Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-03 HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 3, 2016 CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:05 p.m. Present: Mr. G. Zeilstra - Chair Councillors J. Gazzola and Z. Janecki and Messrs. S. Miladinovic, S. Thomson, S. Hamoen, S. Burrows, P. Ciuciura, and M. Timmerman. Staff: L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Resources S. Parks, Heritage Planner D. Livingstone, Committee Administrator J. Joseph, Community Engagement Consultant C. Spere, Manager, Engineering Construction B. Cronkite, Transportation Planning Project Manager S. DiDonato, Manager, Arts & Culture CSD-16-028 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2016-IV-004 1. - 171 FREDERICK ST - REPLACE WINDOWS AND DOOR Ms. S. Parks advised the applicant for HPA-2016-IV-004, 171 Frederick Street, has requested that this matter be considered at the meeting of June 7, 2016 to provide additional time for a sample window to be obtained for consideration of the Committee. CSD-16-030 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2016-V-007 2. - 1221 DOON VILLAGE ROAD - ROOF REPLACEMENT The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-16-030, dated April 11, 2016 recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application HPA-2016-V-007 to permit roof replacement at 1221 Doon Village Road. Ms. S. Parks presented the Report. In response to questions from the Committee, Ms. Parks advised the applicant was invited to attend the meeting and bring a sample of the proposed roofing material. She stated that through pictures provided by the applicant and research conducted on the website, the product has a matte finish and will look similar to cedar shakes. With regard to similar roofs in the District, Mr. S. Hamoen, District Representative, indicated there is a similar steel roof in the neighbourhood. Mr. L. Bensason clarified that an application has not been brought forward for consideration and noted that previous requests for steel roofs in general have not been supported in a residential application as the type was flat and shiny. He further explained the type of shake material that would be acceptable would have to be in keeping and appropriate to the District. Ms. Parks advised the first proposed type was not acceptable and she worked with the applicant to determine a recommended type which resulted in the recommendation for approval this date. With regard to the process, Ms. Parks advised that if approved by unanimous consent, the Heritage Permit Application can be approved through delegated authority. She recommended applying a condition that staff review the material prior to the issuance of heritage permit approval. The Committee generally expressed support for the application; however, recommended that approval be granted upon the applicant providing a sample of the roofing material, subject to the approval of Heritage Planning staff. Carried Unanimously The following motion was then voted on and . On motion by Mr. S. Hamoen - it was resolved: That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA- 2016-V-007 be approved to permit installation of a new roof on the property municipally addressed as 1221 Doon Village Road, in accordance with the plans and supplementary information submitted with the application and subject to the following condition: HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 3, 2016 - 10 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-16-030 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2016-V-007 2. - 1221 DOON VILLAGE ROAD - That a sample of the roofing material be reviewed by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a heritage permit. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT REVIEW 3. The Committee considered the City of Kitchener Community Engagement Review presented by Mr. J. Joseph. Mr. Joseph provided an orientation on the role of Community Engagement Consultant and an overview on current projects, including: online engagement, and a He indicated during engagement with citizens, consistent themes have become apparent which have resulted in the need for a review. He stated the projects will inform the development of a community engagement policy. Mr. Joseph lead the Committee through the online engagement tool available at www.peakdemocracy.ca/m/154. A discussion ensued regarding internal and external consultation process to examine the members experiences with engagement with the City. Mr. Joseph encouraged members to share his contact info with those that are not typically engaged to obtain information on their engagement experiences. NEW PATHWAYS IN VICTORIA PARK 4. The Committee considered the 2016 Sidewalk Infill Victoria Park Multiuse trails along Jubilee Drive, David Street, and Water Street South. Mr. B. Cronkite presented an overview on the Council approved, sidewalk infill policy. He provided the background that initiated the policy stating sustainability, walkability and safety of pedestrians and the removal of barriers to accessibility were identified concerns within the City of Kitchener. He stated the Jubilee Drive area is a Priority 1 and that 25% of the overall sidewalk is missing, identifying an immediate need to improve sidewalks in the Victoria Park Conservation District. Mr. C. Spere reviewed the proposed sidewalk implementation plan and project details for each street, stating the sidewalks will meander around existing features and materials will be reviewed to blend the needs of operations, heritage guidelines and requirements of the sidewalk policy. He explained the process and considerations for the program, stating asphalt and concrete are proposed, and staff will use different construction methods to ensure the preservation of trees. He requested an endorsement from the Committee to move forward. Mr. L. Bensason referred to the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Plan stating the Plan discourages additional pathways in the park. However, where pathways are introduced, the Heritage District Plan indicates meandering paths are a guideline item. He stated Heritage Staff does not require a permit; but the guidelines state there is a philosophy applied by the heritage consultant that the park needs to be experienced; that meandering to get to a final destination should be considered in identifying how and where paths should be located. Priority linkage and secondary linkage were developed with staff which determined the locations for the proposed program. He stated staffs perspective is not to build the secondary linkages at this time and that staff are working with Engineering to provide comments. He suggested feedback and input from the Committee can be provided to staff for consideration and compilation into the report. Mr. Kronkite responded to questions advising the Sidewalk Infill Policy indicates sidewalks shall be provided in accordance with the respective approved polices and in consultation with Heritage Planning and does not require further Council consideration. The Committee generally supported the recommendation of Heritage Planning staff, as it is in keeping with Heritage Conservation Guidelines and preserves the intention of the heritage landscape to be enjoyed. The Committee supported the installation of primary linkages at this time; thereby, addressing accessibility issues. The Committee encouraged staff to examine secondary linkages at a future date with consideration of traffic counts and pedestrian needs prior to installing sidewalk in the secondary routes. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 3, 2016 - 11 - CITY OF KITCHENER NEW PATHWAYS IN VICTORIA PARK 4. Mr. Spere responded to questions regarding the installation and tender process for the installation of pathways in Victoria Park advising the tender is quantity based and in-house design will be completed by City-staff as part of a larger sidewalk program. At the request of the Committee, Mr. Spere stated he would provide the outcome and feedback from the engagement process regarding this matter to the Committee. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON THE USE OF 48 ONTARIO ST. N. 5. The Committee considered a verbal update on the use of 48 Ontario Street North as provided by Ms. S. DiDonato. In addition, the Committee was in receipt of the Statement of Significance for the property municipally addressed as 48 Ontario Street North and known as the Bell Telephone Co./ Canadian Legion property. Ms. DiDonato addressed the Committee advising Arts and Culture is beginning the consultation process to determine the use for the property at 48 Ontario Street North and explained there has been interest from the community to provide feedback. She explained consultation is being scoped to determine the vision of the future of the building with an emphasis on arts and culture. In response to questions from the Committee regarding the significance of the property, Mr. Bensason stated the property is listed on the Municipal Heritage Register and is considered a cultural heritage resource. He stated the building is vacant and maintained and in order to lower the risk to the building it is important to find an occupant and suitable use. He explained that as a vacant city owned building, it is a priority to be designated and likely meets the criteria being developed by the Heritage Designation Sub-Committee. He added that from a Heritage Planning perspective, staff would ensure awareness on the heritage permit application process on the part of the user regarding implications from alternations to the building. A discussion ensued regarding the Heritage Designation of 48 Ontario Street North and there was general support for the Sub-Committee to continue their work developing criteria and matrix to prioritize properties for designation. Mr. Bensason provided clarification stating the property is definitely in the top group for the following reasons: heritage attributes; Ontario Regulation 906 to the Ontario Heritage Act; Official Plan policies; and the objective to lead by example by designating city-owned properties. Direction was given by the Committee to ensure the Sub-Committee recommendation is brought forward in advance of the results of the community engagement process for the use of the building. Ms. E. Robson indicated the community engagement process will begin in fall 2016 and requested the Committee to provide input on who the stakeholders are; who should be targeting to participate; and, considerations from a heritage perspective as the engagement process is developed. She explained staff are designing the community engage process right now, meeting with Advisory Committees and examining engagement opportunities, such as tours and a charrette. She encouraged the Committee to share the information with their network, to attend and participate in the process. The Committee suggested engaging commercial tenants or owners of heritage buildings as stakeholders to discuss unique situations that could arise related to the use or occupancy of the building. Ms. Robson and Ms. DiDonato expressed appreciation to the Committee for their input and advised they anticipate presenting the results of the community engagement for arts and culture community use opportunities for the building by the end of the year. Ms. DiDonato assured the Committee that no further movement is expected to take place before the presentation to Council scheduled for the year with regard to tenancy or occupancy of the building. HERITAGE BEST PRACTICES OPEN FORUM 6. No update was provided this date or the Heritage Designation or Promotion Subcommittees. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 3, 2016 - 12 - CITY OF KITCHENER ADJOURNMENT 7. On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:08 p.m. D. Livingstone Committee Administrator