Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK - 2020-09-01 - Item 2 - Full Draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA)-518 Bridgeport RdCultural Heritage Impact Assessment 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener, Ontario. Prepared by: Amy Barnes M.A. CAHP C Amy Barnes Consulting June 2020 Report prepared for: Elev8 Properties Inc. 19 Shadywood Lane Cambridge, ON, N1R 2S5 Report prepared by: Amy Barnes, M.A., CAHP Amy Barnes Consulting Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................10 1.1 Report Limitations...........................................................................................................................10 2 STUDY APPROACH............................................................................................................................................11 2.1 Definitions and Abbreviations.........................................................................................................11 2.2 Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Framework..........................................................................14 2.3 Site Visit...........................................................................................................................................17 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPERTY...................................................................................................................18 3.1 Property Location............................................................................................................................18 3.2 Property Description.......................................................................................................................19 3.3 Property Context.............................................................................................................................22 3.4 Adjacent Heritage Resources..........................................................................................................25 3.5 Exisiting Heritage Status..................................................................................................................25 3.5.1 518 Bridgeport Road East SOS.............................................................................................................26 4 POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK............................................................................................................28 4.1 Provincial Acts, Regulations, Plans, and Guidelines........................................................................28 4.1.1 Planning Act.........................................................................................................................................28 4.1.2 Provincial Policy Statement (2020)......................................................................................................28 4.1.3 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019)......................................................................30 4.1.4 Ontario Heritage Act............................................................................................................................30 4.1.5 Summary..............................................................................................................................................31 4.2 Region of Waterloo.........................................................................................................................31 4.2.1 The Region of Waterloo Strategic Plan (2019-2023)...........................................................................31 4.2.2 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)..............................................................................................32 4.2.3 Regional Implementation Guideline for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation (2018) ...............36 4.2.4 Summary..............................................................................................................................................38 4.3 City of Kitchener..............................................................................................................................38 4.3.1 City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete & Healthy Kitchener (2014) .............................................38 4.3.2 City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study (2014)..............................................................50 4.3.3 Summary..............................................................................................................................................51 4.4 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2"d Edition) ............51 4.5 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties......................................53 4.6 Ontario Heritage Toolkit..................................................................................................................54 5 CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES...................................................................................................................56 5.1 Understanding CHLs........................................................................................................................56 6 PROPERTY HISTORY..........................................................................................................................................60 6.1 Pre -Contact Settlement...................................................................................................................60 6.2 European settlement.......................................................................................................................62 6.2.1 Bridgeport............................................................................................................................................64 6.3 Property History and Ownership.....................................................................................................67 6.4 Property Morphology......................................................................................................................74 7 PHYSICAL/ DESIGN DESCRIPTION.....................................................................................................................83 7.1 Exterior............................................................................................................................................83 7.1.1 Additional Considerations...................................................................................................................90 7.2 Interior.............................................................................................................................................93 7.3 Landscape........................................................................................................................................93 7.3.1 Borgstrom's Designed Landscape......................................................................................................102 7.3.2 Tree Management Plan.....................................................................................................................106 8 EVALUATIONS.................................................................................................................................................110 8.1 Ontario Regulation 9/06................................................................................................................110 8.2 Cultural Heritage Landscape..........................................................................................................112 8.3 Summary of Evaluation.................................................................................................................117 8.4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.........................................................................117 8.4.1 Description of Property.....................................................................................................................117 8.4.2 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest..............................................................................118 8.4.3 Heritage Attributes............................................................................................................................119 9 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT..............................................................................................120 10 IMPACT ASSESSMENT.....................................................................................................................................131 10.1 Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans...........................................131 10.2 City of Kitchener Design Guidelines: City Wide Design.................................................................133 10.3 Region of Waterloo: Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or MatureNeighbourhood.........................................................................................................................................137 iv 10.4 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada...............................143 10.5 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties....................................145 10.6 Summary of Impact Assessment...................................................................................................147 11 ALTERNATIVES................................................................................................................................................149 11.1 Option 1 - Do Nothing...................................................................................................................149 11.2 Option 2— Severance with Three new Lots (24m Lots)..................................................................149 11.3 Option 3- Severance with Three new Lots (18.3M Lots)...............................................................150 11.4 Option 4- Severance with Two New Lots (24M Lots)....................................................................151 11.5 Preferred Option...........................................................................................................................153 12 MITIGATIVE MEASURES..................................................................................................................................154 13 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................................155 14 RIGHT OF USE.................................................................................................................................................156 15 SIGNATURES...................................................................................................................................................156 16 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................................157 16.1 Background Sources......................................................................................................................157 16.2 Policies...........................................................................................................................................161 17 PROJECT PERSONNEL......................................................................................................................................163 Figures Figure 1: Map of 518 Bridgeport Road (red star) and surrounding area (City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 2020)..................................................................................................................................................18 Figure 2: Aerial of the subject property outlined in red (City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 2020).......... 18 Figure 3: Schedule 125 showing the current zoning. The subject property is noted with a red star (Property Description, City of Kitchener, 2018)..........................................................................................19 Figure 4: Fagade and west elevation (AB, 2020)......................................................................................... 20 Figure 5: East elevation showing formal garden area (AB, 2020)............................................................... 21 Figure 6: Aerial image of 518 Bridgeport Road, showing open areas and driveway (AB, 2020) ................ 21 Figure 7: Bridgeport Road looking east. The subject property is identified with red arrow. (AB, 2020)..22 Figure 8: Bridgeport Road looking west (left) and looking east (right) (AB, 2020) ..................................... 23 Figure 9: Properties located along the north side of Bridgeport (AB, 2020) .............................................. 23 Figure 10: Adjacent property located east of 518 Bridgeport Road (AB, 2020) ......................................... 24 Figure 11: Adjacent property located west of 518 Bridgeport Road (AB, 2020) ........................................ 24 Figure 12: The Region of Waterloo uses a three -pronged approach to determine a significant CHL (Region of Waterloo, 2018).........................................................................................................................37 Figure 13: Diagram of the Regulatory Framework identified in the City of Kitchener Official plan (City of KitchenerOP, 2014).................................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 14: Appendix 4- Maps of Cultural Heritage Landscapes. 518 Bridgeport Road is noted with a red star. (City of Kitchener, 2014).................................................................................................................... 