard, Director of Planning
Appendices:
Appendix `A': Listing of the 55 significant CHLs identified in the CHL study.
Appendix `B': Public comments received online to the questionnaire and
correspondence with the Westmount Golf and Country Club.
Appendix `C': Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study and appendices dated
October 2014 prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd.- available for
view and download at www.kitchener.ca/chls.
8
4 - 8
Appendix `A': Listing of the 55 Significant CHLs Identified in the CHL Study
See Appendix 4 of the CHL Study at www.kitchener.ca/chls to view corresponding map
AGRICULTURE
L-AGR-1 Woolner Farmstead
L-AGR-2 500 Stauffer Drive
L-AGR-3 Steckle Homestead
CEMETERIES
L-CE-1 First Mennonite Cemetery
L-CE2 Mount Hope Cemetery
L-CE-3 Doon Presbyterian Church & Biehn-Kinzie Family Cemetery
L-CE-4 St. Peter's Lutheran Cemetery
L-CE-5 Strasburg Lutheran Pioneer Cemetery
L-CE-6 Bridgeport Free Church & Memorial Cemeteries
L-CE-7 Woodland Cemetery
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL & RETAIL
L-COM-1 Warehouse District
L-COM-2 Downtown
GRAND RIVER
L-GRC-1 Grand River Corridor
INSTITUTIONAL
L-INS-1 Freeport Hospital
L-INS-2 Civic District
L-INS-3 "Catholic Block"
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOODS
L-NBR-1 Caryndale Neighbourhood
L-NBR-2 Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD
L-NBR-3 Onward Avenue Neighbourhood
4 - 9
L-NBR-4 Pandora Neighbourhood
L-NBR-5 St Mary's HCD
L-NBR-6 Upper Doon HCD
L-NBR-7 Victoria Park Neighbourhood
L-NBR-8 Westmount East & West Neighbourhood
L-NBR-9 Queen's Boulevard
L-NBR-10 Cedar Hill Neighbourhood
L-NBR-11 Central Frederick Neighbourhood
L-NBR-12 Mount Hope/Breithaupt/Gildner/Gruhn
Neighbourhood
PARKS & PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
L-OPS-1 Pioneer Tower West
L-OPS-2 Huron Natural Area
L-OPS-3 Chicopee
L-OPS-4 Westmount Golf Course
L-OPS-5 Victoria Park
L-OPS-6 Rockway Neighbourhood, Gardens & Golf
Course
L-OPS-7 Doon Golf Course
TRANSPORTATION
L-RD-1 Dodge Drive
L-RD2 Doon Village Road
L-RD-3 Groh Drive
L-RD-4 Hidden Valley Road
L-RD-5 Huron Road
L-RD-6 Jubilee Drive
L-RD-7 Mill Park Drive
L-RD-8 Pioneer Tower Road & Lookout Lane
L-RD-9 Plains Road
L-RD-10 Reidel Drive
L-RD-11 Stauffer Drive
L-RD-12 Tilt Drive
4 - 10
L-RD-13 Trussler Road
L-RD-14 Union Street & Union
Boulevard
L-RR-15 Canadian National Railway
Line
L-TRL-16 Iron Horse Trail
L-TRL-17 Walter Bean Trail
RESIDENTIAL/ ESTATE
L-RES-1 Homer Watson House
L-RES-2 Sims Estate
L-RES-3 Woodside Homestead
4 - 11
Appendix `B': Public Comments Received Online to the Questionnaire and
Correspondence with the Westmount Golf & Country Club
Public Comments Received Online to the Questionnaire
Q. Are there other cultural heritage landscapes of significance that you feel should be
added to the list of candidate sites already identified?Why? For example, does it help to
tell the history of your community? Is it notable due to its design or physical form? Does
it create a sense of place?
1. Test
I feel the grand river trail is important and under threat by recent
development. A good example is the area along Zeller drive. This was
2. formerly agricultural/forrested and now is flanked by houses. It is hard to
enjoy this trail when you can see into people's back windows. A terrible
loss.
The Uniroyal factory, formerly Dominion Tire, on Strange Street should be
added. Designed by Albert Kahn and built in 1912, the work done there was
responsible for Kitchener becoming the "Rubber Capital of Canada.
