Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK Minutes - 2020-03-03HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 3, 2020CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:01p.m. Present:A. Reid -Chair Councillors D. Chapman, J. Gazzola, C. Michaud,and Ms. K. Huxted, Ms. S. Hossack, Ms. V. Mance, Ms. B. MuellerandMessrs.D.Vongphakdy, J. Baker, P. CiuciuraandD. Gundrum Staff:N. Lobley, Director, Parks and Cemeteries E.Pastrik, Manager, Manager,Maintenance &Operations L. Bensason, Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning V. Grohn, Heritage Planner D. Saunderson, Committee Administrator 1.PRESENTATION-JEAN HAALBOOM-1982 LOCAL ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE(LACAC)CALENDAR Ms. J. Haalboom presented a calendar that included water colour paintings by Mr. Bert Williams of 12 notable heritage properties within Kitchener. She provided an overview of the first Heritage Committee for Kitchener which was known as Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC), including when the Ontario Heritage Act was initially passed and the establishment of the first heritage inventory. Ms. V. Mance entered the meeting at this time. 2.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -4WESTGATE WALK -PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT The Committee considered a memorandum dated February 18, 2020 regarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as 4 Westgate Walk. The HIA addresses aproposal toadjustthe lot lineat 4 Westgate Walk. The subject property islocated within the Westmount East and West Cultural Heritage Landscape, and isidentified as a property of heritage interest, but is currently not listed on the Municipal Heritage Register.Ms. V. Grohn provided opening remarks regarding the HIA advising Heritage Planning staff will be seeking the Committee’s input and comments,which will be taken into consideration as part of staff’s review of the HIA and the processing of the associated planning application.She noted the property does not currently have heritage status,but was identified as a property of heritage interest. Mr. E. Sugden, MHBC Planning Ltd.,provided an overview of the draft HIA stating the property owner is intending onsubmitting a Planning Act application to complete a lot line adjustment. He commented the lot line adjustment willallow for another single detached dwelling to be constructed on the lot to the left of the subject dwelling. He indicated the subject property is part of the Westgate Walk subdivision and is comprised of two full lots. He stated the dwelling has historical significance due tothe owners, as well as theproperty beingthe Dare Family, a local business family known for operating Dare Foods and for its physical and design value as the architect who designed the single detached dwelling was Eberhard Zeidler an internationally renowned architect. Mr. Sugden further advised the new lot line is intended to ensure no changes would be required to the existing dwelling and landscape featureson the subject property currently in existence this date. He commented both lots wouldbe similar in nature and would mimic the currentstreetscape, statingboth parcelsalsoconform totheregulations outlined in Zoning By-law. He added there would be no additional lots created on the street as the parcel is comprised of two whole lots on a plan of subdivision, the lot line adjustment is intended to maintain the dwelling in situ. Questions were raised regarding theland acknowledgement and whether there was a duty to consult with the First Nations when reviewing any Planning Act applications.It was noted there is no mappingfor the subject property identifying it as having archeology significance. Ms. V. Hicks, MHBC Planning,advised that if/when a Planning Act application is submitted,any consultation requirements would be completed at that time. Ms. S. Hossack advised the intent of the notation is to provide a land acknowledgement, statingthe subject property is within the territory of Haldiman Tract, advising a duty to consult would not apply. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 3, 2020-6-CITY OF KITCHENER 2.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -4 WESTGATE WALK -PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT(CONT’D) In response to questions, Ms. Grohn further advised a subsequentHIA wouldnot be required for the construction of the new single detached dwelling. Councillor J. Gazzola requested clarification on the requirement for an HIA. Mr. L. Bensason advised at the time the City was reviewing properties for the Municipal Heritage Registrar, staff would contact the property owner regarding the potential listing and if there was no responseat that time, the property was noted as having potential heritage significance,but listing was not pursued. He indicated the subject property was noted and if/when a Planning Act application was submitted,it would necessitate the requirement for an HIA.In response to further questions, Ms. Grohn advised staff have spoken with the property owner regarding possible heritage designation and they are not willing to pursue designation at this time. Councillor D. Chapman questioned whether the trees on the subject property would be impacted by the construction of a new dwelling. Mr. Sugden advised the majority of the trees on the property are around the perimeter, stating there is a large open area that would accommodate a new dwelling. He further advisedthe lot line between the new home andthe property municipally addressed as 6 Westgate Walk would remain unchanged and any setbacks between the dwellingswouldneed to comply with the Zoning By-law. Ms. A. Reid questioned with the amount of redevelopment currently occurring on Westgate Walk, whether there were any protections that could be implemented to maintain the unique character of the neighbourhood and its sparsely dense lots. Ms. Grohn advised the street is part of a larger neighbourhood that was identified as a Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) in 2014. She stated since that time, staff have been working through plans/strategies for the implementation of the CHL’s identified within the study. In response to further questions, Mr. Bensason advised staff are currently in the process of reviewing the CHL’s that are located within the City’s secondary plans as those CHL’s are currently subject to CRoZByand are of greatest priority, which is anticipated to take 2 to 3 years to be completed. He noted theprocess includes reviewing the CHL area and completing further reviews to identify the attributes of those neighbourhoods to fullyimplement the CHL designation. In response to questions, Mr.Sugden advised the proposed future use of the vacant lot is still yet to be determined.He stated there is a possibility the property owner intends on constructing a smaller dwelling as their homeat presentis beyond their current need. He further advised the neighbourhood,although it was identified as a CHL, has not been formally designated as a CHL at this time. Questions were raised regarding the process for listing or potentially designating the property and possible avenues that can be taken to encourage homeowners to support heritage listing/designation. Mr. Bensason advised staff typically only pursue listing or designation if the property owner is receptive to the designation. He stated in the pastwhenstaff pursued heritage status without the owners’support,Councilopted to side with the property owner. He further advised each property is assessedon a case-by-case basis.In this situation,the house is not under threat as they are not proposing any changes or demolition to the home. Mr. Bensason noted staff would continue to communicate with the propertyowner regardingthe heritage status of the property. Ms. B. Mueller entered the meeting at this time. 3.SURVIVOR GARDEN-VICTORIA PARK -DESIGN CONCEPT AND DESIGN STATEMENT The Committee considered an internalmemoentitled “For Comment-SurvivorGarden, Victoria Park, Design Concept and Design Statement” dated February 14, 2020 regarding an update on the status of the Survivor Garden project proposed in Victoria Park.Mr. M. Milloy and Ms. A. Walter, Gateman Milloy were in attendance to respond to questions from the Committee. Mr. N. Lobley present the memo which included: the project milestones to date; the intent of the proposed garden;the proposed location of the garden within Victoria Park, the design concept; HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 3, 2020-7-CITY OF KITCHENER 3.SURVIVOR GARDEN-VICTORIA PARK -DESIGN CONCEPT AND DESIGN STATEMENT(CONT’D) as well as, the proposed timeline and next steps. He stated the majority of the garden is intended to be constructed in 2020, with the possibility for installing the balance of the features such as the public art piece in 2021. In response to questions, Mr. Lobley advised the proposed survivor garden is being donated to the City by a joint team of Scott Barker and Gateman Milloy and will include an additional capital funding donationfor the future maintenance of the garden. Questions of clarificationwere raised regarding Page 3-9 of the agenda where itnotedthe survivor garden respects the heritage of the park. Mr. L. Bensason advised when considering Victoria Park, it is located within the Victoria Park Heritage Area Conservation District(VPHACD) and the District has policies and guidelines that speaks to heritage and cultural significance of the Park. He noted the guidelines speak to romanticlandscapes,sweeps of grasses, the woods and the element of surprise moving from one element to the next. He indicated there is always interest to add new features to the Park, stating staff want to ensure any new features are attentive to the guidelines. Several members spoke in support of the proposed design. In response to questions, Mr. Lobley advised the labyrinth is intended to be constructed from a bound surface, stating the final material has not yet been determined. He indicated the requirement forthe garden is to be fully accessible. Questions were raised regarding maintenance of the garden.Mr. Lobley advised the design is intended to have low maintenance landscaping and will include patterns and design features that consider municipal maintenance practises. He stated Gateman Milloy have a long-standing past for designing and constructing park spaces and have a good understanding for municipal practises. Mr. D. Gundrumquestioned the public art feature. Ms.Walter advisedtheycurrently have releasedacall for proposal and have received approximately 5 submissions of interest. In response to questions, Mr. Lobley advised following the creation and adoption of the Open Space Strategy, Parks staff intend on creating Master Plansfor 4 possibly 5 of the City’s larger more unique parks within the City. He stated Victoria Park is one of those 5 parks, indicating the intention of the Master Plan is to address long-range planning for the Park, noting it was anticipated to be completedin 2021. Mr. Lobley further advised the Master Plan would be brought forward for the Committee’s consideration during the development process. 4.INTRODUCTION NEW COMMITTEE MEMBER On behalf of the Committee, Ms. A. Reid welcomed Mr. D.Vongphakdywho was recently appointed to Heritage Kitchener as the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District representative. 5.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -149-151 ONTARIO STREET NORTH/21 WEBER STREET WEST Mr. L. Bensason advised as this matter has sometime sensitivity,it was requested that the Committee receive a presentation this date from Mr. M. Bolen, Edge Architectsregarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as149-151 Ontario Street North/21 Weber Street West. Ms. D. Saunderson advised in order to add the additional item to the agenda this date, the Committee would be required to waive notice toreceive the presentation as it not an item listed on the agenda. On motion by Ms. S. Hossack- it was resolved: HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 3, 2020-8-CITY OF KITCHENER 5.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -149-151 ONTARIO STREET NORTH/21 WEBER STREET WEST (CONT’D) “That in accordance with Section 27.7.14 of the City’s Procedural By-law, Heritage Kitchener Committee agreed to dispense with the requirements to provide notice to receive a presentation fromMr. M. Bolen, Edge Architectsregarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as 149-151 Ontario Street North/21Weber Street West.” Carriedwith the required 2/3 of the whole of the Committee. Mr. L. Bensason provided opening remarks stating the Committee initially considered aHeritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as 149-151 Ontario Street North/21 Weber Street Westin May 2019. He stated since that time,the applicant has been working through the Site Plan approval process and has amended their development proposal from what the Committee had considered previously. He stated the Architect is in attendance this date to provide updates on their development proposed, noting Heritage Planning staff would like Committeefeedback on the updated design. Mr. M. Bolen, Edge Architects, provided an overview of the proposed development stating when the Committee previously provided feedback on the Draft HIA,the intention was to incorporate the heritage dwelling on the ground floor of the development, having the multi-residential dwelling supported by pillarsabove.He indicated when reviewing further,the suggestions outlined in the Tall Building Guidelines,it shifted the design to maximize the floor area and reduce the overall height of the building. He stated with these changes,ithas altered the ground floor and how the heritage dwelling is intended to be conserved. Mr. Bolen advised the design is now intended to fully enclose the heritage resource behinda glass wall, which will also help in its conservationby reducing the dwelling’sexposure to the elements and minimize the alterations required to incorporate it into the development. He stated the intention is to ensure the glass has minimal reflection as possible to showcase the dwelling and to make the space more interactive with the construction of a court yard in and around the heritage dwelling. In response to questions, Mr. Bolen advised the glass was required as the tower floor plate was pulled forward to accommodate some of the regulations outlined in the Tall Building Guidelines, which then created challenges with maintenance and preservation of the heritage dwelling due to the elements (i.e. snow). He indicated forlong-termpreservation and maintenance of the dwelling,it would be easier to preserve the attribute by shielding it with glass. There were some concerns raised regarding the possibility that the heritage dwelling would now lack of connectivity with the street and would seem out of reach from the public realm. Other comments were noted that it was an interesting preservation technique that would be unique within the Downtown, and the glass court yard would allow for an interactive space to invite people into enjoy the heritage feature. Ms. V. Mance stated in her opinion,she appreciatesthe proposed glass wall, noting careful consideration should be given to the support columns as in the image presented,they could seem barring and restrictive to the view of the heritage home. Questions were raised regarding what the proposed use would be for the spaces in and around the heritage dwelling. Mr. Bolen advised that is still yet to be determined. He stated the design that incorporates a space that is more marketable would be a unique opportunity for possibly a restaurant or café. Ms. A. Reid questioned the heritage status of the property. Mr. Bensason advised the property is currently listed on the Municipal Heritage Registrar. He indicated enclosing the dwelling would not prohibit possible designation.He stated staff would need to have further dialogue with the property owner prior to considering designation, noting if that was considered,the current practice would be to wait until completion of the project so the property owner was not required to obtain Heritage Permit Applications throughout the construction process. Councillor J. Gazzola and Ms. K. Huxted left the meeting at this time. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MARCH 3, 2020-9-CITY OF KITCHENER 6.HERITAGE KITCHENER 2019-2020 WORK PLAN UPDATE The Committee consideredthe Heritage Kitchener 2019-2020Work Plan, which includes the activities intended to be completed by Heritage Planning staff and the Committee for the 2019- 2020 Advisory Committee term.In addition, Mr. L. Bensason circulated this date “Heritage Best Practices Recommended Actions-Heritage Kitchener Sub-Committees” and an internal memo entitled “Heritage Promotion Sub-Committee-Proposed Heritage House Plaque Program”, dated February 8, 2017. Mr. Bensason noted at the February 4, 2020 Heritage Kitchener meeting,it was requested to review the existing Work Plan and work completed by the previous heritage sub-committees. He provided an overview of the documents, noting staff have no objections to including a Work Plan discussion on a future agenda, stating staff are open to including additional items that are committee led. Mr. Bensason provided further information on work previously completed by the Committee, including: the plaquing program;the Canada 150 anniversary signage program; and, the four- step listing process to establish the Municipal Heritage Register. He provided additional information on heritage designation and the process requiredto designate a heritage property. Members offered the following suggestionsfor possible consideration of Committee-led initiatives that were completed or could be undertaken in the future: Lead/organize a walking tour; Review properties currently on the MHR and consult the property owner regarding designation if the ownership has changed since the previous heritage designation open house; Create a promotional item, similar to the calendar presented by Ms. J. Haalboom at the start of the meeting; and, Promoting the self-guided walking tours on the City’s website. Mr. Bensason advised pending the number of required items on the next Heritage Kitchener meeting agenda, the Work Plan can be included for further discussion, noting depending on the motivation of the members, any number of items could be considered for addition to the Work Plan for the balance of the 2020 term. Councillor C. Michaud left the meeting at this time. 7.STATUS UPDATES -HERITAGE BEST PRACTICES UPDATE AND 2020PRIORITIES -HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOLLOW-UPS Mr. L. Bensason advised there were no status updates this date. 8.ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:06p.m. D. Saunderson Committee Administrator