51 Figure 15: Joseph Brant (Thayendanegea) c. 1807. (National Gallery of Canada/5777, Accessed from The CanadianEncyclopedia, 2019)....................................................................................................................61 Figure 16: Map showing the land associated with the Haldimand Grant (Victor Temrano, Native-Land.ca) .................................................................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 17: Map of the Town of Berlin 1853-1854 (ArcGIS, 2015)...............................................................63 Figure 18: Birds eye view of Berlin c. 1892 (Waterloo Generations, Kitchener Public Library) ................. 63 Figure 19: Peter and Mary Tagge in 1865 (Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. Local ID P000412) ..................................................................................................................................................... 65 Figure 20: Bridgeport Mill. 1916. (Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. Local identifier. P009605)..................................................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 21: Photograph of Berlin & Bridgeport Electric Street Railways in 1905 (KPL Digital Collection, 1905)........................................................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 22: 1867 advertisement for Elias Eby mills in Bridgeport (Waterloo Generations, Person ID 121065) .................................................................................................................................................................... 67 Figure 23: Portrait of Thomas Pearce (KPL Digital Collection, Local Identifier P000159) ...........................69 Figure 24: Photo of William Sims in 1928. William was part Delta Kappa Epsilon during his studies at the University of Toronto (Ancestry.com, University of Toronto, Yearbook 1928) ..........................................70 Figure 25: Clipping from 1923 Newspaper articles showing Carl Borgstrom (No Author, 1923) ...............73 Figure 26: 1861 Tremaine Map of Waterloo County with a red star noting the general area of the subject property(ArcGIS, 2015).............................................................................................................................75 Figure 27: Map showing the road present in 1853 (bolded black) (Geospatial Centre, Kitchener Historical StreetProject).............................................................................................................................................76 Figure 28: Map the County of Waterloo in 1879 (Geospatial Centre, 1879) .............................................76 Figure 29: Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo County, 1881. A red star denotes the general area of the subject property (Parsell. H & Co, 1881)..............................................................................................77 Figure 30: Map of the City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo in 1923. A red star denotes general area of the subject property (Geospatial Centre, 1923).....................................................................................77 V Figure 31: Air photo, 1930. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1930, IM6)...... 78 Figure 32: Air photo, 1945. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1945, IM6)...... 78 Figure 33: Air photo, 1955. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1955, IM6)...... 79 Figure 34: Air photo, 1963. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1963, IM6)..... 79 Figure 35: Aerial of subject property and surrounding context in 2005 (Google Earth Pro, 2005)............80 Figure 36: View of entrance and front lawn in 2009 (Google Maps, 2019) ................................................80 Figure 37: View of western edge of property in 2009 (Google Maps, 2019) .............................................81 Figure 38: Aerial of subject property and surrounding context in 2019 The subject property is outline with red (Google Earth Pro, 2019)..............................................................................................................81 Figure 39: Historic Street Project showing streets from 1853-1992 (Geospatial Centre, Kitchener HistoricalStreet Project).............................................................................................................................82 Figure 40: Aerial of the house showing the original c. 1914 structure outlined in red (Google Earth Pro, 2020)........................................................................................................................................................... 83 Figure 41: South elevation (fagade) and west elevation of the portion of the house -built c. 1914. (AB, 2020)........................................................................................................................................................... 84 Figure 42: West elevation showing roofline and the variation of window openings (AB, 2020) ............... 85 Figure 43: Main entrance (AB, 2020)..........................................................................................................85 Figure 44: East elevation of the portion of the house -built c. 1914 (AB, 2020) .........................................86 Figure 45: West elevation showing the rear addition and garage (AB, 2020) ............................................89 Figure 46: North elevation showing rear porch and open shed (AB, 2020) ...............................................89 Figure 47: East elevation showing rear addition and French doors (AB, 2020) ..........................................90 Figure 48: Maps showing existing elevations of the property (MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying, 2020). .................................................................................................................................................................... 95 Figure 49: View of driveway looking west, showing the relationship between the sidewalk, front lawn, andhouse (AB, 2020)..................................................................................................................................96 Figure 50: Openings located along the driveway which provides access to the open lawn (left) and opening from driveway to the formal garden terrace (right)..................................................................... 96 Figure 51: Upper flagstone terrace (left) with detail of balustrade (AB, 2020) ..........................................97 Figure 52: Middle level of formal garden area showing geometric hedging (AB, 2020) ............................97 Figure 53: Centrally places stairs located in middle of the formal garden (left) and stone ramp located on north edge of terrace (AB, 2020)................................................................................................................ 98 Figure 54: Pool edge with soften corners and surrounding flagstone boarder (AB, 2020) ........................98 vii Figure 55: Open lawn area (AB, 2020)........................................................................................................99 Figure 56: View of open lawn area from the south-east area of the property. Note the overgrown Forsythia plant on the right side. (AB, 2020)........................................................................................... 100 Figure 57: Wooden lychgate (AB, 2020)................................................................................................... 100 Figure 58: View towards Bridgeport Road from west side of property (AB, 2020) .................................. 101 Figure 59: View towards rear of property from west side of property (AB, 2020) ..................................101 Figure 60: Borgstrom's original garden layout, August 1946 (Image provided by current owner) .......... 104 Figure 61: Detailed view of the original garden layout (Image provided by current owner)...................104 Figure 62: Revised garden layout (Image provided by current owner) ...................................................105 Figure 63: Revised balustrade design (Image provided by current owners) ............................................105 Figure 64: Tree condition survey and associated driplines for 518 Bridgeport Road (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020)......................................................................................................................................107 Figure 65: Tree management plan (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020).......................................................108 Figure 66: Details list of tree species (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020) ...................................................109 Figure 67: Site plan showing the proposed sever lots and building envelopes (MacDonald Tamblyn Lord SurveyingLtd., 2020)................................................................................................................................122 Figure 68: Aerial view of property showing proposed severed lot (Adapted Google Map, 2020)...........123 Figure 69: Aerial view showing propose site plan and building envelopes (Adapted from MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd., 2020).........................................................................................................124 Figure 70: Proposed tree management plan. The shaded trees will be retained. (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020)......................................................................................................................................125 Figure 71: Tree management details (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020) ...................................................126 Figure 72: Proposed facade design for east lot........................................................................................127 Figure 73: Proposed design for east lot showing right, left, and rear elevations.....................................127 Figure 74: Proposed first floor layout for east lot....................................................................................128 Figure 75: Proposed second floor layout for east lot...............................................................................128 Figure 76: Front and rear elevations for proposed west lot..................................................................... 129 Figure 77: Proposed design for side elevations for west lot..................................................................... 129 Figure 78: Proposed first floor layout for west lot....................................................................................130 Figure 79: Proposed second floor plan for west lot..................................................................................130 Figure 80: View into the property from the proposed edge of the retained lot (approximate) (AB, 2020) .................................................................................................................................................................. 148 viii Figure 81: View of current open lawn area from eastern edge (AB, 2020) ..............................................148 Figure 82: Option 2 proposed site plan (Adapted Google Map)...............................................................150 Figure 83: Option 3 proposed site plan (Adapted Google Map)...............................................................151 Figure 84: Option 4 proposed site plan (MacDonald, Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd., 2020) .....................152 Figure 85: Aerial view of propose site plan showing lot lines and building envelopes ............................153 Tables Table 1: R-2 and Permitted Uses.................................................................................................................20 Table 2: Detailed review of Cultural Heritage Resource Policies found in Section 12 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014).....................................................................................................................40 Table 3: Evaluation against O. Reg. 9/06.................................................................................................. 110 Table 4: CHL evaluation using an adapted version of O. Reg. 9/06 Criteria for Heritage Value or Interest .................................................................................................................................................................. 112 Table 5: Indicators of Historical Integrity.................................................................................................. 113 Table 6: Indicators of Community Value...................................................................................................115 Table 7: Summary of Potential impact on heritage attributes.................................................................131 Table 8: Analysis of the 'elements of successful infill' against proposed redevelopment .......................138 Table 9: Standards and Guidelines regarding the preservation of the cultural heritage resource .......... 143 Table 10: Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties regarding the conservation of the cultural heritage resource........................................................................................145 Appendices Appendix A: City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment Terms of Reference ....................................................164 Appendix B: City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Statement of Significance for 518 Bridgeport Road...... 168 Appendix C: Additional Photographic documentation of 518 Bridgeport Road .........................................................176 Appendix D: Inspection Report for 518 Bridgeport Road..........................................................................................192 Appendix E: Impact Assessment Chart.....................................................................................................................230 Appendix F: Detailed review of the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual: City Wide Design...............................234 Appendix G: Region of Waterloo Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood..........................................................................................................................................................262 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Amy Barnes Consulting was retained by Elev8 Properties Inc. in May 2020 to complete a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (CHIA)' for the property located at 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener, Ontario (henceforth the subject property). The subject property 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). Elev8 Properties Inc. is preparing a redevelopment application for the subject property and a CHIA has been requested by city staff. The purpose of a CHIA is to determine the cultural heritage value or interest of the subject property and to identify any potential impacts of the proposed redevelopment. The CHIA has been prepared in accordance with the City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment- Terms of Reference (Appendix A). 1.1 REPORT LIMITATIONS The author of this report is a full member in good standing with the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). Qualifications can be found in at the end of this report. Any remarks regarding the condition of the buildings or trees on the property relates to observations made during the site visit and information included in third party reports or assessments. The findings of this report do not address any structural issues associated with any buildings or features on the subject property. This report was carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic while Ontario was under a State of Emergency and during the period of phased re -opening. Due to numerous closures and restrictions, access to libraries and archival materials was limited. With respect to historical research, the purpose of this report is to evaluate the subject property. The author used existing historical information provided by the City of Kitchener as well as online repositories.' The author is fully aware that there is additional historical information in existence. Nevertheless, the author believes that the information collected, reviewed, and analyzed is sufficient to conduct an evaluation using O. Reg. 9/06 criteria. This report reflects the professional opinion of the author. 1 Some documents, policies, and guidelines referenced in this report use the term Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). For consistency, the term Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment will be used throughout this report. 10 Amy Barnes Consulting PA 9l; 19101111W0REA01INA3 3. LTJ ENIIW 0W CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Definitions applied in the preparation of the CHIA are those provided in the Provincial Policy Statement (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 (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 to contain archaeological resources. Criteria to identify archaeological potential are established by the Province. The Ontario Heritage Act requires archaeological potential to be confirmed by a licensed archaeologist (PPS, 2020). Archaeological Resources includes artifacts, archaeological sites and marine archaeological sites, as defined under the Ontario Heritage Act. The identification and evaluation of such resources are based upon archaeological fieldwork undertaken in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act (OP, 2014; PPS 2020). Built heritage resource means a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured or constructed part or remnant that contributes to a property's cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community, including an Indigenous community. Built heritage resources are located on property that may be designated under Parts IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or that may be included on local, provincial, federal and/or international registers (PPS, 2020). 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 (OP, 2014). Conserved 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. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment, and/or heritage impact assessment that has been approved, accepted or adopted by the relevant planning authority and/or decision- maker. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches can be included in these plans and assessments (PPS, 2020). 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 11 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 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 (OP, 2014). 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, trailways, viewsheds, natural areas and industrial complexes of heritage significance; and areas recognized by federal or international designation authorities (OP, 2014). Cultural Heritage Resources2 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 (OP, 2014). Existing when used in reference to a use, lot, building or structure, means any use, lot, building or structure legally established or created prior to the day of approval of this Official Plan (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, constructed, or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting (e.g. significant views or vistas to or from a protected heritage property) (PPS, 2020). 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 Corridors means streets or multi -use pathways which because of their unique structural, topographic and visual characteristics, as well as abutting vegetation, built environment and cultural landscape, historical significance or location within a Heritage Conservation District are recognized as a cultural heritage resource and are intended to be conserved (OP, 2014). 22 The term built heritage resources (PPS, 2020) only encompasses built resources, whereas the term cultural heritage resource takes into consideration cultural heritage landscape (OP, 2014). As such, the term cultural heritage resource and will be used throughout this report. s The term heritage attributes is defined differently under the OHA and the PPS. Since this report is being prepared as part of application under the Planning Act, the PPS definition applies. However, the property is also listed under Section 27 of the OHA. Both definitions have been included. 12 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment means 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 (OP, 2014). Identify/Identified (in regard to cultural heritage landscapes) identify will mean designate for the purposes of the Regional Official Plan (OP, 2014). Municipal Heritage Register means a register maintained by the City of Kitchener, in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, which includes protected heritage properties and properties listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest (OP, 2020). MTCS refers to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, now known as Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Cultural Industries. Natural Heritage Features - features of the natural environment that make up the Natural Heritage System, include but are not limited to the following: a) Provincially Significant Wetlands; b) Locally Significant Wetlands; c) Significant Valleys; d) Environmentally Significant Valley Features; e) Locally Significant Valleylands; f) Environmentally Sensitive Policy Areas; g) Significant Woodlands; h) Locally Significant Woodlands; i) Significant Habitat of Endangered or Threatened Species; j) Significant Wildlife Habitat; k) Fish Habitat; 1) Regional Recharge Areas; m) Environmentally Significant Discharge Areas; n) Environmentally Significant Recharge Areas; o) Significant Landforms (Earth Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest); p) Ecological Restoration Areas; and, q) Natural Linkages and Corridors. Protected Heritage Property means 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 (OP, 2014, PPS, 2020). 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 13 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener the streetscape, which includes all elements of the street as well as the building fagades facing the street (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 (OP, 2014). Redevelopment means the creation of new units, uses or lots on previously developed land in existing communities, including brownfield and greyfield sites. It may also involve the partial or full demolition of a building and/or structure and the assembly of lands for development (OP, 2014) SOS refers to a Statement of Significance. Significant means e) in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest. Processes and criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest are established by the Province under the authority of the Ontario Heritage Act (PPS, 2020). Significant' means g) in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people (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 (OP, 2014). I►#►M4111111001CL\0:I11 ilk] IEva aIL I7_L41NEVIS1y*51.1 ► 111►1aaMill IILTIM91ilk] C/ This CHIA follows the requirements5 outlined 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. 2.2 A detailed site history, include a list of former owners obtained 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. 4 The term significant is defined differently under the OHA and the PPS. Since this report is being prepared as part of application under the Planning Act, the PPS definition applies. However, the property is also listed under Section 27 of the OHA. Both definitions have been included. 5 Based on a conversation with City of Planning Staff, some components, specifically an interior site inspection was prohibited due to Covid-19. City Staff will determine if these need to be updated at a later date. 14 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 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. 15 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 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 the CHIA are: INTRODUCTION Section 1 of this CHIA comprises an introduction to the report. STUDY APPROACH Section 2 provides the definitions and methodology used in the report. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPERTY An overview of the property, including aerial images and plans of the existing conditions, size, location, general topography and physical description are provided in Section 3. A description of potential and known cultural heritage resources on the property (TOR Item 2.3). The subject property is defined using the municipal address and legal description. The physical setting of the property, including the surrounding neighbourhood, surrounding heritage interests, and general physical features is described. Client contact information is provided (TOR Item 2.1). POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK Section 4 provides a review of applicable legislation and policy. The analysis considered municipal, regional, and provincial legislation and policies. It also reviewed and considered applicable guidelines and heritage conservation principles (TOR Item 2.7). PROPERTY CONTEXT A description of the property and surrounding areas is outlined in Section 3 (TOR Item 2.4). HISTORICAL CONTEXT Section 6 provides a history of the property based on a review of available resources. The historical overview took into consideration the main residence, the garage, and the gardens. Given the closure of libraries and archival repositories due to Covid-19, the Statement of Significance generated by the City of Kitchener was used as a starting point for historical research. Additional digitally available archival material was considered. (TOR Item 2.2). PHYSICAL/ DESIGN DESCRIPTION Section 7 provide a written description of the all the buildings and structures associated with the property as well as landscaping features (TOR Item 2.3). Any known addition and/or demolition has been identified (TOR Items 2.3 and 2.4). Floor plans will not be included due to health and safety restrictions on account of Covid-19. This limitation was communicated to City 16 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Planning staff at the onset of the project. Photographic documentation of all exterior elements is provided in Section 7 and in Appendix C (TOR Item 2.4). EVALUATIONS The property has been evaluated in accordance with O. Reg. 9/06 of the OHA and the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation framework. The results of the evaluations are outlined in Section 8 of this report (TOR Item 2.3). DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A description of the proposed redevelopment is outlined in Section 9 (TOR Item 2.5). IMPACT ASSESSMENT An impact assessment, using the identified impacts outlined in MTCS Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans, is provided in Section 10 (TOR Item 2.5). ALTERNATIVES Alternatives and the identification of the preferred option are outlined in Section 11. Mitigative measures are provided in Section 12 (Item 2.6) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS An overview of the O. Reg 9/06 evaluation, impacts assessment, mitigative measures and the rationale for the development proposal is discussed in Section 13 (TOR Item 2.8). Section 13 also provides recommendations for any additional work on the property going forward (TOR Item 2.9). REFERENCES Section 16 provided references and resources consulted for the HIA (TOR Item 2.10). PROJECT PERSONNEL Section 17 provides the authors qualifications (TOR Item 2.10). 2.3 SITE VISIT For all property being reviewed under the OHA, MTCS suggests that "... a property being evaluated should be examined at least twice.116 Ms. Barnes carried out a site visit on 20 May 2020. Ms. Barnes examined the property and exterior of the buildings. This site inspection was conducted alone and there was no interaction with any other persons. Health and safety protocols were followed. The exterior of the main residence and the garage were examined and photographed. The general context and the streetscape were also examined and photographed. The interior was not accessed at this time due to Covid-19 health and safety protocol. A secondary site visit was carried out by Ms. Barnes on 21 June 2020. 6 MTCS. 2006. Heritage Property Evaluation. Pg. 19. 17 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The subject property, know municipally as 518 Bridgeport Road, is located in the City of Kitchener, Region of Waterloo, Ontario. The subject property is located on the north side of Bridgeport Road, Regional Road 9, in the Bridgeport West Neighbourhood. The subject property is bounded by Lancaster Street West to the east, and Lang Crescent to the north and west. Bridgeport Road is a four -lane, two-way, arterial road, which generally runs in an east -west direction. P x O _ N �B'eithaupt F,,i A rA vpVE U f Z J wl G5. Q$ — tlD,i 5WP Figure 1: Map of 518 Bridgeport Road (red star) and surrounding area (City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 2020) Figure 2: Aerial of the subject property outlined in red (City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 2020). 18 Amy Barnes Consulting K�►tea:191aIlaWM111�YyIN1i9[0I►1 CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The subject property follows an irregular plan and is 5801.54 sq. m in size (0.58 ha, 1.43 acres).' The subject property consists of a one -and -one-half storey early 20th century concrete block residential dwelling, with one storey attached garage. It is best described as a vernacular architectural style with subtle influences from the Arts and Crafts movement and Georgian Revival style. The main residence was built c.1914 and a rear addition and garage added in 19418. The residence is situated on the crest of a hill of the 1.43 -acre parcel of land and has a large set back from the street. In addition to the built structure the property is a mix of open areas, a formal garden area, and wooded and naturalized areas. The property is accessed by a gently sloping curved driveway. The cultural heritage resources which contribute to the heritage value of the subject property include the main residence with attached garage and landscaped gardens. The property is zoned R-2 Residential; permitted uses are outlined in Table 1. The legal description is GCT Pt Lot 59 RP 58-R-8657 Part 1. The property is currently owned by Kimberly Love and Glen Drummond. This CHIA is being prepared for Elev8 Properties Inc. in anticipation of the purchase of property. Figure 3: Schedule 125 showing the current zoning. The subject property is noted with a red star (Property Description, City of Kitchener, 2018). City of Kitchener Interactive Map. 518 Bridgeport Road Property Information. 2020. s Due to the closure of archival repositories, the dates could not be confirmed. The information was taken from the Statement of Significance. 19 �:�f�■■■iii'ii�'� pill s yisn++ ����,��,�,1��•."L��a1r"� �` '„��"ter''+""� all, 'all Omm D®® Figure 3: Schedule 125 showing the current zoning. The subject property is noted with a red star (Property Description, City of Kitchener, 2018). City of Kitchener Interactive Map. 518 Bridgeport Road Property Information. 2020. s Due to the closure of archival repositories, the dates could not be confirmed. The information was taken from the Statement of Significance. 19 Amy Barnes Consulting Table 1: R-2 and Permitted Uses' CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener R-2 Zoning is regulated under Section 36 (By -Law 94-1, S.9) (City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law 85-1) (Amended: By-law 2006-174, S.1) (City of Kitchener Housekeeping Amendment) which reads: Permitted • Coach House Use: • Dwelling Unit • Duplex Dwelling (By-law 94-183, S.20) • Home Business • Private Home Day Care • Residential Care Facility • Single Detached Dwelling Figure 4: Fagade and west elevation (AB, 2020) 9 City of Kitchener. Schedule 125. 20 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 5: East elevation showing formal garden area (AB, 2020). Figure 6: Aerial image of 518 Bridgeport Road, showing open areas and driveway (AB, 2020). 21 Amy Barnes Consulting 9*9=2M97211 I'M WK 9101NI:rl CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The Bridgeport West Neighbourhood represents a wide variety of housing types, commercial spaces and places of worship which have been built at various time periods. The north side of Bridgeport Street and the area surrounding the subject property (north, east, and west) consists of single-family dwellings. Lot sizes, architectural styles, setbacks, massing, and height vary dramatically throughout the neighbourhood. The south side of Bridgeport Street is also composed of residential dwellings which have a variety of architectural styles and a generally cohesive setback from the street. Immediately across from the subject property is a large church (St. Peter and Paul Greek Orthodox Church) and large open green area. To the east of the subject property, at the intersection of Bridgeport Road and Lancaster Street, is a mix of commercial businesses of various sizes. Section 6.4 examines various maps and air photos and provides an increased understanding of the contextual surroundings and neighbourhood development. Figure 7: Bridgeport Road looking east. The subject property is identified with red arrow. (AB, 2020). 22 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 8: Bridgeport Road looking west (left) and looking east (right) (AB, 2020). Figure 9: Properties located along the north side of Bridgeport (AB, 2020). 23 ITT CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 8: Bridgeport Road looking west (left) and looking east (right) (AB, 2020). Figure 9: Properties located along the north side of Bridgeport (AB, 2020). 23 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener -r — $�§0 � Y i� Figure 10: Adjacent property located east of 518 Bridgeport Road (AB, 2020). Figure 11: Adjacent property located west of 518 Bridgeport Road (AB, 2020). 24 $�§0 � Y Figure 11: Adjacent property located west of 518 Bridgeport Road (AB, 2020). 24 Amy Barnes Consulting 91121 9 11 111 ON NEVOIN 104-01111MG111101 CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener There are no heritage resources located adjacent, or contiguous, to the property recognized under the OHA. reW�IVA 116319101e111111:111: IIFIT01MiIFN r1�1 The subject property is a listed property as per Section 27 of the OHA. The property was added to the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register as a non designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on 12 January 2009. The City of Kitchener follows a specific process when considering adding a property to the Municipal Heritage Register. The four -step process is intended to allow for an objective and thorough evaluation of the potential heritage resource.10 The four steps are: 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".11 As part of Step 3, "Heritage Planning staff prepare a 'statement of significance' [SOS] for each property and notify the property owners of the heritage interest in the property".12 An SOS is intended to provide an understanding of the property and identify the cultural heritage value or interest. An SOS contains the following information: • Municipal Address, AW • Legal Address; • Year Built; • Architectural Styles; • Original Owner; • Original Use; • Condition; io City of Kitchener. Heritage Brochure. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 25 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Description of the Historic Place; • Heritage Value; • Heritage Attributes; • Photos; and • A Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form. The Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation form provides a preliminary evaluation of the property using 14 different criteria. The criteria generally reflect the nine criteria outlined in Ontario Regulation 9/06 (O. Reg /06) of the OHA. The Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation is re-examined and adjusted if needed, by the evaluation subcommittee. [e111111.�1M79iIE:11:l:N11Zelisli)kaa:ZiL\17X_ -10031. This section highlights the SOS information assigned to the subject property. The SOS was considered as part of the evaluation (Section 8). The full SOS for 518 Bridgeport Road is included as Appendix B. Heritage Value 518 Bridgeport Road is recognized for its aesthetic and historic value. The design, physical and contextual value relate to the architecture and construction of the residence and attached garage as well as the landscaped gardens. The house is a unique example of Vernacular architecture with influences from the Craftsman and French Canadian Colonial architectural styles. The house is in excellent condition with many intact original elements. The house features poured concrete (1910) and cinder block (1941) construction with concrete pargework that is painted grey and scored to resemble square cut stone. Architectural details are executed in wood, glass, stone, and concrete including brackets, multi -pane windows, and balustrades. The landscaped gardens display a blend of both structure and natural forms. The gardens were built in tiers, starting with a flagstone terrace and balustrade, which stretched along the length of the ivy-covered house. A few steps lead to a grassy level bounded by geometric hedges before another stairway descends to a concrete path marking the perimeter of the buried pool. The structured tiers give way to a sweeping lawn edged by curved beds and towering trees. On the north edge of the property lies a steep wooded area with a meandering path. The gardens host rare and unique species such as the Carolinian rose, Indian bean tree, and catalpa tree. The historic and associative value relates to the historical ownership of the property as well as its association with a prominent landscape architect. The house was built in 1914 by Thomas Pearce as a wedding gift for his daughter, Harriet, who married English sea captain Ernest Snow. In 1939, the property was sold to William and Mary Sims, who named the house "Hilltop House." The Sims family was well-known in Kitchener's legal circles. William, his brother J. Kenneth, and their father Harvey all had law practices. Hilltop House was the first of two Sims family estates in Kitchener. In 1929, Harvey Sims built the second estate in the Chicopee area, which was later occupied by his son J. Kenneth Sims. In 1941, a one -and -a -half storey addition to the rear of the house was constructed by local builder Ball Brothers Construction. The architect of the addition was T.H. Wells of Waterloo. Extensive landscaping was added to the 26 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener property in 1945 and designed by prominent landscape architect Carl A. Borgstrom of Churchville, Ontario. Borgstrom also designed the landscaping at the second estate. In addition to the two Sims estates, Borgstrom designed the Rock Garden at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton and was one of the founding members of the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects. Heritage Attributes The heritage value in 518 Bridgeport Road lies in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction and architectural style, including: • Concrete block construction with pargework that is painted grey and scored to resemble square cut stone; • All windows, window openings, and stone sills; • All exterior doors and door openings; • Segmentally -arched portico entrance with flat canopy and brackets; • Roof, roofline, and dormers; • Wood soffits and brackets; and • Brick chimneys. All Borgstrom-designed landscape features, including: • Curved driveway lined with trees and shrubs; • Front lawn with grass, trees and shrubs, • Terraced grass slope on east side of property; • Flagstone walkways, stairs, ramp, and concrete balustrade; • Stone pool liner; • Coniferous and deciduous shrubs adjacent to the house, on top level of • terrace; • Trees and shrubs bordering the east side of the property; and • Trees and sloped terrain of the east side of the property. 27 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The following policy review considers relevant Provincial, Regional, Municipal policies' and applicable heritage guidelines. 4.1 PROVINCIAL ACTS, REGULATIONS, PLANS, AND GUIDELINES Cultural heritage and cultural heritage resources are considered a matter of provincial interest and managed through Provincial legislation, policy, and guidelines. These policies provide a framework which must be considered for any proposed redevelopment. Overall, these provincial policies support the conservation of cultural heritage resources. 4.1.1 PLANNING ACT In Ontario, the Planning Act is the primary document for municipal and provincial land use planning. With respect to provincial interest in heritage, Part I (2) states: "The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under the Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, (d) the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological, or scientific interest".13 The current Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), issued under section 3 of the Planning Act, came into effect 1 May 2020. 4.1.2 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT (2020) The PPS offers policy direction on land use planning and development. It is considered a "key part of Ontario's policy -led planning system" and "sets the foundation for regulating the development and use of land".14 The PPS and municipal official plans create a: "...framework for comprehensive, integrated, place -based and long-term planning that supports and integrates the principles of strong communities, a clean and healthy environment and economic growth, for the long terri The PPS is meant to be read in its entirety as "more than one policy is relevant, a decision maker should consider all of the relevant policies to understand how they work together"." Specifically Section 2.6 articulates the provincial policies with respect to cultural heritage, however there are addition areas of the PPS which address cultural heritage. 13 Province of Ontario. 1990. Planning Act, Part 1 (2, d). 14 PPS. 2020. Part 1: Preamble. Pg. 1. 15 Ibid. Pg. 1. 161bid. Pg. 1. 28 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Part IV. Vision for Ontario's Land Use Planning System notes the wise use and management of cultural heritage resources over the long term is of provincial interest.17 Furthermore, Section 1.21, states: "A coordinated, integrated and comprehensive approach should be used when dealing with planning matters within municipalities, across lower, single and/or upper -tier municipal boundaries, and with other orders of government, agencies and boards including: c) managing natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral, and cultural heritage and archaeological resources;"18 Section 1.7 states: Long-term economic prosperity should be supported by: e) 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; 19 Section 2.0 Wise Use and Management of Resources states: "Ontario's long-term prosperity, environmental health, and social well-being depend on conserving biodiversity, protecting the health of the Great Lakes, and protecting natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral and cultural heritage and archaeological resources for their economic, environmental and social benefits."20 Section 4.6 of the PPS states: "The official plan is the most important vehicle for implementation of this Provincial Policy Statement. Comprehensive, integrated and long-term planning is best achieved through official plans. Official plans shall identify provincial interests and set out appropriate land use designations and policies. To determine the significance of some natural heritage features and other resources, evaluation may be required. In order to protect provincial interests, planning authorities shall keep their official plans up-to-date with this Provincial Policy Statement. The policies of this Provincial Policy Statement continue to apply after adoption and approval of an official plan".21 With regards to Cultural Heritage, Section 2.6 Cultural Heritage and Archaeology outlines five guiding policies. They state: "2.6.1 Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. 17 PPS. 2020. Part IV. P. 6 18 PPS. 2020. Part V. P. 12-13. 19 PPS. 2020. Part V. P. 22 20 PPS. 2020. Part V. P. 24 21 PPS. 2020. Part V. Pg. 35. 29 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 2.6.2 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential unless significant archaeological resources have been conserved. 2.6.3 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. 2.6.4 Planning authorities should consider and promote archaeological management plans and cultural plans in conserving cultural heritage and archaeological resources. 2.6.5 Planning authorities shall engage with Indigenous communities and consider their interests when identifying, protecting and managing cultural heritage and archaeological resources."22 Lastly, in regards to cultural heritage, significant is defined as "resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest. Processes and criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest are established by the Province under the authority of the Ontario Heritage Act".23 4.1.3 GROWTH PLAN FOR THE GREATER GOLDEN HORSESHOE (2019) A Place to Grow: Growth plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019) came into effect on 16 May 2019. The document notes that the plan, "together with the Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and the Niagara Escarpment Plan, builds on the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) to establish a unique land use planning framework for the GGH".24 Section 4.2.7. addresses cultural heritage resources. It states: 1. Cultural heritage resources will be conserved in order to foster a sense of place and benefit communities, particularly in strategic growth areas. 2. Municipalities will work with stakeholders, as well as First Nations and Metis communities, in developing and implementing official plan policies and strategies for the identification, wise use and management of cultural heritage resources. Municipalities are encouraged to prepare archaeological management plans and municipal cultural plans and consider them in their decision-making.2s 4.1.4 ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT The OHA R.S.O., 1990, c.0.18 is the primary piece of legislation used by municipalities to conserve cultural heritage resources. The OHA authorizes municipalities to enter into heritage easements, add properties of cultural heritage value or interest to a Heritage Register (Section 22 PPS. 2020. Part V. P. 31. 23 Ibid. Pg. 51. 24 A Place to Grow. 2019. Introduction. Pg.3. 25 A Place to Grow. 2019. Pg. 47. 30 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 27), designate individual properties of cultural heritage value or interest (Section 29, Part IV) or create heritage conservation districts (Part V). The OHA authorizes municipalities to list non -designated property believed to be of cultural heritage value or interest on their municipal register under Section 27. A listed property is recognized for having some degree of cultural heritage value and possible future designation. The designation of individual properties is under the authority of O. Reg 9/06. O. Reg. 9/06 outlines the criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest under Section 29 of the OHA. These nine criteria are used to help determine if an individual property is significant. They include: 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, 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 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. 1•MM�i�1► r► UII'M Section 3.4 of this report demonstrates that 518 Bridgeport Road is a listed property under Section 27 of the OHA. Based upon this status meets the definition of a significant cultural heritage resource. The PPS states that significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. C�►�:�xel[�7►�il��i%�r�:��iI�7 The City of Kitchener is located with in the Region of Waterloo. The following regional policies have been considered. 4.2.1 THE REGION OF WATERLOO STRATEGIC PLAN (2019-2023) 31 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener With every new Regional Council, the Region of Waterloo creates a strategic plan to set priorities for the coming term. With the help of community input the plan identifies five areas of focus: Thriving economy; Sustainable transportation; Environment and climate action; Healthy, safe and inclusive communities; and Responsive and engaging public service.26 Cultural heritage is addressed in Section 1 Thriving Economy, where it is noted that "Residents see arts, culture, and heritage as important aspects of the community"27. Strategic Objective 1.3 states that the Region will "Support the arts, culture and heritage sector to enrich the lives of residents and attract visitors to Waterloo Region1128. It identifies three actions to achieve this, which include: 1.3.1 Work with community partners to develop a regional cultural plan that complements area municipal plans and that defines and reinforces the Regional cultural mandate. 1.3.2 Develop a robust, transparent and equitable grant funding strategy to support arts and cultural sector 1.3.3. Provide opportunities for cultural activities and events to take place at Regional facilities on Regional property.29 4.2.2 REGION OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN (2015) The Regional Official Plan (ROP) is a legal document which sets out the "goals, objectives and policies to manage and direct physical (land use) change and its effects on the cultural, social, economic and natural environment within the regional community".30 The ROP outlines goals and policies to help manage change in the Region over a 20 -year period. The current ROP was approved with modifications by the Ontario Municipal Board on 8 June 2015.31 Not only does the ROP emphasize that land use planning is a shared responsibility between the Region and Area Municipalities, it also notes that "the Planning Act requires that all Regional and Area Municipal public works, Area Municipal official plans and land use related by-laws, and all future development must conform to the Regional Official Plan".32 Chapter 2, Subsection 2.D of the ROP outlines polices for the Urban Area.33 Section 2.D.1 General Development Policies states: 26 Region of Waterloo. Strategic Focus 2019-2023. Pg. 12. 2' Ibid. Pg. 16. 28 Ibid. Pg. 16. 21 Region of Waterloo. Strategic Focus 2019-2023. Pg. 18. 30 Region of Waterloo. 2015. Regional Official Plan. Pg. 3. 31 Ibid. Pg. 1. 32 Ibid. Pg. 3. 33 518 Bridgeport Road is located within the Urban Area. 32 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener "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 of the ROP outlines policies related to the Liveability in Waterloo Region. It states: "The livability of a region is based not only on its design and infrastructure, but also on how these elements are used to help the region become a desirable, accessible and safe community that places significant importance on providing choice, and maintaining and fostering a high quality of life.1131 Section 3G addresses Cultural Heritage and notes that cultural heritage resources 'provide an important means of defining and confirming regional identity.36 In regard to the identification of regional Cultural Heritage Resources, the following policies apply: 3.G.1 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. 3.G.2 The Region will prepare and update a Regional Implementation Guideline for Conserving Regionally Significant Cultural Heritage Resources. In accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, 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. 3.G.3 Area Municipalities will identify cultural heritage resources by establishing and maintaining a register of properties that are of cultural heritage value or interest. Area Municipalities will include on their register properties designated under Part IV, V or VI of the Heritage Act, and will consider including, but not be limited to, the following additional cultural heritage resources of cultural heritage value or interest: (a) properties that have heritage conservation easements or covenants registered against title; (b) cultural heritage resources of Regional interest; and 3a Region of Waterloo. 2015. Regional Official Plan. Pg. 20. 3s Ibid. Pg. 39. 36 Ibid. Pg. 48. 33 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener (c) cultural heritage resources identified by the Grand River Conservation Authority and the Federal or Provincial governments. 3.G.4 The Region will coordinate and maintain a region -wide inventory of cultural heritage resources that are: (a) listed on registers established and maintained by Area Municipalities; (b) identified by the Federal or Provincial governments, and the Grand River Conservation Authority; (c) identified through research by the Region, Area Municipalities, postsecondary institutions or local historical societies; (d) of Regional interest; or (e) owned by the Region.37 Regarding cultural heritage landscapes the following policies apply: 3.G.5 The Region will prepare and update a Regional Implementation Guideline for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. This guideline will outline the framework for identifying Cultural Heritage Landscapes, including Cultural Heritage Landscapes of Regional interest, and for documenting each individual landscape through a Cultural Heritage Conservation Landscape Plan that includes: (a) a statement of significance; (b) a listing of the cultural heritage resources and attributes being conserved within the Cultural Heritage Landscape through the use of existing planning tools, such as Heritage Act designations, listings on the Municipal Register, official plan policies, secondary plans and zoning bylaws; and (c) recommendations for additional conservation measures. 3.G.6 Area Municipalities will designate Cultural Heritage Landscapes in their official plans and establish associated policies to conserve these areas. The purpose of this designation is to conserve groupings of cultural heritage resources that together have greater heritage significance than their constituent elements or pa rts. 3.G.7 The Region will assist Area Municipalities with the preparation of Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation Plans for Cultural Heritage Landscapes of Regional interest. 38 Regarding Cultural Heritage Impact Assessments, the ROP outlines the following policies. 37 Region of Waterloo. 2015. Regional Official Plan. Pg. 48-49. 38 Ibid. Pg.48-49. 34 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 3.G.13 Area Municipalities will establish policies in their official plans to require the submission of a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment in support of a proposed development that includes or is adjacent to a designated property, or includes a non -designated resource of cultural heritage value or interest listed on the Municipal Heritage Register. 3.G.14 Where a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment required under Policy 3.G.13 relates to a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest, the Area Municipality will ensure that a copy of the assessment is circulated to the Region for review. In this situation, the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment submitted by the owner/applicant will be completed to the satisfaction of both the Region and the Area Municipality. 3.G.15 Where a development application includes, or is adjacent to, a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest which is not listed on a Municipal Heritage Register, the owner/applicant will be required to submit a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment to the satisfaction of the Region. 3.G.16 The Region will undertake a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment and consult with the affected Area Municipality and the Regional Heritage Planning Advisory Committee prior to planning, designing or altering Regional buildings or infrastructure that may affect a cultural heritage resource listed on the region - wide inventory described in Policy 3.G.4. The Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment will be reviewed and approved in accordance with the policies in this Plan. 3.G.17 Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment will include, but not be limited to the following: (a) historical research, site analysis and evaluation; (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 impacts; (e) consideration of alternatives, mitigation and conservation methods; 3.G.18 Where a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment required in this Plan relates to a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest, the conservation recommendations will, wherever feasible, aim to conserve cultural heritage resources intact by: (a) recognizing and incorporating heritage resources and their surrounding context into the proposed development in a manner that does not compromise or destroy the heritage resource; 35 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener (b) protecting and stabilizing built heritage resources that may be underutilized, derelict, or vacant; and (c) designing development to be physically and visually compatible with, and distinguishable from, the heritage resource. 3.G.19 Where it is not feasible to conserve a cultural heritage resource intact in accordance with Policy 3.G.18, the conservation recommendations will: a) promote the reuse or adaptive reuse of the resource, building, or building elements to preserve the resource and the handiwork of past artisans; and (b) require the owner/applicant to provide measured drawings, a land use history, photographs and other available documentation of the cultural heritage resource in its surrounding context. 3.G.20 Cultural Heritage Impact Assessments may be scoped or waived by the Region or the Area Municipality as applicable.39 4.2.3 REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINE FOR CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION (2018) In 2013, Regional Council endorsed the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. The document was updated in 2018. The purpose of the document is: "...to provide guidance to applicants, Area Municipal Heritage Advisory Committees (MHACs) and Regional and Area Municipal staff on the implementation of cultural heritage landscape policies of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) for the identification of cultural heritage resources, the preparation and review of development applications, and for the undertaking of heritage review during the Environmental Assessment (EA) process."40 The document provides information on the identification and evaluation of Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHLs), how to prepare a CHL technical study, existing policies for designation of a CHL, and the conservation of a CHL through a CHIA. 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 39 Region of Waterloo. 2015. Regional Official Plan. Pg.49-50 40 Region of Waterloo. 2018. Regional Implementation Guidelines Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. P. 2 36 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener recognized by federal or international designation authorities (e.g. a National Historic Site or District designation, or a UNESCO World Heritage Site).41 Section 1.0 notes that CHLs are typically characterized by: • A concentration of cultural heritage resources, such as buildings, structures and landforms; • A concentration of supporting structural elements such as vegetation, fences or roads; • A sense of visual coherence; and, • A distinctiveness which enables the area to be recognized from neighbouring area.42 Section D (Guidelines) provides guidance on the identification and evaluation of CHLs. The purpose of this section is to ensure "efficient, consistent, comprehensive and defensible process is used to identify CHLs worthy of conservation within the region" .41 This section outlines the process for the identification and evaluation of CHLs and states: "In accordance with policy 3.G.5 of the Regional Official Plan (ROP), this section of the guideline will apply when Area Municipal staff and Municipal Heritage Advisory Committees are identifying and evaluating the significance of the candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL). A CHL that is determined to be a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest is also subject to policies 3.G.2, 3.G.14 and 3.G.15.1144 The document outlines how a potential CHL is evaluated using a three -pronged approach which considers cultural heritage value or interest, historical integrity, and community value. This approach is illustrated in a diagram taken from Section 5.0 of the document (Figure 12). Cultur eritage Value o ntThstt Lands pes that are associate lh the of the area, have design alue ndlor have contextual value. Significant Cthat CHL Histoty Communi Value andscave Landscap that are functiity value by a andl co unityrefl Figure 12: The Region of Waterloo uses a three -pronged approach to determine a significant CHL (Region of Waterloo, 2018). 41 Ibid. Pg. 2 42 Region of Waterloo 43 Ibid. Pg. 14. 44 Ibid. Pg. 14. 2018. Regional Implementation Guidelines Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation Pg. 2. 37 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 4.2.4 SUMMARY The policies noted above outline the Regional approach to the identification, protection, and conservation of cultural heritage resources. The policies are not adequately specific to apply to a particular property; however, they do provide direction for local municipalities to ensure that local cultural heritage resources are conserved. The subject property has not been identified as a potential CHL, or as components of a potential CHL, by the Region of Waterloo. To ensure that this CHIA is consistent with best practice, an evaluation of the property, using the CHL study framework was conducted (Section 8.2). 121MwelIWKS]aI 1C41:140111C0 4.3.1 CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN: A COMPLETE & HEALTHY KITCHENER (2014) The City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete & Healthy Kitchener (OP) was approved 19 November 2014. The OP is a legal document "that contains goals, objectives and policies to manage direct physical and land use change and their effects on the cultural, social, economic and natural environment within the city".45 Section 1.A.1 states the purpose of the OP is: 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. 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.46 Section 1.A.3 Planning Framework, notes that the plan incorporates the policies and regulatory frameworks established by "the Province, as outlined in the Provincial Policy Statement, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) and other Provincial legislation. This plan also incorporates policies established by the Region as provided in the Regional Official Plan".47 The regulatory framework outlined in the OP is show in Figure 13. 41 City of Kitchener. City of Kitchener Official Plan. 2014. Pg. 1-1. 46 Ibid. Pg. 1-1. 4' Ibid. Pg. 1-3. 38 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 13: Diagram of the Regulatory Framework identified in the City of Kitchener Official plan (City of Kitchener OP, 2014) Part C of the OP contains policies and objectives which direct growth and development decisions in the City of Kitchener. Section 8.C.2 Urban Forests notes the value of tree and the tree canopy on "public and private lands, residential streets, parks and natural areas" and "encourages the conservation and wise management of the urban forest".48 Section 8.C.2.5. and 8.C.2.6 states: "The City will encourage landscaping on public and private lands to preserve and complement the existing natural landscape. The City will direct the use of a mix of indigenous plant species and trees having historic or cultural significance in these landscape areas. The City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road rights of - way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and conserve existing healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies in Section 11, the Urban Design Manual and the Development Manua 1.1149 Regarding a development plan or site alteration. Section 8.C.2.16. states: "The City will require the preparation and submission of a tree management plan in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, where applicable, as a condition of a development application. Any tree management plan must identify the trees proposed to be removed, justify the need for removal, identify the methods of removal and specify an ecologically sound tree replacement scheme and any mitigative measures to be taken to prevent detrimental impacts on remaining trees."so Section 8.C.2.19. states: 48 City of Kitchener. Official Plan. 2014. Pg. 8-9 49 Ibid. Pg. 8-10 so Ibid. Pg. 8-11. 39 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener "When considering development, redevelopment or site alteration proposals, the City may require the protection and enhancement of hedgerows, especially where: a) they link other elements of the Natural Heritage System; b) wildlife regularly use them as habitat or movement corridors; c) they are composed of mature, healthy trees; d) they contain trees that are rare, unique, culturally important or over 100 years in age; or, e) they contribute to the aesthetics of the landscape." Regarding cultural heritage, Part C, Section 12 Cultural Heritage Resources outlines how the City identifies, conserves, and manages cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener. Section 12, provides "the framework to ensure the conservation of those cultural heritage resources which reflect and contribute to the history, identity and character of Kitchener".51 The overarching 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.52 All of the OP policies were reviewed, and applicable policies are identified, in Table 2. Table 2: Detailed review of Cultural Heritage Resource Policies found in Section 12 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014). Policy Description of Policy 12.C.1.1. The City will ensure that cultural heritage resources are conserved using the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act and the Municipal Act. " City of Kitchener. Official Plan. 2014. Pg. 12-1. 12 Ibid. Pg. 12-1. Consideration Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. 40 Amy Barnes Consulting Policy 12.C.1.2. 12.C.1.3. 12.C.1.4. Description of Policy The City will establish and consult with a Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC) on matters relating to cultural heritage resources in accordance with provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. I The City will develop, prioritize and maintain a list of cultural heritage resources which will include the following: a) properties listed as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register; b) properties designated under Part IV and V of the Ontario Heritage Act; c) cultural heritage landscapes; and, d) heritage corridors. 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. The City acknowledges that not all of the city's cultural heritage resources have been identified as a cultural heritage resource as in Policy 12.C.1.3. Accordingly, a property does not have to be listed or designated to be considered as having cultural heritage value or interest. CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Consideration Applicable. The MHC (Heritage Kitchener) will be consulted. Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. The property is identified as a listed property on the Municipal Heritage Register. This policy is not applicable. 12.C.1.5. Through the processing of applications submitted Applicable. The policy under the Planning Act, resources of potential has been considered. 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 Not applicable. Committee (MHC), will develop, maintain and implement a Municipal Heritage Conservation 41 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Policy Description of Policy Consideration Master Plan to be adopted by Council. The Municipal Heritage Conservation Master Plan will establish goals, objectives, 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 Applicable. The policy interest will be considered for designation under the has been considered. 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 12.C.1.8. The City, in cooperation with the Region and the Applicable. The policy Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC), will identify, has been considered. inventory and list on the Municipal Heritage Register, cultural heritage landscapes in the city. 12.C.1.9. Cultural heritage landscapes will be identified on This map was Map 9 in accordance with the Regional Official Plan reviewed. The subject and this Plan. Map 9 may be revised without the property is not need for an Official Plan Amendment at such time as identified as a CHL. cultural heritage landscapes are identified. 12.C.1.10. The City will require the conservation of significant Applicable. The policy cultural heritage landscapes within the city. has been considered as part of this report. 12.C.1.11. The City will require the conservation of cemeteries Not applicable. of cultural heritage significance (including human beings' remains, animals' 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. 42 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Policy Description of Policy Consideration 12.C.1.12. The City recognizes the Grand River as a Canadian Not applicable. The Heritage River and will co-operate with the Region property is not and the Grand River Conservation Authority in efforts adjacent to the Grand to conserve, manage and enhance, where practical, River. the river's natural, cultural, recreational, scenic and ecological features. Heritage Conservations Districts Policies 12.C.1.13 — The full description of Policy 12.C.1.13 — 12.C.1.16 Not applicable. The 12. C.1.16 can be found on page 12-3 and 12-4 of the OP. property is not located within an HCD. Archaeology 12.C.1.17 & The full description of Policy 12.C.1.17 & 12.C.1.18 Not applicable. The 12. C.1.18 can be found on Page 12-4 of the OP. author of this report is not a licenced Archeologist. Archaeology should be addressed through another process. Conservation Measures 12.C.1.19. In addition to listing and designating properties Applicable. The policy under the Ontario Heritage Act, the City may use and has been considered as adopt further measures to encourage the protection, part of this report. 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). 43 Amy Barnes Consulting Policy Description of Policy 12.C.1.20. The City will make decisions with respect to cultural heritage resources that are consistent with the policies of the Provincial 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 the land use designations and other policies of this Plan will 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 of an application submitted under the Planning Act, including 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 CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Consideration Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. 12.C.1.23. The City will require the submission of a Heritage Applicable. This report Impact Assessment and/or a Heritage Conservation satisfies the policy. Plan for development, 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; 44 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Policy Description of Policy Consideration 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 Not applicable. Policy 12.C.1.23 relates to a cultural heritage Circulation to the resource of Regional interest, the City will ensure Region will be at the that a copy of the assessment is circulated to the direction of City of Region for review prior to final consideration by the Kitchener Staff. City. 12.C.1.25. A Heritage Impact Assessment and Heritage Applicable. Conservation Plan required by the City must be Qualifications of prepared by a qualified person in accordance with author can be found in the minimum requirements as outlined in the City of Section 17. 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 Applicable. The report outlined in a Terms of Reference. In general, the outlines how this contents of a Heritage Impact Assessment will policy has been include, but not be limited to, the following: included in the report. a) historical research, site analysis and See Section 2.2. evaluation; 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. 45 Amy Barnes Consulting Policy 12.C.1.27. Description of Policy Any conclusions and recommendations of the Heritage Impact Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan approved by the City will be incorporated as mitigative and/or conservation measures 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 required by the City may be scoped or waived by the City, as deemed appropriate. Heritage Permit Application 12.C.1.29- The full description of Policy 12.C.1.29 & 12.C.1.31 12. C.1.31 can be found on Page 12-6 of the OP. Demolition/Damage of Cultural Heritage Resources CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Consideration Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. Applicable. The CHIA report has been requested by City Staff. Not applicable. The property is not designated under Part IV of the OHA. 12.C.1.32. Where a cultural heritage resource is proposed to be Applicable. The policy demolished, the City may require all or any part of has been considered as the demolished cultural heritage resource to be part of this report. given to the City for re -use, archival, display or commemorative purposes, at no cost to the City. 12.C.1.33. In the event that demolition, salvage, dismantling, Applicable. The policy relocation or irrevocable damage to a significant has been considered as cultural heritage resource is proposed and permitted, part of this report. the owner/applicant will be required to 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 Applicable. The policy the demolition, salvage, dismantling, relocation or has been considered as irrevocable damage to a significant cultural heritage part of this report. resource, such documentation must be prepared by a qualified person and must include the following: 46 Amy Barnes Consulting Policy Description of Policy a) architectural measured drawings; 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 property of cultural heritage value or interest listed on the Municipal Heritage Register, the owner/applicant will be required to provide written notice to the City of the intent to demolish, 60 days 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 Heritage Act any cultural heritage resource if that resource is threatened with demolition, significant alterations or other potentially adverse impacts. Public Infrastructure 12.C.1.37. The City will ensure that all private and public works projects affecting a cultural heritage resource will be consistent with the Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of 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. Incentives CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Consideration Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. Applicable. The policy has been considered as part of this report. Not applicable. The property is a private residence. 47 Amy Barnes Consulting the development of heritage sites, trails, interpretive has been considered as CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Policy Description of Policy Consideration 12.C.1.38 12.C.1.38. The City may establish and support Applicable. The policy stewardship and the visibility of cultural heritage financial recognition and other incentive programs to has been considered as 12.C.1.42. assist with the conservation of cultural heritage part of this report. resources. 12.C.1.39 The City will consider establishing and applying I Applicable. The policy incentives such as increasing height and density has been considered as 12.C.1.40 through the use of bonusing provisions in accordance part of this report. with Section 17.E.17; considerations of extensions of land use; and parking relaxations to encourage and assist in the conservation of protected cultural heritage resources. The application of such incentives will not be restricted to cultural heritage resources but may be transferred to other properties in proximity to the protected cultural heritage resource. A Heritage Impact Assessment and/or Conservation Applicable. The policy Plan may be required and the conclusions and has been considered as recommendations of the approved Heritage Impact part of this report. Assessment and/or approved Conservation Plan will be made conditions of receiving any incentive for the conservation of cultural heritage resources. City Resources/Role 12.C.1.41. I The City will promote the heritage of the city through Applicable. The policy 48 the development of heritage sites, trails, interpretive has been considered as plaques, public archives, awards, educational part of this report programs and by any other means deemed appropriate in order to enhance public appreciation, stewardship and the visibility of cultural heritage resources. Commemoration of cultural heritage resources is Applicable. The policy 12.C.1.42. strongly encouraged, whenever a new private has been considered as development or public work is undertaken in the part of this report. vicinity of a lost site of cultural heritage value or interest, including sites where: a) major events occurred of historical significance; 48 Amy Barnes Consulting Policy 12.C.1.43. 12.C.1.44. 12.C.1.45. Description of Policy 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. The City will lead the community by example in the management and care of City owned cultural heritage resources by following good conservation practice consistent with the Parks Canada 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 care of, and where appropriate, community access to these resources is maintained. CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Consideration Not applicable. The property is privately owned. The City will conserve and consider designation Not applicable. The under the Ontario Heritage Act for all City -owned property is privately cultural heritage resources and prepare strategies owned. and plans for their care, management and stewardship. The City will have regard to the administration of the Not applicable. Accessibility for Ontarians With Disabilities Act, 2005 and the Ontario Building 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 49 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Policy Description of Policy Consideration 12.C.1.46. The City will prepare guidelines as part of the Urban Applicable. The policy Design Manual to address the conservation of has been considered as cultural heritage resources in the city and to part of this report. recognize the importance of the context in which the cultural heritage resources are located. 12.C.1.47. The City may require architectural design guidelines Applicable. The policy to guide development, redevelopment and site has been considered as alteration on, adjacent to, or in close proximity to part of this report. properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or other cultural heritage resources. 12.C.1.48. Signage on protected heritage properties will be Not applicable. compatible and complementary to the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property and in accordance with and consistent with good conservation practice. 4.3.2 CITY OF KITCHENER CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES STUDY (2014) In 2014, the City of Kitchener released the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study which resulted in the identification of 55 CHLs throughout the city. The goal of the study was to expand the understanding beyond individual properties to identify and protect significant cultural heritage landscapes throughout the City of Kitchener. The subject property was not recognized as a CHL within the study. v` 50 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 14: Appendix 4- Maps of Cultural Heritage Landscapes. 518 Bridgeport Road is noted with a red star. (City of Kitchener, 2014) 4.3.3 SUMMARY With regards to the City of Kitchener Official Plan, the policy direction is that of retention and conservation of significant cultural heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes. With regards to the City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, the subject property was not identified as a CHL, or being a part of a larger CHL, within the study. All these policies have been considered as part of the CHIA and inform the analysis and conclusions. 4.4 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF HISTORIC PLACES IN CANADA (2ND EDITION) The City of Kitchener Heritage Impact Assessment Terms of Reference requires the consideration of applicable heritage conservation principles. The Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2" d edition) (Standards and Guidelines) is a pan - Canadian benchmark for heritage conservation practice based on internationally recognized conservation principles. The Standards and Guidelines provides users tools to help manage historic places and/or guidance to understand how to best conserve historic places. 51 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The document provides an overview of the conservation decision making process (Chapter 1) to help identify the appropriate conservation treatments (Preservation, Rehabilitation, or Restoration) (Chapter 2). 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; 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.53 The Standards and Guidelines outline fourteen standards. Depending on the primary treatment selected, specific standards are applicable. For example, if preservation is determined as a treatment option then Standard 1-9 applies. The document provides specific guidelines for: Cultural Landscapes (including Heritage Districts), Archaeological Sites, Buildings, Engineering Word including Civil, Industrial and Military Works and Guidelines for Materials. The guidelines for cultural landscape, including Heritage Districts outlines 11 areas of consideration. These include: o Evidence of Land Use o Evidence of Traditional Practices o Land Patters o Spatial Organization o Visual Relationships o Circulation o Ecological Features o Vegetation o Landforms 53 Parks Canada. Standards and Guideline for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 2010. Pg. 253-255. 52 Amy Barnes Consulting o Water Features o Built Form CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The Standards and Guidelines note that not all treatment types apply to CHI -s. Furthermore, "restoration as a primary treatment usually applies only to designed cultural landscapes or organically evolved, relict landscapes for which the heritage value relates to a specific period in time".54 The Standards and Guidelines have been considered as part of the CHIA. The Standards and Guidelines, as they apply to the redevelopment are discussed further in Section 10. 4.5 EIGHT GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN THE CONSERVATION OF BUILT HERITAGE PROPERTIES The Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties is a document created by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS). The general principles are considered as "best practice" in relation to heritage conservation of built heritage resources. They include: 1. 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. 7. 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. 14 Parks Canada. Standards and Guideline for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 2010. Pg. 50 53 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 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.ss The Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties have been considered as they relate to the redevelopment and are discussed in detail in Section 10. 4.6 ONTARIO HERITAGE TOOLKIT The MTCS Ontario Heritage Toolkit provides information about heritage resources in the land use planning process. Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessment and Conservation Plans outlines what a CHIA is, and the role of a conservation plan. It states that the general contents of a CHIA should include: 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. Furthermore, it outlines the information generally included in a Conservation Plan. This includes: 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 identifies negative impacts which need to be considered with any redevelopment or site alterations. This includes: destruction, alteration, shadows, isolation, direct or indirect obstruction, a change in land use, and land disturbance. Potential mitigative measures to help minimize negative impacts are also identified. These 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 ss MTCS. Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties. 54 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Allowing only compatible infill and additions • Reversible alterations • Buffer zones, site plan control, and other planning mechanisms This information has been considered within this CHIA and inform the conclusions and recommendations. 55 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener x.15=11►111•»:1.�M CHLs represent a wide range of geographies and can include a variety of built, social, associative, and natural elements or features. The multitude of definitions and approaches to understanding CHLs emphasizes that CHLs are complex, multi -layered spaces, with the potential for overlapping, or conflicting, values. The term cultural heritage landscape has been around for several decades and gained recognition after World War I when there was an international movement focused on protecting heritage. At a White House Conference in 1965, there was a call for a World Heritage Trust which would: '...stimulate international cooperation to protect 'the world's superb natural and scenic areas and historic sites for the present and the future of the entire world citizenry'. In 1968, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) developed similar proposals for its members. These proposals were presented to the 1972 United Nations conference on Human Environment in Stockholm".56 In 1972, the convention concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage became the agreed upon text which brought together the two growing movements; "the first focusing on the preservation of cultural sites, and the other dealing with the conservation of nature".57 The convention was adopted at the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November 1972.58 By regarding heritage as both cultural and natural, the convention emphasized the need to recognize and balance both elements. The convention sparked the creation of the World Heritage List. The international efforts to understanding the layers of value assigned to a place became the framework for the identification, protection, and management of CHLs on smaller scales. In 1992, the Convention was revised and resulted in, "...adequate legal and/or traditional protection and management mechanism to ensure the conservation ... of cultural heritage landscapes. The existence of protective legislation at the national, provincial, and municipal level or well-established traditional protection and/or management mechanisms are therefore essential and must be stated in the nomination of .... these cultural landscapes".59 56 UNESCO. 1998-2020. The World Heritage Convention. 57 UNESCO. 1998-2020. The World Heritage Convention. 58 Ibid. " City of Kitchener. 2014. Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. Originally sources: Criteria for Cultural Landscape under the World Heritage Convention, APT Bulletin, 1999. 56 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Using the international conventions as a starting point, provincial, regional, and municipal governing bodies have integrated the concept of CHLs into their governing policies. In the last few decades, the field of heritage conservation has integrated tools to help identify, manage and protect significant CHLs. In Ontario, the PPS (2020) and the City of Kitchener Official Plan, define a CHL as a: "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 buildings, structures, spaces, views, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association. Cultural heritage landscapes may be properties that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act, or have been included on federal and/or international registers, and/or protected through official plan, zoning by-law, or other land use planning mechanisms". 60 IDENTIFICATION OF A CHL UNESCOs definitions of the general types of CHLs provide an understand of how we examine a potential CHL. The three types of CHLs include: Designed Cultural Landscapes: This type of cultural landscape is clearly defined and was created intentionally by man. These landscapes include garden and parkland landscapes, which are constructed for esthetic reasons, which are often but not always associated with religious or other monumental buildings and ensembles. Evolved Cultural Heritage Landscapes: This type of cultural landscape results from an initial social, economic, administrative and/ or religious imperative, and has developed its present form by association with, and in response to, its natural environment. Such landscapes reflect that process of evolution in their form and component features. They fall into two sub -categories: o A relict (or fossil) landscape is one in which an evolutionary process came to an end at some time in the past, either abruptly or over a period of time. Its significant distinguishing features, however, are still visible in material form. o Continuing landscape is one that retains an active social role in contemporary society, which is closely associated with the traditional way of life, and in which the evolutionary process is still in progress. At the same time, it exhibits significant material evidence of its evolution over time. • Associative cultural landscape: The inclusion of such landscapes on UNESCO's World Heritage List is justifiable by virtue of the powerful religious, artistic or cultural 61 PPS. 2020. Pg. 42. 57 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener associations of the natural element, rather than material cultural evidence, which may be insignificant or even absent.61 The framework recognizes that landscapes can operate on a sliding scale from "a modest size of a designed garden (less than an acre) to a vast northern Ontario panoramic vista stretching over several hundreds of square miles, as depicted in the artwork of the Group of Seven".62 CHLs are living spaces and the result of the dynamic process over time. The evaluation of a site, and the approach and method to the conservation of CHLs can be equally complex. EVALUATING A CHL When considering the subject property as a potential CHL, it is important to take into consideration evaluation tools and evaluation criteria which identify and assess the relationship between the built, historical, and natural elements of a landscape. In addition to using an adapted version of O. Reg 9/06, the City of Kitchener CHL Study identified local factors which may influence the formation of a CHL. One factor is defined as natural influences, specifically "Rivers, Water Bodies, and Drainage Patterns", as well as "Physiography and Soils". 61 The second is the influence of settlement patterns, such as historic surveys and lot creations which impacts the way neighbourhoods and communities developed overtime. In this respect, the City of Kitchener CHL study states: "The eventual development of a road network was an organic process that resulted in many complex lot divisions as the original property boundaries were often altered to accommodate new roads (Bloomfield 2006:25). This latter fact has had the most significant impact on the modern landscape. What makes this important to the modern landscape of Kitchener is that travelling through the City is more complicated, but also makes the City more visually interesting than other communities laid out on a geometric grid. Street views terminate in trees or buildings along curves and at T intersections where blocks of gridded streets meet roads with random alignments. The random organization of residential lots makes neighbourhoods more interesting and creates views with unusual compositions adding to the visual character of these area S.1164 Lastly, the historical integrity and the community value of the site are an integral part of using the three -pronged approach (Figure 12) to the identification and evaluation of a potential CHL. The CHL Study identifies several criteria to be used as a framework when considering historical integrity. The document also outlines several criteria to be used to understand if the landscape " UNESCO. Cultural Landscapes. 1992-2020. 62 Ontario Heritage Trust. 2012. Cultural Heritage Landscapes -An Introduction. " City of Kitchener. 2014. Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. Pg. 9 64 Ibid. Pg. 10. 58 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener is valued by the community. In both instances, it is noted that these criteria may not be appropriate for all CHI -s. The historical integrity indicators and the community value criteria have been included as part of the evaluation of the subject property (see Section 8.2). CONSERVATION OF CHLS The Kitchener CHL Study outlines the legislative tools available to conserve CHI -s. The three tools, implemented under the OHA, include: • Part IV designation of an individual Property • Part V designation of an Heritage Conservation District; and • Listing of a CHL on the Municipal Heritage Register as an individual or grouping of non- designated property(ies) of heritage value or interest accompanied by a map or a description of the CHLs.65 Each of these tools have been examined in Section 8.2 to help determine the most appropriate conservation approach. 61 City of Kitchener. 2014. Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. Pg. 7. 59 Amy Barnes Consulting Mika:»iI•I►1rM411111119.Y11aIIX NA I V I I CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The City of Kitchener, as we know it today, was originally part of the Haldimand Tract and the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabe, and Haudenosaunee66 peoples. This territory is covered by the Upper Canada and Haldimand Treaties. In 1784 the British Crown allocated a large portion of land to the Six Nations as a gift to recognize their allegiance during the American Revolution. The request was led by Mohawk leader Thayendanegea (Joseph Brant) and representatives of the Six Nations.67 In 1796, Richard Beasley acquired Block 2 (94,012 acres of land) from Brant with the condition that he was prohibited from subdividing and selling the lands until the Six Nations received full mortgage payments. Despite this agreement, Beasley sold off portions of Block 2 to Mennonite settlers. The settlers, who were unaware of the conditions of sale, feared they would lose the land they had purchased from Beasley. To correct this, a special arrangement was made between Beasley and Brant. The arrangement "...allowed Beasley to sell the bulk of Block Two in order to cover his mortgage obligations completely, while giving the Mennonite buyers legal title to land they had previously purchased. