Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
HK - 2019-05-07 - Item 1 - Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) Full Version - 149-151 Ontario St N, 21 Weber St W
IN 2 MORO: HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West, Kitchener, Ontario t February 2019 revised March 18, 2019 Project # LHC0134 L H Letourneau Heritage Consulting Inc. Project #LHC0134 This page has been left blank deliberately Project #LHC0134 Report prepared for: Report prepared by: Amy Barnes, M.A., CAHP Zack Hamm, M.A. Reviewed by: Christienne Uchiyama, M.A. CAHP Project #LHC0134 Table of Contents 1 STATEMENT OF PROJECT................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Report Limitations................................................................................................................ 1 2 STUDY APPROACH............................................................................................................................................2 2.1 Definitions and Abbreviations..............................................................................................2 2.2 Heritage Impact Assessment Outline.................................................................................. 4 2.3 Site Visit............................................................................................................................... 7 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPERTY................................................................................................................9 3.1 149-151 Ontario Street North.............................................................................................. 9 3.2 21 Weber Street West....................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Existing Heritage Considerations...................................................................................... 15 3.3.1 149-151 Ontario Street North...........................................................................................................16 3.3.2 21 Weber Street West......................................................................................................................17 3.3.3 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District............................................................17 4 POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK.....................................................................................................21 4.1 Provincial Acts, Regulations, Plans, and Guidelines.........................................................21 4.1.1 Planning Act.....................................................................................................................................21 4.1.2 Provincial Policy Statement..............................................................................................................21 4.1.3 Ontario Heritage Act........................................................................................................................22 4.1.4 Summary..........................................................................................................................................23 4.2 Region of Waterloo............................................................................................................ 23 4.2.1 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)...........................................................................................23 4.2.2 The Region of Waterloo Strategic Plan (2015-2018).......................................................................24 4.2.3 Region of Waterloo Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan............................................................24 4.2.4 Regional Implementation Guideline for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation ........................25 4.2.5 Summary..........................................................................................................................................26 4.3 City of Kitchener................................................................................................................ 26 4.3.1 City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete & Healthy Kitchener (2014) ..........................................26 4.4 City of Kitchener Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (2007) ..... 37 4.4.1 Summary..........................................................................................................................................41 4.5 City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study (2014) ..........................................41 4.6 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.................42 4.7 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties ........................43 iv Project #LHC0134 4.8 Ontario Heritage Toolkit.................................................................................................... 44 5 PROPERTY CONTEXT......................................................................................................................................44 149-151 Ontario Street.................................................................................................... 5.1 Ontario Street North.......................................................................................................... 46 5.2 Weber Street West............................................................................................................48 6 HISTORICAL CONTEXT....................................................................................................................................51 Additional Considerations..............................................................................................................111 6.1 City of Kitchener................................................................................................................ 51 6.2 Property Morphology......................................................................................................... 59 6.3 Property History and Ownership....................................................................................... 68 6.3.1 149-151 Ontario Street North........................................................................................................70 8.1.4.1 6.3.2 21 Weber Street West......................................................................................................................71 7 PHYSICAL / DESIGN DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................74 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.........................................................................115 7.1 149-151 Ontario Street North............................................................................................ 74 7.1.1 Exterior.............................................................................................................................................74 7.1.2 Interior..............................................................................................................................................78 21 Weber Street.............................................................................................................. 7.2 21 Weber Street................................................................................................................ 99 7.2.1 Exterior.............................................................................................................................................99 7.2.2 Interior............................................................................................................................................101 Summary of Evaluation..................................................................................................................117 8 EVALUATIONS................................................................................................................................................110 8.1 149-151 Ontario Street.................................................................................................... 110 8.1.1 Ontario Regulation 9/06................................__...............................................................................110 8.1.2 Additional Considerations..............................................................................................................111 8.1.3 Summary of Evaluation..................................................................................................................115 8.1.4 Statement of Significance [Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest] ................................115 8.1.4.1 Description of Property................................................................................................................115 8.1.4.2 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.........................................................................115 8.1.4.3 Heritage Attributes.......................................................................................................................115 8.2 21 Weber Street.............................................................................................................. 116 8.2.1 Ontario Regulation 9/06.................................................................................................................116 8.2.2 Summary of Evaluation..................................................................................................................117 8.3 Cultural Heritage Landscape........................................................................................... 117 8.3.1 Summary of Finding.......................................................................................................................119 9 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT..........................................................................................120 10 IMPACT ASSESSMENT...................................................................................................................................131 V Project #LHC0134 10.1 Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans ...........................131 10.2 Indirect Impacts............................................................................................................... 133 10.2.1 Streetscape Considerations...........................................................................................................139 10.3 Region of Waterloo: Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or MatureNeighbourhood .......................................................................................................................... 142 10.4 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Design Guidelines............ 142 10.5 Additional Considerations................................................................................................ 148 10.5.1 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada...............................148 10.5.2 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties .....................................150 10.6 Summary......................................................................................................................... 151 11 ALTERNATIVES ...............................................................................................................................................153 11.1 Option 1 - Do Nothing...................................................................................................... 153 11.2 Option 2 - Proposed New Development (16 Storeys) ..................................................... 153 11.3 Option 3 - Retention in situ with Proposed New Development (21 -Storey) .................... 154 11.4 Option 4 - Proposed New Development with Salvaged Materials (21 Storeys) .............. 156 11.5 Preferred Option.............................................................................................................. 158 12 MITIGATIVE MEASURES................................................................................................................................159 13 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................160 14 RIGHT OF USE.................................................................................................................................................161 15 SIGNATURES...................................................................................................................................................161 16 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................162 16.1 Background Sources....................................................................................................... 162 16.2 Policies............................................................................................................................ 165 17 PROJECT PERSONNEL..................................................................................................................................166 Figures Figure 1: Location map for 149-151 Ontario Street North (blue dot) (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017) ............................9 Figure 2: Land Use Designation showing the subject properties (yellow circle) (Kitchener OP, 2014) ........................10 Figure 3: Aerial view of 149-151 Ontario Street (circled) and surrounding block (Kitchener OnPoint Maps, 2017).....10 Figure 4: Fagade of 149-151 Ontario Street North. Note the two small landscaped patches and the narrow set back. (AB, 2018)....................................................................................................................................................................11 Figure 5: Zoning Map showing 149-151 Ontario Street listed as a D-4 Zoning (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017).........11 Figure 6: Location of 21 Weber Street West (noted with blue dot) and surrounding area. (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017)............................................................................................................................................................................13 Figure 7: Aerial view of 21 Weber Street West (red) and surrounding block (Kitchener OnPoint Maps, 2017)...........14 Figure 8: Fagade and north elevation of 21 Weber Street West (AB, 2018)................................................................14 Figure 9: Zoning Map showing 21 Weber Street West listed as a D-4 Zoning (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017)..........15 Vi Project #LHC0134 Figure 10: The CCNHCD boundary with the subject properties noted in red (CCNHCD Plan, 2007) .......................... 17 Figure 11: The Region of Waterloo uses a three -pronged approach to determine a significant CHL .......................... 26 Figure 12: City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. The general area of the subject properties are noted with a red star (Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, Appendix 4, p. 27) ......................................................42 Figure 13: Location of subject properties (red star) and location of surrounding large-scale buildings which range in height from six to 19 storeys (blue star) (Kitchener Interactive Maps, 2019)...............................................................46 Figure 14: View of east side of Ontario Street North looking south (AB, 2018)............................................................47 Figure 15: View of west side on Ontario Street North. This is the building directly across from149-151 Ontario Street North(AB, 2018)..........................................................................................................................................................47 Figure 16: View of Weber Street West looking east, showing 11 Weber Street West (red brick building) and 17 Weber Street West (buff brick building). (Google Earth Pro, 2017).........................................................................................48 Figure 17: Weber Street West looking east, with showing 21 Weber Street west on the corner. A portion of 149-151 Ontario Street North is also visible (AB, 2018).............................................................................................................49 Figure 18: Photo taken from corner of Ontario Street North and Weber Street. View looking west down Weber Street West (left) and east down Weber Street (right). The buildings are associate with the CCNHCD (AB, 2018) .............. 49 Figure 19: Recommended Official Plan designations in the CCNHCD Plan. (CCNHCD Plan, Figure 4) .....................50 Figure 20: Noted major gateways (red star) and minor gateways (blue stars) associated with the CCNHCD (CCNHCD Plan, Figure 7).............................................................................................................................................................50 Figure 21: Painting of a typical Conestoga wagon of the period. Courtesy of the State Museum of Pennsylvania (Trotter, 1883)............................................................................................................................................................................ 53 Figure 22: Postcard showing the Grand Trunk Railway Station in Berlin, Ontario (S.H. Knox and Co., 1908)............54 Figure 23: Painting of the Grand River Bridge (probably at Breslau) in 1856 by William Armstrong. Courtesy of Waterloo Historical Society Collection (Armstrong, 1856)...........................................................................................................54 Figure 24: Black and white photograph of Berlin's original town hall built in 1869 (Denton & Gifford, 1924) ...............55 Figure 25: Photograph of Kitchener's second City Hall in Renaissance Revival style, built in 1924 (demolished in 1754). Its dome clock tower now sits in Victoria Park (The Waterloo Region Record Historical Photo Collection, 1972).......55 Figure 26 Photograph of the post office at King and Benton Streets (The Waterloo Region Record Historical Photo Collection, n.d.)............................................................................................................................................................56 Figure 27: Old Berlin Rubber Company, a footwear manufacturer. Archives of Ontario (Moyer, 1979) .......................57 Figure 28: A 1909 photograph of the J.M. Schneider meat packing company with staff posed outside (Moyer, 1979). ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 29: Photo of an older John Hoffman, early innovator of Berlin (Moyer, 1979) ..................................................58 Figure 30: Town of Berlin, 1853, subject properties marked in red (University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre) .......... 60 Figure 31: Map of parts of the Town of Berlin in the County of Waterloo, showing lot 11 owned by Jantz (Plan 401, LRO#58)...................................................................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 32: Clipping of Tremaine's Map of Waterloo Township, 1861, showing Berlin roadways and surrounding land owners(Tremaine, 1861).............................................................................................................................................61 Figure 33: Berlin, 1875, subject properties general area circled in red (University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre)....61 Figure 34: An 1894 (revised 1904) Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North (red) and 21 Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room).......................................................................................................................................................................... 62 Figure 35: A 1908 (revised 1925) Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North (red) and 21 Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room). ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 63 Vii Project #LHC0134 Figure 36: A 1908 (Revised 1946) Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North (red) and 21 Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room).......................................................................................................................................................................... 64 Figure 37: Photo of the Carnegie Library located on the corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The building was demolished c. 1962 (KPL, P010257).......................................................................................................65 Figure 38: Detailed view of the 1908 (Rev. 1925) Fire Insurance Plan showing the First English Lutheran Church ad the Public Library. This section was demolished c. 1960 and replaced with Commerce House (50 Queen Street West). ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 39: Hartman Krug residence located at 117 Ontario Street North. The property was demolished c. 1964 (The Record, 2010)..............................................................................................................................................................66 Figure 40: 10 Duke Street found at the corner of Duke Street and Queen Street North built in 1949 (Davis, 2017)...67 Figure 41: 1969 photo of construction crews clearing the site to build the Corporation Square. Note 149-151 Ontario Street North in the background (The Record, 2010)....................................................................................................67 Figure 42: Aerial of properties (red) and surrounding landscape (Region of Waterloo, 1980) .....................................68 Figure 43: Portrait of J.M. Staebler. (Find A Grave. Memorial ID 161406725).............................................................69 Figure 44: Residence of Dr. H. G. Lackner (left) and portrait (right). (Waterloo Generations, Memorial ID 128157)....73 Figure 45: Fagade (left) and detail of Unit 1 doorway (right) (AB, 2018)......................................................................75 Figure 46: Fagade and north elevation (AB, 2018)......................................................................................................75 Figure 47: East elevation and rear (south) elevation (AB, 2018).................................................................................76 Figure 48: Rear view, showing south west corner (AB, 2018).....................................................................................76 Figure 49: The west elevation, showing the surrounding landscape has been paved (AB, 2018) ...............................77 Figure 50: Detailed image showing, bay window and voussoirs, brick voussoirs with drip molds, quoining and brackets (AB, 2018)....................................................................................................................................................................77 Figure 51: Layout of units (not to scale). Unit 1 is outlined in blue. Unit 2 is outlined in red. Unit three is outlined in green and occupied the entire upper level of the building (AB, 2018)....................................................................................78 Figure 52: Floor layout of Unit 1 (not to scale) (AB, 2018)...........................................................................................79 Figure 53: View of floor layout (left), with view of front entrance (centre) and looking towards the kitchen from front entrance(right) (AB, 2018)...........................................................................................................................................79 Figure 54: Master bedroom (AB, 2018)........................................................................................................................80 Figure 55: View of kitchen (AB, 2018)..........................................................................................................................80 Figure 56: Living room (AB, 2018)...............................................................................................................................81 Figure 57: Bathroom (AB, 2018)..................................................................................................................................81 Figure 58: Floor layout of Unit 2 (not to scale). This unit occupies the entire upper level of 149-151 Ontario Street North. (AB, 2018)....................................................................................................................................................................83 Figure 59: Unit 2 Front door with transom from interior (left) and exterior (right) (ZH, 2018) .......................................83 Figure 60: Stairs and hallways (AB, 2018)...................................................................................................................84 Figure 61: Bedroom 1 (AB, 2018)................................................................................................................................84 Figure 62: Living Room (AB, 2018)..............................................................................................................................85 Figure 63: Transition ways. Showing the living room and kitchen and main transition from one half of the apartment to theother (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................................................85 Figure 64: Kitchen looking south (AB, 2018)................................................................................................................86 Figure 65: Kitchen, looking west (AB, 2018)................................................................................................................86 Figure 66: Bedroom 5 located in the south-west corner (AB, 2018).............................................................................87 Figure 67: Hallway located on the north half of the apartment which provides access to Bedroom 2 and 3 (AB, 2018). ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 87 Viii Project #LHC0134 Figure 68: Bedroom 2 and closet (AB, 2018)...............................................................................................................88 Figure 69: Bedroom 3 (AB, 2018)................................................................................................................................88 Figure 70: Transition way to rear portion (south) side of building (AB, 2018)..............................................................89 Figure 71: Bathroom on east side (AB, 2018)..............................................................................................................89 Figure 72: Bedroom 4 (AB, 2018)................................................................................................................................90 Figure 73: Staircase leading from Unit 2 leading down to laundry room (AB, 2018) ....................................................90 Figure 74: Floor layout of Unit 3 (not to scale). Note the grey area is associated with Unit 2 (AB, 2018) ....................91 Figure 75: Entrance to Unit 3 (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................92 Figure 76: Entrance to Unit 3 (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................92 Figure 77: Kitchen area (AB, 2018)..............................................................................................................................93 Figure 78: Kitchen looking towards hallway (AB, 2018)...............................................................................................93 Figure 79: Hallway (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................................94 Figure 80: Bedroom in Unit 3 (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................94 Figure 81: Living room looking north towards bay window (left) and toward north-east corner (right) (AB, 2018).......95 Figure 82: Floor layout of the basement (not to scale). Note the western half associated with Unit 3 was not explored indetail (AB, 2018).......................................................................................................................................................96 Figure 83: Laundry room (ZH, 2018)............................................................................................................................96 Figure 84: Rear portion of the basement. Note the brick covered with white wash and parging (ZH, 2018) ................97 Figure 85: View of the brick flooring, HVAC equipment. Not the mix of brick and stone walls (ZH, 2018) ...................97 Figure 86: Foundation wall showing mix of brick and stone walls with brick flooring (ZH, 2018) .................................98 Figure 87: View under the crawl space (ZH, 2018)......................................................................................................98 Figure 88: Fagade and north elevation (AB, 2018)......................................................................................................99 Figure 89: South and east elevation. Note the brick and cinderblock materials (AB, 2018) .......................................100 Figure 90: South-west elevation (AB, 2018)...............................................................................................................100 Figure 91: North elevation (AB, 2018)........................................................................................................................101 Figure 92: Upper level floor plan (not to scale) (AB, 2018)........................................................................................102 Figure 93: Upper level facing east (AB, 2018)...........................................................................................................102 Figure 94: Upper level facing west (AB, 2018)...........................................................................................................103 Figure 95: Upper level showing rear (west area) (AB, 2018).....................................................................................103 Figure 96: View looking east behind division wall (AB, 2018)....................................................................................104 Figure 97: View facing north, showing porch (AB, 2018)...........................................................................................104 Figure 98: View of porch (AB, 2018)..........................................................................................................................105 Figure 99: View of entrance way (AB, 2018)..............................................................................................................105 Figure 100: View of entrance looking to lower level (AB, 2018).................................................................................106 Figure 101: Lower level floor plan (not to scale) (AB, 2018)......................................................................................106 Figure 102: Basement area (AB, 2018).....................................................................................................................107 Figure 103: Bathroom on lower level (AB, 2018).......................................................................................................107 Figure 104: Office area (AB, 2018)............................................................................................................................108 Figure 105: Hallway (left) and small room (right) leading to rear room (AB, 2018) ....................................................108 Figure 106: Rear storage room looking south (left) and north (right) (AB, 2018).......................................................109 Figure 107: Two examples of buildings with Italianate features located within CCNHCD. Note the overhanging eaves with wood brackets, segmentally arched windows openings (AB, 2019)...................................................................113 Figure 108: Example of buff brick buildings found within the CCNHCD (AB, 2019) ...................................................113 Figure 109: Examples of architectural elements found with the CCNHCD including overhanging eaves, wood brackets, buff brick, quoins, bay windows, voussoirs with drip molds and brick chimneys (AB, 2019) ......................................114 ix Project #LHC0134 Figure 110: Proposed site plan, showing set back and relationship to the street (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019).........122 Figure 111: North-west and north-east perspective of proposed design (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019) ........................123 Figure 112: Detail of west elevation showing 149-151 Ontario Street North (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019) .................124 Figure 113: South east and south west perspective (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019) .....................................................125 Figure 114: 1s' floor plan (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)...............................................................................................126 Figure 115: Second floor Plans (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)....................................................................................127 Figure 116: Floor 3-21 floor plan. Note the set back of the tower from the three -section portion of the building (Edge ArchitectsLtd., 2019).................................................................................................................................................128 Figure 117: North and east elevations (Edge Architect, 2019)...................................................................................129 Figure 118: South and west elevation. Note the setback for the tower from the three-storey section (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)..................................................................................................................................................................130 Figure 119: Spring shadow study (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019)...................................................................................135 Figure 120: Summer Shadow Study (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019)...............................................................................136 Figure 121: Autumn Shadow Study (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019)................................................................................137 Figure 122: Winter Shadow Study (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)................................................................................138 Figure 123: View of 21 Storey tower from Duke Street (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019) .................................................140 Figure 124: View from Weber Street West looking west towards the property (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019) ...............140 Figure 125: View of 21 storey building from Weber Street West, looking east (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019) .............141 Figure 126: View of 21 storey building from Ontario Street North looking north (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)...........141 Figure 127: Option 2 showing a 16 storeys tower. Massing of the north elevation (left) and west elevation (right) (Edge ArchitectsLtd., 2018).................................................................................................................................................154 Figure 128: Preliminary site plan for Option 2, a 16 Storey building (Edge Architects Ltd. 2018) ..............................154 Figure 129: Option 3 proposed site plan (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019).......................................................................157 Figure 130: North west and north east perspective (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019)......................................................157 Tables Table 1: D-4 Zoning and Permitted Uses.....................................................................................................................12 Table 2: Review of relevant policies in the City of Kitchener Official Plan....................................................................28 Table 3: Review of relevant policies for consideration in the CCNHCD.......................................................................37 Table 4: Evaluation against 0. Reg. 9/06..................................................................................................................110 Table 5: Evaluation of 21 Weber Street West against 0. Reg. 9/06..........................................................................116 Table 6: CHL framework using an adapted version of Reg. 9/06 Criteria for Heritage Value or Interest...................118 Table 7: Potential impact on heritage attributes.........................................................................................................131 Table 8: Assessment of the CCNHCD Guidelines against proposed development ...................................................142 Table 9: Standards and Guidelines related to additions.............................................................................................148 Table 10: Standards and Guidelines regarding the preservation of the cultural heritage resource ............................149 Table 11: Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties regarding the conservation of the cultural heritage resource...........................................................................................................................................150 Appendices Appendix A: City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment Terms of Reference Appendix B: City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Statement of Significance for 149-151 Ontario Street North Appendix C: Photographic documentation of large-scale buildings within 500 metres X Project #LHC0134 Appendix D: City Directory entries for 149-151 Ontario Street North Appendix E: City Directory entries for 21 Weber Street West Appendix F: Full set of designs for Option 2 -16 Storey Building Appendix G: Full set of designs for Option 4 - 21 Storey Building with Salvaged Materials Appendix H: Region of Waterloo Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood Appendix I: Comparative Analysis of CCNHCD XI Project #LHC0134 STATEMENT OF PROJECT Letourneau Heritage Consulting Inc. (LHC) was retained by in 2018 to complete a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West, Kitchener, Ontario. The property located at 149-151 Ontario Street North is included on the City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register as a non- designated property of cultural heritage value or interest under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). 21 Weber Street West is not included on the Municipal Heritage Register but is adjacent to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD). Properties within the CCNHCD are designated under Part V of the OHA through By -Law 2008-39. The property owner is currently preparing to redevelop 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West. The proposed development seeks to remove the building at 21 Weber Street West and portions of the rear additions and roof at 149-151 Ontario Street North. The proposed development seeks to retain the two-storey, semi-detached front portion of 149-151 Ontario Street North in situ and to construct a new 21 -storey residential tower and three-storey parking garage. The purpose of this HIA is to determine the cultural heritage value or interest of 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West and to identify any potential negative impacts of the proposed development on the subject properties and adjacent heritage resources. This HIA is being prepared as part of the Site Plan application. LHC prepared this HIA according to the City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment- Terms of Reference (Appendix A). 1.1 Report Limitations The senior authors of this report are members in good standing with the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals. The qualifications of the heritage consultants who authored this report are provided at the end of this report. All comments regarding the condition of any buildings on the property relate only to observed materials and structural components that are documented in photographs and other studies. The findings of this report do not address any structural or condition related issues associated with any buildings on the property and any potential heritage attributes. With respect to historical research, the purpose of this report is to evaluate the property. The authors are fully aware that there may possibly be additional historical information. Nevertheless, the consultants believe that the information collected, reviewed and analyzed is sufficient to conduct an evaluation using 0. Reg. 9/06 criteria. This report reflects the professional opinion of the authors and the requirements of their membership in various professional and licensing bodies. Project #LHC0134 2 STUDY APPROACH 2.1 Definitions and Abbreviations Definitions applied in the preparation of this HIA are those provided in the Provincial Policy Statement 2014 (PPS), Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) and the City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP). Adjacent means lands, buildings and/or structures that are contiguous or that are directly opposite to other lands, buildings and/or structures, separated only by a laneway, municipal road or other right-of-way. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Alter means to change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair, or disturb and "alteration" has a corresponding meaning ("transformer', "transformation") (OHA). Areas of archaeological potential means areas with the likelihood of containing archaeological resources. Methods to identify archaeological potential are established by the Province, but municipal approaches which achieve the same objectives may also be used. The Ontario Heritage Act requires archaeological potential to be confirmed through archaeological fieldwork (PPS, 2014). Building Design -building design is closely interrelated with built form and is a function of scale, proportion, rhythm, architectural elements and materials. Building design is typically regulated through Urban Design Policies and guidelines. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Built heritage means a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property's cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community, including an Aboriginal community. Built heritage resources are generally located on property that has been designated under Part IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, Regional, Provincial and/or Federal registers (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). CCNHCD means Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Community Character - refers to identifiable pockets of the urban fabric with distinctive physical attributes. These attributes include but are not limited to development patterns, scale of the built environment, architectural vernacular of existing buildings and structures, cultural heritage resources and community infrastructure. Community character is a reflection of community image, identity and sense of place and may also reflect cultural and social values. Cultivating community character is intended to foster community pride. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014) Conserve/Conserved/Conservation (in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology) 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 Ontario Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a heritage conservation plan, archeological assessment, and/or heritage impact assessment. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches can be included in these plans and assessments. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014) CP means Conservation Plan Cultural heritage landscape means 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. 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 may include, but are not limited to, heritage conservation districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, Project #LHC0134 trailways, viewsheds, natural areas and industrial complexes of heritage significance; and areas recognized by federal or international designation authorities. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014) Cultural Heritage Resources - includes buildings, structures and properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or listed on the Municipal Heritage Register, properties on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings, built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes as defined in the Provincial Policy Statement. (City of Kitchener OP, 2014) Gateways means features which demarcate areas with distinctive or recognizable character. Gateways are typically located at major street intersections along major streets entering the City and may also be located at entrances to areas such as the downtown, a Planning Community/District, a neighbourhood, a design district or heritage district. Gateway features may be landmark buildings, special landscape features, unique public spaces or other site elements and are specifically designed to reinforce the character of the area they represent (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Heritage attributes' means the principal features or elements that contribute to a protected heritage property's cultural heritage value or interest, and may include the property's built or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting (including significant views or vistas to or from a protected heritage property) (PPS, 2014). Heritage attributes means, in relation to real property, and to the buildings and structures on the real property, the attributes of the property, buildings and structures that contribute to the property's cultural heritage value or interest; ("attributs patrimoniaux") (OHA). Heritage Conservation District - a geographic area primarily made up of a group of buildings, streets and open spaces which collectively contribute to the cultural heritage value or interest of the area (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Heritage Conservation District Plan — a document that provides policies and guidelines to assist in the protection and enhancement of the cultural heritage values of the district. The document includes a statement of objectives, a statement of the district's cultural heritage value or interest, a description of the district's heritage attributes, policies, guidelines and procedures for achieving stated objectives and managing future change, and a description of external alterations or classes of external alterations that are of minor nature that an owner can carry out without obtaining a permit (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Heritage Conservation Plan — a document that details how a cultural heritage resource can be conserved. The conservation plan may be supplemental to a heritage impact assessment but is typically a separate document. The recommendations of the plan should include descriptions of repairs, stabilization and preservation activities as well as long term conservation, monitoring and maintenance measures (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Heritage Impact Assessment - a document comprising text and graphic material including plans, drawings, photographs that contains the results of historical research, field work, survey, analysis, and description(s) of cultural heritage resources together with a description of the process and procedures in deriving potential effects and mitigation measures as required by official plan policies and any other applicable or pertinent guidelines. A heritage impact assessment may include an archaeological assessment where appropriate (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). 1 Heritage attributes, as a term, is defined separately (and differently) under the Ontario Heritage Act and the PPS. As this report is being submitted as part of a complete application under the Planning Act, the PPS definition would apply. However, the OHA definition is being included as this property is protected under Section 27, Part IV of the OHA. Project #LHC0134 Identify/identified (in regard to cultural heritage landscapes) - identify will mean designate for the purposes of the Regional Official Plan (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). MTCS refers to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. OHA refers to the Ontario Heritage Act. Protected Heritage Property - property designated under Parts IV, V or VI of the Ontario Heritage Act; heritage conservation easement under Parts II or IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; property identified by the Province and prescribed public bodies as provincial heritage property under the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties; property protected under federal legislation, and UNESCO World Heritage Sites (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Public Realm - includes roadways, pedestrian linkages, parks and open spaces, semi-public spaces and accessible parts of public buildings. A significant component of the public realm is the streetscape, which includes all elements of the street as well as the building fagades facing the street (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Qualified Person - for the purposes of cultural heritage resources, means an individual including a professional engineer, architect, archaeologist, etc., having relevant, recent experience in the conservation of cultural heritage resources (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). SOS refers to a Statement of Significance. Urban Design Guidelines provide detailed urban design expectations with respect to focused areas of urban design, including (but not limited to): design of the communities, neighbourhoods, sites, buildings and the design of elements thereof (such as public realm, gateway features, streetscapes, parks and open spaces, cultural heritage resources, built form, building design, parking, transit, landscape design, trees and woodlands, site circulation, site servicing, safety and security, lighting, signage, microclimate, infill development, emergency access and public art) (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Urban Design Manual means a document adopted/approved by Council which contains guidelines to ensure that new development is consistent with the City's vision and policies for urban design and which demonstrates conformity with the four guiding principles contained within the City's vision of function, order, identity and appeal (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Urban Design Report means an urban design document that may be required of an owner/applicant to demonstrate how a development application implements the City's Urban Design Manual. An urban design report does not require Council approval (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). Views and Vistas means significant visual compositions of the built and natural environment that enliven the overall physical character of an area. Views are generally panoramic in nature while vistas are typically a strong individual feature framed by its surroundings (City of Kitchener OP, 2014). 2.2 Heritage Impact Assessment Outline The HIA includes the ten requirements identified in Section 2.0 of the City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference (TOR Items 2.1 to 2.10), as follows: 2.1 Present owner contact information for properties proposed for development and/or site alteration. Project #LHC0134 2.2 A detailed site history to include a listing of owners from the Land Registry Office, and a history of the site use(s). 2.3 A written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject properties including: building elements, building materials, architectural and interior finishes, natural heritage elements, and landscaping. The description will also include a chronological history of the buildings' development, such as additions and demolitions. The report shall include a clear statement of the conclusions regarding the cultural heritage value and interest of each of the subject property as well as a bullet point list of heritage attributes. If applicable, the statement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritage property. 2.4 Documentation of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an appropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site details. Documentation shall also include where available, current floor plans, and historical photos, drawings or other available and relevant archival material. 2.5 An outline of the proposed development, its context, and how it will impact the properties (subject properties and if applicable adjacent protected heritage properties) including buildings, structures, and site details including landscaping. In particular, the potential visual and physical impact of the proposed development on the identified heritage attributes of the properties, shall be assessed. The Heritage Impact Assessment must consider potential negative impacts as identified in the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport's Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. Negative impacts may include but are not limited to: alterations that are not sympathetic or compatible with the cultural heritage resource; demolition of all or part of a cultural heritage resource; etc. The outline should also address the influence and potential impact of the development on the setting and character of the subject properties and adjacent protected heritage property. 2.6 Options shall be provided that explain how the significant cultural heritage resources may be conserved. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited to, preservation/conservation in situ, adaptive re -use, integration of all or part of the heritage resource, relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the heritage resource. 2.7 A summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must be included. Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport); and, the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport). 2.8 Proposed alterations and demolitions must be justified and explained as to any loss of cultural heritage value and impact on the streetscape/neighbourhood context. Project #LHC0134 2.9 Recommendations shall be as specific as possible, describing and illustrating locations, elevations, materials, landscaping, etc. 2.10 The qualifications and background of the person(s) completing the Heritage Impact Assessment shall be included in the report. The author(s) must demonstrate a level of professional understanding and competence in the heritage conservation field of study. The report will also include a reference for any literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in the report. The components of this HIA are listed below: Statement of Project Section 1 of this HIA comprises an introduction to the report. Study Approach In addition to the required content identified in the City's TOR document, this report includes an overview of LHC's approach to the HIA and this outline of the report identifying the locations of TOR required content. Introduction to the Property Section 3 of this report provides a basic overview of the property, including a plan of the existing conditions, area/size, general topography and physical description, and a description of potential and known cultural heritage resources on the property (TOR Item 2.3). The property is clearly and precisely defined using the municipal address and legal description. The physical context of the property, including its immediate neighbourhood, adjacent properties, adjacent heritage interests, and physical features is described. The present owners contact information is provided (TOR Item 2.1). Policy and Legislative Framework A review of applicable legislation and policy is provided in Section 4 of this report. This was done to ensure the heritage planning and policy requirements are clear and to determine if any of these documents specifically identifies any cultural heritage resources on the subject properties. It was also done to ensure that the project will not conflict with any heritage planning requirements. The analysis considered municipal, regional and provincial legislation and policies. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 provide a summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how that have been used in the preparation of this HIA (TOR Item 2.7). Property Context A written and visual description of the area surrounding the property is outlined in Section 5 (TOR Item 2.4). Historical Context A review of the historical background of the surrounding area, the property and associated buildings was undertaken using available archival materials. This included: historical atlases, historical maps, census records, land registry documents, City Directories, historical photographs, and secondary sources. Section 6 of this report presents the findings from the historical research, including a detailed history of owners and the history of the sites use (TOR Item 2.2). Project #LHC0134 Physical/ Design Description A written description of the all the buildings, structures and landscaping features is found in Section 7 (TOR Item 2.3). Any known addition and/or demolition has been identified (TOR Items 2.3 and 2.4). Floor plans and photographic documentation is also provided (TOR Item 2.4). Evaluations An evaluation of the property has been carried out in accordance with 0. Reg. 9/06 of the OHA and the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation framework. The evaluations are outlined in Section 8 of this report (TOR Item 2.3). Description of the Proposed Development A description of the proposed development is outlined in Section 9 (TOR Item 2.5). Impact Assessment An impact assessment per the MTCS Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans is provided in Section 10 (TOR Item 2.5). Alternatives Project alternatives are outline in Section 11 and 12 (Item 2.6) Conclusions and Recommendations A summary of the evaluation, the impacts, mitigative measures and the rationale for the development proposal is discussed in Section 13 (TOR Item 2.8). The report provides recommendations and considerations for work on the property going forward. These are outlined in Section 13 (TOR Item 2.9). References References cited and resources consulted are listed in Section 16 (TOR Item 2.10). Project Personnel The authors' qualifications and background are found in Section 17 (TOR Item 2.10). 2.3 Site Visit The site visits were completed in accordance with MTCS' statement that ideally every property being considered under an Ontario Heritage Act designation should be examined at least twice.2 Ms. Barnes carried out a preliminary site visit on 5 October 2018 with the primary objective of gaining an understanding of both properties and surrounding context. No photographs were taken at this time. Ms. Barnes and Mr. Hamm carried out comprehensive site visit for 149-150 Ontario Street North on 7 November 2018. The interior and exterior were investigated and photographed at this time. The general context and the streetscape were also photographed. 2 MTCS, Heritage Property Evaluation, 2006: 19. Project #LHC0134 Ms. Barnes carried out a comprehensive site visit for 21 Weber Street on 14 November 2018. The interior and exterior were investigated and photographed at this time. The general context and streetscape were also photographed. Ms. Barnes carried out a site visit of the surrounding neighbourhood on 6 January 2019. Photographs of surrounding properties were taken. Project #LHCO 134 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPERTY 3^1 149-151 Ontario Street North The subject property, known municipally ao149' 51 Ontario Street North, is located inWard 1O.inthe City of Kitchener, in the Region of Waterloo, Ontario. The property islocated onthe east side ofOntario Street North, south oyWeber Street West, east ofQueen Street North, north ofDuke Street West, and west ofYoung Street (Figure 1\. This section of Ontario Street North is a two-way street which runs generally in a north -south direction. The property is in the Urban Growth Centre of the City of Kitchener. Within the Urban Growth Centre, the property has a specific land use designation inthe City Centre District (Figure 2>. 148'151Ontario Street North generally follows a square plan and is approximately 597.7M2 (0.06ha /0.15 acres) in size /Figure 3).3 There is 8wo'o0nroy' semi-detached brick building which fronts Ontario Street North (Figure 4). The bui|dinghaeoone'oNnaynaarwingandoone'und'o'holf-oNnaynaarwing.0vemU.thebui|dinghd|ownonLahaped plan and is narrowly set back from Ontario Street North. There are two very small patches of landscapingu|ongthe fagade and the remaining property is covered with paved gravel. The property is zoned DA Office District Zone (Figure 5). See Table 1for the definition and permiUed uses associated with D'4Zoning. The legal description isPart Lot 11'Plan 4O1. The current owner is: CIVIC CENTRE 41 28 68 22 18 A 37 83 .130 21 73 1.51 17 77 149 11 r AZ 52 0 141 50 46 42 �11 04 55 96 57 32 30 4'4SS 19 CITY COMMERCIAL CORE "t. JV 4q 96 10 48 42 90 2 74 Figure 1:Location map for 149151 Ontario Street North (blue dot) (Kitchener OnPointMap, 2017\ 3Information taken from City ofKitchener Interactive Map, 2O17. 9 Official Plan Urban Growth Centre {Downtown) Figure 4: Fagade of 149-151 Ontario Street North. Note the two small landscaped patches and the narrow set back. (AB, 2018) U -5 27 C)j R 1 (;R-3 16H, 1?3R 4 R GR 16F1 ry o 13 BU CR- i -g / 0_ -, 645R�`� f ! D-, �a 95R, 8 7 d Figure 5: Zoning Map showing 149-151 Ontario Street listed as a D-4 Zoning (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017). 11 Project #LHC0134 Table 1: D-4 Zoning and Permitted Uses D-4 Zoning is regulated under By -92-232, S.6 (Amended: By-law 2006-174, S.1) (City of Kitchener Housekeeping Amendment) which reads: No person shall erect, nor use any building in whole or in part, nor use any land, nor permit to use any land, in whole or in part, within a D-4 Zone for any purpose other than one or more of the following uses or uses accessory thereto. Such erection or use shall also comply with the prescribed regulations: Permitted . Commercial Parking Facility Use: • Commercial Recreation • Conference or Convention Facility • Convenience Retail • Day Care Facility • Dwelling Unit • Educational Establishment • Financial Establishment • Health Clinic • Health Office • Home Business (By-law 94-1, S.8) • Hotel • Laboratory • Lodging House • Multiple Dwelling • Office • Personal Services • Printing Establishment • Private Club or Lodge and Union Hall • Private Home Day Care • Religious Institution • Residential Care Facility • Restaurant • Sale, Rental or Service of Business Machines and Office Supplies • Security or Janitorial Services • Studio • Tourist Home 12 Project #LHC0134 3.2 21 Weber Street West The subject property, known municipally as 21 Weber Street West, is located in Ward 10, in the City of Kitchener, in the Region of Waterloo, Ontario. The property is located on the south side of Weber Street, east of Ontario Street North, north of Duke Street West and west of Young Street (Figure 6). This section of Weber Street consists of a four -lane road which runs generally in an east -west direction. The property is located in the Urban Growth Centre of the City of Kitchener. Within the Urban Growth Centre, the property has a specific land use designation in the City Centre District (Figure 2). The subject property located at 21 Weber Street West follows a square plan and is approximately 300.78 m2 (.03 ha, .07 acres) in size4 (Figure 7). The property is zoned D-4. See Table 1 for the definition and permitted uses associated with D-4 Zoning. 21 Weber Street West has a one -storey rectangular building built with brick, concrete and glass (Figure 8). There is a large, open porch located on the west elevation; the upper level is used as a porch and underneath is used for parking. The property is narrowly set back from Weber Street and a paved parking area is located to the west of the building. There is no vegetation on the property. The property is zoned D-4 Office District Zone. See Table 1 for the definition and permitted uses associated with D-4 Zoning. The legal description is PLAN 401 PT LOT 11 W/WEBER E/ONTARIO RP 58R-8619 PT 1. The current owner is: 4-1 28 68 22 1� -94 r 'I 4� r' 35 56) 54 52 108? 141 54 46 /1104` 55 96 32 57 45 % ' 62 D 74s, CI Tr'. -COMMERCIAL CORE i 10 48 4 90 42 ... 74 2r 3 3 3 0. to .-3�4 �`C 7 r. Figure 6: Location of 21 Weber Street West (noted with blue dot) and surrounding area. (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017). 4 Information taken from City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 2017. 13 Project #LHC0134 Figure 7: Aerial view of 21 Weber Street West (red) and surrounding block (Kitchener OnPoint Maps, 2017). =,r= El . � 1 Figure 8: Fagade and north elevation of 21 Weber Street West (AB, 2018). 14 Project #LHC0134 t R 1 Zk D-4 13 9U r1 1- CR-1 CO i - 1-2 RC1 f G —1.` Q_ , v 1 UGC -1 { 15) `{ t1,er , } 1 6458 �? r - W + 81 7 D-4 1008, Figure 9: Zoning Map showing 21 Weber Street West listed as a D-4 Zoning (Kitchener OnPoint Map, 2017). 3.3 Existing Heritage Considerations The City of Kitchener has adopted a four -step process for listing a heritage property on the Municipal Heritage Register. This is a Council approved process, which was intended to "ensure thorough and objective evaluation of each property".5 The four steps include: 1. Initial evaluation by a recorder through completion of a survey form and taking photographs (only where properties are visible from the public realm). 2. Short listing of properties following a review of the recorder's survey form and photographs; undertaken by an evaluation sub -committee comprised of City Staff and Heritage Kitchener Committee members. 3. The City's Heritage Kitchener Committee reviews the merits of the short listed properties; considers the comments of the property owner (if made); and makes a recommendation to City Council. 4. City Council makes a decision on whether or not to list the properties on the Municipal Heritage Register as "non designated property of cultural heritage value or interest".6 As part of the recommendations for Council (step 3), Heritage Planning staff prepare a Statement of Significance (SOS) [also known as a Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest] for each property being proposed to be 5 City of Kitchener. Heritage Brochure. Accessed online from https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD PLAN Heritage Registry Brochure.Pdf 6 Ibid. 15 Project #LHC0134 added to the Municipal Heritage Register. This SOS includes a Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation form which is largely based on the criteria in 0. Reg. 9/06. The subject property located at 21 Weber Street West is not considered a Section 27 OHA listed property. The subject property located at 149-151 Ontario Street North is considered a Section 27 OHA listed property and underwent the listing process noted above. A SOS was prepared and included in the staff report and considered by Council. Council added 149-151 Ontario Street North to the Municipal Heritage Register in 2009. Part of the Council resolution reads "That pursuant to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the following properties be listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest, in accordance with the Statements of Significance attached as Appendix 'A' to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-053."Therefore, the SOS prepared by the City will be considered as part of the evaluation. 3.3.1 149-151 Ontario Street North 149-151 Ontario Street is listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register, the property was added 27 April 2009.7 A SOS was created for 149-151 Ontario Street North at the time. The full SOS document can be found as Appendix B. The document notes that the building was built c. 1876 and originally used as a residential property. The document titled Statement of Significance 149-151 Ontario Street North includes a description of the property, a statement of heritage value or interest, heritage attributes, photographs, and the City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Evaluation Form. The statement of heritage value or interest and heritage attributes states: Heritage Value or Interest 149-151 Ontario Street North is recognized for its design, physical, and historical value. The building is a hybrid architectural styles with influences from Georgian and Italianate architecture. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements including: buff brick; a symmetrical plan with two bay windows; side gable roof; brackets; brick quoining; 1/1 and 2/2 windows with dripstones; window sills; front doors with transoms; and two end chimneys. Although the building is presently used for commercial uses its original use was residential in the form of a semi-detached building. The building is the last remaining example of a residential building on Ontario Street and is a unique example of a working class residence. Heritage Attributes: The heritage value of 149-151 Ontario Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction architectural style, including: • Buff brick construction; • Symmetrical plan with two bay windows; • Roof and roofline; 7 The City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register was last updated 24 October 2017. 16 Project #LHC0134 • Side gable roof; • Wood brackets • Brick quoining; • Window and window openings; • 1/1 and 2/2 windows with dripstones; • Door and door openings; • Front doors with transoms; and • Brick chimney 3.3.2 21 Weber Street West The property located at 21 Weber Street West is not listed pursuant to Section 27 of the OHA or designated pursuant to Section 29 of the OHA. 21 Weber Street West is adjacent to the CCNHCD, which is located along the north side of Weber Street West (Figure 10). MAN �' kill lildw It 2: recommended helhpe oonservaren deM boundary --FF. clvlccentre heritage conservation district plan Figure 10: The CCNHCD boundary with the subject properties noted in red (CCNHCD Plan, 2007). 3.3.3 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District The CCNHCD Plan identifies and outlines the cultural heritage value or interest assign to the landscape within the HCD boundary. The CCNHCD Heritage Character Statement has been considered as part of this HIA. Applicable policies found with the Plan have also been considered as part of this HIA and are identified in Section 5.4 of this HIA. Discussion on the general architectural design guidelines outlined with the CCNHCD Plan were reviewed in detail and considered as part of the impact assessment (Section 10.4 of this HIA). The CCNHCD Heritage Character Statement follows: Heritage Character Statement 17 Project #LHC0134 The Heritage Character Statement identifies and outlines the cultural heritage value or interest associated with the District as a whole. The statement identifies the significant historical, architectural and contextual value recognized within the district. The Heritage Character Statement reads: Historic Context The proposed Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District is an important historic residential neighbourhood that can be linked to several key periods in the development of the City of Kitchener. In tandem with the recently designated Victoria Park neighbourhood, Civic Centre helps to tell the story of Kitchener's phenomenal growth at the turn of the 19th century and of the development of its extensive industrial sector. Almost two-thirds of the existing houses were built between 1880 and 1917 and in most cases were occupied by owners, managers or workers for some of the key industries that defined the community at the turn of the century. The Lang and Breithaupt families for example, whose enterprises and extensive public service did so much to promote and develop the city, are represented by surviving homes in the district. Other businessmen, industrialists and public servants including the village's first reeve, Dr. Scott, Mayors Eden and Greb, and Engineer and County Clerk Herbert Bowman also came to the neighbourhood. Surrounding a central area of larger homes is a large number of well-preserved storey -and -a -half houses built by tradesmen and skilled workers from the factories in the core and along the west side of Victoria opposite the district. As well, three of the city's oldest congregations are represented by well-preserved, landmark buildings in the neighbourhood. Importantly the district remained an attractive place to live right into the present. Well-designed Neo-classical and Tudor revivals can be found throughout the district as well as a 1930s apartment on Weber and several highrises from the 1960s and later. While a significant portion of the former Centre Ward's late 19th century residences between Queen and Frederick have been lost to the expansion of public services and the building of Centre in the Square, most of what made the area a desirable place to live both in the 19th century and today remains. Architectural Character The Civic Centre neighbourhood is one of Kitchener's older neighbourhoods and retains a large number of original buildings that are well crafted and maintained. Architectural styles and influences are consistent with the more popular styles of the period in which they were constructed, including Queen Anne, Georgian and Italianate styles. Of particular note in the neighbourhood are a substantial number of dwellings termed `Berlin or Kitchener Vernacular' which reflected a local interpretation incorporating traces of decorative Queen Anne elements in the wood trim, gables, eaves and fascias. A variant on this style, referred to as the Attic Gable style, is also a local interpretation frequently found in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood which boasts a highly articulated and decorative triple gable roof line. Throughout the neighbourhood, there is a visual consistency to the architecture, delivered through the repetition of such features as front porches including some very fine two storey examples, decorative gables, projecting bays, and recurring window forms and details. In addition to the residential building stock, there are a number of other prominent and well-preserved buildings including three churches and two early commercial buildings. While the majority of the neighbourhood was constructed for, and remains as residential, conversions to commercial and 18 Project #LHC0134 office uses have occurred but with little negative impact on the quality of the streetscape. Despite some redevelopment and associated loss of original structures, overall the Civic Centre Neighbourhood presents a high quality cross-section of architecture from the late 19th and early 20th century with many buildings associated with key business and community leaders of the time. Streetscape Heritage Character With streets framed by mature trees creating a beautiful shaded canopy throughout most of the neighbourhood, the Civic Centre Neighbourhood offers a comfortable and friendly pedestrian environment in the interior of the community. The number of mature trees is remarkable and conveys very strongly the heritage character of the neighbourhood. With linear streets, generally consistent building setbacks, and combined effect of public and private trees along the boulevards, there is a strong rhythm to most of the streetscapes. Laneways threading through the area reflect more traditional patterns of movement and development, and, in Hermie Place create a unique ambiance where houses front directly onto the lane much like a small cottage community. Yards are well maintained with gardens and foundation plantings, trees and other landscape features including fences, hedges and pillars to delineate private space. Hibner Park, Kitchener's second oldest park is also situated in the Civic Centre neighbourhood. Although small, it is an elegant and historic reminder of one of the mayors of Kitchener and offers a link to the past. Overall, the Civic Centre Neighbourhood is rich with historical, architectural and landscape treasures that contribute to the heritage character of the community. Changes to built form and the resulting streetscape have occurred in more recent years, resulting in the loss of some heritage resources. The demand for future change is likely to accelerate given the area's proximity to downtown and initiatives in the immediate vicinity. By designating the area as the Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District, valuable heritage resources can be both preserved and interpreted while still allowing for the necessary and appropriate evolution of the neighbourhood in a manner that links the past, present and future. Key Heritage Attributes In summary,8 the Civic Centre Neighbourhood's heritage attributes are found within its architecture, streetscape and historical associations as outlined in the heritage character statement and more fully described and illustrated in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Study. Key heritage attributes include the following: • Its association with important business and community leaders during a key era of development in Kitchener; • A wealth of well maintained, finely detailed buildings from the late 1800s and early 1900s that are largely intact; • A number of unique buildings, including churches and commercial buildings, which provide distinctive landmarks within and at the edges of the District; • A significant range of recognizable architectural styles and features including attic gable roofs, decorative trim, brick construction, porches and other details, associated with the era in which they were developed; a The Key Heritage Attributes exhibited by the CCNHCD are described in greater detail in Section 2.4 of the HCD Plan. 19 Project #LHC0134 The presence of an attractive and consistent streetscape linked by mature trees, grassed boulevards and laneways; Hibner Park, Kitchener's second oldest city park, as a green jewel in the centre of the District. These attributes are important to the District and the City as a whole and deserve appropriate preservation and management. 20 Project #LHC0134 4 POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK The policy review assessed relevant Provincial, Regional, and Municipal documents. 4.1 Provincial Acts, Regulations, Plans, and Guidelines In Ontario, cultural heritage is considered a matter of provincial interest and cultural heritage resources are managed under Provincial legislation, policy, regulations and guidelines. For example, while the OHA directly addresses cultural heritage, the Planning Act through the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2014 also addresses cultural heritage as an area of provincial interest. Other provincial legislation deals with cultural heritage indirectly or in specific cases. These various acts and policies indicate broad support for the protection of cultural heritage by the Province. They also provide framework that must be considered for any proposed property alteration or development. 4.1.1 Planning Act The Planning Act is the primary document for municipal and provincial land use planning in Ontario. This Act sets the context for provincial interest in heritage. It states under Part I (2, d): The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or scientific interest.9 Section 3 of the Planning Act issues the PPS, and all decisions affecting land use planning matters "shall be consistent with" the Provincial Policy Statement. 4.1.2 Provincial Policy Statement The PPS sets the policy foundation for regulating the development and use of land in Ontario. Land use planning decisions made by municipalities, planning boards, the Province, or a commission or agency of the government must be consistent with the PPS. The document asserts that cultural heritage and archaeological resources provide important environmental, economic and social benefits, and Sections 1.7.14 and 2.6 directly address cultural heritage. Section 1.7 of the PPS regards long-term economic prosperity and promotes cultural heritage as a tool for economic prosperity by "encouraging a sense of place, by promoting well-designed built form and cultural planning, and by conserving features that help define character, including built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes". Section 2.6 of the PPS articulates provincial policy regarding cultural heritage. Section 2.6.1 notes that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. 2.6.3 concerns how planning authorities shall not permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage property except where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved. 2.6.5 elaborates that planning authorities shall consider the interests of Aboriginal communities in conserving cultural heritage and archaeological resources. 9 Province of Ontario. 1990. Planning Act. Part 1(2, d). 21 Project #LHC0134 The PPS considers cultural heritage equal to all other considerations in relation to planning and development within the province. In accordance with Section 3 of the Planning Act, a decision of the Council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board, a Minister of the Crown and a ministry, board, commission or agency of the government, including the Municipal Board, in respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, "shall be consistent with" this PPS. Section 4.7 of the PPS states that official plans are the most important vehicle for implementation of the PPS, and that comprehensive, integrated, and long-term planning is best achieved through official plans. Additionally, it states that official plans shall identify provincial interests and set out appropriate land use designations and policies. To determine the significance of heritage features and other resources, evaluation may be required. 'Significant', in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, refers to resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important contributions they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people. Within the PPS, it states that criteria for determining significance for cultural heritage resources are recommended by the Province, but municipal approaches that achieve or exceed the same objective may also be used. While some significant resources may already be identified and inventoried by official sources, the significance of others can only be determined after evaluation. 4.1.3 Ontario Heritage Act The OHA is directly concerned with heritage conservation within Ontario and serves to give municipalities and the provincial government powers to conserve Ontario's heritage. The OHA has provisions for conservation of heritage at the individual property level, as a heritage district, and/or through easements. Regarding provincial matters, the OHA is administered by the MTCS; the OHA also empowers municipalities to regulate locally designated properties under Section 29, Part IV, and Part V of the OHA. The OHA also empowers municipalities to list non -designated properties which Council believes to be of CHVI on their Register under Section 27, Part IV. An owner of a 'listed' heritage property must provide the municipality with 60 days' notice of their intention to demolish the property. In the City of Kitchener, "Listed" properties are those for which Council has adopted a recommendation to be included on the Register as a non -designated property; making 'listed' properties in Kitchener subject to Section 27 of the OHA. The designation of individual properties is under the authority of 0. Reg. 9/06. Any interventions on properties protected by the OHA (under Section 27 or 29 Part IV; Part V; Part VI; or easement), where required either by legislation or municipal policy, will need to be evaluated against the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest for the property, and where required, any interventions on these designated properties need municipal approval. O.Reg. 9/06 spells out criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest under Section 29 of the OHA. These criteria are used in determining if an individual property is significant. The regulation has three criteria, each with three sub -criteria: 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method; ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit; or 22 Project #LHC0134 iii. demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community; ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture; or iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. 3. The property has contextual value because it, is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area; ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings; or iii. is a landmark. Assessment of a property involves research, site assessment and evaluation. Historical research into the history of the property can include: dates of construction of any structures; research into people, events, technologies or philosophies that may be associated with the property; or, any other pertinent details about a property. The MTCS recommends that site analysis involve at least two site visits to examine the site in its context and find physical evidence related to the site's history. Results from site visits and research are evaluated against the criteria of 0. Reg. 9/06. Only one of the criteria of 0. Reg. 9/06 must be met for a property to have cultural heritage value or interest. In many cases, a property meets multiple criteria. 4.1.4 Summary Section 3.3 of the report demonstrates that the property meets the definition of a significant built heritage resource/cultural heritage resource10 based upon its existing status as a listed property. The PPS states that significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. 4.2 Region of Waterloo 4.2.1 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015) The Regional Official Plan (ROP) provides goals, objectives, and policies to help guide physical change within the region over a 20 -year period.11 This document builds upon the Regional Growth Management Strategy adopted in 2003, which identified a vision for the future of the community and recognized that strong partnerships with Area Municipalities and other stakeholders are necessary to help realize a balanced approach to growth in the region.12 The ROP asserts that land use planning is a shared responsibility between the Region and Area Municipalities rooted in the idea that citizens are best served by effective Regional and Area municipal partnerships and collaboration, including the development and review of official plans. 13 The ROP incorporates the policy and regulatory framework 11 The PPS applies the terms built heritage resource and cultural heritage landscape while the municipal policies apply the term cultural heritage resource. The term cultural heritage resource will be used throughout this report. 11 Region of Waterloo, 2015, Regional Official Plan (ROP), 1. 12 Region of Waterloo, 2015, Regional Official Plan (ROP), 1. 13 Region of Waterloo, 2015, ROP, 3. 23 Project #LHC0134 established by the Province, as outlined in the PPS, the Growth Plan, the Greenbelt Plan and other provincial documents. Chapter 2 relates to General Development Policies and 2.D.1 states that in preparing or reviewing planning studies, or in reviewing development applications or site plans, the Region and/or Area Municipalities will ensure that development occurring within the Urban Area is planned and developed in a manner that: (e) conserves cultural heritage resources and supports the adaptive reuse of historic buildings; (f) respects the scale, physical character and context of established neighbourhoods in areas where reurbanization is planned to occur; Chapter 3 relates to Livability in Waterloo Region and Section 3.G relates specifically to Cultural Heritage. One of the identified objectives is to "Support the conservation of cultural heritage resources" (3.6). Section 3G.1 states that "the Region and Area municipalities will ensure that cultural heritage resources are conserved using the provisions of the Heritage Act, the Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, the Cemeteries Act and the Municipal Act". Section 3.G.2 of the ROP states that the Region will prepare and update a Regional Implementation Guideline for Conserving Regionally Significant Cultural Heritage Resources. In accordance with the OHA, this guideline will outline the criteria and processes the Region will follow to identify and conserve cultural heritage resources of Regional interest including regional roads that have cultural heritage value or interest. 4.2.2 The Region of Waterloo Strategic Plan (2015-2018) The Region of Waterloo engages in a strategic planning process every term of Council. The Region's Strategic Plan identifies priorities based on public input and the top priorities are outlined in five areas. Section 1 Thriving Economy outlines one objective in the plan which addresses cultural heritage and three action plan items to help realize this objective. It reads as follows: Objective 1.3 Enhance arts, culture and heritage opportunities to enrich the lives of residents and attract talent and visitors. 1.3.1 Promote opportunities to support art, culture and heritage activities at Regional Facilities. 1.3.2 Develop a Regional Cultural Plan that defines and strengthens the Regional cultural mandate and identifies and forges future initiatives and partnerships. 1.3.3. Develop a new policy and funding approach for Regional Public Art to help create additional Regional public art projects. 4.2.3 Region of Waterloo Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan The Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan of 2002 provided a series of recommendations and implementation strategies for identification, protection, promotion, and investment in arts, culture and heritage resources in the Waterloo Region. This document provided a definition of cultural heritage for the Region: 24 Project #LHC0134 Arts, culture, and heritage initiatives make a significant contribution to the well-being and quality of life of the residents of Waterloo Region. They reflect and enhance the community's unique identity and diversity, contribute to economic vitality, and shape future growth. Accordingly, the Region of Waterloo, alone or in partnership, will identify, protect, promote, and invest in existing resources; implement strategies to support existing and additional arts, culture, and heritage initiatives; and ensure their long-term prosperity and sustainability.14 The Plan offered five key goals, with the first, Community Identity and Character, stating: "Community Identity and Character Develop a stronger cultural heritage identity for the region, one that celebrates its diversity, the character of its multiple towns and cities and the differing traditions of their founders; its natural features; and the richness of its arts, culture and heritage assets". 15 This document is important due to its role in helping provide guidance and direction for the region for protecting, identifying, and enhancing cultural heritage aspects for communities, and in serving as a primary document to help develop new policies and implementation strategies. 4.2.4 Regional Implementation Guideline for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation The Region of Waterloo has implemented guidelines for the identification, evaluation and conservation of significant Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL). A 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 Indigenous community. The area may include features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association. Examples may include, but are not limited to, heritage conservation districts designated under the OHA; villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trailways, viewsheds, natural areas and industrial complexes of heritage significance; and areas recognized by federal or international designation authorities (e.g. a National Historic Site or District designation, or a UNESCO World Heritage Site) (PPS, 2014). Section D - Guidelines forthe Identification and Evaluation of CHLs of the Guidelines applies when Area Municipal staff and Municipal Heritage Advisory Committees are identifying and evaluating the significance of the candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL). The purpose of this section of the guideline is to ensure an efficient, consistent, comprehensive and defensible process is used to identify CHLs worthy of conservation within the region. Section 5.5 of Section D notes that the significance of each candidate CHL will be evaluated based on a three - pronged approach related to the PPS definition of a CHL to include the: cultural heritage value or interest, historical integrity, and community value of the landscape. Appendix B - Criteria for Heritage Value or Interest, Appendix C - Indicators of Historical Integrity and Appendix D - Indicators of Community Value outline the various criteria which help identify significant CHLs. The document note that the indicators are only examples which are not exclusive and may not be appropriate for every CHL. The Region of Waterloo and City of Kitchener have not identified 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West as a potential CHL or as components of a potential CHL. 14 Region of Waterloo, 2002, The Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan (ACHMP), 4. 15 Region of Waterloo, 2002, The Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan (ACHMP), 5. 25 Project #LHC0134 In order to ensure that this HIA is consistent with best practice, an evaluation of the landscape was carried out and can be found in Section 8.3. Cultur eritage Value o nterest Lands pes that are associate ith the histndlor of the area, have design clue have contextual value. Significant CHL Histocal Integrity, Lancisc pes that have functio al continuity andlo hysically reflect a past. Communi Value Lands :ap that are value by a co unity. Figure 11: The Region of Waterloo uses a three -pronged approach to determine a significant CHL. 4.2.5 Summary All of the policies outlined above demonstrate the Region's approach to the overall protection and commitment for the conservation of cultural heritage resources and provides guidance for local municipalities to employ and ensure that local heritage resources are conserved and maintained for the well-being of communities. The policies are not sufficiently prescriptive to apply to a particular property being considered. 4.3 City of Kitchener 4.3.1 City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete & Healthy Kitchener (2014) The City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) is a legal document which outlines the `goals, objectives and policies to manage and direct physical and land use change and their effects on the cultural, social, economic and natural environment within the City'. 16 The OP outlines a framework for decision making and is essential the short- and long- term planning of the city. Specifically, 1.A.1 outlines the purposes of the OP which reads: 1. To guide the growth and development of the city to the year 2031. 2. To establish an urban structure and land use framework for all land within the jurisdiction of the City. 16 Kitchener Official Plan, 2014, p. 1-1 26 Project #LHC0134 3. To provide guidelines which the City can evaluate the appropriateness of development in relation to the goals, objectives and policies in this Plan. 4. To conform to Provincial and Regional plans, policies, statements and guidelines and appropriately incorporate them in the Official Plan." Part C, Section 12: Cultural Heritage Resources addresses how the city seeks to identify, conserve, and manage the protection of cultural resources with the City of Kitchener. The policies in this section provide a framework to ensure `the conservation of those cultural heritage resources which reflect and contribute to the history, identity and character of Kitchener'. 18 The Cultural Heritage Objectives include: 12.1.1. To conserve the city's cultural heritage resources through their identification, protection, use and/or management in such a way that their heritage values, attributes and integrity are retained. 12.1.2. To ensure that all development or redevelopment and site alteration is sensitive to and respects cultural heritage resources and that cultural heritage resources are conserved. 12.1.3. To increase public awareness and appreciation for cultural heritage resources through educational, promotional and incentive programs. 12.1.4. To lead the community by example with the identification, protection, use and/or management of cultural heritage resources owned and/or leased by the City. 19 The relevant policies found in Section 12: Cultural Heritage Resources are outlined in Table 2 below. The polices 12.C.1.13 -12.C.1.16 Heritage Conservation Districts; 12.C.1.17 -12.C.1.18 Archaeology; 12.C.1.29 - 12.C.1.31 Heritage Permit Application; 12.C.1.37 Public Incentives, 12.C.1.38 -12.C.1.40 Incentives; were considered as part of this review. 17 Ibid. 18 Kitchener Official Plan, 2014, p. 12-1. 19 Kitchener Official Plan, 2014, p. 12-1. 27 Table 2: Review of relevant policies in the City of Kitchener Official Plan Policy Description Discussion 12.C.1.1. The City will ensure that cultural heritage resources are conserved This has been considered using the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Planning Act, as part of the HIA. the Environmental Assessment Act, the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act and the Municipal Act. 12.C.1.2. The City will establish and consult with a Municipal Heritage This is not applicable to Committee (MHC) on matters relating to cultural heritage resources the HIA. in accordance with provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. 12.C.1.3. The City will develop, prioritize and maintain a list of cultural This has been considered heritage resources which will include the following: as part of the HIA. 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. The list may also include cultural heritage resources identified in Federal, Provincial and Regional inventories and properties listed on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings until such time as these properties are re-evaluated and considered for listing on the Municipal Heritage Register. 12.C.1.4. The City acknowledges that not all of the city's cultural heritage This is considered as part resources have been identified as a cultural heritage resource as in of the HIA. The evaluation Policy 12.C.1.3. Accordingly, a property does not have to be listed or is found in Section 8. designated to be considered as having cultural heritage value or interest. 12.C.1.5. Through the processing of applications submitted under the Planning Act, resources of potential cultural heritage value or interest will be identified, evaluated and considered for listing as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register and/or designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. 12.C.1.6. The City, in consultation with the Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC), will develop, maintain and implement a Municipal Heritage Conservation Master Plan to be adopted by Council. The Municipal Heritage Conservation Master Plan will establish goals, objectives, 28 This has been considered as part of the HIA. This is not applicable to the HIA. Policy Description Discussion strategies, policies, criteria and guidelines related to the conservation of the city's cultural heritage resources. The Master Plan will include a descriptive and mapped inventory of all cultural heritage resources recognized by the City and will establish priority levels for the protection of each cultural heritage resource. 12.C.1.7. Properties that are of cultural heritage value or interest will be considered for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The cultural heritage value or interest associated with the cultural heritage resource will be evaluated based on the regulation in the Ontario Heritage Act which provides criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest. Cultural Heritage Landscapes This is considered as part of the HIA. The evaluation is found in Section 8. 12.C.1.8. The City, in cooperation with the Region and the Municipal Heritage This is not applicable to Committee (MHC), will identify, inventory and list on the Municipal the HIA. Heritage Register, cultural heritage landscapes in the city. 12.C.1.9. Cultural heritage landscapes will be identified on Map 9 in This map was reviewed. (UNDER accordance with the Regional Official Plan and this Plan. Map 9 may 149-151 Ontario Street APPEAL) be revised without the need for an Official Plan Amendment at such North and 21 Weber time as cultural heritage landscapes are identified. Street West were not identified as a CHL. 12.C.1.10. The City will require the conservation of significant cultural heritage This is not applicable to landscapes within the city. the HIA. 12.C.1.11. The City will require the conservation of cemeteries of cultural This is not applicable to heritage significance (including human beings' remains, animals' the HIA. remains, vegetation and landscapes of historic, aesthetic and contextual values) in accordance with the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act and the provisions of Parts IV, V and/or VI of the Ontario Heritage Act. 12.C.1.12. The City recognizes the Grand River as a Canadian Heritage River This is not applicable to and will co-operate with the Region and the Grand River the HIA. Conservation Authority in efforts to conserve, manage and enhance, where practical, the river's natural, cultural, recreational, scenic and ecological features. 29 Policy Description Discussion Conservation Measures 12.C.1.19. In addition to listing and designating properties under the Ontario This has been considered Heritage Act, the City may use and adopt further measures to as part of the HIA. encourage the protection, maintenance and conservation of the city's cultural heritage resources including built heritage and significant cultural heritage landscapes and implement Cultural Heritage Resource Conservation Measures Policies in this Plan. These may include but are not limited to covenants and easements pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act; by-laws and agreements pursuant to the Planning Act (Zoning By-law, demolition control, site plan control, community improvement provisions, provisions in a subdivision agreement); and by-laws and agreements pursuant to the Municipal Act (Property Standards Bylaw, tree by-law, sign by- law). 12.C.1.20. The City will make decisions with respect to cultural heritage This is applicable to the resources that are consistent with the policies of the Provincial HIA. Policy Statement, which require the conservation of significant cultural heritage resources. In addition, such decisions will be consistent with the Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 12.C.1.21. All development, redevelopment and site alteration permitted by This is applicable to the the land use designations and other policies of this Plan will HIA. conserve Kitchener's significant cultural heritage resources. The conservation of significant cultural heritage resources will be a requirement and/or condition in the processing and approval of applications submitted under the Planning Act. 12.C.1.22. The City may require financial securities from the owner/applicant This is applicable to the of an application submitted under the Planning Act, including HIA. applications for consent, site plan, draft plan of vacant land condominium and draft plan of subdivision, to ensure the conservation of the city's cultural heritage resources both during and after the development process. Heritage Impact Assessments and Heritage Conservation Plans 12.C.1.23. The City will require the submission of a Heritage Impact The HIA satisfies this Assessment and/or a Heritage Conservation Plan for development, policy. 30 IDescription Discussion redevelopment and site alteration that has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource and is proposed: a) on or adjacent to a protected heritage property; b) on or adjacent to a heritage corridor in accordance with Policies 13.C.4.6 through 13.C.4.18 inclusive; c) on properties listed as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register; d) on properties listed on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings; and/or, e) on or adjacent to an identified cultural heritage landscape. 12.C.1.24. Where a Heritage Impact Assessment required under Policy 12.C.1.23 relates to a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest, the City will ensure that a copy of the assessment is circulated to the Region for review prior to final consideration by the City. 12.C.1.25. A Heritage Impact Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan required by the City must be prepared by a qualified person in accordance with the minimum requirements as outlined in the City of Kitchener's Terms of Reference for Heritage Impact Assessments and Heritage Conservation Plans. 12.C.1.26. The contents of a Heritage Impact Assessment will be outlined in a Terms of Reference. In general, the contents of a Heritage Impact Assessment will include, but not be limited to, the following: a) historical research, site analysis and evaluation,- b) valuation;b) identification of the significance and heritage attributes of the cultural heritage resource; c) description of the proposed development or site alteration; d) assessment of development or site alteration impact or potential adverse impacts; e) consideration of alternatives, mitigation and conservation methods; f) implementation and monitoring; and, g) summary statement and conservation recommendations. 31 This is not applicable to the HIA. The resource is not considered of Regional interest. The HIA satisfies this policy. Qualifications of project personnel are outlined in Section 17. The HIA has been prepared to meet the requirement of this policy. Section 2.2 demonstrates locations of required contents. Poscy I Description Discussion 12.C.1.27. Any conclusions and recommendations of the Heritage Impact This is applicable and has Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan approved by the City been considered as part will be incorporated as mitigative and/or conservation measures of the HIA. into the plans for development or redevelopment and into the requirements and conditions of approval of any application submitted under the Planning Act. 12.C.1.28. Heritage Impact Assessments and Heritage Conservation Plans This is not applicable. An required by the City may be scoped or waived by the City, as HIA has been required. deemed appropriate. Demolition/Damage of Cultural Heritage Resources 12.C.1.32. Where a cultural heritage resource is proposed to be demolished, This is applicable and has the City may require all or any part of the demolished cultural been considered as part heritage resource to be given to the City for re -use, archival, display of the HIA. or commemorative purposes, at no cost to the City. 12.C.1.33. In the event that demolition, salvage, dismantling, relocation or This is applicable and has irrevocable damage to a significant cultural heritage resource is been considered as part proposed and permitted, the owner/applicant will be required to of the HIA. prepare and submit a thorough archival documentation, to the satisfaction of the City, prior to the issuance of an approval and/or permit. 12.C.1.34. Where archival documentation is required to support the This is applicable. Basic demolition, salvage, dismantling, relocation or irrevocable damage floor plans have been to a significant cultural heritage resource, such documentation must created. Item b and c be prepared by a qualified person and must include the following: have been addressed as a) architectural measured drawings; part of this HIA. b) a land use history; and, c) photographs, maps and other available material about the cultural heritage resource in its surrounding context. Archival documentation may be scoped or waived by the City, as deemed appropriate. 12.C.1.35. In the event that demolition is proposed to a non -designated This is applicable and has property of cultural heritage value or interest listed on the been considered as part Municipal Heritage Register, the owner/applicant will be required to of the HIA. provide written notice to the City of the intent to demolish, 60 days 32 raw, I Description I Discussion prior to the date demolition is proposed. The significance of the cultural heritage resource will be evaluated and Council may use the 60 days to pursue designation of the cultural heritage resource under the Ontario Heritage Act. 12.C.1.36. The City may give due consideration to designate under the Ontario This is applicable and has Heritage Act any cultural heritage resource if that resource is been considered as part threatened with demolition, significant alterations or other of the HIA. potentially adverse impacts. Public Infrastructure 12.C.1.37. The City will ensure that all private and public works projects This is not applicable. The affecting a cultural heritage resource will be consistent with the properties are a private Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of residence. Historic Places in Canada, and where such projects are within or adjacent to a Heritage Conservation District, they will be consistent with the guidelines and the policies of the applicable Heritage Conservation District Plan. Private and public works projects may require the submission and approval of a Heritage Impact Assessment, Heritage Conservation Plan and/or Heritage Permit Application. City Resources/Role 12.C.1.41. The City will promote the heritage of the city through the This is not applicable to development of heritage sites, trails, interpretive plaques, public the HIA. archives, awards, educational programs and by any other means deemed appropriate in order to enhance public appreciation, stewardship and the visibility of cultural heritage resources. 12.C.1.42. Commemoration of cultural heritage resources is strongly This is applicable and has encouraged, whenever a new private development or public work is been considered as part undertaken in the vicinity of a lost site of cultural heritage value or of the HIA. interest, including sites where: a) major events occurred of historical significance; b) cultural heritage landscape features such as rivers, streams and shorelines, have disappeared from the cityscape; and, c) important institutions, residences, industries, landmark buildings or settlements of cultural heritage value or interest once existed. 33 Policy Description Discussion 12.C.1.43. The City will lead the community by example in the management This is not applicable. The and care of City owned cultural heritage resources by following properties are privately good conservation practice consistent with the Parks Canada owned. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. In the event that the ownership status of the City -owned significant cultural heritage resource changes, the City will designate and/or enter into an easement agreement with the new owner or lessee to ensure that the continuous c 12.C.1.44. The City will conserve and consider designation under the Ontario This is not applicable. The Heritage Act for all City -owned cultural heritage resources and properties are privately prepare strategies and plans for their care, management and owned. stewardship. 12.C.1.45. The City will have regard to the administration of the Accessibility This is not applicable to for Ontarians With Disabilities Act, 2005 and the Ontario Building the HIA. Code and other related codes and regulations as they relate to cultural heritage resources. Application of the codes and regulations will be assessed on a case-by-case basis to balance accessibility needs with the need to conserve the cultural heritage value of the property with the objective of providing the highest degree of access with the lowest level of impact on the heritage attributes of the property. Design/Integration 12.C.1.46. The City will prepare guidelines as part of the Urban Design Manual This is applicable and has to address the conservation of cultural heritage resources in the city been considered as part and to recognize the importance of the context in which the cultural of the HIA. heritage resources are located. 12.C.1.47. The City may require architectural design guidelines to guide This is applicable and has development, redevelopment and site alteration on, adjacent to, or been considered as part in close proximity to properties designated under the Ontario of the HIA. Heritage Act or other cultural heritage resources. 12.C.1.48. Signage on protected heritage properties will be compatible and This is not applicable to complementary to the heritage attributes of the protected heritage the HIA. property and in accordance with and consistent with good conservation practice. 34 Policy Description Discussion Section 15- Land Use Planning City Centre The City Centre District is the heart of the Downtown and Urban District Growth Centre (Downtown) and focuses around the original commercial area of King Street. The commercial area of King Street has historically developed as a pedestrian—oriented environment characterized by ground floor commercial uses in narrow store fronts, providing frequent entrances for pedestrians. The intent is to maintain the pedestrian appeal while evolving into a compact, contemporary urban setting, with taller buildings, lively street activity and a stylish mix of shops, restaurants and bars and cultural and entertainment uses. This City Centre District is also characterized by several large office developments and by lot sizes and assemblies of lot sizes conducive to future large scale developments. On the edge of this District are small areas with buildings that were originally constructed as single detached dwellings but over the years have been converted to mixed use, commercial or multiple residential uses. As these locations outside of King Street have excellent access to a primary road network and public transportation, they are suitable for redevelopment opportunities to help contribute to achieving the intensification target for the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown). (Emphasis added by author). 15.D.2.34. The City Centre District will be the predominant location in the Downtown for uses such as: (UNDER APPEAL) a) all types and sizes of retail; b) educational establishments; c) arts and entertainment uses such as theatres, cinemas and galleries; d) major institutional uses including cultural facilities such as museums; e) multiple residential; f) offices including public administration, corporate offices and large financial establishments, including major office uses; g) personal services; h) public squares and areas for cultural events and festivals; and i) restaurants and outdoor patios, excluding drive-through restaurants. 35 This is applicable as the properties fall within the City Centre District zone. This has been considered as part of the HIA. This is applicable as the property falls with the City Centre District. This has been reviewed a part of the HIA. This policy is currently under appeal. Policy Description Discussion 15.D.2.35. The predominant use along King Street will be ground floor retail This is not applicable to and restaurants with residential, office, and personal services where the HIA. The properties appropriate, on upper floors. are not located on King Street. 15.D.2.36. The City will encourage personal service uses, small offices, medical This is applicable and has clinics and other service type uses to locate on the upper floors of been considered as part mixed use buildings in order to maintain the continuity of of the HIA. pedestrian interest at the street level. 15.D.2.38. The City will encourage pedestrian -friendly development not only on King Street but on the side streets and public lanes as well to maintain the district's pedestrian appeal and to maximize the points of attraction and to minimize walking distances. 15.D.2.40. The section of King Street generally from the east of Benton Street contains several buildings that are designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act or listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register. To emphasize Kitchener's heritage the conservation of the significant heritage attributes of the buildings will be required. 15.D.2.42. The City will utilize the Zoning By-law to direct and guide the location of uses and the development or redevelopment of properties in this District in the following ways: a) to limit the full range and scale of uses in some locations, as deemed appropriate; b) direct non -convenience retail uses to King Street; c) impose fagade and building height regulations to ensure that buildings maintain a human -scaled form of development along the street; Section 15 Part D City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete & Healthy Kitchener 15- 11 d) where the City Centre District interfaces with other land use Districts, the building fagade heights may be limited at the street line on the City Centre District side of the street and additional height may be set back from the street line fagade to promote compatibility of new development; e) where new development impacts the streetscape, particularly the King Street streetscape, minimum or maximum setbacks from the street or the ground floor may be required to maximize sidewalk space for outdoor 36 This is applicable and has been considered as part of the HIA. This is not applicable. The property is not located on King Street. This is applicable and has been considered as part of the HIA. Policy Description Discussion retailing, restaurant patios and informal gathering places; or, f) increased setbacks may be required along Gaukel Street in order to enhance the vista from King Street to Victoria Park. 4.4 City of Kitchener Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (2007) The CCNHCD is adjacent to 21 Weber Street West and the proposed development site. Due to its adjacency to the CCNHCD, the relevant policies and guidelines in have been considered as part of this HIA. They have been reviewed below in Table 3: Review of relevant policies for consideration in the CCNHCD Table 3: Review of relevant policies for consideration in the CCNHCD Policy Description Discussion Section 3.3 Policies Section 3.3.1 The vast majority of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood was This has been considered as originally developed as single family residential. Despite the part of the HIA. fact that pockets of it have since been redeveloped for high- density apartment buildings, or converted to office or commercial uses, it remains a neighborhood of primarily original detached housing, 2 to 2-1/2 storeys in height on lots of sufficiently generous size that parking and driveways are generally to the side of dwellings. Setbacks of original heritage buildings are relatively uniform at the individual street level, as are building height and scale. To maintain the general consistency of the land uses and development pattern in the District, the following policies are proposed: (c) Higher intensity uses or redevelopment opportunities should be focused at the perimeter, or outside of, the District primarily in appropriate locations in the Victoria Street Mixed Use Corridor or Weber Street; 3.3.3 (a) New buildings will respect and be compatible with the This policy has been New Building heritage character of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood, considered as part of the HIA. through attention to height, built form, setback, The proposed design has been massing, material and other architectural elements such considered against the design as doors, windows, roof lines. guidelines in the CCNHCD. The discussion is found in Section 10.4. 37 Policy 3.3.4 Demolition Description Discussion Project #LHC0134 (b) Design guidelines provided in Section 6.6 of this Plan will The design guidelines for be used to review and evaluate proposals for new Weber street were considered buildings to ensure that new development is compatible as part of this HIA. The with the adjacent context. discussion is found in Section 10.4. The goal of a heritage conservation district is to preserve This is not applicable as the and protect the heritage resources within the short term properties are not located and over the long term. However, it is recognized that there within the HCD boundary. are situations where demolition may be necessary such as Regardless, this policy has partial destruction due to fire or other catastrophic events, been considered as part of this severe structural instability, and occasionally redevelopment HIA. that is in keeping with appropriate City policies. (a) The demolition of heritage buildings in the District is This is not applicable as the strongly discouraged. properties are not located within the HCD boundary. (b) Any proposal to demolish a heritage building or portion Regardless, this policys icy has of a heritage building that is visible from the street or been considered a part this other public space within the District shall require a HIA. heritage permit from the municipality. (c) Where demolition of a heritage building is proposed, the property owner shall provide supporting documentation demonstrating appropriate reasons for the demolition. (d) In situations where demolition is approved by Council, written and / or photographic documentation of any notable architectural features and construction techniques may be required to create a record of the building and its components. (e) Reclamation of suitable building materials such as windows, doors, moldings, columns, bricks, etc. for potential reuse in a new building on the site or as replacement components for other buildings in the neighbourhood which require repair and restoration over time is strongly encouraged if demolition is approved for any heritage buildings in the District. 3.3.5 Site/Area Specific Policies 3.3.5.2 Weber Street contains nearly half of the oldest buildings in Weber Street the Civic Centre Neighbourhood, making it one of the most Area important streets in the District from an architectural and 38 This policy has been considered as part of this HIA. Policy Description historic perspective. The size and scale of heritage buildings on Weber Street is generally larger than the rest of the District, and includes two churches, small scale apartments (3 — 4 storeys) and a number of other larger residences that have been converted to multiple residential units or office/commercial uses. The Municipal Plan designates most of the street as High Density Commercial Residential, with the designation extending slightly in some areas. The following policies are to apply to the whole of Weber Street within the District as well as to those sections of the High Density Commercial Residential designation that extend into the District on College and Young Streets. Policies: (a) The protection and retention of existing heritage buildings and their architectural features is strongly encouraged. (b) Maintain residential streetscape character through the use of appropriate built form, materials, roof pitches, architectural design and details particularly at the interface between Weber Street and the interior of the neighbourhood; (c) Adaptive reuse of existing buildings should be given priority over redevelopment. Flexibility in Municipal Plan policies and zoning regulations is encouraged where necessary to accommodate appropriate adaptive reuse options. (d) Where redevelopment is proposed on vacant or underutilized sites, new development shall be sensitive to and compatible with adjacent heritage resources on the street with respect to height, massing, built form and materials. (e) Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake shadow studies where they abut existing residential uses, to demonstrate that they will not unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas. (f) Design guidelines provided in Section 6.9.2 of this Plan will be used to review and evaluate proposals for major alterations, additions or new. 39 Project #LHC0134 Discussion The discussion is found in Section 10.4 Policy Description Discussion Project #LHC0134 3.3.8 The Provincial Policy Statement provides the primary This HIA has been prepared to Adjacent framework for heritage protection, stating that "Significant satisfy this requirement. Areas built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved." In addition, Policy 2.6.3 states that "Development and site alteration may be permitted on adjacent lands to protected heritage property where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved." It further states that mitigative measures or alternative development approaches may be necessary to ensure that the protected heritage attributes are not affected by adjacent development. To ensure that any development outside of, but adjacent to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District, has appropriate regard for the heritage resources of the District, the following policies are to apply (a) Heritage Impact Assessment, in accordance with the policies of the City of Kitchener, may be required for any redevelopment proposals within or adjacent to the Heritage Conservation District. 4.2 Municipal Plan and Zoning By -Law 4.2.1 High Density Commercial Residential Designation Land Use The High Density Commercial Residential designation Designation located on Weber Street and extending slightly into College and Zoning and Young Streets has the potential to be in conflict with the intent of the heritage conservation district plan. Similar to Victoria Street, this designation is identified in the Municipal Plan as one intended to recognize the area's proximity to downtown and primary roads. Zoning in this area is generally CR -3, permitting a range of residential, commercial, office and service uses, with a floor space ratio of 4 and no height restrictions. Potential infill or redevelopment along Weber Street could have a negative impact on the heritage character of the area if not undertaken in a sensitive manner, particularly as this street contains nearly half of the oldest buildings in the District. As the existing context of Weber Street contains a number of heritage buildings (churches, 4 storey apartment) that are 40 This has been considered as part of the HIA. The properties are not located at an identified "gateway". Policy Description Discussion taller than others in the district (with the exception of modern highrise apartments) and the opposing side of Weber Street is generally different in character than other boundary streets, infill development fronting on Weber Street could potentially be compatible even if taller than 4-5 storeys. However, the 'gateways' to the residential area should maintain a lower profile to be compatible with the development pattern and scale of the District. It is recommended that zoning regulations and Special Provisions similar to those proposed for Victoria Street be considered. This would be consistent with input obtained at the public open house held in February. Angular plane zoning could be considered for a section of the street where infill development may be most likely to occur to better address potential impacts on existing residential / office conversion uses. Consideration of the transfer of density rights, as described later in this report (Section 4.8), is also encouraged. 4.4.1 Summary With regards to these policies, it is recognized that the policy direction is that the retention and conservation of significant cultural heritage resources is required by parts of the Official Plan and strongly encouraged by the CCNHCD Plan. In regard to new development and intensification, some of the policies associated with the City Centre District are in conflict with those found outlined in the CCNHCD Plan for Weber Street West. All of these policies have been considered and inform the conclusions and analysis outlined below. 4.5 City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study (2014) In 2014 the City of Kitchener conducted a large-scale study in order to establish a working inventory of cultural heritage landscapes. The study resulted in the identification of 55 CHLs found throughout the city. The properties associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West were not identified or included within any of the 55 CHLs (Figure 12). However, adjacent CHLs are identified to the north (LNBR-2- Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD) and west (L -INS -3- Catholic Block) along the Weber Street West corridor. 41 Project #LHC0134 Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscapes in Central Neighbourhoods F nr aaEA SPp{HWMa�G.e4n ; 7... _ u� L1'111� 4A i, «. M.awAnN� ¢CnF.wWad.{e.d �- �, •f P� FpF�a� 4� " f/I�L FNS -z m f //'7q��s L-V6R-I NA .... r L'CC-4 r, A"`_... 9�w -i c)�n-i 120.000 r u F R L NUR 4• �n. L-O—S d ^ f L NBP.-� UI S•5 � c NIC" .•1 ar al'�a y. r ,rti Wti.' L.VHR-P �'L-N3R-1 C� \9R T'. ¢a�� L�at� ..r•'''��- Jf`.'r+`"Lz�f 4. • .4?ir �R Ver„ ./ 4 NFIR 4' Fa4 ^.T L ",�l�y-� - * ..✓r xra r`,�.; L NII . - ,�' s t w � t .all n L•OPSG �. -_-, � til' 1 4�°r jw ci.-. 3✓.'L.:'e rrl. rf{;....t'. c� soya'" "' -., - - � �� �,•. �'°BR w,�y��B � a�'� �. .,. KITCHENER CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE STUDY Figure 12: City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. The general area of the subject properties are noted with a red star (Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, Appendix 4, p. 27). 4.6 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada Section 2.7 of the City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference note that applicable heritage conservation principles, and how they will be used, must be considered. The Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Standards and Guidelines) is a heritage conservation document which will be considered. The Standards and Guidelines is a tool to help guide change to cultural heritage resources. It provides an overview to the conservation decision-making process; conservation treatments; standards for appropriate conservation, and guidelines for conservation. In the context of the Standards and Guidelines, conservation is understood to embrace several key concepts including preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration. These terms are defined as follows: Conservation: all actions or processes that are aimed at safeguarding the character -defining elements of an historic place so as to retain its heritage value and extend its physical life. This may involve Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, or a combination of these actions or processes; Preservation: the action or process of protecting, maintaining, and/or stabilizing the existing materials, form, and integrity of an historic place, or of an individual component, while protecting its heritage value; 42 Project #LHC0134 Rehabilitation: the action or process of making possible a continuing or compatible contemporary use of an historic place, or an individual component, while protecting its heritage value; and, Restoration: the action or process of accurately revealing, recovering or representing the state of an historic place, or of an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history, while protecting its heritage value.20 The Standards and Guidelines provide an overview of conservation practices and has been considered in this HIA. The proposed development seeks to conserve [Conservation] the cultural heritage resource in its current location and safeguard as many heritage attributes as possible [Preservation]. The Standards and Guidelines, as they apply to the proposed development, are discussed in greater detail in Section 10. 4.7 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties Section 2.7 of the City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference note that the Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (1997), should be considered. This document was compiled by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) as a tool to help guide change to cultural heritage resources. These principles are intended to provide a basis for decisions concerning "good practice" in heritage conservation: Respect for documentary evidence: do not restore based on conjecture. Conservation work should be based on historic documentation such as historic photographs, drawings, or physical evidence. 2. Respect for the original location: do not move buildings unless there is no other means to save them. Site is an integral component of a building or structure. Change in site diminishes the cultural heritage value considerably. 3. Respect for historic materials: repair/conserve—rather than replace building materials and finishes, except where absolutely necessary. Minimal intervention maintains the heritage content of the built resource. 4. Respect for original fabric: repair with like materials. Repair to return the resource to its prior condition, without altering its integrity. 5. Respect for the building's history: do not restore to one period at the expense of another period. Do not destroy later additions to a building or structure solely to restore to a single time period. 6. Reversibility: alteration should be able to be returned to original conditions. This conserves earlier building design and technique, e.g. When a new door opening is put into a stone wall, the original stones are numbered, removed and stored, allowing for future restoration. Legibility: new work should be distinguishable from old. Buildings or structures should be recognized as products of their own time, and new additions should not blur the distinction between old and new. 8. Maintenance: with continuous care, future restoration work will not be necessary. With regular upkeep, major conservation projects and their high costs can be avoided. 20 Parks Canada, 2011. 43 Project #LHC0134 The Eight Guiding Principals provide an overview of conservation practices and good decision-making and have been considered in this HIA. The Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (1997), as they relate to the proposed development, are discussed in greater detail in Section 10. 4.8 Ontario Heritage Toolkit The MTCS Ontario Heritage Toolkit provides a variety of information on heritage planning and conservation. In the booklet Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, information on Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans are provided as Info Sheet # 5. This information sheet notes that an HIA generally contains the following information: 1. Historical Research, Site Analysis and Evaluation; 2. Identification of the Significance and Heritage Attributes in the Cultural Heritage Resource; 3. Description of Propose site development; 4. Measurement of Development or Site Alteration Impact; 5. Consideration of Alternatives, Mitigation and Conservation Methods; 6. Implementation and Monitoring; and 7. Summary Statement and Conservation Recommendations. Conservation Plans generally contain the following information: 1. Identification of the conservation principles appropriate for the type of cultural heritage resource being conserved; 2. Analysis of cultural heritage resource; 3. Recommendations for conservation measures and interventions; 4. Schedule for conservation work; and 5. Monitoring. The document provides examples of seven potential negative impacts on cultural heritage resources which need to be considered with any proposed site alteration or development. They include destruction, alteration, shadows, isolation, direct or indirect obstruction, a change in land use, and land disturbance. Potential mitigative measures are also identified, which include alternative development approaches, isolating development and site alteration from significant built and natural features and vistas, design guidelines that harmonize mass, setback, setting, and materials, limiting height and density, allowing only compatible infill and additions, reversible alterations, buffer zones, site plan control, and other planning mechanisms. This guidance material been considered throughout this report and informs the conclusions and analysis outlined below. 5 PROPERTY CONTEXT 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West are located in the City Centre District. The City Centre District is the commercial core centred around King Street. King Street is located two blocks south. According to the OP, the "area has historically developed as a pedestrian—oriented environment characterized by ground floor commercial uses in narrow store fronts, providing frequent entrances for pedestrians". The subject properties together occupy a corner lot. To the west is the rear of a large four -storey building. On the north side of this section of Weber Street West, the streetscape is inconsistent in height, massing, rhythm, and use. E UP Project #LHC0134 Within an approximately 500 -meter radius of the subject properties there are over a dozen large-scale buildings which range in height from 6 to 19 storeys. These buildings are used in a residential, public, and/or commercial capacity (Figure 13). Including:21 1. 50 Queen Street North: 11 storey Commercial Centre (Commerce House). 2. 57 Queen Street North: 18 storey Building: Residential Condos (The Regency). 3. 141 Ontario Street North: 6 storeys, appears all Commercial (Ontario Tower). 4. 30 Duke Street: 10 storey Commercial Centre (Duke Tower). 5. 11 Margaret Avenue: 18 storey residential apartments (Queen -Margaret Apartments) 6. 100 Queen Street North: 18 Storey residential apartments (Queen -Margaret Apartments). 7. 101 Fredrick St: 11 storeys commercial building. 8. 40 Weber Street East: 9 storey commercial building. 9. 85 Fredrick Street: 8 storeys, public institution (Waterloo Regional Court House). 10. 53 Water Street North: 16 storey residential apartments (Alexandrian Rental Suites). 11. 22 Fredrick Street: 11 storey commercial building (Financial Horizons Group). 12. 85 Duke Street West -19 Storey residential condos 13. 220 King Street West- Mixed use commercial and public building. (Kitchener City Hall) 14. 55 King Street West- tiered 12 storey commercial building. 15. 30 Queen Street North- 6 storey parking garage. See Appendix C for photographic documentation of the large-scale buildings listed above. 21 Bolded entries are located on the same block as the subject properties. 45 Project #LHC0134 0 N Figure 13: Location of subject properties (red star) and location of surrounding large-scale buildings which range in height from six to 19 storeys (blue star) (Kitchener Interactive Maps, 2019). 5.1 Ontario Street North 149-151 Ontario Street North is located on the east side of Ontario Street and is the only residential building on the block. Ontario Street North is a two way street which runs in a general north -south direction. Aside from 149-151 Ontario Street North, there is only one entrance to a commercial space which is located at 141 Ontario Street North. The six -storey building is located directly south and made with glass and concrete. It appears to be used for commercial purposes. The east side of this section of Ontario Street North has limited opportunities for pedestrian interactions. Further south is a large, concrete, ten -storey building (30 Duke Street East) which is used by both public and private business. This building is accessed from Duke Street only. All the buildings along the east side of the street have very narrow setbacks and the only vegetation is that noted in front of 149-151 Ontario Street North (Figure 14). Similarly, the west side of Ontario Street consists of a parking lot, a small one -storey building, and the rear elevation of the original St. Mary's Hall (35 Weber Street West). 35 Weber Street West is a large, four -storey building with a flat roof. It appears to be occupied by public and private sector organizations including the Waterloo Region Catholic School Board and the Downtown Community Centre (Figure 15). This building has its primary entrance on the 46 northwest elevation. The building's secondary entrances appear to be the ones located along Ontario Street North. 149-151 Ontario Street North is the only residential property on east or west side of the street. LEO Figure 14: View of east side of Ontario Street North looking south (AB, 2018). Figure 15: View of west side on Ontario Street North. This is the building directly across from149-151 Ontario Street North (AB, 2018). 47 Project #LHC0134 5.2 Weber Street West 21 Weber Street West is located on the south side of the Weber Street West. Weber Street is a four -lane arterial road. Adjacent to 21 Weber Street West are two brick buildings (11 and 17 Weber Street West) which are used for commercial purposes. 17 Weber Street West is a two and a half storey buff brick building and 11 Weber Street West is a two-storey red brick building (Figure 16). The two commercial buildings have narrow set backs. There is a large 12 -storey concrete building on the corner of Weber Street West and Queen Street. The main entrance to this building is located along Queen Street. There is large open concrete platform which surrounds the main level of the building. The only vegetation along this portion of the streetscape is the minimal plantings located in front of the two small commercial buildings (Figure 17). This section of Weber Street West is composed of commercial- and institutional -use buildings and is accessed by pedestrian traffic primarily during business hours only. There are two large churches (one which fronts towards Queen Street), two small commercial buildings, and large open areas used for parking. This section does not have any residential buildings and pedestrian appeal would also be minimal (Figure 18). The north side of Weber Street West is also the boundary line for the CCNHCD. This section of Weber Street is noted as having some of the oldest built heritage resources within the district. Details about the heritage value of this district are found in Section 3.3.2.1 of this CHIA. The CCNHCD Plan identifies major and minor `gateways' associated with the district. Ontario Street North is not considered a major or minor gateway (Figure 20). This section of Weber Street West is recommended within the CCNHCD as a "High Density Commercial Residential" zoning and is current under a CR -3 Zoning (Figure 19). Figure 16: View of Weber Street West looking east, showing 11 Weber Street West (red brick building) and 17 Weber Street West (buff brick building). (Google Earth Pro, 2017). 48 Project #LHC0134 11i1 �1�'1iiiM all r;-jJIiiir,11111-jJI; r%IWW' Figure 17: Weber Street West looking east, with showing 21 Weber Street west on the corner. A portion of 149-151 Ontario Street North is also visible (AB, 2018). Figure 18: Photo taken from corner of Ontario Street North and Weber Street. View looking west down Weber Street West (left) and east down Weber Street (right). The buildings are associate with the CCNHCD (AB, 2018). 49 Project #LHC0134 CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN FOR LAND USE MAP 9 SECONDARY PLAN — �e�sr�f bM1kdVe ree•ie. u.0 1 .,p ; \�\\ _once uucrwi camemm� �` •., c•� _' Y�F_ NPP '�•. oe�n cn.,.n.tiax..a..mi rY I. •♦. Anna uecmav .. Low Rma ♦ ./ Regrywvruw PaM � .� Praeerslbn �♦ .. '� • � i._i eo-swgdsr..a.y R.. i - Y � gil 5 f ��` � �Rim�Ffno-W Reee lig 4: recomrnen&d WWI plan er'.. $sena Figure 19: Recommended Official Plan designations in the CCNHCD Plan. (CCNHCD Plan, Figure 4). 4 1:5o b 7114 Ei�.nq�l.�u Figure 20: Noted major gateways (red star) and minor gateways (blue stars) associated with the CCNHCD (CCNHCD Plan, Figure 7). 50 Project #LHC0134 6 HISTORICAL CONTEXT 6.1 City of Kitchener Early Euro -Canadian History- German Canadian In 1784 the British Crown acquired a large portion of Mississaugas territory. The Crown promptly allocated it to the Six Nations in compensation for their allegiance during the American Revolution. In 1796, Joseph Brant sold 38,000 hectares of that land to Richard Beasley, a loyalist and colonel.22 The earliest European settlers in present-day Kitchener were a group of Pennsylvania German Mennonites who, over time, purchased the majority of Beasley's land, formulating 160 farm tracts and raising the first structures by 1800.23 The Mennonites came to play a major role in transforming the moraines, swamplands, into rich and productive farmland over the following century. Among the first to settlers to arrive from Pennsylvania were the Eby, Erb, Schneider, and Weber families in the same caravan. Benjamin Eby led the expedition, though it was guided by Abraham Weber who had scouted the land and whose father had already purchased land in the area.24 Joseph Schneider also bought 448 acres of what became the centre of early development and is now downtown Kitchener. For this reason he is often considered to be Kitchener's founder.25 Schneider also built the area's first log cabin and later a sawmill on his land in tandem with a framed Georgian home — the latter remains to this day and is used as a museum known as Schneider Haus Figure 25. The initial settlement was named Sand Hills for the large sandy hills that filled the area at the time.26 In 1813, the Mennonites renamed the settlement to Ebytown in honour of their spiritual leader and first schoolteacher, Benjamin Eby.27 These early leaders were instrumental in founding the community and ensuring its success. German Canadians were substantial contributors to nineteenth century Canadian history and culture, particularly in Ontario. They made up upwards of 40% of Loyalists moving into Upper Canada in the decades following the American Revolution.28 German Mennonites, a particular religious -culture sect, were mostly pacific Anabaptist farmers from Pennsylvania fleeing American nationalists.29 They banded together and acquired a massive tract of 60,000 acres of land under the German Company in Waterloo County,30 transplanting their population in a series of chain migrations of families.31 By 1813 the settlement had erected its first church on what is now King Street East. The frame building was replaced by a brick church in 1902.32 In 1816 the Government of Upper Canada designated the settlement the Township of Waterloo.33 22 City of Kitchener, "About Kitchener." Accessed November 5, 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/20100712113505/http://cityofkitchener. icreate. kitchener.ca/en/living inkitchener/AboutKitchener.asp 23 Ibid. 24 Bill Moyer, Kitchener Yesterday Revisited: An Illustrated History, (Burlington, ON: Windsor Publications, 1979), 1. 25 Ibid, 3. 26 City of Kitchener, "About Kitchener." Accessed November 5, 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/20100712113505/http://cityofkitchener. icreate.kitchener.ca/en/living inkitchener/AboutKitchener.asp 27 Trotter, Nebold Hugh. 1883. 28 Gerard Bassler, "German Canadians," The Canadian Encyclopedia. Accessed November 5, 2018. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/german-canadians 29 Ibid. 30 Government of Canada, "Waterloo Pioneers", Plaque. 31 Gerard Bassler, "German Canadians". 32 Ibid. 33 City of Kitchener, "About Kitchener." Accessed November 5, 2018. https:Hweb.archive.org/web/20100712113505/http://cityofkitchener. icreate.kitchener.ca/en/living inkitchener/AboutKitchener.asp 51 Project #LHC0134 By 1833 the area was renamed Berlin. In 1845 it only had about 400 inhabitants, a newspaper, a post office, one physician and one surgeon, a lawyer, three stores, one brewery, one printing office, two taverns, one pump maker, and two blacksmiths.34 The population was intensely communal, often having `community raising bees' to help particular families or individuals build their first homes or install new infrastructure, such as a large barn. The almost homogenously German region attracted many immigrants from Germany itself by the 1850s.35 By 1860, likely owing to the influx German population, the predominant religion had become Lutheran.36 Between 1830 and 1860, both frame structures and fieldstone houses could be found dotting the countryside and hamlets of Waterloo County, including Berlin. Tremaine's 1861 atlas shows a rapidly expanding Berlin surrounded by many settled agricultural lots, as well as extensive rail connections (Figure 26). Berlin received its first public stage coach service in 1835, as well as its first post office in 1842 (daily mail was introduced in 1845).37 The Bank of Upper Canada opened a branch on Queen Street in 1853. Waterloo County held its first council meeting in 1853 at Berlin's newly built county courthouse with 12 members from five townships present.38 John Scott was appointed the first Reeve in 1854, with other council members including Gabriel W. Bowman, George Jantz, Henry Stroh and Enoch Ziegler.39 They selected the Reeve of Waterloo Township, John Scott, as the County's first warden. Establishing Waterloo County engendered a number of enduring institutions: roads and bridges, a judiciary and jail, high schools, a House of Industry and Refuge, agricultural societies and local markets.40 Berlin was first connected to rail in 1856 by a newly constructed Grand Trunk Railway Station and route, causing an influx of many workers from the United Kingdom and United States, and requiring feats of engineering such as building the river trestle across the Grand River at Breslau (Figure 22 and Figure 23).41 This was a major boom to the community at large, improving industrialization in the area.42 It brought effective connection to the outside for Berlin, contributing rail passenger and freight service, and enabling more intense growth — new industries and schools reflect this.43 John Hoffman, under the patronage of Benjamin Eby, began Berlin's first furniture factory, established the first foundry in Berlin, installed the community's first factory bell, and imported the settlements first steam - powered machinery from Buffalo for his factory (Figure 29).44 His foundry was located at the corner of Preston Road and Foundry Street (now King and Ontario Street North).45 In 1860, the settlement had grown to almost 2000 people including a number of different nationalities (mostly European) in addition to those born in Canada.46 Indeed, a year earlier, the settlement received its first sewer laid 34 William Smith, "Berlin", Smith's Canadian Gazetteer (Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell), p. 15. Accessed November 6, 2018. https:Harchive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smit/page/n7 35 Gerard Bassler, "German Canadians". 36 Bill Moyer, Kitchener Yesterday, 32. 37 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." Accessed December 11, 2018. https://www.archeion.ca/history-of- city-of-kitchener-fonds 38 Historic Plaques of Waterloo County, "Plaque #36." Accessed December 12, 2018. https://web.arch ive.org/web/20070721134716/http://www.waynecook.com/awaterloo.html 39 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 40 Historic Plaques of Waterloo County, "Plaque #36." 41 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 42 City of Kitchener, "About Kitchener." 43 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 44 Bill Moyer, Kitchener Yesterday, 31. 45 Ibid, 29. 46 Ibid, 32. 52 Project #LHC0134 between Queen and Ontario Streets and draining into Schneider's pond.47 This growth continued through the rest of the century. By 1869, Berlin had built its own Town Hall and farmer's market (Figure 24), and the following year had grown its population to 2636.48 In 1883, the town had Thomas Fuller, build a three-storey Gothic -inspired post -office (Figure 25).49 The population thereafter multiplied, achieving 9676 in 1900 running 92 industries. The population rose to 12,125 just six years Iater.50 It achieved another first in 1910 when it became the first Ontario settlement to develop the infrastructure to receive hydroelectric power from Niagara.51 Figure 21: Painting of a typical Conestoga wagon of the period. Courtesy of the State Museum of Pennsylvania (Trotter, 1883). 47 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 48 Ibid. 49 Rych Mills, "Flash from the past: Berlin post office was community hub for 50 years," Waterloo Region Record, 2015. Accessed December 11, 2018. https://www.therecord.com/living-story/5595744-flash-from-the-past-berlin-post-office-was- commun ity-hub-for-50-years/ 50 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 51 Ibid. 53 Project #LHC0134 Figure 22: Postcard showing the Grand Trunk Railway Station in Berlin, Ontario (S.H. Knox and Co., 1908). Figure 23: Painting of the Grand River Bridge (probably at Breslau) in 1856 by William Armstrong. Courtesy of Waterloo Historical Society Collection (Armstrong, 1856). 54 Project #LHC0134 Figure 24: Black and white photograph of Berlin's original town hall built in 1869 (Denton & Gifford, 1924). Figure 25: Photograph of Kitchener's second City Hall in Renaissance Revival style, built in 1924 (demolished in 1754). Its dome clock tower now sits in Victoria Park (The Waterloo Region Record Historical Photo Collection, 1972). 55 Project #LHC0134 Figure 26 Photograph of the post office at King and Benton Streets (The Waterloo Region Record Historical Photo Collection, n.d.). The Twentieth Century Industrialization transformed Berlin by the turn of the century and the town earned the name `Busy Berlin'. A pamphlet touted it as both an extremely safe place with the need for few police and "...a centre of tall chimneys and well -employed citizens".52 Historian Bill Moyer notes that by 1901 Berlin was "producing everything from bicycles and cigars to pianos and production cars" while tanneries, rubber factories, meat packers, and clothing manufacturers were the major employers.53 Among these, Joseph Schneider stands out as the founder of Canada's third largest meat packing business (Figure 28).54 One of the region's traditional industries was shoe manufacturing, with major employers including the Dominion Rubber Company and the Berlin Rubber Company (Figure 27).55 Milton and Nelson Good developed an engine in 1899-1900 and were selling their Leroy automobile as the first production cars in Canada, though it was relatively short-lived owing to an inability to find investment capital.56 When the town had grown to 12,000 people in 1906, it had 20 churches, an orphanage, a hospital, five banks, and three public parks, as well as 140 hydrants and a world-class sewage disposal system, along with a new public library on the corner of Queen and Weber Streets, Figure 37. 52 Bill Moyer, Kitchener Yesterday, 45. 53 Ibid, 45. 54 Ibid, 40. 55 Ibid, 42. 56 Ibid, 46. 56 Project #LHC0134 Berlin received its official designation as a city on June 9, 1912 when its population rose to 15,00057; however, the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 lead to significant anti -German sentiment.58 This manifested in pressure to change the name of the city in 1914, and after no small amount of debate and controversy this occurred. Berlin changed its name to Kitchener in the name of Herbert Kitchener, 1s' Earl of Kitchener, who had recently died serving as Secretary of State for War for the United Kingdom.59 This was also a partial bid to secure the city's existing commercial relationships, which would be under peril were it to remain associated with Germany under such anti - German sentiments.60 As with many other cities and towns in Ontario, economic growth largely stagnated as economies faltered following the war. Even so, Kitchener built its second — much grander — City Hall in 1924 in the Renaissance Revival style, though it was later demolished in 1974. The clocktower still sits in Victoria Park (See Figure 25).Kitchener issued its first community development plan in 1925, which included a complete layout and prospectus for growth, in addition to other features.61 Kitchener was perhaps less affected by the Great Depression than many other communities, largely owing to its diversified industrial base that helped it weather the times, to the extent that many businesses stayed open throughout the economic disaster.62 Kitchener successfully moved its industrial efforts from wartime toward a boom following the conflict, and in 1965 it was the fastest growing city in Canada, briefly surpassing Vancouver, Calgary, and Montreal once again owing largely to its diversified economy that protected it from economic shocks and ensured its steady growth.63 Over the course of the latter twentieth century, Kitchener continued growing substantially, and in the twenty-first century is a vibrant part of one of Canada's largest metropolitan centres. RVafiR CO -14-Y aL,LoIN0{,B{RLFN.-] PROVINCIAL CONzrRYCT¢ON CO.� L/YITtI, ZS JoRoaN STRi[T. TOMONTO, Kok. 8..TRM Of .LIN_C Figure 27: Old Berlin Rubber Company, a footwear manufacturer. Archives of Ontario (Moyer, 1979). 57 City of Kitchener Corporate Archives, "Custodial history." 58 City of Kitchener, "About Kitchener." 59 Ibid. 60 Luisa d'Amato. "First World War ripped away Canada's'age of innocence"'. Waterloo Region Record. Accessed November 1, 2018. https://www.kitchenerpost.ca/news-story/4605027-first-world-war-ripped-away-canada-s-age-of-innocence-/ 61 Bill Moyer, Kitchener Yesterday, 64. 62 Ibid, 71. 63 Ibid, 83. 57 Project #LHC0134 Figure 28: A 1909 photograph of the J.M. Schneider meat packing company with staff posed outside (Moyer, 1979). W Figure 29: Photo of an older John Hoffman, early innovator of Berlin (Moyer, 1979). 58 Project #LHC0134 6.2 Property Morphology 149-151 Ontario Street North is believed to have been built c. 1876, while the current structure at 21 Weber Street West is believed to have been built c. 1957. Through this time the City of Kitchener has undergone significant changes to the social, economic, and built fabric. The block of land bounded by Weber Street West, Queen Street North, Duke Street East, and Ontario Street North, in which the two properties are located, changed dramatically through the 201h century. The following section outlines some of the prominent changes to the surrounding context. 1850-1900 1853-1854 Map of Part of the Town of Berlin, Capital of the County of Waterloo shows the downtown are being laid out and some of amenities present (Figure 30). The map shows the beginning of commercial and civic institutions lining present day King Street. The map shows the presence of a hotel, factory, post office, court house and jail and Town Hall. The Map of parts of the Town of Berlin in the County of Waterloo (Plan 401) was created in May 1859 (Figure 31). The map shows the division of blocks into small lots and specially outline Lot 11 in which the subject properties are located. At this time the lot is associated with Jantz. The 1861 Tremaine Map of Waterloo Township does not provide further detail about the property or surrounding area specifically; however, it does outline provide an understanding of the surrounding streets and roadways (Figure 32). The subject properties are located within the large black area which is considered to be the main centre with a concentration of built structures. The 1875 Birds Eye View provides an artist rendering of the subject properties and the surrounding area (Figure 33). Although the map is an interpretation of the area, it does suggest that there was concentration of buildings around the subject properties. Further south on Foundry Street an open area is depicted. The 1894, Revised 1904, Fire Insurance Plan highlights the extent of development on this block (Figure 34). The block showcases two large buildings (labelled Public Library and St. Matthews Lutheran Church) along Queen Street, while the rest of the block appears to be residential dwellings of various sizes, configurations and placements along the streetscape. At this time, present-day 149-151 Ontario Street North (listed as 164-166 Foundry Street) is noted in detail. The two units are separate and the one -storey rear wing associated with 151 Ontario Street North and the one -and -a -half -storey rear wing associated with 149 Ontario Street North are present. There is a one -and -a -half storey building at the corner of Ontario Street North and Weber Street (listed as 163 Ontario Street North). 21 Weber Street is not present. 59 Project #LHC0134 v b Figure 30: Town of Berlin, 1853, subject properties marked in red (University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre). Figure 31: Map of parts of the Town of Berlin in the County of Waterloo, showing lot 11 owned by Jantz (Plan 401, LRO#58). 60 jzz !t'rit3��I5'FY� i 4� ✓lfr,VZI - P a ��' f=1'.Y � ,5� lfjlJ�r� aC✓r'J ,_IJ.S �c,i.�;?��llJ,lJ(.'- '�t.r Figure 31: Map of parts of the Town of Berlin in the County of Waterloo, showing lot 11 owned by Jantz (Plan 401, LRO#58). 60 Project #LHC01 34 Figure 32: Clipping of Tremaine's Map of Waterloo Township, 1861, showing Berlin roadways and surrounding land owners (Tremaine, 1861). Figure 33: Berlin, 1875, subject properties general area circled in red (University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre). 61 Project #LHC0134 Figure 34: An 1894 (revised 1904) Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North (red) and 21 Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room). 1900- 1950 The 1908, revised 1925, Fire Insurance Plan shows minimal change to the block (Figure 35). The Public Library and St. Matthews Lutheran Church remain along Queen Street, as well as, the residential dwellings. 149-151 Ontario Street North is noted in detail (the property appears to have been known as 83-85 Ontario Street at one point). The coloured image confirms the brick is original. 163 Ontario Street North is also noted as being a brick dwelling with a 62 Project #LHC0134 one storey stone veneer auto port. Based on the placement of the bay window, it appears that this building fronted onto Ontario Street North, not Weber Street West. The 1908, revised 1946, Fire Insurance Plan shows minimal changes to the block (Figure 36). The dwelling located on the corner of Duke Street and Queen Street has been converted into commercial use and is now labelled as an Electrical Workshop Supermotor and Lighting. 149-151 Ontario Street North and 163 Ontario Street North remained unchanged. ' � P X x In � Q r Q \ x Z) fir\ L \ x I \ 4 x x 7 r M J �y AD - 7 Q� P Z� i �t� x J �S x -_N — _ — , \ i 7f7 Figure 35: A 1908 (revised 1925) Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North (red) and 21 Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room). 63 : -AC SP =7 Al -7 :Z Afdf �� I � Figure 36: A1908(R (Revised 19 f Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario SrleetNorth (red)and / Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room). 64 �- . � < I � Figure 36: A1908(R (Revised 19 f Fire Insurance Plan showing the surrounding block and general area associated with 149-151 Ontario SrleetNorth (red)and / Weber Street West (yellow) (Kitchener Public Library, Grace Schmidt Room). 64 Project #LHC0134 1950-2000 Through the second half of the 20th century the surrounding landscape underwent dramatic changes. This significantly altered the use, massing, scale and height of the block. Two prominent changes were the demolition of the Carnegie Public Library64 (built 1904) (Figure 37) located on the corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West and the demolition of the large Hartman Krug65 residence (built 1896) at 117 Ontario Street North (Figure 39). The 1908 (rev 1925) Fire Insurance Plan shows the First English Lutheran Church, which was located adjacent to the Library on Queen Street North (Figure 38). 66 The church was used from 1914 until 1939 when the congregation moved to a new church located a King Street and Green Street. During the Second World War this building was used by the Red Cross, and eventually sold to the Kitchener Public library; the building was demolished in 1958.67 Subsequently all the buildings in this figure were demolished to make way for `Commerce House'. Figure 40 is a street view photo of 10 Duke Street which is located at the corner of Duke Street and Queen Street North. This building was built in 1949 and based on 1947 Fire Insurance Plans replaced a commercial structure which was noted as Electrical Workshop: Super Motor & Plumbing Co. Figure 41 shows the block while undergoing construction. You can see that the majority of the block, except for the upper corner, has been demolish, flattened, and cleared. A new six -storey building, and ten -storey building would fill in this section at the corner of Duke Street and Ontario Street North. Figure 42 is an aerial image from 1980 which shows the block after construction of the towers has been completed. 7 b-jW• Vr • r ' ae Figure 37: Photo of the Carnegie Library located on the corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The building was demolished c. 1962 (KPL, P010257). 64 The library was replaced in 1962 by the existing library located at 85 Queen Street North. 65 H. Krug was a prominent business man and founder H. Krug Furniture Co. Ltd. (aka Krug Inc.) and owner of Doon Twines Ltd. (later called Canada Cordage). The grand 30 room house was demolished c. 1964, along with the adjacent residence which was once owned by William (Daddy) Simpson, who was another kingpin of the 19th century furniture industry. The properties are now the site of a six storey and ten story building known as Corporation Square (30 Duke Street West and 141 Ontario Street North). 66 Fear, Jon. Flash from the Past: St. Mark's Lutheran Church marks 100 years. The Record. August 23, 2013. Retrieved from, https://www.therecord.com/living-story/4047236-flash-from-the-past-st-mark-s-lutheran-church-marks-100-years/ 67 Ibid. 65 1 x f I I � G4 Project #LHC0134 Figure 38: Detailed view of the 1908 (Rev. 1925) Fire Insurance Plan showing the First English Lutheran Church ad the Public Library. This section was demolished c. 1960 and replaced with Commerce House (50 Queen Street West). Figure 39: Hartman Krug residence located at 117 Ontario Street North. The property was demolished c. 1964 (The Record, 2010). 66 r/ . 4-1 y _ Figure 39: Hartman Krug residence located at 117 Ontario Street North. The property was demolished c. 1964 (The Record, 2010). 66 Project #LHC0134 Figure 40: 10 Duke Street found at the corner of Duke Street and Queen Street North built in 1949 (Davis, 2017). Figure 41: 1969 photo of construction crews clearing the site to build the Corporation Square. Note 149-151 Ontario Street North in the background (The Record, 2010). 67 Project #LHC0134 4 ..IL .: Imp i u7 Figure 42: Aerial of properties (red) and surrounding landscape (Region of Waterloo, 1980). 6.3 Property History and Ownership 0 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West have a shared history from 1859 until about 1906. The 1859 Weber Survey Map (Plan 401)68 shows both properties form Lot 11 — at the time the property is associated with the Jantz family. No historical information was found which connected either of the properties with the family name Jantz at this time. The City of Kitchener municipal heritage inventory sheet and Statement of Significance for 149-151 Ontario Street North note that the structure was built c. 1876 and the original owner is listed as Wilhelmina Louisa Bauman.69 Land title abstracts confirm that Wilhelmina Louisa Bauman (et. mar) owned Lot 11 in 1881. 68 LRO Waterloo #58. Plan 401. Map of parts of the Town of Berlin in the County of Waterloo. 69 Some historical textual materials sign the name as Bowman; this is how the name is spelled on the Land Title abstracts. 68 Project #LHC0134 Wilhelmina Louisa Bauman (n6e Stumpf) was born c. 1842 to parents William Stumpf (b. 1810, Kitchener) and Nancy (n6e Gaukel) (b. 1810 Pennsylvania, USA).70 She married Daniel Lewis Bauman on 22 October 1867 in Berlin" and together they had multiple children including: Ira, Fredrick, Walter (b. 1871), Ivan (b. 1872), Charles (b. 1875), Jeremiah (b. 1876), Alfred (b. 1878) and Byren (b. 1880), and Clara (b. 1884).72 Wilhelmina Bauman sold the entire Lot (noted as 0.27 -acres in size) to Jacob Merner Staebler on 18 July 1881.73 J.M. Staebler was well known within the Township of Waterloo. J.M. Staebler (b. Aug 16, 1846, d. 7 May 1906) was a self-taught man who could read and write in German and English despite not attending school.74 During his ownership of 149-151 Ontario Street North, his residence was on Queen Street South.75 J.M. Staebler was married three time and had a least five children. He was mayor of Berlin in 1891.76 According to the 1893 City Directory, J.M. Staebler lived at 95 Queen Street South77 and worked at 35 King Street. Presumably, the lots and the extant structures on the subject properties were occupied by tenants at this time. Upon Staebler's death in 1906 his widow and third wife, Anne May divided and sold Lot 11.78 At this time 149-151 Ontario Street North was known as 83-85 Foundry Street and 21 Weber Street West comprised part of 19 Weber Street (in some cases listed as 87 Foundry Street). From this point onwards two properties are listed separately in City Directories. oeho� . Art* J. M. Staebler, Mayor 1891. Figure 43: Portrait of J.M. Staebler. (Find A Grave. Memorial ID 161406725). 70 Waterloo Generations. Wilhelmine Louisa Bowman. Person ID 18119. Retrieved from, http://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personlD=18119&tree=generations 71 Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; County Marriage Registers, 1858 -June 1869; Reel: 17 72 Year: 1881; Census Place: Waterloo, Waterloo North, Ontario; Roll: C_13265; Page: 14; Family No: 60 73 LRO#58. Deed of Land. Instrument Number 4809 & Land title Abstracts for Lot 11, Plan 401, Town of Berlin. 74 Waterloo Generations. Mayor Jacob Merner Staebler. Person 137544. 75 Ibid. 76 Ibid. 77 Built 1878. 78 It appears the lot, or parts of it, were divided into what today is known as 21 Weber Street West, 17 Weber Street West, and 149-151 Ontario Street North. 69 Project #LHC0134 6.3.1 149-151 Ontario Street North On 9 August 1906, the Trusts and Guarantee Company Ltd., Administrator of Staebler Estate, sold the property (0.147 acres) to George Harrison for $3000.00.79 George Harrison (et ux) sold the property to Alfred C. Bender on 30 June 1925 for $8,500.00.80 The deed for this transaction has a stamp on it which says `A.C. Bender, Real Estate and Conveyancing, 11 Queen Street South'. A.C. Bender (et ux) would sell the property to Melvina Wildfong, of Preston Ontario, on 4 January 1929 for $8,800.0081, who on 28 March 1947 sold an undivided half interest to Eli and Alice Weber (as joint tenants).82 When Melvina died on 3 November 1951, the property was bequeathed to Alice Weber.83 On 7 November 1960, Majorie Hoerle (married women), Audrey Thibideau (married women), Muriel (Pearl) Cormier (married women) acting as executors for Alice Weber (widow), granted the property to Morgan H Allcraft to use.84 What happened next is unclear; however, there appears to have been a dispute over ownership of the property which was settled at the Supreme Court of Ontario. The finding shows that by way of a Certificate of final order for Foreclosure Majorie Hoerle, Audrey Thibideau, Muriel (Pearl) Cormier, (plaintiffs) granted the property to Morgan H Allcraft and Bernhardt Insurance Services Limited, Edward Sirkel; Trelco Ltd.; and the Shirlite MFG. Co. Ltd. on 9 March 1966.85 The following year, Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd granted the property to William Archibald Bernhardt.86 William Albert Archibald `Archie' Bernhardt was bom 26 December 1904 to parents William George Bernhardt (b. 1869, d. 1924) and Maude May MacDonald (b. 1882, d, 1938).87 The property appears to have stayed in the Bernhardt family until 30 June 1990 when it was transferred to 816601 Ontario Ltd.88 It appears a small portion of the property was sold to Frederick J. Shue Inc. William Cline, and Carole Grossman, who worked at 17 Weber Street, as tenants in common. The remainder of the property was sold to Guy Property Inc. on 21 August 2015, who in turn sold it to the present owner, 89 Despite the record of ownership listed above, it does not appear that any of these owners occupied the residence at any time. 151 Ontario Street was occupied consistently by Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. from 1966 until at least 2014 and used as an office for the company. City Directories from 1893 until 2014 indicate that 149 Ontario Street was used as a short-term rental by dozens of occupants. A snapshot of entries over the years shows us that residents resided there for only a few years at a time. Some of the occupants' professions included: teamster [1907], high school teacher [1911], machinist [1919], clerk [1919], stock keeper for Bell Telephone [1923], tailor [1923], stock keeper [1923], care taker [1928], shipper [1935] global furniture worker [1939], taxi driver [1947], carpenter [1955], clerk [1963], assembler at Electrohome [1973], and waiter [1974].90 The City Directories also highlight that around 1983 there are upwards of nine apartments 79 LRO# 58. Deed of Land. Land title Abstracts for Lot 11, Plan 401, Town of Berlin. Instrument No. 20505. 80 Ibid. Instrument No. 54885. 81 Ibid. Instrument No. 61902. 82 Ibid. Instrument No. 93372. 83 Ibid. Instrument No. 211956. 84 Ibid. Instrument No. 211956. 85 Ibid. Instrument No. 211956. 86 Ibid. Instrument No. 339924. 87 Waterloo Generations. William Albert Archibald Archie' Bernhardt. Person ID 1351637. Retrieved from, http://qenerations.regionofwaterloo.ca/,qetperson.phP?personID=1351637&tree=qenerations 88 LRO#58. Deed of Land. Land title Abstracts for Lot 11, Plan 401, Town of Berlin Instrument No. 1175440. 89 LRO#58. Service Ontario. Parcel Register for Property Identifier. Pin: 22316-0061 (LT) Reg. Number WR901932. 90 Vernon's City Directories from 1983-2014. See Appendix D for full source list. 70 Project #LHC0134 associated with 149 Ontario Street North. It is possible that at this time the interior was adapted into its current configuration to accommodate this many dwelling units. See Appendix D for available City Directory entries from 1893 until 2014 for 149 and 151 Ontario Street North. Currently, the building is a residential triplex -149 Ontario Street North comprises two residential units (Unit 2 & Unit3), and 151 Ontario Street North comprises one unit (Unit 1). 6.3.2 21 Weber Street West Fire Insurance Plans (1893, 1908, 1925 and 1946) show a large two-storey brick dwelling with a wrap around porch fronting Ontario Street North associated with present-day 21 Weber Street. The Fire Insurance Plans and City Directories suggest that the property was known as 163 Ontario Street North and 19 Weber Street.91 The building represented in the plans is no longer extant. Below is a description of the property owners and relevant land transfers. In 1906 the property was subdivided when The Trusts and Guarantee Company Ltd., Administrator of Staebler Estate sold part of lot 11 (containing present-day 21 Weber Street) to Catherine Benninger for $3,000.00 on 15 September 1906.92 On 11 May 1911, Catherine and John Benninger sold the 0.114 acres to Harry Mackie Lackner for $3,800.00.93 Dr. Harry M. Lackner (b. 10 Dec 1884, Berlin d. 1964, Kitchener, ON) was the son of Dr. Henry George Lackner (b. 1815, d. 1925) and Helen Allister Mackie (b. 1853, d. 1935).94 Dr. Henry George Lackner, was mayor of Berlin from 1886-7 to 1893 and worked as a physician. His son, Harry M. Lackner, also worked as a doctor95 his entire life (Figure 44).96 Dr. Harry M. Lackner married Margaret Anne Nelson (b. abt. 1884, d. 1915) on 6 October 1909 and had a baby boy, Henry`Allister' Lackner, in 1910. Margaret died in child birth on 14 June 1915 along with their second infant (John Angus Lackner).97 Dr. Harry M. Lackner remarried on 7 November 1916 to a widow named Matilda Hamilton McCrae-Ballard.98 The 1935 Canadian Voters List noted the Dr. Harry Lackner and Matilda were living at 163 Ontario Street North. Also listed was Miss Jean Ferguson (spinster) and Miss Evelyn Huether (domestic help).99 It is unclear exactly when they moved out, but by 1945 the couple are listed as living at 50 Margaret Avenue. loo The Canadian Voter Lists from 1949 to 1963 note that the couple lived at 20 Roy Street. 101 City Directories note that in 1941 the property is associated with Miss Ferguson for one year. 102 From 1943-1948, the property was occupied by W. K. Malcom. It was listed as vacant in 1949 and occupied from 1950-1957 by J. A. Grant.103 91 Both numbers are shown on insurance plans and are noted in City Directories presenting the same information. 92 LRO#58. Deed of Land. Land title Abstracts for Lot 11, Plan 401, Town of Berlin Instrument No. 20909. 93 Ibid. Instrument No. 26412. 94 Find A Grave. Dr. Harry M. Lackner. Memorial no. 189047245. 95 Dr. Harry M. Lackner also served as part of the Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps and was award the Canadian Efficiency Decoration on 7 March 1955. (Ancestry.com. Canada, Military Honours and Awards Citation Cards, 1900-1961). 96 Ibid. & City Directories. 97 Find A Grave. Margaret Anne Nelson Lackner, Memorial No. 189049469. 98 Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Registrations of Marriages, 1869-1928; Reel: 379 99 Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. R1003 -6-3-E (RG113-13). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 100 Find a Grave. Dr. Harry M. Lackner. Memorial no. 189047245. 101 Original data: Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. R1003 -6-3-E (RG113-13). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 102 Vernon's City Directory 1941. los Vernon's City Directories 1941-1957. 71 Project #LHC0134 The Lackner doctors appeared to have operated their medical practice from this location from 1911 until 1957. Starting in 1939, Dr. H. Allister Lackner, son of Harry M. Lackner, appeared beside his father in the City Directories. The 1925 Fire Insurance Plan suggests that the side portion of 19 Weber may have been used by the Doctors. On 18 April 1957 Harry M. Lackner sold the property to the City of Kitchener.104 This is also the same year in which the City Directories stop listing 19 Weber Street and 163 Ontario Street North and may be the year that the building was demolished. The Lackner Doctors were most associated with St. Mary's Hospital throughout their medical careers. The original St. Mary's Church was located on the southern corner of Weber Street West and Young Streets. 105 To honour the decades (80 years) of medical service by the three generations of Lackner Doctors, the local community and St. Mary's Hospital created `The Lackner Awards'. This award is presented annually "to a physician who demonstrates excellence in patient care, innovation, compassion, and a commitment to the mission and values of St. Mary's General Hospital and the St. Joseph's Health System". 106 On 4 November 1957 The Corporation of the City of Kitchener granted the property to John F. Ledger. 107 In 1958, 21 Weber Street West appeared for the first time in the City Directory and is associated with J.F. Ledger and J.F. Diefenbacher.108 These two continued to be associated with the property until 15 December 1987, when Ledger sold the property to Fredrick Kirvan.109 J.F. Ledger was listed as working as a dentist; various dentist were listed as working at 21 Weber Street.' 10 Since 1998 the building saw a handful of commercial enterprises run from the building including: The Dolphin (1989), Lantern Garden Restaurant (1990-1999), Coffee Mugs and Donuts and More (2000), Energy Care (2001-2011), Vacant (2012), DaVinci Cafe and Bar (2013) and Vacant (2014) and Saav Kitchens (Currently, 2019). The chain of ownership of 21 Weber Street is, as follows: Fredrick Kirvan (in trust) granted part of the lot to William John Bernhardt (1997); John Bernhardt granted the property to Predrag Durdevic (2001); Predrag Durdevic transferred the property to Sasa Erceg (2007); Sasa Erceg transferred the property to Umesh Manani (2010); Umesh Manini transferred the property to 1476795 Ontario Limited (2016);111 purchased the property in 2018. See Appendix E for available City Directory entries from 1893 until 2014 for 21 Weber Street West. 104 LRO#58 Instrument No. 153969. 105 Stroh, Jacob. 1931. Reminiscences of Berlin (now Kitchener). Retrieved from, http://www.whs.ca/wp- contenYuploads/2015/11/1931.pdf 106 Health News for Waterloo County. St. Mary's physician receives medical excellence award. 2012. Retrieved from, https://www.wwhealthline.ca/displavArticle.aspx?id=21161. 107 LRO#58 Instrument No. 161723. 108 Vernon's City Directory 1957-1958. 109 LRO#58 Instrument No. 926762. 110 Vernon's City Directory 1958-1988. 111 LRO#58. Service Ontario. Parcel Register for Property Identifier. Pin: 22316-0057 (LT) Reg. Number 1360001 & 1517760 & Reg. Number WR274902 & Reg. Number WR552209. 72 Project #LHC0134 Figure 44: Residence of Dr. H. G. Lackner (left) and portrait (right). (Waterloo Generations, Memorial ID 128157). 73 Project #LHC0134 7 PHYSICAL / DESIGN DESCRIPTION 7.1 149-151 Ontario Street North 7. 1.1 Exterior The cultural heritage resource associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North is a two-storey, semi-detached building which contains three separate residential units (Figure 45). According to Fire Insurance Plans the building was historically separated into two units, divided down the center. As early as 1894, there was a one -storey rear addition on the north half of the building and a one -and -a -half storey addition on the southern half of the building (Figure 47 and Figure 48). It is unclear if this was the original design. Overall the building follows an L-shaped plan with long fagade fronting onto Ontario Street North. The entire building is clad in buff brick in a stretcher bond. The brick appears to be fairly uniform in colour (buff brick) on the main section of the building while the rear wings have subtle variations of colours (red and yellow hues). There is more intricate brickwork on the main section of the building which includes, brick quoining, brick voussoirs with drip molds on the window openings and entranceways, brick voussoirs on the bay windows, and angled or bevelled brick forming a dripline which extends outwards above the foundation. The main portion of the building is built on a stone foundation which has been covered with parging. This appears to be consistent for the rear wing as well. The main section of the building has a medium pitched gable roof with overhanging eaves on the fagade and rear elevation only. The roofline is flush on the side (north and south) elevations. The eaves have vinyl covered soffits and the fagade has five paired molded wooden brackets rhythmically placed along the roofline (Figure 50). The roof is clad in asphalt shingles and there are two single stacked brick exterior chimneys located centrally on the side elevations. The south-east corner of the rear wing has an asphalt gable roof with a single gable style dormer. The north-east portion of the rear wing is attached to the main building by a shed style roofline. The roof of the rear wing has narrow overhanging eaves with a plain frieze. The fagade is symmetrical in design with two large bay windows located on the lower level with narrow paired windows directly above. Each bay window has a hipped shingled roof and includes three segmentally arched windows opening with brick voussoirs and lug sills. All the other window openings located on the main building are segmentally arched with brick voussoirs with drip molds and lug sills (Figure 50). All the glazings associated with the main building are new vinyl windows. All the window openings located on the rear wing have rectangular window openings and lug sills. The basement windows are square with brick voussoirs. 112 There are four entrances to the building. Two are located on the fagade and were original used as the main entrances to each of the respective units (Unit 1 and Unit 2). They have single wooden doors with segmentally arched openings and brick voussoirs with drip molds. The doors each have one large pane of glass, a slot for letters, and newer hardware. Each door has a segmentally arched transom. One transom is made with clear class (151 Ontario Street North) and the other has red decorative print which appears to be a decal (149 Ontario Street North). The entrances are accessed by wooden stairs. There is a single door entrance located at the rear of the building (east elevation) which is accessed by a new wooden ramp and provides access to a communal laundry area (Figure 46). The last entrance is located along the south-east corner of the building and provides access to Unit 3. It is accessed by new wooden stairs (Figure 49). Both doors located on the rear wing are new. 112 The basement window on the south-east corner of the rear wing does not have brick voussoirs. It is unclear why this is the only window which does not follow the design pattern. 74 Project #LHC0134 The building is most influenced by the Italianate architectural style which was popular in Ontario between 1860- 1890.13 Features which represent the Italianate architectural style include: paired eave brackets; tall segmentally arched paired windows; quoins; brick voussoirs with drip molds; and wide overhanging eaves. Some modest Georgian architectural style influence includes: the paired chimneys; side gable roof and overall symmetrical design. Aside from new windows, there do not appear to have been major alterations or additions to the building. Figure 45: Fagade (left) and detail of Unit 1 doorway (right) (AB, 2018). Figure 46: Fagade and north elevation (AB, 2018). 113 Mike], Robert. 2004. p. 65. 75 Project #LHC0134 Figure 47: East elevation and rear (south) elevation (AB, 2018). Figure 48: Rear view, showing south west corner (AB, 2018). 76 Project #LHC0134 Figure 49: The west elevation, showing the surrounding landscape has been paved (AB, 2018). Figure 50: Detailed image showing, bay window and voussoirs, brick voussoirs with drip molds, quoining and brackets (AB, 2018). 77 Project #LHC0134 7.1.2 Interior The interior floor plan has been modified from its original configuration in order to create three separate units (Figure 51). Unit 1 is a one -bedroom unit which occupies the north half of the main level and can be accessed through the north fagade doorway, and through the a secondary door located in the laundy room at the rear. Unit 2 occupies the entire upper level of both the main building and the rear wing. This is a five -bedroom unit which is accessed through the main entrance on the fapade or through the a secondary door located in the laundy room at the rear. Unit 3 is located on the south side of the main level and is accessed throught stairway on the south elevation. Shared Laundry LiNIT LIT U UGIT 1 N T - ,d Figure 51: Layout of units (not to scale). Unit 1 is outlined in blue. Unit 2 is outlined in red. Unit three is outlined in green and occupied the entire upper level of the building (AB, 2018). Unit 1- One Bedroom Unit 1 is a one -bedroom apartment with the main entrance is located on the west elevation (Figure 52). The single wooden door has a segmentally arched transom with a single clear pane of glass. Upon entering the unit, there is an open area and a door opening which has been filled in. The entire unit has 12 ft. ceilings. Moving through the front entrance towards the rear (east) is a large area which contains the kitchen and living room (Figure 53). The kitchen and living room have a drop tiled ceiling and laminate flooring is found in the kitchen, and carpet in the living room (Figure 55 and Figure 56). The master bedroom is located in the north-west section of the unit (Figure 54). Along the west elevation is a bay window with three window openings and an additional window is located on the north elevation. All the windows have moulded wooden trim and a wooden sill. The bedroom has a carpeted floor, 9'/z inch wooden baseboards, and a drop tile ceiling. A closet has been created out of drywall in the north-east corner of the bedroom. In the north-east corner of the unit are two small rooms used as a bathroom; one room has the shower and the other room has a toilet and sink (Figure 57). The bathroom has tiled floors, 9'/z inch wooden baseboards and a window on the north elevation which as moulded wooden trim and a wooden sill. All the hardware appears to be new. 78 Project #LHC0134 Laundry i Bathroom I Living Kitchen Room Bedroom Figure 52: Floor layout of Unit 1 (not to scale) (AB, 2018). Figure 53: View of floor layout (left), with view of front entrance (centre) and looking towards the kitchen from front entrance (right) (AB, 2018). 79 Project #LHC0134 Figure 54: Master bedroom (AB, 2018). Figure 55: View of kitchen (AB, 2018). 80 Project #LHC0134 Figure 56: Living room (AB, 2018). Figure 57: Bathroom (AB, 2018). 81 Project #LHC0134 Unit 2- Five Bedroom Unit 2 is a five -bedroom apartment. The main entrance is located on the west elevation (Figure 58). The single wooden door has a segmentally arched transom with red floral pattern design; the transom design is a decal (Figure 59). Upon entering the unit there is a doorway on south side which has been filled in as part of the interior alterations. The entrance has 12 ft. high ceilings and 9'/z inch wooden baseboards. The floor is covered with laminate flooring. The wooden staircase leads straight to the upper level. The handrail, baluster, stringers, rise and newel are made of wood and appear to be original. The newel has a decorative top and the balustrade has a modest moulded shaft (Figure 60). The tread of the stair is covered in carpet. At the top of the stairs a section of the original division wall has been removed creating a large opening and connecting the two halves (Figure 63). At some point the second staircase was removed and filled in. Bedroom 1 has three windows (two on west elevation and one south elevation), a carpeted floor and a drop ceiling (making the height approximately 10ft); all the original hardware has been removed (Figure 61). There are 9'/z inch plain wooden baseboard present and there is a small closet, with one window, located in the north-west corner of the bedroom. The window openings are surrounded by moulded wood trim and sills and the door opening is surrounding with moulded wood trim. The living room follows a similar form with 9'/z inch wooden baseboards, carpet flooring, a single window on the south elevation, which is surrounded with wooden trim and a wooden sill. The living room has high ceilings (12 ft.) with a stucco ceiling finish (Figure 62). Towards the rear of the Unit (east), on the south side, is a thick transition and two steps down into the kitchen. The kitchen is part of the rear wing. The kitchen has sloped ceilings, approximately 4 inch plain wooden baseboards, laminate flooring and a single small rectangular window surrounded by wooden trim (Figure 64 and Figure 65).Further towards the rear (east) there is a bathroom with laminate flooring. At the very rear (east) is Bedroom 5 (Figure 66). This bedroom has carpet flooring, a stucco ceiling, and two windows on the east elevation. The window opening, and the door opening appear to be surrounded by a plain wood trim. On the north side of the upper level are three bedrooms and a bathroom. The hallway appears wider than the other side as the original staircase has been removed (Figure 67). A wall has been added to the hallways. Bedroom 2 is located on the north-west corner of the main building. Bedroom 2 has 12 ft. ceilings, carpet flooring, a stucco finish ceiling and 9'/z inch wooden baseboards (Figure 68). There are four windows associated with the room: three on the west elevation and one on the north elevation. All the window openings are surrounded by moulded wood trim and wooden sills. There is small closet located in the south west corner of the bedroom and currently being used as an office/storage area. Bedroom 3 follows a similar pattern to the others with 12 ft. stucco ceilings, carpeted flooring, 9'/z inch wooden baseboards, and a small closet found in the north-west corner of the room (Figure 69).14 The room has one window located on the north elevation. The window opening is surrounded by moulded wood trim and wooden sills. Heading to the rear of the building one passes through a thick transition way and step down into a small hallway (Figure 70). To the south is a staircase which leads down a level to the laundry room (Figure 73). To the north is a small bathroom, with laminate flooring and a slanted celling. This is followed by Bedroom 4 located on the north-east corner (Figure 72). Bedroom 4 has carpet floors, no closet, slanted roof line, and plain wood trim (approximately 4 inches), and one window located on the north elevation. The window is surrounded by moulded wood trim with a wooden sill. 114 Pictures are limited due to the tenant being in the room at the time. 82 In general, all the hardware in this unit is newer. There are also variations of metal grates found throughout the Unit. Bedroom 4 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 2 ClosEt Clas�t Living Room Bedroom 1 Figure 58: Floor layout of Unit 2 (not to scale). This unit occupies the entire upper level of 149-151 Ontario Street North. (AB, 2018). Figure 59: Unit 2 Front door with transom from interior (left) and exterior (right) (ZH, 2018). 83 Project #LHC0134 Figure 60: Stairs and hallways (AB, 2018). Figure 61: Bedroom 1 (AB, 2018). 84 Project #LHC0134 Figure 62: Living Room (AB, 2018). Figure 63: Transition ways. Showing the living room and kitchen and main transition from one half of the apartment to the other (AB, 2018). 85 Figure 64: Kitchen looking south (AB, 2018). Figure 65: Kitchen, looking west (AB, 2018). 86 Project #LHC0134 Project #LHC0134 Figure 66: Bedroom 5 located in the south-west corner (AB, 2018). Figure 67: Hallway located on the north half of the apartment which provides access to Bedroom 2 and 3 (AB, 2018). 87 Project #LHC0134 Figure 68: Bedroom 2 and closet (AB, 2018). Figure 69: Bedroom 3 (AB, 2018). 88 Figure 70: Transition way to rear portion (south) side of building (AB, 2018). Figure 71: Bathroom on east side (AB, 2018). 89 Project #LHC0134 Figure 72: Bedroom 4 (AB, 2018). Figure 73: Staircase leading from Unit 2 leading down to laundry room (AB, 2018). 90 Project #LHC0134 Unit 3- One bedroom The main entrance is located in the south-east elevation and accessed by exterior stairs. Upon entering the unit the entrance is being used for storage and laundry (Figure 75 and Figure 76). This room has two newer narrow windows along the east elevation. The window openings are surrouded by moulded wooden trim with a wooden sill. There are large wooden baseboards and laminate flooring, similar to the rest of the units. There is drop tile ceiling. Moving towards the front of the unit (west), one enter into the kitchen which has laminate flooring, simple wood plank baseboards and a sinlge large rectangluar window on the south elevation. This window is surrouded by simple wood trim. To the south-east of the kitchen is a bathroom which has tile flooring. The narrow hallway ceilings shift to 12 ft ceilings. Off the hallway there are two doors. One is a small and simple closet, the other one lead to the basement which is accessed by wooden stairs. The basement is clad in brick and appears similar to the basement described in the next section. This basement was not viewed. The hallways leads to is a large square bedroom with a single window located on the south elevation (Figure 80). The window openings are surrouded by moulded wooden trim with a wooden sill. There are simple wooden baseboards and the floor has carpet. The style and design is similar to rest of the units. The ceiling is clad in drop ceilign tile. There is a transition way which leads to the front room. There are four windows assocaied with the living room, three in the bay window, and one on the west elevation (Figure 81). All the window openings are surrouded by moulded wooden trim with a wooden sill. There are newer simple wooden baseboards and carpet, similar to the rest of the units. The ceiling has a stucco finish. A opening on the northern eleveation has been closed in (Figure 81). Rntrance a�srs� Kitchen Bedroom LivinC Room Figure 74: Floor layout of Unit 3 (not to scale). Note the grey area is associated with Unit 2 (AB, 2018). 91 Figure 75: Entrance to Unit 3 (AB, 2018). Figure 76: Entrance to Unit 3 (AB, 2018). 92 Figure 77: Kitchen area (AB, 2018). Figure 78: Kitchen looking towards hallway (AB, 2018). 93 Figure 79: Hallway (AB, 2018). Figure 80: Bedroom in Unit 3 (AB, 2018). 94 Project #LHC0134 Project #LHC0134 Figure 81: Living room looking north towards bay window (left) and toward north-east corner (right) (AB, 2018). Laundry Room and Basement At the rear of the property is a shared laundry room (Figure 83). In addition the exterior entrance, the room can be access from the interior of Unit 1 and Unit 2. The room has a drop ceiling and laminate flooring. The walls are covered with a vertical wood plank. There do not appear to be any features of note associated with this room. The basement is accessed through the laundry room. The basement is divide into two rooms. The most easterly room has concrete flooring and the walls are made with brick. There are many areas which have been covered with parging and areas that were whitewashed at one time (Figure 84). The other room has brick laid on the floor and the walls are both field stone and heavy mortor and brick (Figure 86). The HVAC equipement is located in basement and there are metal and wood support beams located throughout (Figure 85). There is a small opening in the westerly brick wall which provides visual access to a small crawl space located under the main poriton of the house (Figure 87). There are brick support pillars. It is unclear what the flooring is made of. 95 Project #LHC0134 Crawl Space Figure 82: Floor layout of the basement (not to scale). Note the western half associated with Unit 3 was not explored in detail (AB, 2018). Figure 83: Laundry room (ZH, 2018). 96 Project #LHC0134 Figure 84: Rear portion of the basement. Note the brick covered with white wash and parging (ZH, 2018). Figure 85: View of the brick flooring, HVAC equipment. Not the mix of brick and stone walls (ZH, 2018). 97 Project #LHC0134 Figure 86: Foundation wall showing mix of brick and stone walls with brick flooring (ZH, 2018). Figure 87: View under the crawl space (ZH, 2018). 98 Project #LHC0134 7.2 21 Weber Street The building historically associated with 163 Ontario Street North or 19 Weber Street West is no longer extant. It is unclear when the current building was erected; however, historical documents associated with the property suggest it may have been built c. 1957. 7.2.1 Exterior The two-storey building follows a rectangular plan with a short fagade (Figure 88). The building is set back from the street. There is a closed -in porch on the upper level of the eastern elevation which made with wood and supported by metal posts (Figure 91). The main level, under the porch is open and accommodates parking. There is no vegetation on the site; the entire area surrounding the building consists of paved parking. The exterior of the building is made with large glass panes, white brick, vinyl siding, and cinder blocks (Figure 89). The building has a flat roof; there is a layer of vinyl trim of various sizes found along the roofline. The foundation is cinder blocks. In the south-west corner is a wooden staircase which provides access to the upper level. There is a newer single rectangular window along the lower level of the south elevation. Figure 88: Fagade and north elevation (AB, 2018). 99 Figure 89: South and east elevation. Note the brick and cinderblock materials (AB, 2018). Figure 90: South-west elevation (AB, 2018). 100 Project #LHC0134 Project #LHC0134 Figure 91: North elevation (AB, 2018). 7.2.2 Interior The interior follows a simple split-level floor plan (Figure 92 and Figure 101). The main entrance is located on the north-west corner and accessed by wide metal stairs. Upon entering building there is a small open lobby area with wide metal stairs heading up to the upper level and the lower level (Figure 99 and Figure 100). The upper level contains one large open area with laminate flooring and pod lighting (Figure 94 and Figure 95). There is a division wall towards the rear, which spans about two-thirds of the width; behind the wall is an open area which is used as an office space (Figure 95). There is an emergency exit located in the south-west corner which has metal stairs leading the main level (Figure 96). There is a large sliding door located in the south-west corner of the upper level which leads an open large open porch (Figure 98). The porch is made with multiple types of materials including wood (railings, support post, flooring) and metal (roof, support beams, roof, and siding for wind break on the south end,). The entire lower level has laminate flooring, except for the bathroom which is tile. The bathroom is located on the south elevation at the bottom of the stairs (Figure 103). There is a narrow hallway which generally runs through the centre of the level. To the north, there is a small office (Figure 104) and on the south side there is an additional room used as kitchenette (Figure 105). At the rear (south) of the level there is large storage area across the entire width of the building. The entire floor has newer wooden baseboards and wooden trim surrounding the doorways except the rear storage area (Figure 106). Directly to the south of the staircase is a door which leads to a small basement area. The foundation is clad in cinderblock and it stores the service amenities and HVAC equipment (Figure 102). 101 Figure 92: Upper level floor plan (not to scale) (AB, 2018). Figure 93: Upper level facing east (AB, 2018) 102 Project #LHC0134 Project #LHC0134 Figure 94: Upper level facing west (AB, 2018). Figure 95: Upper level showing rear (west area) (AB, 2018). 103 Project #LHC0134 Figure 96: View looking east behind division wall (AB, 2018). Figure 97: View facing north, showing porch (AB, 2018). 104 R 49 WIN 11111 ��iil m-; Project #LHC0134 Figure 100: View of entrance looking to lower level (AB, 2018). Figure 101: Lower level floor plan (not to scale) (AB, 2018). 106 Figure 102: Basement area (AB, 2018). Figure 103: Bathroom on lower level (AB, 2018). 107 Project #LHC0134 Figure 104: Office area (AB, 2018). Project #LHC0134 Figure 105: Hallway (left) and small room (right) leading to rear room (AB, 2018). 108 Project #LHC0134 Figure 106: Rear storage room looking south (left) and north (right) (AB, 2018). 109 8 EVALUATIONS 8.1 149-151 Ontario Street 8.1.1 Ontario Regulation 9/06 A SOS [SCHVI] was prepared for this property in 2007. In discussion with City of Kitchener Staff it was recommended that this report consider the SOS [SCHVI] and carry out an independent evaluation as needed. As such, the property was evaluated against the criteria outlined in 0. Reg. 9/06. A "property may be designated under section 29 of the Act if it meets one or more of the following criteria for determining whether it is of cultural heritage value or interest''. Table 4: Evaluation against 0. Reg. 9/06 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material, or construction method, ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or Yes The semi-detached buff brick building was built c. 1876 and is an early example of a vernacular building showing Italianate and Georgian influences. Many of the original Italian ate -influenced features remain intact including paired eave brackets, tall segmentally arched paired window openings, quoins, brick voussoirs with drip molds, and wide overhanging eaves. The limited Georgian architectural influences are found in the paired chimneys ends, gable roof and overall symmetrical plan. The building does not display a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. It was built using common methods and techniques for that time period. iii. demonstrates a high No The building does not display a high degree of technical or degree of technical or scientific achievement. It was built using common building scientific achievementtechniques for its time period and location. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations Yes with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, The property does not have a direct connection with a specific event, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. The property is associated with the theme of industrialization in Kitchener throughout the late 19th and 201h century and the presence of multi -tenant dwellings. Many of the tenants associated with the property worked in nearby industries 110 ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. Of we Project #LHC0134 wnicn were imporiam io ine oeveiopmeni or micnener ano the downtown commercial core. The property does not appear to yield, or have the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community. The property has been covered with asphalt. The builder is unknown. 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or iii. is a landmark. No The property is not important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of the area. The surrounding context and its legibility as a residential house and/or as a small-scale commercial space has been lost. This section of Ontario Street North, and the majority of the surrounding block, are dominated by medium and large- scale commercial buildings. As a result of these changes the property is more associated with the commercial core, in both zoning and location, than with residential use. No The property is not physically, functionally or historically linked to its surroundings. The adjacent and surrounding residential dwellings which once lined the east side of Ontario Street North were all lost in the mid 20th century. No The property is not a landmark. 8.1.2 Additional Considerations In order to understand the uniqueness and representative value of the physical features of 149-151 Ontario Street North as well as thematic associations outlined in the existing SOS, a comparative analysis of buildings of similar, style, materials, age of construction and massing within the CCNHCD was explored. Information was extracted from observations from the site visits and information outlined in the CCNHCD Plan and CCNHCD Study Inventory Summary. The comparative analysis demonstrates that there are at least a dozen buildings categorized as illustrating ill Project #LHC0134 Italianate influences (Figure 107) and at least eighteen categorized as Georgian architectural styles. Furthermore, the CCNHCD Plan identifies that Italianate and Georgian architectural styles are amongst the more represented styles in the Districts. Within the CCNHCD there are more than 50 building noted as being built between c. 1870-1890. The CCNHCD Plan notes that "Almost two-thirds of the existing houses were built between 1880 and 1917 and in most cases were occupied by owners, managers or workers for some of the key industries that defined the community at the turn of the century". 115 Dozens of buff brick buildings were observed throughout the district and many buildings have variations of brick voussoirs with drip molds, bay windows, overhanging eaves, segmentally arched windows, doors with transoms and quoins. The CCNHCD notes that Throughout the neighbourhood, there is a visual consistency to the architecture, delivered through the repetition of such features as front porches including some very fine two storey examples, decorative gables, projecting bays, and recurring window forms and details.16 Lastly, there are at least eight semi-detached buildings which range from modest working-class residences to more ornate and decorative residences; three of semi-detached residences were built c. 1885 in the Italianate architectural style. Appendix I provides photographic documentation of some example buildings of similar age and style. The comparative analysis is not intended to diminish the cultural heritage value or interest identified in the 0. Reg 9/06 evaluation (Section 8.1.1.), but rather, to understand the degree to which the building and its physical features may be considered `unique' as written in the SOS [SCHVI]. The comparative analysis shows that all of the subject property's heritage attributes can be observed on numerous buildings through the nearby district. It also highlights that although there are multiple semi-detached buildings in the district, the scale and design of 149-151 Ontario Street North is not represented. An updated draft SOS [SCHVI] has been included below. 115 CCNHCD Plan. P. 2.4. 116 CCNHCD Plan. P. 2.4. 112 Project #LHC0134 Figure 107: Two examples of buildings with Italianate features located within CCNHCD. Note the overhanging eaves with wood brackets, segmentally arched windows openings (AB, 2019). Figure 108: Example of buff brick buildings found within the CCNHCD (AB, 2019). 113 Project #LHC0134 Figure 109: Examples of architectural elements found with the CCNHCD including overhanging eaves, wood brackets, buff brick, quoins, bay windows, voussoirs with drip molds and brick chimneys (AB, 2019). 114 Project #LHC0134 8.1.3 Summary of Evaluation The property needs to meet one criterion to be considered for designation under section 29 of the OHA. The subject property meets two of criteria identified in 0. Reg. 9/06 of the OHA and would be eligible for designation. The property meets the definition of significant as defined by the PPS. The authors findings generally align with those outlined in the existing SOS [SCHVI] (Section 3.3.1). The SOS [SCHVI] and heritage attributes have been modified to reflect the authors findings and augmented with additional details as needed. Heritage attributes which are no longer present have been removed. 8.1.4 Statement of Significance [Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest] The cultural heritage value or interest of the property resides in the c. 1876 semi-detached brick building and its use a residential dwelling for working-class tenant throughout the late 19th and 20th century. 8.1.4.1 Description of Property 149-151 Ontario Street North is a two storey 19th century brick building. The building is an early example of a vernacular building with influences from Georgian and Italianate architecture. The building is situated on a 0.15 - acre parcel of land located on the east side of Ontario Street North between Duke Street West and Weber Street West in the City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. The legal description is Plan 401 Part Lot 11. 8.1.4.2 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest 149-151 Ontario Street North is recognized for its design/physical, and historical/associative value. The property at 149-151 Ontario Street North demonstrates design or physical value as an early example of a late 191h century, semi-detached, vernacular brick building with both Italianate and modest Georgian influences. The building has many intact original elements including: buff brick; a symmetrical plan with two bay windows; side gable roof; brackets; brick quoining; brick voussoirs with drip molds; window sills; front doors with transoms; and two end chimneys. The building is the last remaining example of a residential building in this section of Ontario Street North and is an example of a working-class residence. 8.1.4.3 Heritage Attributes The heritage attributes supporting the cultural heritage value of the property are represented in the c. 1876 two- storey, semi-detached brick building. They include: • Buff brick construction; • Symmetrical plan with two bay windows; • Side gable roof and overhanging eaves; • Wood brackets; • Brick quoining; • Segmentally arched window openings; • Brick voussoirs with drip mold; • Door and door openings; 115 • Front doors with transoms; and • Two brick chimneys 8.2 21 Weber Street 8.2.1 Ontario Regulation 9/06 In order to be consistent with best practices and the OHA, the property was evaluated against the criteria outlined in 0. Reg. 9/06. 0. Reg. 9/06 states that a "property may be designated under section 29 of the Act if it meets one or more of the following criteria for determining whether it is of cultural heritage value or interest." Table 5: Evaluation of 21 Weber Street West against 0. Reg. 9/06 Reg. 9/06 Criteria Y/V — The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative No 21 Weber Street West is not a rare, unique, or early example of a style, type, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material, or expression, material or construction method. The construction method, exact date of construction is unknown; however, it is believed to have been built c. 1957 and built in a vernacular style. ii. displays a high degree of No The building does not display a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or craftsmanship or artistic merit. iii. demonstrates a high degree of No The building does not display a high degree of technical or scientific technical or scientific achievement. achievement. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations with a No 21 Weber Street West does not have any direct theme, event, belief, person, association with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or activity, organization or institution that is significant institution that is significant to a to the community. community, The property comprising 19 Weber Street West was associated with Dr. Harry Lackner and his son Dr. Henry Lackner. It was originally located at the corner of Weber Street West and Ontario Street North. The property had a large two storey building and was purchased by Dr. Harry Lackner in 1911. The building was used for his medical practice for many years although Harry lived elsewhere. The 116 Project #LHC0134 • i building associated with the Lackner's at 19 Weber I Street was demolished c. 1957. ii. yields, or has the potential to No yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or The property does not appear to yield, or have the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community. The entire property surface is covered with asphalt. iii. demonstrates or reflects the work No The builder is unknown. or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, No The building is in keeping with the commercial maintaining or supporting the nature of the adjacent building located to the south; character of an area, however, the size, set back, style, and massing are not in keeping with the surrounding structures or larger streetscape. ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or iii. is a landmark. 8.2.2 Summary of Evaluation — -f- No No The property dose not appear to be physically, functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. No The property is not a landmark. The property needs to meet one criterion to be considered for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The property does not meet any criteria identified in 0. Reg. 9/06 of the OHA and is not eligible for designation. The property does not meet the definition of significant as defined by the PPS. No statement of cultural heritage value or interest is required. Cultural Heritage Landscape 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West were examined together as a potential CHL using the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscapes framework. The framework uses an adapted version of 0. Reg. 9/06 and provides a series of separate charts which identify indicators to be considered. The document notes that the cultural heritage value and interest of the individual cultural heritage resources within the landscape will add to the overall value and interest of the landscape as a whole. 117 Project #LHC0134 Table 6: CHL framework using an adapted version of Reg. 9/06 Criteria for Heritage Value or Interest �O. Reg. 9/06 Criteria 1. The landscape has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative or No early example of a style, type, expression, material, or construction method, The landscape is not an early example of style, type, expression, material or construction method. There are no landscape features of note as the entire property (aside from modest landscape features in front of 149-151 Ontario Street) has been paved. There are no furnishing of note and no rare, unique, or representative landscape element. ii. displays a high degree of No The landscape does not display any degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or craftsmanship or artistic merit. iii. demonstrates a high degree of No The landscape does not demonstrate any technical or scientific achievement. degree of technical or scientific achievement. 2. The landscape has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or No The landscape does not have any direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. No The landscape does not appear to yield, or have the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. iii. demonstrates or reflects the work No The landscape does not demonstrate or reflects or ideas of an architect, artist, the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, builder, designer or theorist who is designer or theorist who is significant to a significant to a community. community. 3. The landscape has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, No The landscape is not important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 118 Project #LHC0134 • . Reg. 9/06 Criteria Y/N Summary A OF hbk- ii. is physically, functionally, visually No The landscape is not physically, functionally, or historically linked to its surroundings, or iii. is a landmark. No 8.3.1 Summary of Finding visually or historically linked to its surroundings. The landscape is not considered a landmark. The property needs to meet one criterion to be considered for designation as a CHL. The subject properties do not meet any of the criteria identified. As a result, the historical and community value indicators associated with a CHL were not evaluated. 119 Project #LHC0134 9 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development seeks to retain the majority of the two-storey, semi-detached brick structure at 149-151 Ontario Street North in situ and to integrate it into a new development (Figure 110). The existing brick chimneys, a portion of the rear wings and roofline of 149-151 Ontario Street North and the building associated with 21 Weber Street West are proposed for removal. 149-151 Ontario Street North will be used for commercial purposes and the remaining building will be for residential use. The entire fagade and side elevations of 149-151 Ontario Street North will be retained and maintained in situ (Figure 112). This will conserve the building's set back and relationship with the street. The proposed residential tower and parking will be built around the existing cultural heritage resource. The full fagade and most of the southern elevation will remain legible. There are no proposed openings to be created for 149-151 Ontario Street; the two entrances will be maintained. The main lobby to the residential tower will be located along the southern portion of the property and accessed from Ontario Street North. The lobby to the residential tower will be set back from the existing fagade by one foot and constructed primarily in glass. Within the lobby area, the south elevation of 149-151 Ontario Street North will be exposed and visible. The new residential building will be legible as two distinct sections. The first section will be a three-storey portion of the building which will front towards Weber Street West and be used for parking. This section of the building will be set close to the sidewalk and centrally placed on the lot. The second section is a 21 -storey tower which will be set back from Weber Street West and used for residential purposes. The three-storey section of the building will be built with brick and include details reflecting the architectural characteristics of the area. Design elements to be incorporated include: • the use of brick; • brick voussoirs with drip molds on upper level windows; • brick voussoirs on lower level windows; • narrow paired windows on the upper level; • rhythmically placed windows on the north and west elevations; and, • the inclusion of brick window sills (Figure 112). The building will have a flat roof with a glass enclosed patio space on top. The three-storey section of the building is intended for use as parking. After researching viable options, a Klaus car stacking system is being proposed in order to maximize the desired parking capacity and minimize the overall height of the structure. The parking garage will be accessed from Ontario Street North. Brick voussoirs are proposed above the garage door entrances. The parking area will be set back one foot from 149-151 Ontario Street North. This set back is consistent with the lobby located on the southern side and allows 149-151 Ontario Street to be more visually prominent at street level. The 21 -storey tower will be located in the south-east area of the property, set back from Weber Street West. The preliminary design concept proposes that the tower will be made with a mixture of materials including brick, glass, architectural precast concrete and aluminum composite metal (ACM) panels (Figure 111). The exterior of the first and second level of the east and south elevations will have minimal detailing as they will not be visible from the street (Figure 113). The tower portion will have an irregular footprint and large windows providing texture and depth to the tower's design (Figure 118). Windows have primarily been placed on the west and north elevations in order to maximize natural light and views for each unit (Figure 117). 120 Project #LHC0134 The lobby will be located on the main level along the south elevation. The L-shaped lobby carries around to the eastern elevation, leading to the stairs and elevators (Figure 114). The elevators will be located centrally, but towards the eastern elevation. The north, south, and western elevations of 149-151 Ontario Street will be retained. Portions of the rear additions will be retained; however, the eastern (rear) elevation will be removed. The second floor will have a similar layout as the main level (Figure 115). This includes an L-shaped area along the southern and eastern elevations. The remaining floors (three through 21) will all be similar in design and layout (Figure 116). There are eight units proposed for each floor with two staircases and elevators. The units range in size from 494 sq. ft to 549 sq. ft. Some of the exterior finishes associated with the three-storey section of the proposed design have the potential to be further refined. In an effort to allow planning processes to commence the owner proposes to register on title that the final design details will be completed to the satisfaction of Heritage Planning Staff. 121 N N a 1 M lAV Lu �P�#sem#dr ����� SIR r" 1 I a 1 M lAV �P�#sem#dr ����� SIR r" 1 I RIS 0 N J U O L L Q W c cn O O cnO 0- 2 O 0 (D U (D 0- cn L a) Q co m a) L O C 9-- 2 CB cn L O Z L _LM U- M N r M O U 2 J U N O d LLJ u W 0 - LU r� ++ � ui 2 wl CA z L LL a N r lam in's imam M 01, O N '6 J U U i Q U1 W U Q L Q cu i O 66 _LM LL LO N r 131 LLJ CM 13 lam in's imam M 01, O N '6 J U U i Q U1 W U Q L Q cu i O 66 _LM LL LO N r ft N J U U w 0 0 N J U U w 0 0 1113 131 LLJ cm 11 11111 LLJ Rl 0 CD co (D co 0- 0 0 0 0 U- 2) U— CD co (D co 0- 0 0 0 0 U- 2) U— r f7�l F_ i W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .III IIII I I 1 f l l l l 1 I I i I I I I I II 4 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I� I I I I I I I I I 1111:111 ❑i❑i❑i❑i❑iii❑i❑iii❑i❑ipi❑i❑i❑i❑iii❑i i iiiiiii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I p I I I I I I I I I I IIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIII I I S I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I Hill I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i i i I I i i i i I I i I i i i I i I i i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II u I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I R II �i�i❑iii❑i�"i❑iDiCi❑i❑i©iDi❑i❑i❑i❑i❑i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I❑ I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I x -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I� I III -I I I I II I IIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 jI I 11 jI I 11 ,Ij 11 Cp51 , 19 11 11 0 N U 0 i Q w U) 0 m U) cz C C6 0 z ti LL 0, N r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NIKKEI I I 1�ilmlpl I 1 10111111 11 1 ]1 fll�1■!m❑❑N ■1 I■■■!■!❑!❑!❑!❑❑LI I � II- I I I I I I I I I I I I I� I� IN II❑I7I©I�I❑I 11I�I❑I NO 711®1❑I❑I �I❑I❑I � I F I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I� D I❑ 1 ❑1 ❑ 1❑ 1:i ❑I ❑I D❑1 Di1Ml ❑ 1❑ 1❑❑ D❑ 1❑ 14 1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�iI ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ [111146! ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I ❑_ DiDiDDE U [11 DIE DiLIE! Di®i❑i❑iDi❑i❑i;"q lliiiiiiiliiiiiii❑ I I I I I I I I I ❑- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I � ❑� I I I I I 'I I _I C l I � � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I z Project #LHC0134 10 IMPACT ASSESSMENT The evaluations outlined in Section 8 determined that 21 Weber Street West does not have cultural heritage value or interest. The evaluations determined that 149-151 Ontario Street North does have cultural value or interest. The cultural heritage value or interest is expressed through the heritage attributes noted in Section 8.1.4.3. The following section considers local, regional, and provincial guidelines to identify and understand any potential negative impacts of the proposed development on 149-151 Ontario Street, the streetscape, and the surrounding area. Potential negative impacts on the heritage attributes of 149-151 Ontario Street North are considered in Section 10.1. Section 10.2 considers indirect impacts on the surrounding streetscape and adjacent heritage resources. Section 10.3 provides a review of the proposed development against the Region of Waterloo's guidelines for new development in historic or mature neighbourhoods. Lastly, section 10.4 provides a review of the proposed development against the CCNHCD design guidelines. A summary is provided in Section 10.5. 10.1 Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans The MTCS Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans outlines seven potential negative impacts to be considered with any proposed development or property alteration. The impacts include: Destruction of any part of any significant heritage attribute or features; Alteration that is not sympathetic or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance; Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of a natural feature or planting, such as a garden; Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context, or a significant relationship; Direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or built and natural features; A change in land use such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly open spaces; and Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. Table 7 considers any potential negative impacts on the heritage attributes of 149-151 Ontario Street, against the proposed development. Table 7: Potential impact on heritage attributes Destruction of any, or part of The proposed development seeks to retain majority of the cultural any, significant heritage heritage resource in situ. Overall, the majority of heritage attributes attribute or features will be unaltered; however, portions of the rear additions, two brick chimneys, and a portion of the roof are proposed to be removed. As 131 Project #LHC0134 Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of an associated natural feature or plantings, such as a garden Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, roof and possibly the segmentally arched windows (north elevation). As part of the proposed development the following heritage attributes will be removed: buff brick (associated with rear wings) and two brick chimneys. The proposed development will have no negative impacts in terms of destruction or removal on the following attributes: buff brick construction of the two-storey structure being retained; symmetrical plan with two bay windows; side gable roof and overhanging eaves; wood brackets; brick quoining; segmentally arched window openings; brick voussoirs with drip mold; doors and door openings; and front doors with transoms. The overall historic appearance of the fagade of 149-151 Ontario Street North will remain unaltered. The proposed new development will be set back by one foot in order to ensure the cultural heritage resource is the most prominent feature at street level. The one -foot setback will also work increase the legibility of the building. The proposed development will not be physically connected to the existing building; however, it will give the appearance that the two are fully integrated. The tower and the three-storey portion of the proposed development will be visually distinguished from the retained building primarily through design and materials. The contemporary materials used on the three-storey section are in keeping with the streetscape found along Weber Street West. The tower will be clad in modern materials and will be visually distinctive from the rest of building. The three- storey portion of the proposed development has been designed with elements intended to be respectful and compatible with the character of the streetscape. Shadows created from the proposed development will have no greater impact than those of existing adjacent developments. A shadow study to analyse the impact of shadowing on adjacent properties has been prepared and its findings are summarised in Section 10.2 The proposed development will not result in the isolation of the property from its surrounding context and no significant contextual relationships have been identified. 132 Project #LHC0134 context or a significant relationship Direct or indirect obstruction This proposed development does not obstruct significant views or of significant views or vistas vistas. The noted significant `gateway' identified within the CCNHCD within, from, or of built and is located at Queen Street and Weber Street West. The proposed natural features development does not obstruct the view from the gateway into the residential portion of the CCNHCD. A change in land use (such as rezoning a church to a multi -unit residence) where the change in use negates the property's cultural heritage value Land Disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. 10.2 Indirect Impacts With the addition of the new structures is anticipated that a small number of heritage attributes on the north elevation will no longer be fully visible. This includes the buff brick, the side gable roof, and the segmentally arched windows. However, obstruction of these heritage attributes does not affect any significant views or the overall legibility of the building. Uses of the subject properties, like the neighbourhood itself, have transitioned over time. The urban environment has significantly evolved. Previous uses have included residential, commercial, and mixed-use functions. The proposed development will result in the structures remaining in residential and commercial uses, which have both been historical uses. N/A A shadow study was carried out by Edge Architects Ltd. in 2019. The shadow study was done to determine any indirect adverse impacts on the character of the Weber Street West streetscape, as well as, the heritage resources associated within the CCNHCD located on the north side of Weber Street West. The shadow study examined projected shadow created by the proposed 21 -storey tower as well as shadows currently created by existing buildings. The study looked at all four seasons at five time periods: 10 a.m., 12 p.m., 2 p.m., 4 p.m., and 6 p.m. The shadow study revealed that a shadow created solely by the tower will be cast along the north side of Weber Street West in the spring, fall, and winter seasons for small windows of time (Figure 119, Figure 120, Figure 121, and Figure 122). The shadow study also demonstrated that there are periods of time in which the shadow produced by the tower aligns with shadows produced by other buildings located in the surrounding area. To this end, shadows created from the proposed development will have no greater impact than those of shadows from those already existing at these time periods. The heritage resources which are affected by the tower shadow include those located along the north side of Weber Street West, including two large churches, two commercial buildings, and three large parking lots. There are no residential buildings along this portion of the Weber Street West. The shadows do not 133 Project #LHC0134 significantly interfere with legibility of the heritage attributes or the character of the streetscape associated with section of Weber Street West. Lastly, the shadows do not unreasonably impact access to sunlight in rear yards. Additionally, the shadow study revealed that a shadow created solely by the tower will be cast to the west in spring, fall, and winter for short period of time. The shadow cast to the west will fall onto the rear portion of 35 Weber Street West. The elevation of the building which is impacted is not the primary pedestrian or vehicular entrance to the building; the main entrance is located on the western portion of this large building. To this end, the shadow created solely by the tower will have no greater impact on the pedestrian area of the building than those of shadows created from the four -storey building itself. Overall, the shadow will not unreasonable impact access to sunlight and do not have a negative impact on 35 Weber Street West. 134 M O U 2 J U Q) 0 d 0 J I � C I� zcn 04 c CL Vr r 93y{;�y I C CL G CL r IgH Im I I € ❑ r I L CL IZ_ rl CL i M O U 2 J U N O d 0 N J U L L A 7 CO 0 O C� L CO QCi CC C CO O O L _2) LL � N 2 off W M s JIM CL % ; N 1A d N rn f U N �s I Oda M iS 839IIA a CL E 1 CyCL r �CC4 G a� ! E s = c+ Z) " .. !! N t 3 7- Y a i M a 9i9�, i 7B C � I I I CL d � ll � QJ l 7 h [ r 'V% 0 N J U L L A 7 CO 0 O C� L CO QCi CC C CO O O L _2) LL 0 N J U O L L L.L. a CO 0 O co co L CO C N 7 O1 LL S' ti l a CL Cr- r E, ti All i 1 C CL 1� i CL .o E ow. M 1S 8i9 777��5 MIS 5� I E -w 0 N J U O L L L.L. a CO 0 O co co L CO C N 7 O1 LL W O N J U CD L L O W_ CO 0 O co co L CO C N O L LL LU F7 - n 2 cn 5a I@ LU I N Iw I al I C 3M I C CL E N_ CL ' I � isaaearw� _ _ Q I � W O N J U CD L L O W_ CO 0 O co co L CO C N O L LL Project #LHC0134 10.2.1 Streetscape Considerations The CCNHCD located on the north side of Weber Street West is considered an important street within the HCD. The CCNHCD Plan notes that consideration should be given to "maintaining residential streetscape character through the use of appropriate built form, materials, roof pitch, architectural design and details"."' Furthermore, the CCNHCD identified major and minor gateways, as well as, transition gateways (which are identified as the roads leading into the residential portion from Weber Street West). In order to understand the impact of the proposed development on the Weber Street West streetscape and noted gateways, street views showing the size and scale of the proposed development were generated. While the following streetscape renderings were generated as part of an earlier design, they have been included because they still provide an understanding of the overall visual impact of the 21 -storey tower from various angles. The following views were generated: • Duke Street looking east (Figure 123); • Weber Street West looking west (Figure 125); • Weber Street West looking east (Figure 126); and • Ontario Street North looking north (Figure 127) When reviewing significant views and gateways identified with the CCNHCD, there are two views of note. The first view is considered a major gateway and located at the corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West; the significant view identified from this corner is looking into the district (north) (Figure 125). As shown in the streetscape rendering the proposed development will not have a significant impact on the view into the district from this gateway because it is blocked by the existing 10 -storey building located on the south corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The proposed development does not obstruct any significant views into the CCNHCD, or along the north side Weber Street West. The second view of note is the associated with the Weber Street West streetscape. The size and scale of the tower does have an impact on the streetscape when approaching from the west. This is because the tower is in the foreground and highly visible and as one approaches from the west (looking from Young Street). This is further accentuated by the generally low profile (two to four storeys) of the existing buildings on both side of the street in this section. The proposed tower detracts from overall character of Weber Street West due to its height; however, the step back of the tower helps to mitigate the impact along the streetscape and from the pedestrian vantage point and the two -to -three-storey portion allows the low profile of the streetscape to be maintained. 117 CCNHCD Plan, 2007. P. 3.9. 139 Project #LHC0134 Figure 123: View of 21 Storey tower from Duke Street (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019). Figure 124: View from Weber Street West looking west towards the property (Edge Architect Ltd., 2019). 140 s��..�.. Iii- ..����r��. - �r,., �� ,�"���������h illlllllllllllllllllll! ���ti� � ^ ii 1 _-1� -: ■. I���¢� �,.i:.iiiiiill¢I¢II1111 I r� [[ �iluulllllllllllll I I � I �� �� � I'�IIIPrI(I . I � ►' Ilf,l,l�lll�ll` I I � I I I I I I I I � ■� ,Illlllllllll i � �� 'i I �1-,- �__�, � � � � 11Y11 Project #LHC0134 10.3 Region of Waterloo: Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood The Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood was prepared primarily to address small-scale infill projects which typically range from single detached houses to row houses having a maximum five units. These guidelines have not been designed to respond to high rise development. The full set of guidelines can be found in Appendix H. Regardless, the introduction to these guidelines provide general guidance for new construction and have been considered. It reads: When new buildings are integrated into an existing historic property or historic neighbourhood, the following approaches are encouraged in order of preference: 1. Preservation/conservation: maintain historic buildings with little alteration 2. Adaptive reuse: reuse historic buildings by implementing restoration and/or rehabilitation efforts 3. Incorporation: adaptive reuse that generally requires significant alterations or additions has been considered. The proposed development seeks to conserve 149-151 Ontario Street North in situ with as little alteration as possible. The conservation of the building is in keeping with the preferred choice for infill and new development. 10.4 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Design Guidelines The CCNHCD Plan has numerous design guidelines which have been created to ensure that new development with the district is respectful of the overall character of the neighbourhood. While the proposed development does not fall within the CCNHCD boundary and, as such, the guidelines do not apply. The property is adjacent to the CCNHCD and the policies and guideline have nonetheless been considered as they relate to potential impacts on those adjacent properties and the Weber Street West streetscape. A discussion is outlined in Table 9. Table 8: Assessment of the CCNHCD Guidelines against proposed development. iscussion 3.3.5.2 Weber Street Area Weber Street contains nearly half of the oldest buildings in The following policies address the the Civic Centre Neighbourhood, making it one of the most Weber Street West area. It is understood important streets in the District from an architectural and that this section of Weber Street historic perspective. The size and scale of heritage contains buildings which are generally buildings on Weber Street is generally larger than the rest larger (3-4 storeys) and it is designated of the District, and includes two churches, small scale high Density Commercial Residential. apartments (3 — 4 storeys) and a number of other larger The proposed development is outside of residences that have been converted to multiple residential the CCNHCD and therefore the following units or office/commercial uses. The Municipal Plan policies do no apply, however, they have designates most of the street as High Density Commercial been reviewed and considered. Residential, with the designation extending slightly in some areas. The following policies are to apply to the whole of Weber Street within the District as well as to those sections 142 Policy Discussion of the High Density Commercial Residential designation that extend into the District on College and Young Streets. Policies: (a) The protection and retention of existing N/A heritage buildings and their architectural features is strongly encouraged. (b) Maintain residential streetscape character through the use of appropriate built form, materials, roof pitches, architectural design and details particularly at the interface between Weber Street and the interior of the neighbourhood; (c) Adaptive reuse of existing buildings should be given priority over redevelopment. Flexibility in Municipal Plan policies and zoning regulations is encouraged where necessary to accommodate appropriate adaptive reuse options. Project #LHC0134 I ne character of the streetscape nas been considered within the design as demonstrated by the three-storey section of the building. N/A. (d) Where redevelopment is proposed on vacant The three-storey section of the building or underutilized sites, new development shall be which fronts onto Weber Street West is sensitive to and compatible with adjacent sensitive and compatible with the heritage resources on the street with respect to streetscape. It is respectful of height, height, massing, built form and materials. massing, built form and materials. (e) Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake shadow studies where they abut existing residential uses, to demonstrate that they will not unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas. A shadow study has been conducted which demonstrates that the proposed development does not unreasonably impact access to sunlight in rear yards. (f) Design guidelines provided in Section 6.9.2 of The policies outline in 6.9.4 pertain to this Plan will be used to review and evaluate Weber Street and have been considered proposals for major alterations, additions or new below. buildings to ensure that new development is compatible with the adjacent context. 11 Guideline Discussion 6.6 NEW BUILDINGS - RESIDENTIAL 143 Guideline In addition to the large vacant tract of land on Margaret Avenue, there are a few locations in the residential core area of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District where new buildings are likely to be constructed. New or replacement buildings may be constructed in some cases as a result of fire or structural instability. In such situations, new buildings must be designed to be compatible with the heritage characteristics of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood to help retain the overall visual context of the area Recommended Practices and Design Guidelines Match setback, footprint, size and massing patterns of the neighbourhood, particularly to the immediately adjacent neighbors. Setbacks of new development should be consistent with adjacent buildings. Where setbacks are not generally uniform, the new building should be aligned with the building that is most similar to the predominant setback on the street. New buildings and entrances must be oriented to the street and are encouraged to have architectural interest to contribute to the visual appeal of the neighbourhood. Project #LHC0134 Discussion The following guidelines have been considered against the proposed development. The setback is in keeping with the adjacent buildings. The size, massing and footprint of the three-storey section of the building which fronts onto Weber Street West, opposite the CCNHCD, is in keeping with the streetscape and neighbourhood. The size, footprint and massing of the rear tower portion are not in keeping with the immediate neighbourhood. The setback is consistent with the adjacent buildings located along Weber Street. There are two entrances to the property. The main entrance is not orientated towards Weber Street West. The entrance to parking garage and the lobby are located on Ontario Street North. Respond to unique conditions or location, such as corner I This property is located on a corner lot. properties, by providing architectural interest and details on Both the north and west elevations both street facing facades. provide architectural interest. The elevation fronting towards Ontario Street North has an entranceways (glass) juxtaposed the retained buff brick 144 uideline -Discussion Use roof shapes and major design elements that are complementary to surrounding buildings and heritage patterns. Project #LHC0134 building. The elevation fronting towards Weber Street West has been designed with similar materials and design elements found on the north side of Weber Street West. The property has a flat roofline. This is in keeping with the buildings located adjacent to the south and west; it is not in keeping with property located to the east. A flat roof is not complementary to the surrounding building and heritage patterns. Size, shape, proportion, number and placement of windows In the three-storey section the size, and doors should reflect common building patterns and placement, and proportions of the upper styles of other buildings in the immediate area. level windows are in keeping with the character of the area. The lower level windows are larger but rhythmically placed. Use materials and colours that represent the texture and palette of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Where appropriate, incorporate in a contemporary way some of the traditional details that are standard elements in the principal facades of properties in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Such details as transoms and sidelights at 145 The rear tower portion of the proposed design is designed in a contemporary style with varied window placements and does not reflect the patterns and styles of building found within the 4 District. The three-storey portion of the building will be built with brick. Brick is a common material found within the district. The colour palette has not been finalized. The rear tower portion of the building will be a mix of brick, glass and precast concrete and/or aluminum composite metal (ACM) panels. The three-storey portion of the building has been designed to includes some traditional elements but maintain a feel. The blend of uideline doors and windows, covered porches, divided light windows and decorative details to articulate plain and flat surfaces, add character that complements the original appearance of the neighbourhood and add value to the individual property. Front drive garages are strongly discouraged. Garages should be located in the rear yard whenever possible and will be subject to the design guidelines of the HCD Plan. 6.9.4 Weber Street Any infill development on Weber Street should maintain a strong relationship to the street at the lower levels (2 to 4 storeys) with respect to built form and use. Project #LHC0134 Discussion traditional and contemporary styles seeks to complement the character of the CCNHCD, while not trying to replicate a historic building design. The parking garage is intended to be located in the three-storey portion of the building. It will not be visible. The three-storey portion of the building creates a visible setback and helps soften the impact of the height of the tower from the streetscape. It provides a transition to the higher tower located at the rear. Setbacks of new development should be consistent with All the buildings along this section of adjacent buildings. Where significantly different setbacks Weber Street have narrow setbacks exist on either side, the new building should be aligned with from the street. The proposed set back the building that is most similar to the predominant setback is in keeping with the adjacent on the street. properties. It also responds to the Building facades at the street level should incorporate architectural detail, similar materials and colours, and existing area reserved for road widening. The three-storey portion of the building, at street level, incorporates architectural consistency with the vertical and horizontal proportions or detailing and elements which work to rhythm of adjacent / nearby buildings on the street to provide a cohesive streetscape. establish a cohesive streetscape. New development shall have entrances oriented to the The main entrance is oriented towards street. Ontario Street North. Size, placement and proportion of window and door The size, placement, and proportions of openings for new buildings or additions should be generally the window openings found on the upper consistent with those on other buildings along the street. level of the three-storey portion of the building are consistent with those found in the neighbourhood. The lower level 146 Guideline Any new buildings taller than 3 to 4 storeys should incorporate some form of height transition or stepbacks to minimize the perception of height and shadow impacts to pedestrians on the street and provide more visual continuity. Stepbacks should be a minimum of 2 metres to provide for useable outdoor terraces for the upper levels. Any buildings taller than 5 storeys abutting a residential property to the rear should be constructed within a 45 - degree angular plane where feasible, starting from the rear property line, to minimize visual impacts on adjacent property owners To minimize impacts on properties to the rear of or flanking Weber Street, a rear yard setback of 15 metres should be maintained for new buildings as well as additions where feasible. Discussion windows are larger, however, they are rhythmically placed. The three-storey portion of the building has been integrated into the design in order to soften the height transition and visual impact of the tower. Surrounding buildings are commercial properties. This is not applicable. Locate loading, garbage and other service elements The garage and other services are not (HVAC, metres, etc.) away from the front facade so they do proposed to be located along the not have a negative visual impact on the street or new facade. building /addition. The examples on this page and the following pages illustrate buildings that would primarily be considered suitable for Weber Street and Victoria Street, as they reflect residential, commercial/office or commercial/residential types of mixed-use developments of higher intensity. Attention to design is evident in the selection of materials, fapade articulation and attention to detail. They present a good relationship to the street, and several of the examples illustrate the use of upper storey stepbacks. They also demonstrate some well -executed modern interpretations of traditional architectural details and building components. 147 These types of examples were considered throughout the design phase. Project #LHC0134 10.5 Additional Considerations 10.5.1 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada The Standards and Guidelines is a pan -Canadian benchmark for heritage conservation practice based on internationally recognized conservation principles. The Standards and Guidelines offer guidance for decision-making when there are proposed interventions on historic places. The heritage conservation principles outlined in the Standards and Guidelines provide an overview of conservation practices but do not speak directly to impact assessment. They have been considered within this section to help determine if the overall intent of the design is in keeping with accepted conservation practices. The proposed development seeks to retain the main portion of the cultural heritage resource in situ and develop the remaining property with a residential tower with parking garage. The general standards and guidelines which relate to the new development are identified in Table 9. The primary treatment for the cultural heritage resource is conservation through preservation. The definition of preservation `involves protecting, maintaining and stabilizing the existing form, material and integrity of a historic place or of an individual component, while protecting its heritage value'18. There are nine standards to be considered with this treatment option. Table 11 discusses the nine standards against the proposed development. Table 9: Standards and Guidelines related to additions. Aim for minimal intervention The proposed development aims for minimal interventions. The rear wing, brick chimneys and a portion of the roofline will be removed to accommodate the proposed development. The entire fagade, the relationship to the street and structural envelope of the main portion the building will be preserved. Make sure the new work is physically and visually The proposed development will be set back from the compatible with, subordinate to and existing cultural heritage resource by one foot. The distinguishable from the historic place setback increases the visibility of the cultural heritage resource from the street level. In general, the scale and Design new work so that it could be removed in the future (reversibility) "I Standards and Guidelines. P.1 148 height of the proposed development is not subordinate to the cultural heritage resource. The proposed development will be distinguishable from the cultural heritage resource. The proposed development will be built around the existing cultural heritage resource. The proposed development could be removed in the future. Project #LHC0134 Select the location for a new addition so that the The proposed development will be set back from the heritage value of the original building is existing cultural heritage resource by one foot. The maintained majority of heritage attributes reside in the fagade of the cultural heritage resource, which will be conserved. Design the new addition in a manner that draws a The new addition will be designed in a contemporary clear distinction between what is historic and whathh ' I I d'i tt f th is new. Design the addition so that it is compatible in terms of materials and massing with the exterior form of the historic building and its setting. Find solutions to meet accessibility requirements that are compatible with the exterior form of the historic building, i.e. introducing a gently sloped walkway instead of a constructed ramp with handrails in front of an historic building. Work with accessibility and conservation specialists and users to determine the most appropriate solution to accessibility issues with the least impact on the character -defining elements and overall heritage value of the historic building manner w is is c ear y is nc rom a exis t' ing cultural heritage resource. Due to the size and scale of the proposed development, it will not be keeping with the form and setting of the cultural heritage resource. Accessibility will be addressed in the proposed development. Accessibility will be addressed in the proposed development. Table 10: Standards and Guidelines regarding the preservation of the cultural heritage resource. 1. Conserve the heritage value of a historic place. Do not remove, replace or substantially alter its intact or repairable character -defining elements. Do not move a part of a historic place if its current location is a character -defining element. 2. Conserve changes to a historic place that, over time, have become character- defining elements in their own right. 3. Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention. 149 The cultural heritage resource is proposed to remain in situ. The majority of the identified heritage attributes are associated with the fagade and will remain unaltered. The chimneys and some of the rear wings and roofline of the building will be removed. There character defining elements are associated with the original building. The proposed development is seeking minimal intervention. The majority of the heritage attributes will be conserved. Project #LHC0134 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of No additional elements from other time periods are its time, place and use. Do not create a false sense of proposed to be added to the cultural heritage resource. historical development by adding elements from other historic places or other properties, or by combining features of the same property that never coexisted. 5. Find a use for a historic place that requires minimal The proposed use for the cultural heritage resource is or no change to its character -defining elements. as a commercial space. This is in keeping with one of its historic uses. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize a historic place It is recommended that a CP be created in order to until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect ensure the protection of the cultural heritage resource and preserve archaeological resources in place. Where during the construction phase. there is potential for disturbing archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information. 7. Evaluate the existing condition of character -defining elements to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention. There are no proposed changes to the fagade of the existing cultural heritage resource as part of the proposed development. 8. Maintain character -defining elements on an ongoing The proposed development will seek to maintain the basis. Repair character- defining elements by retained character defining elements. reinforcing their materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character -defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes. 9. Make any intervention needed to preserve character - defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable on close inspection. Document any intervention for future reference. There are no proposed interventions needed to preserve the character defining elements as part of the proposed development. 10.5.2 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties In regards to the Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties the following table considered each principle in relation to the proposed development. Table 11: Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties regarding the conservation of the cultural heritage resource. 150 Respect for documentary evidence: do not restore based on conjecture. Conservation work should be based on historic documentation such as historic photographs, drawings, or physical evidence. Project #LHC0134 The propose development does not involved any restoration. Respect for the original location: do not move buildings The building will remain in situ. unless there is no other means to save them. Site is an integral component of a building or structure. Change in site diminishes the cultural heritage value considerably Respect for historic materials: repair/conserve—rather than replace building materials and finishes, except where absolutely necessary. Minimal intervention maintains the heritage content of the built resource. The proposed development does not involve the replacement of heritage features. This can be addressed as needed in a detailed CP. Respect for original fabric: repair with like materials. There are no repairs proposed as part of the proposed Repair to return the resource to its prior condition, development. without altering its integrity. This can be addressed as needed in a detailed CP. Respect for the building's history: do not restore to one The propose development does not involved any period at the expense of another period. Do not destroy restoration. later additions to a building or structure solely to restore to a single time period. Reversibility: alteration should be able to be returned to There are no proposed alterations associated with the original conditions. This conserves earlier building cultural heritage resource. design and technique, e.g. When a new door opening is This can be explored in more detail as needed in a put into a stone wall, the original stones are numbered, detailed CP. removed and stored, allowing for future restoration. Legibility: new work should be distinguishable from old. The proposed development will be clearly Buildings or structures should be recognized as distinguishable from the cultural heritage resource. products of their own time, and new additions should not blur the distinction between old and new. Maintenance: with continuous care, future restoration Ongoing maintenance is encouraged. work will not be necessary. With regular upkeep, major conservation projects and their high costs can be avoided 10.6 Summary As outlined above, the removal of portions of the rear additions, two brick chimneys, and a portion of the roofline of 149-151 Ontario Street North, will result in a negative impact on some of the identified heritage attributes. However, 151 Project #LHC0134 the cultural heritage value or interest of the overall structure will be retained and remain legible in the retained two storey semi-detached structure. With the preparation and implementation of a CP, the proposed conservation and preservation strategy is in keeping with the Standards and Guidelines. The proposed development is generally in keeping with the outlined best practices. The inclusion of the three-storey section of the building provides a visual and physical transition and softens the impact on the Weber Street West streetscape from the height of the tower. Additionally, the highest portion of the building has been placed away from the street, so as to be less noticeable to pedestrians. The style of the three-storey building is respectful and sympathetic to the character of the area and the surrounding streetscape and is subordinate to, and set back from, the existing cultural heritage resource. The shadow study reveals that a shadow will be created along the north side of Weber Street West and on the west side of Ontario Street North in the spring, fall, and winter seasons for small windows of time. The shadow study showed that the shadow from the proposed tower does not significantly interfere with legibility of the heritage attributes or the character of the streetscape associated with this section of Weber Street West; the shadow does not unreasonably impact access to sunlight in rear yards. The shadow cast to the west will fall onto the rear portion of 35 Weber Street West. The elevation of the building which is most impacted is not the primary pedestrian or vehicular entrance to the building; the main entrance is located on the western portion of this large building. To this end, the shadow created solely by the tower will have no greater impact than those of shadows created from the four -storey building itself. Overall, the shadow will not unreasonable impact access to sunlight and do not have a negative impact on 35 Weber Street West. There are two significant street views which were considered. The first is considered a major gateway to the CCNHCD and located at the corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The second view is along the Weber Street West Streetscape. The streetscape renderings show that the proposed development will not have a significant impact on the views into the district from this gateway because it is blocked by the existing ten storey building located on the south corner of Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The propose development does not obstruct any significant views into the CCNHCD, or along the north side Weber Street West. The streetscape view of along Weber Street West, as approaching from the west looking east, show that the size and scale of the tower does have a significant impact on the streetscape. This is because of the height of the tower which is now in the foreground. The proposed height of the tower detracts from overall character of Weber Street West however it does not have an impact on the heritage attributes of the building associated with the CCNHCD. Lastly, the CCNHCD guidelines were considered. As a result of the inclusion of the three-storey portion of the building along Weber Street West, the proposed development is in keeping with many of the policies which govern Weber Street West. The size, footprint and massing of the rear tower portion are not in keeping with the immediate neighbourhood. The towers presence and visibility are softened by the three-storey portion of the building. 152 Project #LHC0134 11 ALTERNATIVES The following range of alternatives were explored. 11.1 Option 1 - Do Nothing This option would not result in any changes or improvements to 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West. The buildings would remain in situ and the property would remain as it currently is. This option would not allow for the redevelopment of the property and the properties would continue to be used for small scale residential and commercial purposes. 149-151 Ontario Street North would remain listed on the City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register as a non- designated property of cultural heritage value or interest. Unless a Planning Act application is submitted, a Section 27 OHA listing does not provide protection for a cultural heritage resource beyond demolition control. Unsympathetic alterations permitted under the building code would be allowed. 11.2 Option 2 - Proposed New Development (16 Storeys) This option would seek to demolish the existing structures associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North and 21 Weber Street West. The structure at 149-151 Ontario Street North would be removed from the City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest. This option would seek to increase the overall density of the property through the construction of a new 16 -Storey Mixed Use Building. The new building would have underground parking. The main level would have a residential/commercial unit located in the north-west corner which is proposed to occupy 109 sm (1,176 sf). The main residential lobby is located on Ontario Street North and in the general location of the existing entrance found on 149-151 Ontario Street North. The ramp to the underground parking would be access from Ontario Street North as well (Figure 129). The typical floor plan for the 2°d to 161h level has the elevator located centrally with units surrounding. There are eight units proposed per floor (104 units in total). There are three square units proposed at 544 sf (50.5 sm), four units proposed as 549 sf (51 sm), one proposed at 512 sf (47.6 sm). The large building would be placed with a very narrow set back from the streetscape. The streetscape would interface directly with the 16 -storey tower as the building would go up with a straight vertical line (Figure 127). The full set of designs can be found in Appendix F. The demolition of the cultural heritage resource is not supported by the PPS, or municipal policies. 153 Project #LHC0134 Figure 127: Option 2 showing a 16 storeys tower. Massing of the north elevation (left) and west elevation (right) (Edge Architects Ltd., 2018). I I M rn rn Pry u� Erna ~ i Surface Parking Access 35191 I uta I I � 1 18 E �C _ �F E_] 16 Storey Mixed Use Building 104 Unit Building Footprint 461 Srn (4462 sf) Gross Floor Area 6547 sm 371009 sf! I 7 -- Main Residential / Undergroand Entrance Parking Romp EDGE ARCHITECTS LTG [ PRELIMINARY II DESIGN REPORT PROJECT NUMBER( 1&115 ADDRESS i 151 cr1-ARIo 12.1 WESER ONTARIO ST CITY KFOMEr;ER,orl SEIEET SIZE a 11x17 DATE/ '15fD7JM 8 Site P- 1 2D) an1:2D0 Figure 128: Preliminary site plan for Option 2, a 16 Storey building (Edge Architects Ltd. 2018). 04 11.3 Option 3 - Retention in situ with Proposed New Development (21 -Storey) The proposed development seeks to retain the majority of the two-storey, semi-detached brick structure at 149-151 Ontario Street North in situ and to integrate it into a new development (Figure 110). The existing brick chimneys, a portion of the rear wings and roofline of 149-151 Ontario Street North and the building associated with 21 Weber Street West are proposed for removal. 149-151 Ontario Street North will be used for commercial purposes and the remaining building will be for residential use. 154 Project #LHC0134 The entire fagade and side elevations of 149-151 Ontario Street North will be retained and maintained in situ (Figure 112). This will conserve the building's set back and relationship with the street. The proposed residential tower and parking will be built around the existing cultural heritage resource. The full fagade and most of the southern elevation will remain legible. The main lobby to the residential tower will be located along the southern portion of the property and accessed from Ontario Street North. The lobby to the residential tower will be set back from the existing fagade by one foot and constructed primarily in glass. Within the lobby area, the south elevation of 149-151 Ontario Street North will be exposed and visible. The new residential building will be legible as two distinct sections. The first section will be a three-storey portion of the building which will front towards Weber Street West and be used for parking. This section of the building will be set close to the sidewalk and centrally placed on the lot. The second section is a 21 -storey tower which will be set back from Weber Street West and used for residential purposes. The three-storey section of the building will be built with brick and include details reflecting the architectural characteristics of the area. Design elements to be incorporated include: • the use of brick; • brick voussoirs with drip molds on upper level windows; • brick voussoirs on lower level windows; • narrow paired windows on the upper level; • rhythmically placed windows on the north and west elevations; and, • the inclusion of brick window sills (Figure 112). The building will have a flat roof with a glass enclosed patio space on top. The three-storey section of the building is intended for use as parking. After researching viable options, a Klaus car stacking system is being proposed in order to maximize the desired parking capacity and minimize the overall height of the structure. The parking garage will be accessed from Ontario Street North. Brick voussoirs are proposed above the garage door entrances. The parking area will be set back one foot from 149-151 Ontario Street North. This set back is consistent with the lobby located on the southern side and allows 149-151 Ontario Street to be more visually prominent at street level. The 21 -storey tower will be located in the south-east area of the property, set back from Weber Street West. The preliminary design concept proposes that the tower will be made with a mixture of materials including brick, glass, architectural precast concrete and aluminum composite metal (ACM) panels (Figure 111). The exterior of the first and second level of the east and south elevations will have minimal detailing as they will not be visible from the street (Figure 113). The tower portion will have an irregular footprint and large windows providing texture and depth to the tower's design (Figure 118). Windows have primarily been placed on the west and north elevations in order to maximize natural light and views for each unit (Figure 117). The lobby will be located on the main level along the south elevation. The L-shaped lobby carries around to the eastern elevation, leading to the stairs and elevators (Figure 114). The elevators will be located centrally, but towards the eastern elevation. The north, south, and western elevations of 149-151 Ontario Street will be retained. Portions of the rear additions will be retained; however, the eastern (rear) elevation will be removed. The second floor will have a similar layout as the main level (Figure 115). This includes an L-shaped area along the southern and eastern elevations. 155 Project #LHC0134 The remaining floors (three through 21) will all be similar in design and layout (Figure 116). There are eight units proposed for each floor with two staircases and elevators. The units range in size from 494 sq. ft to 549 sq. ft. Some of the exterior finishes associated with the three-storey section of the proposed design have the potential to be further refined. In an effort to allow planning processes to commence the owner proposes to register on title that the final design details will be completed to the satisfaction of Heritage Planning Staff. 149-151 Ontario Street North could remain listed on the City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register as a non- designated property of cultural heritage value or interest. 11.4 Option 4 - Proposed New Development with Salvaged Materials (21 Storeys) This option seeks to demolish the existing buildings on site and build a new building. The new building will have a T-shaped footprint and will have two visually distinct sections. The first section of the building, which will front towards Weber Street West, is proposed to be a two- to three-storey building clad in buff brick. The images provide throughout this report show a two-storey building; however, a three-storey building would also be in keeping with the massing, height and character of the surrounding area. The two -to three-storey building is proposed to be built with buff brick. There is an opportunity to use brick salvaged from the extant building. The design contains small details which are intended to reflect some of the character of the structures to be removed and be sympathetic to the surrounding character of the area. Design elements include raise brick along the corners and roofline, brick voussoirs with drip molds, large rectangular window openings rhythmically placed and brick sills. The roof is proposed to be flat and edged with plantings; there are also plantings proposed for around the ground level. This internal area of this section is intended to be used as open concept communal space for residence. The 21 -storey tower has multiple proposed balconies which add texture and depth to the design. Each floor is similar in design and layout except for the main floor and the 2°d floor (Mezzanine floor). Three balconies' can be found on the north elevation, one on the east elevation and one on the south elevation. The preliminary design concept proposes that the tower will be made with a mixture of materials including glass, architectural precast concrete and aluminum composite metal (ACM) panels. The full set of drawings are located in Appendix G. The demolition of the cultural heritage resource is not supported by the PPS, or municipal policies. 156 ONTARIO STREIT N ---------- 7 r. Figure 129: Option 3 proposed site plan (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019). Project #LHC01 34 ---------------- L — ---- II _,+ate' ---------- 7 r. Figure 129: Option 3 proposed site plan (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019). Project #LHC01 34 Figure 130: North west and north east perspective (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019). 157 ■ E ....,.,._' _�"_... _. II _,+ate' EDGE ®® . . . . . . . . ---- Figure 130: North west and north east perspective (Edge Architects Ltd., 2019). 157 Project #LHC0134 11.5 Preferred Option Taking all things into consideration, it the professional opinion of the author that Option 3 is the preferred choice for the following reasons. The property associated with 149-151 Ontario Street has been found to have cultural heritage value or interest. This option allows for the majority of the heritage attributes to remain intact and visible in their original location. The proposed development will be set back from the cultural heritage resource which will increase its visibility and help distinguish the assigned cultural heritage value or interest. Conservation of the building in situ is the preferred conservation method as outlined in the Standards and Guidelines. The conservation of a recognized cultural heritage resource is also mandated by multiple municipal policies (i.e. OP policies 12.C.11., 12.C.1.20, 12.C.21) and by section 2.6.1. of the PPS. Lastly, this option also takes into consideration the streetscape and character of the entire area. The property is located on the edge of two districts. The proposed development can help with the transition between the distinct historic character found in the CCNHCD to the north and distinct commercial character found in the City Centre District to the south. The CCNHCD has a distinct architecture style and is comprised of predominately two- to three- storey buildings. The City Central District is characterized by commercial buildings, in part which include large towers. The portion of the proposed development which fronts towards Weber Street West, has been purposefully designed to be three- storeys and in a sympathetic architecture style. By placing the tower at the rear, and retaining the existing property associated with 149-151 Ontario Street North, the impact of the tower along the street level is softened. 158 Project #LHC0134 12 MITIGATIVE MEASURES To mitigate negative impacts related to removal and alteration of heritage attributes, photographic documentation of property — specifically, the rear elevation, chimneys and roofline - prior to any alteration is recommended. The photographic documentation should be included in the property file for the new building. The photographs provided within this report may be considered sufficient archival documentation; however, as per OP policy 12.c.1.33, this determination will be made by City of Kitchener Staff. Any additional required documentation should be included as part of the CP. A CP will be required for this property. The CP must adhere to the requirements outlined the City of Kitchener Conservation Plans Terms of Reference. This includes outlining Short -Term, Medium- Term and Long -Term Conservation Work. The CP should identify and outline the specific items which ensure the retained building is safeguarded and secured while elements are being removed, and while the new development is being constructed. The buff brick which will be removed as part of the proposed development may be considered for salvage and the CP will outline the degree to which this is feasibe. Furthermore, it is recommended that a professional with heritage experience aid in the dismantling or deconstruction of items which have been identified. This should be outlined in the CP. The proposed development and the proposed conservation and preservation of 149-151 Ontario Street North was reviewed against the Standards and Guidelines and the Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties. In order to safeguard the cultural heritage resource these two documents should be reviewed again in detail against the overall proposed development within the CP. To mitigate the impact from the height of the proposed tower, the preferred design places the tower away from the Weber Street West streetscape, at the rear of the lot. This is in keeping with best practices. As per OP policy 12.C.1.32, should the proposed development be approved, it is understood that `the City may require all or any part of the demolished cultural heritage resource to be given to the City for re -use, archival, display or commemorative purposes, at no cost to the City'. Should the City determine that they wish to pursue any aspect of the above policy with regards to the removal of the rear wing, chimney or roofline, it is recommended that they inform the owner as soon as possible. Commemoration is encouraged. There is an opportunity to include photographs of the building in the lobby of the new building, along with a brief write up of the property history. This will help the users understand the building which was retained and provide insight into the history of the property. Lastly, the author is aware that some of the exterior details of the three-storey portion of the building have not been finalized and have the potential to be refined. In an effort to allow additional planning processes to commence the owner is willing to have something registered on title to which they agree that the final design details of this area will be completed to the satisfaction of Heritage Planning Staff. 159 Project #LHC0134 13 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS An evaluation of 21 Weber Street West demonstrates that it is not considered to have cultural heritage value or interest. An evaluation of 149-151 Ontario Street North shows that it meets the criteria laid out in 0. Reg. 9/06. As part of this report a SOS [SCHVI] and a list of heritage attributes was developed to help guide the evaluation of potential impacts on the property. As part of the propose development alternative options were examined and additional research carried out to explore a variety of parking options; parking was considered an invaluable asset. Option 3 was selected as the preferred option. This option seeks to retain the majority of 149-151 Ontario Street and integrate it into a new residential development. This option preserves the cultural heritage value or interest associated with the building, while providing an opportunity for new residential development and the revitalization of an underutilized corner. Section 2.6.1 of the PPS notes that significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. The preferred development is not in conflict with PPS Policy 2.6.1. The conservation of the cultural heritage resource in situ is also supported and encouraged by multiple municipal, regional, and provincial policies. The impact assessment outlined that the proposed development will have a negative impact on some of the heritage attributes associate with 149-151 Ontario Street, as well as some of the views associated with the Weber Street West streetscape. In order to lessen this negative impact resulting from preferred design, the following mitigative measures have been recommended: • Documentation of the property; • Potential salvage of materials, specifically the buff brick; • Inclusion of a three-storey portion of the building along Weber Street; • The setback of the tower; and • A CP. The proposed development will become the highest on the block and it will be in the foreground when approached from the west. The height of the tower will also have a minor indirect impact through the creation of a shadow on the north side of Weber Street West for small windows of time. While the size and scale of the tower does have an impact on the streetscape, the step back of the tower helps to mitigate the impact along the streetscape and from the pedestrian vantage point and the three-storey portion allows the low profile of the streetscape to be maintained. The retention and set back of the new building from the existing building allow the cultural heritage resource to the most prominent feature from the street. It is recommended that wording be registered on title indicating that the final design details of the three-storey section of the building will be completed to the satisfaction of Heritage Planning Staff. Based on the foregoing analysis it is the authors' recommendation that the preferred option be permitted. 160 Project #LHC0134 14 RIGHT OF USE The information, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are for the sole benefit of `Owners'. Any other use of this report by others without permission is prohibited and is without responsibility to LHC. The report, all plans, data, drawings and other documents as well as all electronic media prepared by LHC are considered its professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of LHC, who authorizes only the Owners and approved users (including municipal review and approval bodies) to make copies of the report, but only in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for the use of the report by those parties. Unless otherwise stated, the suggestions, recommendations and opinions given in this report are intended only for the guidance of Owners and approved users. In addition, this assessment is subject to the following limitations and understandings: The review of the policy/legislation was limited to that information directly related to cultural heritage management; it is not a comprehensive planning review. • Soundscapes, cultural identity, and sense of place analysis were not integrated into this report. 15 SIGNATURES Draft Draft Amy Barnes, MA, CAHP Christienne Uchiyama, MA, CAHP Project Manager and Senior Cultural Specialist Principal, Manager Heritage Consulting Services Letourneau Heritage Consulting Inc. Letourneau Heritage Consulting Inc. 161 Project #LHC0134 16 REFERENCES 16.1 Background Sources Ancestry.com and Genealogical Research Library. 1826-1936. Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1826-1936 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010. Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; County Marriage Registers, 1858 -June 1869; Reel: 17 ---. 1881 Canada Census Index provided by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints © Copyright 1999 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. All use is subject to the limited use license and other terms and conditions applicable to this site. Original data: Canada. "Census of Canada, 1881." Statistics Canada Fonds, Record Group 31-C-1. LAC microfilm C-13162 to C-13286. Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa. Retrieved from http://www.bac-lac.qc.ca/eng/census/1881/Pages/about-census.aspx ---. 1935-1980 Canada, Voters Lists, [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012. Original data: Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. R1 003-6-3-E (RG113-13). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada ---. Canada, Military Honours and Awards Citation Cards, 1900-1961 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012. Original data: Honours and Awards Citation Cards. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Library and Archives Canada. ---. Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1826-1936[database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010. Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Registrations of Marriages, 1869-1928; Reel: 379 Armstrong, William. (1856). Grand River Bridge, 1856. Painting. Waterloo Historical Society Collection. Retrieved from https://historicallyspeakingkitchener.wordpress.com/2018/04/02/william-armstrong-the-g rand -trunk- %20railway-and-the-breslau-bridge/ Bassler, Gerard P. (2013). German Canadians. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/german-canadians City of Kitchener. (2010). About Kitchener. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20100712113505/http://cityofkitchener.icreate.kitchener.ca/en/livinginkitchener/Abo utKitchener.asp ---. (n.d.) Heritage Brochure. Retrieved from https://www.kitchener.ca/en/building-and-development/heritage- properties.aspx#Non-desig nated-heritage-properties City of Kitchener Corporate Archives. (2012). Custodial history. Archeion; Archives Association of Ontario. Retrieved from https://www.archeion.ca/history-of-city-of-kitchener-fonds D'amato, Luisa. First World War ripped away Canada's `age of innocence'. Waterloo Region Record. Retrieved from https://www.archeion.ca/history-of-city-of-kitchener-fonds Denton & Gifford. (1924). 1924 demolition of the Kitchener City Hall. Photograph. Waterloo Historical Society. Retrieved from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/75514/data Find A Grave database and images. Memorial page for Jacob Merner Staebler (16 Aug 1846-7 May 1906). Find A Grave Memorial no. 161406725, citing Mount Hope Cemetery (Kitchener -Waterloo), Kitchener, Waterloo Regional Municipality, Ontario, Canada; Maintained by Patrick Murphy (contributor 47037730). 162 Project #LHC0134 ---. Memorial page for Dr. Harry Mackie Lackner (10 Dec 1884-1964), Find A Grave Memorial no. 189047245, citing Mount Hope Cemetery (Kitchener -Waterloo), Kitchener, Waterloo Regional Municipality, Ontario, Canada; Maintained by Patrick Murphy (contributor 47037730). ---. Memorial page for Margaret Anne Nelson Lackner (7 Nov 1883-14 Jun 1915), Find A Grave Memorial no. 189049469, citing Mount Hope Cemetery (Kitchener -Waterloo), Kitchener, Waterloo Regional Municipality, Ontario, Canada; Maintained by Patrick Murphy (contributor 47037730). Government of Canada. (n.d.). Waterloo Pioneers. Plaque. Retrieved from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/german-canadians H. Parsell & Co. (1881). Illustrated Atlas of the County of Waterloo. Toronto, Ontario. Retrieved from https://digital. libra ry.mcgill. ca/countyatlas/searchmapframes.p hp Health News for Waterloo County. (2012). St. Mary's physician receives medical excellence award. 2012. Retrieved from https://www.wwhealthline.ca/displayArticle.aspx?id=21161 Historic Plaques of Waterloo County. Various plaques. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20070721134716/http://www.waynecook.com/awaterloo. html Kitchener Public Library. (189?). Hartman Krug Residence. From the Waterloo Historical Society Collection. Local Identifier: P007080. Retrieved from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/47813/data?n=3 ---. (1894). 1894 Revised 1904 Fire Insurance Plan. Plate 5. Microfiche accessed through the Grace Schmidt Room. ---. (1925). 1908 Revised 1925 Fire Insurance Plan. Plate 5. Microfiche accessed through the Grace Schmidt Room. ---. (1946). 1908 Revised 1946 Fire Insurance Plan. Plate 5. Microfiche accessed through the Grace Schmidt Room. ---- (1962). Demolition of the Kitchener Public Library Carnegie building c. 1962. From KPL Photograph Collection. Local Identifier P010257. Retrieved from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/49665/data Mikel, Robert. (2004). Ontario House Styles: the distinctive architecture of the provinces 181h and 191h century homes. Published by James Lorimer & Company Ltd: Toronto. Mills, Rych. (2015). Flash from the past: Berlin post office was community hub for 50 years. Waterloo Region Record. Retrieved from https://www.therecord.com/living-story/5595744-flash-from-the-past-berlin-post-office-was- com m u n ity-h u b -for -50 -yea rs/ Moyer, Bill. (1979). Kitchener Yesterday Revisited: An Illustrated History. Burlington, ON: Windsor Publications. National Trust for Canada. (2018). Schneider Haus Historical Site. Photo. Retrieved from https://historicplacesday.calprovince/ontariolhistoricplacelschneider-haus-national-historic-site/ Region of Waterloo. (1980). 1980 Aerial Photograph. Photo Number 11 N. Northway-Gestalt Corporation Job Number c-8823. Retrieved from the Kitchener Public Library. Smith, William. (1846). Smith's Canadian Gazetteer. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smiYpage/n7 S.H. Knox and Co. (1908). Postcard of the Grand Trunk Railway Station, Berlin, ON. Waterloo Historical Society. Retrieved from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/3399769/data 163 Project #LHC0134 The Record (2010). Flash from the Past: Corporation Square was built on site of Krug mansion. Retrieved from https://www. the record.com/living-story/2569296-flash-from-the-past-corporation-square-was-built-on-site-of-krug- mansion/ ---. (2013). Flash from the Past: St. Mark's Lutheran Church marks 100 years. Written by Jon Fear. Retrieved from https://www. the record.com/living-story/4047236-flash-from-the-past-st-mark-s-lutheran-church-marks-100-years/ ---. (2017).Duke Street office building on the market. Written by Brent Davis. Retrieved from https://www. the record.com/news-storv/7541647-d u ke-street-office-building-on-the-market/ Trotter, Nebold Hugh. (1883). Conestoga Wagon. State Museum of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, PA. Tremaine, George. (1861). Map of the County of Waterloo. Retrieved from http://maps.library. utoronto.ca/hqis/cou ntymaps/waterloo/index. html University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. (n.d.) Digital Historic Air Photos of Kitchener Waterloo: 1930-1963. Retrieved from https://www.lib.uwaterloo.ca/locations/umd/project/IM30.html ---. (n.d.). Waterloo Region Historic Maps, 1853-1923. Retrieved from https://uwaterloo.ca/library/qeospatial/collections/maps-and-atlases/waterloo-region-historical-maps ---. (1853-54). Map of Part of the Town of Berlin, Township and County of Waterloo, C.W. Surveyed for George John Grange, Esq. ---. (1979-1989). Berlin, 1875, province of Ontario, Canada. Published in Celebration of the 101h Anniversary for the City of Kitchener. Uttley, William Velores. (1975). A History of Kitchener. Kitchener, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Veterans Affairs Canada. Canadian Efficiency Decoration. Retrieved from http://www.veterans.qc.ca/eng/remembrance/medals-decorations/details/65 Waterloo Generations. (n.d.) Mayor Jacob Merner Staebler. Person 137544. Accessed from http://qenerations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.phP?person ID=137544&tree=qenerations ---. (n.d). Wilhelmine Louisa Bowman. Person ID 18119. Retrieved from http://qenerations. req ionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?person ID=18119&tree=qenerations ---. (n.d). Dr. Mayor Henry George Lackner, Mayor. Person ID 128157. Retrieved from, http://qenerations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson. php?person I D=128157&tree=qenerations ---. (n.d.). William Albert Archibald `Archie' Bernhardt. Person ID 1351637. Retrieved from, http://qenerations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson. php?person I D=1351637&tree=qenerations Waterloo Historical Society. (1931). Stroh, Jacob. Reminiscences of Berlin (now Kitchener). Retrieved from, http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1931.pdf Waterloo Region Record. (1972). The old Kitchener City Hall. Photograph. Waterloo Region Record Historical Photo Collection. Retrieved from https://www.therecord.com/living-story/2597140-flash-from-the-past-grand- stairway- was-inside-old-kitchener-city-hall/ Walker & Miles. (1877). Illustrated Atlas of County of Waterloo. Retrieved from http://digital. libra ry.mcgill. ca/CountyAtlas/searchmapframes.php 164 Project #LHC0134 Waterloo Historical Society. (1906). Black and white photograph of the exterior of the Berlin public library. Kitchener Public Library. Retrieved from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-qsr/50787/data?n=1 16.2 Policies Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. (2006). Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process. Retrieved from, http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/Heritage Tool Kit Heritage PPS infoSheet.pdf ---- (2014). Standards & Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties: Heritage Identification and Evaluation Process. Retrieved from http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/heritage/MTCS Heritage IE Process.pdf Province of Ontario. (1990) The Planning Act. Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90pl3 ---- (1990). Ontario Heritage Act. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90ol8 ---- (2014). The Provincial Policy Statement. Retrieved from http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463 Region of Waterloo. (1989). Archaeological Facilities Master Plan. Retrieved from, https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/explorArchaeological Facilities Master Planing -the - reg ion/reso u rces/Docu me nts/ARC HAEO LOG ICAL_MASTER_PLAN. pdf ---- (2002). Arts, Culture and heritage Master plan. Retrieved from, regionofwaterloo.ca/en/discoveringTheRegion/resources/artsmasterplan.pdf ---- (2013). Region of Waterloo Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. Retrieved from https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/exploring-the region/resources/Documents/Final_Implementation_Guideline_for_CHL_Conservation-access.pdf ---- (2015). Regional Official Plan. Retrieved from, http://www. regionofwaterloo. ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp City of Kitchener. (2014). City of Kitchener Official Plan: A complete & Healthy Kitchener. Retrieved from, https://www. kitchener.ca/en/resou rcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_New-Official-Plan--- CONSOLI DATED -Version -Modifications -Deferrals --Appeals. pdf ----- (2007). City of Kitchener Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. Retrieved from, https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD PLAN HeritagePlanCivicCentre.Pdf 165 Project #LHC0134 17 PROJECT PERSONNEL Amy Barnes, M.A. CAHP, Project Manager and Senior Cultural Heritage Specialist Amy Barnes, M.A. CAHP, has been working in the heritage field since 2009. She holds a M.A. in Heritage Conservation from the School of Canadian Studies at Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario and is a full member with the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals. Ms. Barnes has successfully completed the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Foundations in Public Participation and the IAP2 Planning and Techniques for Effective Public Participation courses. Ms. Barnes has worked in the Heritage Planning Departments at the City of Kingston and the Municipality of North Grenville where her duties involved public consultation, records management and work on a variety of heritage -related planning issues. Ms. Barnes has worked on numerous Heritage Impact Assessments and dozens of Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports throughout Ontario and has completed large scale heritage inventories for built heritage and cultural heritage landscapes. Ms. Barnes has been an active member of the Cambridge Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee since 2009. Ms. Barnes has presented at numerous conferences and speaking engagements on heritage related topics. Ms. Barnes has a great deal of experience researching and presenting historical information to a variety of audiences including both professionals and engaged citizens. Ms. Barnes has worked both independently and as part of a large multidisciplinary team. Ms. Barnes has worked in both the private and public sector on heritage projects that vary in size and scale. Christienne Uchiyama, MA CAHP - Principal and Manager — Heritage Consulting Services Christienne Uchiyama MA CAHP is Principal and Manager — Heritage Consulting Services with Letourneau Heritage Consulting. She is a Heritage Consultant and Professional Archaeologist (P376) with more than a decade of experience working on heritage aspects of planning and development projects. She is a member in good standing of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals and received her MA in Heritage Conservation from Carleton University School of Canadian Studies. Her thesis examined the identification and assessment of impacts on cultural heritage resources in the context of Environmental Assessment. Since 2003 Chris has provided archaeological and heritage conservation advice, support and expertise as a member of numerous multi -disciplinary project teams for projects across Ontario and New Brunswick, including such major projects as: all phases of archaeological assessment at the Canadian War Museum site at LeBreton Flats, Ottawa; renewable energy projects; natural gas pipeline routes; railway lines; hydro powerline corridors; and highway/road realignments. She has completed more than 100 cultural heritage technical reports for development proposals at all levels of government, including cultural heritage evaluation reports, heritage impact assessments, and archaeological licence reports. Her specialties include the development of Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports, under both 0. Reg. 9/06 and 10/06, and Heritage Impact Assessments. Zack Hamm, MA - Junior Cultural Heritage Specialist Mr. Hamm is a Junior Cultural Heritage Specialist with LHC. He began his academic background studying ancient civilizations and working in Mediterranean and Ontario Cultural Resource management. He graduated from the University of Windsor's Master of Arts in History with a focus on Canadian modernity in 2015. Zack has become deeply interested in local, regional, and national Canadian and First Nations histories, and has more recently turned his passions and interests into a career in heritage. Since joining LHC in 2017, Zack has been involved in a number of projects including archaeological assessments and heritage impact assessments. 166 Appendix A Heritage Impact Assessment Terms of Reference City of Kitchener Development Services Department - Planning Division Heritage Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference 1.0 Background A Heritage Impact Assessment is a study to determine the impacts to known and potential cultural heritage resources within a defined area proposed for future development. The study shall include an inventory of all cultural heritage resources within the planning application area. The study results in a report which identifies all known cultural heritage resources, evaluates the significance of the resources, and makes recommendations toward mitigative measures that would minimize negative impacts to those resources. A Heritage Impact Assessment may be required on a property which is listed on the City's Heritage Advisory Committee Inventory; listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register; designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, or where development is proposed adjacent to a protected heritage property. The requirement may also apply to unknown or recorded cultural heritage resources which are discovered during the development application stage or construction. 2.0 Heritage Impact Assessment Requirements It is important to recognize the need for Heritage Impact Assessments at the earliest possible stage of development or alteration. Notice will be given to the property owner and/or their representative as early as possible. When the property is the subject of a Plan of Subdivision or Site Plan application, notice of a Heritage Impact Assessment requirement will typically be given at the pre -application meeting, followed by written notification. The notice will inform the property owner of any known heritage resources specific to the subject property and provide guidelines to completing the Heritage Impact Assessment. The following minimum requirements will be required in a Heritage Impact Assessment: 2.1 Present owner contact information for properties proposed for development and/or site alteration. 2.2 A detailed site history to include a listing of owners from the Land Registry Office, and a history of the site use(s). 2.3 A written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject properties including: building elements, building materials, architectural and interior finishes, natural heritage elements, and landscaping. The description will also include a chronological history of the buildings' development, such as additions and demolitions. The report shall include a clear statement of the conclusions regarding the cultural heritage value and interest of the subject property as well as a bullet point list of heritage attributes. If applicable, the statement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritage property. 2.4 Documentation of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an appropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site details. Documentation shall also include where available, current floor plans, and historical photos, drawings or other available and relevant archival material. 2.5 An outline of the proposed development, its context, and how it will impact the properties (subject property and if applicable adjacent protected heritage properties) including buildings, structures, and site details including landscaping. In particular, the potential visual and physical impact of the proposed development on the identified heritage attributes of the properties, shall be assessed. The Heritage Impact Assessment must consider potential negative impacts as identified in the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport's Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. Negative impacts may include but are not limited to: alterations that are not sympathetic or compatible with the cultural heritage resource; demolition of all or part of a cultural heritage resource; etc. The outline should also address the influence and potential impact of the development on the setting and character of the subject properties and adjacent protected heritage property. 2.6 Options shall be provided that explain how the significant cultural heritage resources may be conserved. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited to, preservation/conservation in situ, adaptive re -use, integration of all or part of the heritage resource, relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the heritage resource. 2.7 A summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must be included. Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport); and, the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport). 2.8 Proposed alterations and demolitions must be justified and explained as to any loss of cultural heritage value and impact on the streetscape/neighbourhood context. 2.9 Recommendations shall be as specific as possible, describing and illustrating locations, elevations, materials, landscaping, etc. 2.10 The qualifications and background of the person(s) completing the Heritage Impact Assessment shall be included in the report. The author(s) must demonstrate a level of professional understanding and competence in the heritage conservation field of study. The report will also include a reference for 3.0 4.0 any literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in the report. Summary Statement and Conservation Recommendations The summary statement should provide a full description of: ■ The significance and heritage attributes of the subject properties. ■ The identification of any impact the proposed development will have on the heritage attributes of the subject properties, including adjacent protected heritage property. ■ An explanation of what conservation or mitigative measures, or alternative development, or site alteration approaches are recommended. ■ Clarification as to why specific conservation or mitigative measures, or alternative development or site alteration approaches are not appropriate. Mandatory Recommendation The consultant must write a recommendation as to whether the subject properties are worthy of listing or designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Should the consultant not support heritage designation then it must be clearly stated as to why the subject property does not meet the criteria as stated in Regulation 9/06. The following questions must be answered in the mandatory recommendation of the report: 1. Do the properties meet the criteria for listing on the Municipal Heritage Register as a Non -Designated Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest? 2. Do the properties meet the criteria for heritage designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act? Why or why not? 3. If the subject properties do not meet the criteria for heritage listing or designation then it must be clearly stated as to why they do not. 4. Regardless of the failure to meet criteria for heritage listing or designation, do the properties warrant conservation as per the definition in the Provincial Policy Statement? Why or why not? 5.0 Approval Process Five (5) hard copies of the Heritage Impact Assessment and one digital pdf copy shall be provided to Heritage Planning staff. Both the hard and digital copies shall be marked with a "DRAFT" watermark background. The Heritage Impact Assessment will be reviewed by City staff to determine whether all requirements have been met and to review the preferred option(s). Following the review of the Heritage Impact Assessment by City staff, five (5) hard copies and one digital copy of the final Heritage Impact Assessment ("DRAFT" watermark removed) will be required. The copies of the final Heritage Impact Assessment will be considered by the Director of Planning. Note that Heritage Impact Assessments may be circulated to the City's Heritage Kitchener Committee for information and discussion. A Site Plan Review Committee meeting may not be scheduled until the City's Heritage Kitchener Committee has been provided an opportunity to review and provide feedback to City staff. Heritage Impact Assessments may be subject to a peer review to be conducted by a qualified heritage consultant at the expense of the City of Kitchener. The applicant will be notified of Staff's comments and acceptance, or rejection of the report. An accepted Heritage Impact Assessment will become part of the further processing of a development application under the direction of the Planning Division. The recommendations within the final approved version of the Heritage Impact Assessment may be incorporated into development related legal agreements between the City and the proponent at the discretion of the municipality. Appendix B City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Statement of Significance for 149-151 Ontario Street North APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Statement of Significance 149-151 ONTARIO STREET NORTH Municipal Address: 149-151 Ontario Street North, Kitchener Legal Description: Plan 401 Part Lot 11 Year Built: c. 1876 Architectural Style: Hybrid with influences from Georgian and Italianate Architecture Original Owner: Wilhemina Bauman Original Use: Residential Description of Historic Place 17 r- 149 1 149-151 Ontario Street North is a two storey 19th century brick building. The building represents a hybrid architectural style with influences from Georgian and Italianate architecture. The building is situated on a 0.15 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Ontario Street North between Duke Street West and Weber Street West in the City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Heritage Value or Interest 149-151 Ontario Street North is recognized for its design, physical, and historical value. The building is a hybrid architectural style with influences from Georgian and Italianate architecture. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements including: buff brick; a symmetrical plan with two bay windows; side gable roof; brackets; brick quoining; 1/1 and 2/2 windows with dripstones; window sills; front doors with transoms; and two end chimneys. Although the building is presently used for commercial uses its original use was residential in the form of a semi-detached building. The building is the last remaining example of a residential building on Ontario Street and is a unique example of a typical working class residence. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 149-151 Ontario Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction architectural style, including: o buff brick construction; o symmetrical plan with two bay windows; o roof and roofline; o side gable roof; Photos Jar APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE o wood brackets; o brick quoining; o windows and window openings; 0 1/1 and 2/2 windows with dripstones; o window sills; o doors and door openings; o front doors with transoms; and o brick chimneys. ~_ d 1 V Front Elevation APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE P�� ��00_- Left Elevation Right Elevation APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Front Door, Transom and Brick Voussoirs with Dripstones - ! __i G- Windows, Brick Voussoirs with Dripstones APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form Address: 149-151 Ontario Street North Period: c. 1876 Recorder Name: JA, SL, LR, & TB Description: Hybrid with influences from Georgian and Italianate architecture Photographs: Front Fagade ® Left Fagade ® Right Fagade ® Rear Fagade ❑ Details ® Setting ❑ Date: April 21, 2007 Design or Physical Value Style Is this a notable, rare or unique example of a particular architectural style or type? Construction Is this a notable, rare, unique or early example of a particular material or method of construction? Design Is this a particularly attractive or unique structure because of the merits of its design, composition, craftsmanship or details? Does this structure demonstrate a high degree of technical or scientific achievement? Interior Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Notes — RECORDER EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ Contextual Value RECORDER Continuity Does this structure contribute to the continuity N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ or character of the street,neighbourhood or area? Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Setting Is the setting or orientation of the structure N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ or landscaping noteworthy? Does it provide a physical, historical, functional N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ original site, moved from another site, etc. or visual link to its surroundings? Landmark Is this a particularly important visual landmark ❑ R N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Unknown ❑ within the region, city or neighbourhood? ❑ C (indicate degree of importance) 0 N Completeness Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external features that Unknown ❑ No ❑ complete the site? Notes — Integrity RECORDER Site Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Note: if relocated, i.e. relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations Does this building retain most of its original materials N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 and design features? Is this a notable structure due to sympathetic N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 alterations that have taken place over time? Condition Is this building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Notes EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 APPENDIX B: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Historical or Associative Value & Significance RECORDER Does this property or structure have strong associations with and/or Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ contribute to the understanding of a belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant or unique within the City? Is the original, previous or existing use significant? N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 resource or cultural heritage landscape, as identified in the Provincial Policy Statement under the Ontario Planning Act? A property or structure valued for the important contribution it makes to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people? Notes — EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Appendix C Photographic Documentation of Large -Scale Buildings within 500 Meters Appendix C: Photographic Documentation of Large Scale Buildings within 500 Meters Photo 1: 50 Queen Street North is an 11 storey building known as Commercial House (AB, 2018). Photo 2: 57 Queen Street North is an 18 storey residential building known as The Regency (AB, 2018). Photo 3: 141 Ontario Street North is located adjacent to 149-151 Ontario Street North. It is a 6 storey building and appears to be commercial. It is known as Ontario Tower. (AB, 2018). Photo 4: 30 Duke Street is a 10 storey Commercial Centre, known as Duke Tower (Google Maps, 2018). Photo \f1Margaret Avenue *a f8/oer/m&Anr* apartment building and lcoaer)with the CC&RCO/%2f8 Photo E1O Queen Street North 2a 18yoer/m/Anr*apartment building and located within the CC&RCO/%2f8 \,\ ■ � } � # ■ � 'k > ■ � (� � �_}\ t # • . O .¥�� � , y� A■■■�- , _ , ©�#` \ � ^ \ i i , :� �■■■, � - � � - y a � .. Photo E1O Queen Street North 2a 18yoer/m/Anr*apartment building and located within the CC&RCO/%2f8 Photo 7: 101 Fredrick Street is an 11 storey commercial building (left). Attached to it is 40 Weber Street East which is a 9 storey commercial building (right) (Google Maps, 2018). Photo 8: 53 Water Street North is a 16 storey residential apartment building known as Alexandrian Rental Suite (Google Maps, 2018). Photo 9: 85 Fredrick Street is an 8 storey public building used as the Waterloo Regional Court House (Google Maps, 2018). Photo 10: 22 Fredrick Street is an 11 storey commercial building (Google maps, 2018). Photo 11: 220 King Street West is a 10 storey building used as Kitchener City Hall (Google Maps, 2018). Photo 12: 85 Duke Street is a 19 Storey Condominium building (Google Maps, 2019). Photo 13: 6 storey parking garage located at 30 Queen Street North (Google Maps, 2019). J fry ' �� rn y , ! �" \ Photo 14: 55 King Street West is a tiered 12 storey commercial building (Google Maps, 2018). Appendix D City Directory Listings for 149-151 Ontario Street East Appendix D: City Directory Listings for 149-151 Ontario Street Sources: 1893-1918: Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo, and Bridgeport Street and Alphabetical Business and Miscellaneous Directory. Henry Vernon and Sons, Publisher. Hamilton. 1919-2014: Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo Street and Alphabetical Business and Miscellaneous. Vernon and Sons Publishing. Hamilton. sib � 1901-1903 No street numbers are provided. Those identified on the street include: Rev W.A. Bradley H. Kruff 27 G.H. Whiting 29 Mrs. John S. Shantz 31 A. Von Neubronn 1 33 W.J. Arnott M.D. 1907-1908 (149) 83 Foundry Street N: Albert Kaufman wks tmstr [Works Teamster] (151) 85 Foundry Street N: B.U. Clemens wks rubber factory 1908-1909 (149) 83 Foundry Street N: Albert Kaufman wkrs deliverer (151) 85 Foundry Street N: B.U. Clemens 1911-1912 1 (149) 83 Foundry Street N: Waltr [Walter] W Williams. Works as a Teacher: high school (151) 85 Foundry Street N: B.U. Clemens 1912-1913 (149) 83 Foundry Street N: Walter W Williams 1 (151) 85 Foundry Street N: B.U. Clemens 1919 (149) 83 Foundry Street N — Conrad Biehl, works as mach [Machinist]/ Melissa Biehl, works as Clk W G & R [Clerk] (151) 85 Foundry Street N: Gus Wendt (163 Ontario Street N: Ontario Street N) 87 Foundry Street N Dr. H.M. Lackner 1921-1924 149 Ontario Street N: George Filsinger, works as a tailor 151 Ontario Street N: John Hoflinch, works as a stock keeper for Bell telephone 163 Ontario Street N: Ontario Street N Dr. H.M. Lackner 1925 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 151 Ontario Street N: John Hoflich, works as a Chf clk [clerk] for Bell Tel Co. 163 Ontario Street N: Ontario Street N Ontario Street N Dr. H.M. Lackner 1926 149 Ontario Street N: Weins, D. (Tenant) 151 Ontario Street N: John Hoflich (Tenant) 163 Ontario Street N: Ontario Street N Ontario Street N Dr. H.M. Lackner, Owner 1927 149 Ontario Street N: Weins, D. (Tenant) 149 Ontario Street N: Dietrich Jr. wks Kaufman Rbr Co. -2- YEAR(S) LISTINGS 149 Ontario Street N: Jacob Fenner (Tenant) 151 Ontario Street N: Vacant 163 Ontario Street N: Ontario Street N Ontario Street N Dr. H.M. Lackner, Owner 1928 149 Ontario Street N: — Dietrich family lived there including: Dietrich (wife Marie) works Dom Button Co Agnes works Can Goodrich Co. Dietrich Jr. works Kaufman Rbr [Rubber] Co, Marguerite, works Can Goodrich Co. 151 Ontario Street N: J.J. Weigand. (Tenant) and his wife Phoebe. J. Weigard works as a caretaker at Bank of Montreal. 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H. Owner 1929 149 Ontario Street N: Hy, Penner 151 Ontario Street N: J.J. Wiegand 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 1930 149 Ontario Street N: Hy Penner 151 Ontario Street N: Mrs. Phoebe Wiegand 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 1931-149 Ontario Street N: Hy Penner 149 Ontario Street N: John Drobina 149 Ontario Street N: Jos [Joseph] Schnobel 151 Ontario Street N: J.J. Wiegand 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 1932 F149 Ontario Street N: Peter Penner 149 Ontario Street N: H.J. Penner 149 Ontario Street N: J. Drobina 151 Ontario Street N: Mrs. Phoebe Wiegand 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 1933 149 Ontario Street N: Peter Penner 149 Ontario Street N: H.J. Penner 149 Ontario Street N: J. Drobina 151 Ontario Street N: Mrs. Phoebe Wiegand 151 Ontario Street N: Edwd [Edward] Ludwig 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 1934 149 Ontario Street N: Bettendorf, Philip 149 Ontario Street N: Licher, Ma 149 Ontario Street N: Gengler, Nicholas 151 Ontario Street N: Cook, M., Mrs. -3- 1935 1936 151 Ontario Street N: Ludwig, Edwd. 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) Struke, John 149 Ontario Street N: Bettendorf, Philip 149 Ontario Street N: Licher, Ma 149 Ontario Street N: Gengler, Nicholas 149 Ontario Street N: Messemer, Jacob 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N: Loewen, Peter 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the property) 149 Ontario Street N: Radscheidt, Willy 149 Ontario Street N: Stengel, Jacob 149 Ontario Street N: Goetz, Mathw [Matthew] 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N 163 Ontario Street N property) 1937 No Entry Loewen, Peter Lackner, H.M. Dr.* (denotes member of the family owns the 1938 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter (wife Helena) 149 Ontario Street N: Struke, John 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N: Loewen, Peter 163 Ontario Street N: Vacant 1939 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter (wife Helena) 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Jacob, works at Globe Furn [Furniture] 149 Ontario Street N: Winsor, Louisa, Mrs. 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N: Cornelsen, Albt 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.A. 1940 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter (wife Helena) 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Jacob 149 Ontario Street N: Partridge, E.C. 149 Ontario Street N: Delion, Alfred 149 Ontario Street N: Winsor, Louisa, Mrs. 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N: Cornelsen, Albt 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.A. 1941 1 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Partridge, E.C. 149 Ontario Street N: Delion, Alfred 151 Ontario Street N: Boldt, B.B. 151 Ontario Street N: Cornelsen, Albt 163 Ontario Street N: Lackner, H.A. 1942 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Partridge, E.C. 151 Ontario Street N: Adams, Hugh A. 163 Ontario Street N: Ferguson, E.W., Mrs. 1943 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Dirksen, Frank 151 Ontario Street N: Adams, Hugh A. 151 Ontario Street N: Bertrand L., Mrs. 163 Ontario Street N: Malcom, W.K. 1944 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Dirksen, Frank 151 Ontario Street N: Daub, Donald 151 Ontario Street N: Adams, Hugh A. 151 Ontario Street N: Bertrand L., Mrs. 163 Ontario Street N: Malcom, W.K. 1945 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Dirksen, Frank 151 Ontario Street N: Schneider, L. 151 Ontario Street N: Adams, Hugh A. 163 Ontario Street N: Malcom, W.K. 1946 149 Ontario Street N 149 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N 163 Ontario Street N 1947-1948 1 149 Ontario Street N 149 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N 163 Ontario Street N 1949 149 Ontario Street N 149 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N 151 Ontario Street N Jacob, Adams Peters, Peter Schneider, L. Adams, Hugh A. (Dom Tire) Malcom, W.K. Jacob, Adams Peters, Peter Adams, H.A. Works as a Ctge [Cartage] Adam, R. N, Works as a taxi Malcom, W.K. Jacob, Adams Peters, Peter Adams, H.A. & Sons Stroh, D., Mrs. -5- 163 Ontario Street N: Vacant 1951-1954 149 Ontario Street N: Jacob, Adams 149 Ontario Street N: Peters, Peter 151 Ontario Street N: Adams, H.A. & Sons 151 Ontario Street N: Stroh, D., Mrs. 163 Ontario Street N: Grant, J.A. Sr. 1955 149 Ontario Street N: Janke, Edward* (*indicates the property is owned by some member of the family) 149 Ontario Street N: Shilda, Hans. Works as a carp [carpenter]) 149 Ontario Street N: Schonebeger, Frank 149 Ontario Street N: Jankowski, L. 151 Ontario Street N: Stroh, D., Mrs. 151 Ontario Street N: Steppler, Wm 163 Ontario Street N: J.A. Grant 1956 149 Ontario Street N: Janke, Edward* (*indicates the property is owned by some member of the family) 149 Ontario Street N: Shilda, Hans. Works as a carp [carpenter] 149 Ontario Street N: Schonebeger, Frank 151 Ontario Street N: Gruneberg, S. 163 Ontario Street N: J.A. Grant 1957 149 Ontario Street N: Schonebeger, Frank 151 Ontario Street N: Gruneberg, S. 151 Ontario Street N: Kabutz,Hans 163 Ontario Street N: J.A. Grant works as a Shpr [shopkeeper] Schneider 1958 149 Ontario Street N: Schcwalz, Horst 151 Ontario Street N: Gruneberg, S. 151 Ontario Street N: Lunz, Gunter 1959 149 Ontario Street N: Schcwalz, Horst 151 Ontario Street N: Gruneberg, S. 151 Ontario Street N: Ott, David 1960 149 Ontario Street N: Iza, Donald 151 Ontario Street N: C.R. Hudson 1961 149 Ontario Street N: McKenzie George 151 Ontario Street N: No entry for this address 1962 149 Ontario Street N: Harry Copan 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, George 151 Ontario Street N: No entry for this address M 1963 149 Ontario Street N: Wright, Robt 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, George, works as a clerk at the Imperial Cigar Store 151 Ontario Street N: No entry for this address 1964 1 149 Ontario Street N: Pelletier, Jack 149 Ontario Street N: Root, Norman 149 Ontario Street N: Mothersell, Melville 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 151 Ontario Street N: No entry for this address 1965 1966 1967 1968 149 Ontario Street N: Pelletier, Jack 149 Ontario Street N: Demanchant, B. 149 Ontario Street N: Egerdeen, L. 149 Ontario Street N: Payne, Donald 149 Ontario Street N: Mothersell, Melville 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Thompson, Colen 151 Ontario Street N: No entry for this address 149 Ontario Street N: Adam, Jos 149 Ontario Street N: Pelletier, Jack 149 Ontario Street N: McLennan, F. 149 Ontario Street N: Mills, Wm 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Ritchie, Michl 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: Adam, Jos 149 Ontario Street N: Gauley, Robert 149 Ontario Street N: Dopp, J.F. 149 Ontario Street N: Sly, Dennis 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Gouliere, Betty 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. E S parking lot 149 Ontario Street N: Adam, Jos 149 Ontario Street N: Miller, Robert 149 Ontario Street N: Kinzie, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Sly, Dennis 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Doyle, Patrick 149 Ontario Street N: Kennedy, John 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. -7- 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 E S parking lot 149 Ontario Street N: Adam, Jos 149 Ontario Street N: Forthuber, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Kinzie, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: Snow, J., Mrs. 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Doyle, Patrick 149 Ontario Street N: Frank Cormier 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: Jones, Glady (Apt 1) 149 Ontario Street N: Morton, Ernie 149 Ontario Street N: Guy, Danl 149 Ontario Street N: Brown, Ronald 149 Ontario Street N: Glenn, Chas 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Truchon, J. 149 Ontario Street N: Deforge, Donald 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1 149 Ontario Street N: Jones, Glady (Apt 1) 149 Ontario Street N: Morton, Ernie 149 Ontario Street N: Guy, Danl 149 Ontario Street N: Brown, Ronald 149 Ontario Street N: Glenn, Chas 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Truchon, J. 149 Ontario Street N: Deforge, Donald 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: Jones, Glady (Apt 1) 149 Ontario Street N: Kitnzie, Peter 149 Ontario Street N: St. Clair, Ross 149 Ontario Street N: Scott, J. 149 Ontario Street N: Nightingale, B. 149 Ontario Street N: Weber, G.H. 149 Ontario Street N: Novak, J. 149 Ontario Street N: Gottschalk, D. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: Jones, Glady (Apt 1) 149 Ontario Street N: Miller, Brian 149 Ontario Street N: Lenox, Chas 149 Ontario Street N: Salter, G., works as an asmbler [assembler] at Electrohome 149 Ontario Street N: Craft, Victor 149 Ontario Street N: Brennen, B. 149 Ontario Street N: Anderson, L. 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1974 149 Ontario Street N: Jones, Glady (Apt 1) 149 Ontario Street N: Alexander, J. (Apt 7) works as a waiter at the Grand Union Hotel 149 Ontario Street N: Jasper, J. (Apt 8) 149 Ontario Street N: Salter, G. (Apt 5) works as an asmbler [assembler] at Electrohome 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 149 Ontario Street N: Rohrback, Ernest (Apt 10) 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 149 Ontario Street N: Jacques, B. (Apt 6), works as a cabinet maker for Columbia cabinets 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1975-1976 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 1983 Apartments: 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1977-1978 149 Ontario Street N: Scott D. 149 Ontario Street N: 3: 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1979 149 Ontario Street N: Goldring N. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1980 149 Ontario Street N: Goldring N. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: 149 Ontario Street N: Wiegand D. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1981 149 Ontario Street N: Aschmore U. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1982 149 Ontario Street N: Villemaire D. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1983 Apartments: 149 Ontario Street N: 1: Vacant 149 Ontario Street N: 2: Louberg M. 149 Ontario Street N: 3: No return 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Duong L. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: Nurcombe G. 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1984 Apartments: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: 3: Storage 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Louberg M. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: Nurcombe G. 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1985 Apartments: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: 3: Storage 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Campbell R. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: Nurcombe G. 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1986 Apartments: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: 3: Storage 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Feeney D. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: Nurcombe G. 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1987 Apartments: 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Feeney D. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: Nurcombe G. 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1988 Apartments: 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. -10- 149 Ontario Street N: 4: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 5: Hart L. 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R. 149 Ontario Street N: 7: No Return 149 Ontario Street N: 8: Fraser W. 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Robb N. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1989 Apartments: 149 Ontario Street N: 12: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 149 Ontario Street N: 4: No Return 149 Ontario Street N: 5: No Return 149 Ontario Street N: 6: Lang R 149 Ontario Street N: 7: No Return 149 Ontario Street N: 8: No Return 149 Ontario Street N: 9: Fraser W. 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1990 149 Ontario Street N: 1: Vacant 149 Ontario Street N: 2: No return 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. 1993-2014 149 Ontario Street N: Vacant 151 Ontario Street N: Bernhardt Insurance Services Ltd. - 11 - Appendix E City Directory Listings for 21 Weber Street West Appendix E: City Directory Listings for Weber Street West Sources: 1893-1918: Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo, and Bridgeport Street and Alphabetical Business and Miscellaneous Directory. Henry Vernon and Sons, Publisher. Hamilton. 1919-2014: Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo Street and Alphabetical Business and Miscellaneous. Vernon and Sons Publishing. Hamilton. 1901-1903 No street numbers are provided. Those identified on the street include: Rev W.A. Bradley H. Kruff 27 G.H. Whiting 29 Mrs. John S. Shantz 31 A. Von Neubronn 33 W.J. Arnott M. D 1907-1908 19 Weber Street W: Albert Ortman, works as a labourer No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1908-1924 19 Weber Street W: John Benninger works at the rubber factory No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1925 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys — Owner 19 Weber Street W: Ratz, R. MD No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1926-1938 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys — Owner No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1939-1942 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys. 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.A. Phys. No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1943 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys. 19 Weber Street W: Glaister, Deborah, Phys. No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1944-1946 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys. No 21 Weber Street W Listed 1947-1957 19 Weber Street W: Lackner, H.M. Phys., Lackner, H.A. Phys. No 21 Weber Street W Listed -2- 1958-1963 No longer a listing for 19 Weber Street. 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J.F. 21 Weber Street W: Diefenbacher, J.F. 1964 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J.F. 1965-1977 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J.F. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: Phillips, G. (dnst) 1978-1985 Dental Clinic 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: Messersmith, D. (dnst) 1986 21 Weber Street W: Dental Clinic 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: Jrug, R. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: Messersmith, D. (dnst) 1987 21 Weber Street W: Dental Clinic 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: No Return 1988 21 Weber Street W: Dental Clinic 21 Weber Street W: Ledger, J. (dnst) 21 Weber Street W: No Return 1989 21 Weber Street W: The Dolphin 1990-1999 21 Weber Street W: Lantern Garden Restaurant 2000 21 Weber Street W: Coffee Mugs Donuts and More 2001 21 Weber Street W: - Energy Cafe 2003-2011 21 Weber Street W: - Energy Cafe 2012 No 21 Weber Street W. Listed at all. 2013 DaVinci Cafe and Bar (listed as new to this directory. Also reference to be on the west side of Ontario Street- possible typo) 2014 Vacant -3- Appendix F Full Set of Option 2 — 16 Designs for Storey Building W 0 W O F J i Z J W De n J ol LO 21 S LU J Q LU Q H x W z O U LE H 0 N Q � � � w Z LIMJm x 0 O X N w N J w O LU r, F- Q W 0 F z W 00 N U �~ w \z� z 'n m O 2 LU W Lo V V) z� w � W N UW y\ W Q Q Lu ~ w O W H w F u aayo 21 S LU J Q LU Q H x W z O U LE H 0 N Q LIMJzzxo a` E E E \/ a 00 \ k \/\} @ \ �/ * k([ z L \ / LU ƒ2 »�2\ R_ z ®z w � co = §w U V_ 7 2 2 LU ~ LMU « Q �r x \\\\ §k/§k \EEEE 0- v) § tn m 0 —1 a` E E E ` a k \/\} \/\} \ ka k([ »�2\ \\\\ \EEEE § E E E E § a \ y \\ \\\ \ & 2 \y�� <$ 2 » ®; , _ ) ¥ , , \\\)\ (0 \ \\)\ - - \ _ } ))ƒ\ , < § m ) )) [ k\\ §3 §/ \ " k) ■) d/2{\ / �/j m 0 —1 W 0 W d J �O z LU �z W V) �w C) ���� ;oz0 x 00 LU N CZ r, Lu 0 Z N w � O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z ,,, HLLJ N U w H -o Lp LL �au,� o� aQUvv) • c0 p 0 � N N W 0 W A�� d J F- U W F- U U Q �O z LU �z J /) LU �_ V) �w C) ; ��oz�� x 0 00 Lu - N w Lu 0 Z N w � O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z ,,, LLJ U w H -o Lp LL �au,� o� aQUv=i� Ln 0 W 0 W A�� d J F- U W F- U U Q �O z LU �z J /) LU �_ V) �w C) ; n�oZ�co Xo 00 Lu — N D LU O Z 0 N w O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z ,,, LLJ U w H -o Lp LL �au,� o� aQUv=i� W 0 W A�� d J F- U W F- U U Q �O z LU �z J /) LU �_ V) �w C) m ��oz�� � x 0 00 Lu - N w Lu 0 Z N w � O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z ,,, LLJ U w H -o Lp LL �au,� o� aQUv=i� E79 0 I W 0 W O F J cn U LU V a i� �O z LU �z W V) W uC) m OZ x o 00 Lu — N D LU O Z 0 N w O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z ,,, U w H � LU oo�W� o� aaUyo NO I W 0 W d J �O z UJ �z W V) �w C) m n�oZ�co � x 0 00 Lu — N D LU O Z 0 N w O u N Q� �z LUO LU m Z -- ,,, � H N LLJ U w H -o Lp LL �au,� o� aQUvv) Em• I Appendix G Full Set of Option 3— 21 Designs for Storey Building IV 1104,1014" WIVO ry Ix IV 1104,1014" WIVO z m 111dis dlulm A-- 111-03 ONUIXI INII Al—Odd NI N � fl IM fl— - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24o— o u G ii o o u — — —--T—-- - — — - O C14 z m 111dis dlulm A-- 111-03 ONUIXI INII Al—Odd NI N � fl IM fl— - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24o— o u G ii o o u — — —--T—-- - — — - O . L (Y) HI M H oil Mill fl� � T. . L oo, < m LO C) m 00 _ O � o LI I of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of o ro ' I I I I k ,I ;L a l 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I10 I I 3 II II — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I I 1 i 1 - im - i�1 - i - i i■ i1 i�l i� im i I I I ,■ _l� J� __1�■ I■1 I■ Ism Ism I■i lilm lilm I� �� 111 111 111 f1 si1 �1 r1 Al 11 .■I .11 .11 al, .11 ,JI ..■I .■ � i . 111 lil I� 111 I II I II u. •.... : .... .. .. .■ "m _ Im_ 11■_ I��" ,.■I I■■� I■ I� II■ lU� !�I ILi:. U I�' IL■: LI I■ _ O � o LI I of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of o ro ' I I I I k ,I ;L a l 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I10 I I 3 II II — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I I 1 i 1 - im - i�1 - i - i i■ i1 i�l i� im i I I I ,■ _l� J� __1�■ I■1 I■ Ism Ism I■i lilm lilm I� �� 111 111 111 f1 si1 �1 r1 Al 11 .■I .11 .11 al, .11 ,JI ..■I .■ � i . 111 lil I� 111 I II I II u. •.... : .... .. .. .■ "m _ Im_ 11■_ I��" ,.■I I■■� I■ I� II■ lU� !�I ILi:. U I�' IL■: LI I■ Appendix H Region of Waterloo Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood Region of Waterloo Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties /l/ew CoIrtr6evel tion 4 Ilell-ecleae /l/e�46ou1400cls In this guide: ➢ Small-scale Historic Infill ➢ Elements of Successful Infill Design ➢ Setback ➢ Orientation ➢ Scale ➢ Proportion ➢ Rhythm ➢ Massing ➢ Height ➢ Materials ➢ Colour ➢ Roof Shape ➢ Detail and Ornamentation ➢ Landscape features ➢ Secondary Buildings ➢ Parking ➢ Neighbourhood Composition ➢ Neighbourhood Amenities ➢ Demolition 1454224 Introduction Infill housing is new construction on an available site within a historic or mature neighbourhood. Mature neighbourhoods often have a distinct architectural character. This is the result of geographic and climatic conditions, local building techniques and materials, and the style of the period during which the area was built. A sensitive infill project will be sympathetic to the existing architecture of the neighbourhood, while providing new residential developments that take advantage of the existing infrastructure. Ideally, an infill project will use existing open space and will not require the demolition of a building. The design of the new construction should be compatible with the existing streetscape to conserve the neighbourhood's heritage character by adopting appropriate building styles, profiles, massing and materials. Infill projects that may impact formally designated structures or neighbourhoods under the Ontario Heritage Act will require consultation with and approval from a Municipal Heritage Contact. Page 1 of 9 Aw- y vv Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage properties Small-scale Historic Infill When new buildings are integrated into an existing historic property or historic neighbourhood, the following approaches are encouraged in order of preference: 1. Preservation/conservation: maintain historic buildings with little alteration 2. Adaptive reuse: reuse historic buildings by implementing restoration and/or rehabilitation efforts 3. Incorporation: adaptive reuse that generally requires significant alterations or additions This guide will primarily address small-scale infill projects into historic surroundings, such as: ■ Secondary suites (converted basement or addition) ■ Garage suites ■ Garden suites (laneway housing) ■ Small lots (single -detached houses) ■ Semi-detached houses (side-by-side duplexes) ■ Duplexes (up-and-down duplexes) ■ Fourplexes ■ Row housing (up to five units) For guidance on additions to heritage structures, please refer to the Region of Waterloo's Practical Guide: Additions. Elements of Successful Infill Design It is important to note that new construction does not need to imitate or replicate the original in order to be compatible with its surrounding heritage streetscape. An infill project should be identifiable as a product of its own time to avoid giving a false sense of the past. A contemporary building can coexist with its heritage neighbours, if the design is respectful and innovative. Every project is unique, and should be assessed accordingly. As identified by the District of Columbia's Historic Preservation Guidelines for "New construction in historic districts," successful infill design will consider the following: Setback Orientation Scale Proportion Rhythm Massing Height Materials Colour 1454224 Page 2 of 9 F Ar •D y v vv Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Pr -,erties Roof shape Secondary buildings Detail and ornamentation Parking Landscape features Setback An infill project should respect a building's setback from the street and the existing setback of surrounding buildings. The streetscape should not be dominated by new construction. Respecting the alignment of rear facades is not as necessary as they can rarely be viewed from a public street. Setbacks will be identified in your city or township's zoning bylaw. TP111111 STREET Image: Good example of infill maintaining existing setbacks (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.3) Orientation STREET Image: Less desirable example of infill that does not match existing front and side yard setbacks (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.3) The orientation of a building is the direction that it faces. Most historic buildings squarely front the street, with their facade and main entrance in full view. In some cases, historic buildings are oriented to a side yard. A new building should respect the primary orientation of its neighbours. The porch is often an important feature of the home as seen from the street. When possible, avoid hiding the entrance behind an oversized garage, and create an inviting design to encourage public use of the street. Scale Scale is the relative size of a building in relation to neighbouring structures or a common object, such as cars. It is also the relative size of building Image: Site lines used to determine visibility of taller infill at the back of a lot as seen from the street (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.4) 1454224 Page 3 of 9 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties elements to one another and the overall building, such as windows, doors, cornices and other features. Most residential buildings are designed to the human scale, rather than a monumental scale, as is the case with many churches or government buildings. The building scale of a new structure should be kept consistent with the general scale of its neighbours. If you had hoped to build a taller structure, opt to place the highest portions of the building away from the street, so they are less noticeable to pedestrians and do not cast unnecessary shadows. Proportion Proportion is the relationship of the dimensions of building elements, like windows and doors, to each other and to the elevations. Proportions are often expressed in mathematical ratios. For example, many heritage buildings designed in the 1800s and early 1900s used mathematical proportions to determine the size and position of building elements. The design of a new building should respect, but not necessarily duplicate, the existing proportions of neighbouring buildings. Rhythm The spacing of repetitive facade elements, like projecting bays, windows, doors and brackets, gives an elevation its rhythm. The space between houses, the height of roofs, cornices, towers and other roof projections establishes the rhythm of a street. A new building should respect the rhythm of its neighbours and the streetscape. Massing Massing is the general shape and size of a building. A building's massing significantly contributes to the character of ll ri� a street, especially in areas with row houses and adjoining Image: Unsuccessful example of infill due to significantly smaller massing and commercial buildings. As a height compared to adjacent heritage buildings (Helen Lardner Conservation & result, new construction should Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.4) respect the massing of existing neighbouring buildings. The apparent mass of a structure may be altered through the appearance of dormers, towers and other roof projections, as well as facade projections such as bays, porches and steps. 1454224 Page 4 of 9 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage vroperties Height The height of walls, cornices, roofs, bays, chimneys and towers all contribute to the character of a building and neighbourhood. New buildings should be designed to respect existing building heights, although they do not necessarily need to be exactly the same height. Generally, if a new building is more than half -to -one storey higher or lower than existing buildings that are all the same height, Image: Undesirable example of infill housing. The new construction is substantially larger than adjacent heritage buildings (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.5) it will appear out of place. However, a new building added to a street with structures of varied heights may be more than one storey higher or lower than its neighbours and still be compatible. Upper storey setbacks can be helpful in reducing the apparent height of a new building. Materials Materials typical of a historic neighbourhood, such as brick, stone or wood should be used in the design of new construction. If a number of materials are used in an area, there will be more leeway to integrate a wider variety of materials. The size, texture, surface finish and other defining characteristics of exterior materials are as important as the type of material itself. For example, a new building constructed of glazed brick in a street of heritage buildings clad in buff brick would not be compatible. Colour The construction materials used on a building often determine its colour scheme. For example, brick, stone, terra cotta, slate, wood, stucco, asphalt shingle, copper, lead and other materials that are usually left unpainted give colour to a building. The colour scheme of a new building should complement the surrounding buildings. As a general rule, no more than three different colours should be used on a new building. Roof Shape The roof shape of a new building should respect those of its neighbours. For example, on a street composed of homes 111MR1111 ON MIN 11 I - Im Image: Poor example of infill due to inappropriate roof type and placement of window and door openings (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.5) 1454224 Page 5 of 9 NEELPractical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties with front gable roofs, it is advised that a new building have a similarly designed roof. Introducing a different roof style, such as a flat roof, would alter the established character of the street. For more information on roofs, please see the Region of Waterloo's Practical Guide: Roofs. Detail and Ornamentation Some heritage buildings in the Region of Waterloo contain elaborate detail and ornamentation while others have relatively simple designs. A new building should take into account the amount, location and elaborateness of architectural ornamentation on neighbouring buildings. Existing details and ornamentation can be used as the basis for those on a new building but they should not be copied exactly. A contemporary interpretation of historic details and ornamentation should be used to differentiate between a heritage building and sympathetic new construction. Landscape Features Plants, trees, fences, retaining walls, sidewalks, driveways and other landscape features are important character defining elements in historic neighbourhoods (see Practical Guide: Landscaping for more information). If possible, mature trees and shrubs and existing landscaping should be retained when a new structure is built on a lot. If this is not possible, landscaping that complements the new building and the neighbouring structures and landscaping should be designed. New construction may alter site drainage patterns and affect trees both on and near the site. Protection of major trees with extensive root systems may require the oversight of a specialist during construction. Significant existing landscape features, such as retaining walls and iron fences, should also be retained. Again, if this is not possible, new compatible features should be constructed along with the new building. Secondary Buildings Secondary buildings, such as -� garages and sheds are t) r important character defining elements In some historic Image: Inappropriate inclusion of garages inconsistent with design of neighbourhoods. They add scale adjacent buildings (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2006, p.6) and visual interest to primary buildings. New structures designed for inclusion in neighbour - 1454224 Page 6 of 9 N vv Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage P erties hoods with existing secondary buildings should consider the contributions they make to the character of the site and the street, while respecting their location, size, and materials. Parking New infill developments should not worsen the neighbourhood parking situation, especially if there is already a shortage of parking spaces for residents and visitors. Parking spaces should be screened from private and communal outdoor living areas and should be secure and visible from the house. Neighbourhood Composition Mature neighbourhoods in the Region of Waterloo have distinct architectural character resulting from local building methods and materials, and the style of the period in which the neighbourhood was built. When this character is consistent, for example in the St. Mary's neighbourhood of Kitchener with its concentration of wartime housing, it is important that new infill development reflect the existing style as closely as possible. However, when the existing character is more varied, as in neighbourhoods that developed over longer time periods or areas with a diverse mix of houses and industrial or commercial buildings, there is less pressure to conform. Neighbourhood Amenities Plans for infill construction should try to take advantage of adjacent neighbourhood amenities, such as parks, services and public transit. For example, new construction should ensure that a significant view or access to a neighbourhood park is not spoiled or altered for residents and visitors to the area. The existing site landscape should be used to continue or contribute to the enjoyment of public parks and open spaces. More specifically, angled or bay windows can be incorporated to gain views of significant topographical features, or upper level balconies and roof terraces can be included to provide private outdoor living areas and unobstructed views. Demolition The conservation and integration of heritage buildings into new development is encouraged and may be required by the local municipality. An assessment of the potential reuse of build - 1454224 Page 7 of 9 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Pi erties ings on an infill site should be undertaken before a decision is made to demolish them. When contemplating removing a historic building to allow for higher densities, moving the building onto a new site should be considered. However, if this is not possible, the careful salvage of significant historic building materials should be undertaken to allow their use in the restoration of other buildings. Summary The construction of successful infill housing in historic neighbourhoods is an effective way to ensure that the vibrancy and unique architectural character of a neighbourhood is maintained over time. It allows a neighbourhood to evolve while still respecting the spirit of the era in which it was first constructed. To ensure that an infill project is successful, adherence to the principles outlined in this practical guide should be followed. Consultation with a heritage professional as well as a local Municipal Heritage Committee or Municipal Planning staff will also ensure that the design of a new infill project is respectful of the neighbourhood context in which it will be located. References If you would like to learn more about infill in historic neigbourhoods, please refer to the following primary sources: Canada Mortgage & Housing Corporation. (1982). "New housing in existing neighbourhoods: advisory document". Ottawa, ON. Government of the District of Columbia. (2010). "District of Columbia Historic Preservation Guidelines: New construction in historic districts." Historic Preservation Office: Washington, DC. Additional sources: City of Ottawa. (May 2012). "Urban design guidelines for low-rise infill housing." http://ottawa.ca/sites/ottawa.ca/files/migrated/files/capl33008.pdf Fletcher & Company. (2009). "Residential infill guidelines: A manual of planning and design guidelines for residential infill in mature neighbourhoods." City of Edmonton, Planning & Development, Planning & Policy Services Branch. 1454224 Page 8 of 9 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Pli derties http://www.edmonton.ca/city government/urban planning and design/residential- infill.aspx Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd. (June 2006). "Guidelines for infill development in heritage areas in Hobsons Bay." www.hobsonsbay.vic.gov.au/files/7fe6ed28-ae63-4920-b4e8- 9fd700b61e2e/Guidelines for Infill Development in Heritage Areas in Hobsons Bay Hill, N. (1996). "Victoria Park Area, Kitchener: Heritage Conservation District Plan." City of Kitchener, ON. Historic Preservation League of Oregon. (2011). "Compatible infill design: Principles for new construction in Oregon's historic districts." Special Report. http://b log.preservationnation.org/2011/11/16/infiIIs-in-seeking-a-balance-for-oregon- historic-districts/#.VOOx59hOy1s Saint John Heritage. (2010). "Practical Conservation Guideline: Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-law." City of Saint John, Planning & Development. http://www.saintmohn.ca/site/media/SaintJohn/Bv-Law%20Eng.pdf U.S. Department of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Services. (1980). "The Secretary of the Interior's standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings." US Government Printing Office: Washington, DC. Alternate formats of this document are available upon request. Please contact Lindsay Benjamin at LBenjamin@regionofwaterloo.ca, 519-575-4757 ext. 3210, TTY 519-575-4608 to request an alternate format Disclaimer This practical guide contains useful information on restoring and preserving heritage buildings, but it is intended as a general resource only. Content from third parties with specific expertise has been heavily relied upon and their original works have been acknowledged in the list of references included at the end of this document. The Region of Waterloo has taken all reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the information in this publication. However, it is recommended that building owners consult with trained specialists, such as contractors, builders, plumbers, heating and air professionals and electricians, before undertaking any renovations, repairs or construction on their properties. The Region does not assume responsibility for any loss or damage resulting from adherence to the information in this practical guide. 1454224 Page 9 of 9 M Appendix I Comparative Analysis Appendix I: Comparative Analysis Example of Semi -Detached Buildings with the CCNHCD Photo 1: 67/69 Athens Street West, built c. 1905 (AB, 2019). Photo 2: 86188 College Street West, built c. 1900 (AB, 2019). Appendix I: Comparative Analysis Photo 5: 50-52 Weber Street West, built c. 1875 (Google Maps, 2018). Photo 6: 56 Weber Street West built c. 1889 (Google Maps, 2017). ��IF � w rijog rar IM, - I � I -f 19 all .f'