3 For background documentation, please consult "Rieder Rubber and
Romance : How Kitchener became the Rubber Capital of Canada" by
Susan Mavor.
An e-version has been forwarded to Rod MacDonald at Landplan and Leon
Bensason, VCity of Kitchener
Are there early first nations landscapes that should be recognized and/or
4. early settlement landscapes (Bridgeport, Lower Doon,etc.. Those pieces of
the story seem to be missing.
5 The homes around the KPL - it is where the founding fathers of Berlin lived.
Possibly look at sections of Bridgeport or along the Grand River.
6. Freeport Bridge
7 1021 Doon Village Road > birthplace of artist Homer Watson (near Tilt
Drive)
Joseph Schneider Haus on Queen Street; although it's re-created Doon
Heritage Village; the Kaufman Footwear building; Krug Furniture building;
$ VIA rail station (what will happen to the train station when the transit hub is
relocated to King and Victoria?). The jog in Queen Street at King Street -
don't ever let the transportation planners try to straighten this out by
demolishing a building or two.
9 Courtland/Queen intersection ... homes, rowhouses, Bread and Roses co-
op
Peoples places who are/were important to the growth and heritage of
10. Kitchener Waterloo.
How'bout Shirk Place in Bridgeport (incl the part above Woolwich)? Or
11. Laurel Creek through Bridgeport? Or Macville Ave?
12. Unsure.
4 - 12
13. Kind Edward school and neigbourhood. Historic school and surrounding
houses
Conestoga College
14. WLU
U ofW
WLU St. Jeromes
Pearl Place/Scott Street/Irvin Street: this is a little pocket of very old houses,
some traditional Berlin vernacular homes, on very quiet streets close to
downtown. In the case of Pearl Place, it's a dead end, and half the street
15. has already been knocked down for a development. Irvin is one-way, kind of
out of the way and forgotten, with both single-family dwellings and rental
properties. It has low-income housing and higher-end homes. It has a
history, and at least one resident who is now in her late 80s who was born
on the street and still lives there.
Q. Do you have any information or personal stories that would explain why you value any
of the candidate sites listed above?
1. test
2 I am a mason that worked on several of the sites listed. I specialize in stone
and restoration.
For background regarding the Westmount neighbourhood-one of Canada's
first "planned subdivisions"- please consult "Westmount: The Tie that Binds
3. the Twin Cities" by Susan Mavor.
A PDF version of this book has been forwarded to Rod MacDonald at
Landplan and Leon Bensason, City of Kitchener.
I liked the idea of a document like a coffee table book that showcases the
4 cities landscapes. Perhaps a future project would be to create such a book
working with local historians. Connecting the tangible elements in the
landscapes with real people and their stories.
5 I just love Woodside and feel that we do not celebrate the City's (and
Region's) political history enough.
6 I value the history of downtown Berlin / Kitchener. Walper hotel & stories of
the days of prohibition told by elders from the community.
Some of the sites I chose because I believe they are most at risk from
development, benign neglect, or intentional neglect (i.e. Woodside National
7 Historic Site). Shame on this community and indeed the entire country for
not uttering more than a whimper when the Federal government closed the
property; the Region should step forward and fund/operate it at the level it
deserves.
History is a big thing to me. You need to know where you came from and
8 what your family or people did before you. It's needs to be saved for our
children and children's children to know what people had to go through to
get top where we are today.
Caryndale, aside from the fact that the topography is virtually unaltered, has
9 interesting stories. All the houses are different and many have their original
owners, others house second and third generation inhabitants. Many of the
Caryndale inhabitants are members of the Carmel New Church and the
4 - 13
settlement is built around the church. The church building was recognized
by architects for its unusual style.
It is both visually and culturally unique; developed over an approximately 40
year period one house at a time and as an intentional community. Although
it is fairly recent (1960s) as a community, its roots are in kitchener in the
C19th.
10. Simply the most culture, history and beauty in some of these areas.
Caryndale Neighbourhood (L-NBR-2) is of significance to me because I was
raised in the community of Caryndale and went to the private school here -
The Carmel New Church School. This neighbourhood is a religious
11. community and represents something very special in Kitchener. It is
unusual and quite neat to have a community that was built around a church
and school. I would love to see this area conserved because I believe it has
significant cultural heritage.
I have lived in Caryndale since my parents built their home at the top of
Chapel Hill Drive in 1969. For several years before that, we grew a large
12 plot of potatoes on their lot, which did wonderfully in the rich but sandy soil.
Caryndale has a unique "country in the city" atmosphere that is instantly felt
by all who come here. The history of how this community was established is
fascinating and worth preserving.
With regards to #2 - Residential Neighbourhood -
13. http://www.carmelnewchurch.org/about.html
I have the pleasure of living with my young family in Caryndale. There is a
14. great sense of community in the neighbourhood . We love the large lots and
access to the nearby Caryndale woods.
I grew up in Caryndale until my 20s. A year and a half ago my wife, two
boys and I moved back to Caryndale and into the house I grew up in. This is
15. a great neighbourhood to raise children. It was built around the church and
many of us still believe in the uses of a community like this one. It is number
one on my list by far.
I spent the first 25 years of my life in the community of Caryndale. It's such
a unique area in Kitchener-Waterloo, with the incredibly individualized
homes and twisting and hilly roads. Many of my high school friends who
grew up outside of Caryndale, knew of it well and shared in reminiscing
16. about visiting the park or outside basketball court or even just going for a
peaceful, quite walk or bike ride around "the figure-eight," as we called it. It
is also a friendly neighbourhood. Everyone waves to everyone, even if you
don't know them. There's nothing quite like this community in KW from my
experience exploring our city.
The caryndale neighborhood demonstrates a time when the land was
valued and respected for what it was. Homes were built with the natural
shape of the land and each home was unique to the family who built it. It
17. also has large properties and beautiful greenery and trees. This
neighborhood is in stark contrast to the generic neighborhoods that are built
now. The caryndale neighborhood is an important part of this city's cultural
heritage.
18. Since I live in the Central Frederick neighbourhood, I appreciate the lovely
4 - 14
old homes, tree-lined streets, and sense of history one has when one walks
around the neighbourhood. It's full of families, an active neighbourhood
association, arts and culture -- people who are talented and want to share
that with others in the neighbourhood. Irvin Street, on the other hand, used
to be part of the redlight district, and still has residents with drug and alcohol
issues. But I feel that's what makes it a healthy neighbourhood, one where
everyone takes it for what it is.
Q. Do you have any additional comments, ideas or suggestions regarding this study? Did
you notice that we missed something, or is there a site you think we should add to or
remove from the list? Your feedback is appreciated.
1. test- Leon
My ratings
2. 1. Westmount 2. Westmount Golf Course 3. Union Street 4 First Mennonite
Cemetery 5.Gildner GreenNeighbourhood
3 1 think it is a great idea to identify these areas and buildings. The City did a
good job with the starting list.
I am not convinced that streetscapes are landscapes in and of themselves.
4. They are scenic, but would be best preserved if part of a neighbourhood or
rural landscape.
5 I'm not a resident of Kitchener and so the neighbourhoods don't mean as
much to me. It's difficult to choose among the cemeteries and parks!
6 1 would really like to see Woodside preserved. it's not only our heritage, but
Canada's Heritage. it teaches our children what life was like back then.
7 1 don't know enough about most of the sites to rank them, so I just picked 3
obvious ones from the list.
$ We do need to be careful to maintain neighbourhoods that have historic
value that are close to the rapid transit developments.
9 The four churches at Weber, Frederick, and Queen: Lutheran, zion United,
Trinity United and St. Andrews Presbyterian.
4 - 15
Correspondence with the Westmount Golf & Country Club
est Golf and
Country Club, Limited
�r
W
August 5, 2014
Mr. 1,eon Rens;ason
Co ardinatoa. Cultural t lr rita7 e Planning
CSD—Manning I
Kitcheii City Ball,Sig, Floor
Kitchenwer, Ontario
VN2 rj 4G7
Email: IUecan,Itrr°misa;son@kitchener.nca
Dear Mr. Ben a son:
Re: Kitchener Cultural)Heritage Landscape Studer
I am ww.nritinp in response to your letter dented May 2.5, 20.1.4,
V also attended the public information srar>smcan r n June 11,„ 2014 togoth7er with Rick Findlay,, one
of my fellow board rnoinbers frran) e:wtmount's Board Ulf Directors,,
Westm unt understands that Kitche.n;er's Oiltural Heritage(Landscape Study is I driven by
the 2014 Pruvincial Policy 5tateirnerit irelated to Cultural Heritage Landscapes, We also
understand that the objective of this initiative is to define geographical amens til'tat vnay Ihave,
been modified by Burman activity and are identified as Ihaving cultural heritage value or Interest
by a CrOrnMUnityr, has a general proposition for our community,these objectives arre ail s,itii" e,
hiowever,Westrincrunt is concerned)that gray such designation,of our property may rx)t be in the,
best intm;sls c9 our club arid, tlrnr fore, not in Li best lenp terrn interests'Of oUr cxirtmrnunity.
Wn,,stmouint was constructed between 1929 and 1,931 and has evolved over the years into the
ran erfu� property that it is tiartaay, lit is a golf coLkrs,e designed by Stanley Thompson, who is
pariabahly Canada's, minst farnotts gruff course uari.lhitect, lhav ng desip,ned may other golf courses
in Canada such as St, George's Golf& C mintr°y Club in Torcmntia and lSanff Springs gulf Course in
Banff, AP),erta,among othiers
Westrnount is also ranked as one of thip best g;calf courses:In Canada. In the,most recent rrvsn'iiirml
of 1 100 top goill courses in Canada by SC IDI EGoIj MalgazJlne released on July 19, 201.4,
Westm aunt is ranked as thie 1,7i°"best worse in,Canada,
4 - 16
. 2
As a private ClVb,We5trnowit iha5 achievod whar it has over the years through the dedicadoin of
our members to finance and maintain our property to the high level that it isx A desigp'mUon
such as yoau are proposing cijuse us to feel very concerne=d that WeArnount will lose its ablility
to sult-fly control how we care far our property. We know best how t.,o caro for and rm.,jintairiour
property and the prospect of losing; any of that control or being subjeict to any potential
restric,bons causer, as great concern,
We. appreciate that your study may identity properties that need protectiflgr, bout un our view
Westimount already has the protection it needs throagh our member.5 who require that: we
maintain Westmount t�o a premier standard-
We, therefore, respectfully reqwq thiit Wesimaum be rernowd frami 0if, Kitchener Culturail
Heritage Landscape Study.
Yours,tnAy,
Greg Shepherf.1
preskfent
4 - 17
Leon Bensason,MOP,RPPF CAHP
Cx,xirtfina,lor,Cultural Her itaige P1110intiIIrig,
C5.0,- Planning Division
Kitchener City Hall, bath Plipor
2010 11(hip Str,eet.West, P-0. Pox 1118
(A It"INER Kitcliener O,IN N2G 4G7
Phone;519.741-2200 x 730,fi.0
Fax 519.741,26Z4
TTY; 1-860-969-9994
August 29, 2014
Mr.Greg Shepherd, Prwjident
We5trinount Golf &Country Club Ltd.
50 inveraless,Drive
Kitchener,ON., N2M 47,9
Dear Mr, Shepherd,
RE, Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study-11-11storic Places Kitchener
I dentiffication,of the Westnniou nt Golf&CoitAintry C�l u 4
public Information Meeting-September 11, Oct:
Thank you for your'letter of August 5, 2014- 1 understand 1,1 the Westmiou nit C,olfa and Country Club Board of
Directors are requesting that the wo5tlnount(-1,011f a lid Country Club I removed frorn the Kitchener Cultural
Heritage Lain dsra pe Study. III have disaissed this request with the study team,and our consultant I Landplan
Collaborative Ltd.).
As noted,41 your letter, the study we are undertaking its Ibeing drivien in part by lour obligation to comply,with
niunicipall,regional and pirolvincial policy and legislation, requiringthat,significant cultural heritage landscapes,
Lie coriserved, In order to be able to conserve a cultural heritage resource,it must first be identified and
evaluated, the purpose of this study is to tali s'tock and identify cultural herftage,landscapes 116cated within
the city boundary,This includes,considering,,both public and privately owned,property,,
Tl,w WestirTiount:Golf and COUntry Club property is; ofsignificanit Cultural hieritage value,particularly for guts.
design,value., its hi�toric asspriation with the We5lirnplint lNeighbourbood and golf related history(including
Stanley [hortipson), and f-or its conirrionity va6a. In evialivating the resource, the Landplan Coll,aboratf—ve Ltd.,
has 44entified the property as a Cultural Heritage Resource of Considerable ValIue and Regional Significance in
that it meets many of the criteria associated with establishing local and re.p),onal significance-We ackinowliedgei
that this is d1up, in large part to thei dedication arid stewardship ofthe club's Board of Directors over many
years.
I understand your concern iin regard to rniaintaining,control over how Ibest to care for and nialintain the
property aind in being sublect to potential restrictions, The issue of balancing pi-Nate property owner rights
wiI planning,objectives t1lat are in the broader community and,public interest(such as conwrving culI
heritage~resources is are Issue t h at we successfully deal with a l l the t!rne,
4 - 18
Let me assure you that the purpose of this study is one of establishing an inwmtory only. T his study in itself
will not designate the.property or irnpose restrictions, Row we propo-zw to acfcfresij the conservation of earth of
the cultural heritage landscapes identified in this study will need to be the subject of another sttgdy or process
that will involve additional property owner and/or public consolitation,
It is reasonable to suggest that should the Westmount.GO and Country Club property be identifi"as a
culturall heritage landscape in this study,ther L wouild be a publijr interest in seeing the values and attributes
which cont6bute,to fnaktrig the property siBnificant conserved. It is not the City's intent to have control over
or impose restrictitris on the day,to,day operations and maintenance of the roff course or club However,the
City may have an interest in onderstanding the implications of major proposal's that could have a,sig nificant
In1pi"ICt Orl MAntaining The property as a cultural heritape landscape.Tpie rnost obvious LXarn1ple of this would
be a proposal to redevelop the golf,course for residential or other uses, wNch our Consultants advise has
resulted in the loss of other Stanley Mompson designed courses in Canada. 11 have en(JOs'ed for your
information a destription o�f the significance of the property as currently drafted by The Landlukin
Collaborative Ltd.,a,s well as a ll(icat[on map and matrix outlinin(,t the results of the evaluation undertaken Iby
the consultant.
Part afthe purpose of establishing a heritage inventory,is to decide as a cornmunity what reSO'UrCeS are Most
irrip,ortant to current and future generations, It Is our hope that the efforts we are makingtoday to identify
cultural heritage landscapes in Kitchener,will lead the City and pro,p,e.rtyown(,!rs to work tagether at
ide,ntifying appropriate levels and methods of tortservatiom t am hopeful that the Board of Director- of tho
We-strytount Golf and COLIntry Club property would agree wi1h this objective and intent, given the,significance
of the property,
rhe Landp I an Co I I iborative Ltd, is recomrniendinj, that the Westimount Golf and Country Club property shotjd4
continue to be identified as a oulturM heritage. landscape in this study. A second pubfic information meeting
has been scheduled for Septernber 11,2014 from 7pni,to 5pm,in the Conestoga Room at Kiltchener City Hall
(consultant presentation to commence at 7:3,01pm). The consultants will be presenting the study findings to
the PUb6c before firiafi?ing the study.A study report is expected to be considered by the duty's Heritage
Kitchener Cornmittee on November 4, ),1014 and then,by City Council in the Spring of 2015. Should CoUrldl
agree with the study recornimendatiolm,then those properties identified ir)this study will be considered to be
cultural heritage,landscapem
As, always, please do not hesitate to contact me %hauldl you have any questions, require additijonall
information,or would like to meet to discuss this matter in more detail.
Yours,truly,
Leon IBensason,, MCIP, RPP,CAFIP
Coordinator,Cultural Heritage Planning
4 - 19
Appendix `C': Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study and appendices dated
October 2014 prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd.
The Kitchener CHL Study is available for view and download at www.kitchener.ca/chls
,, of
Pf r"a�
CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES
4 - 20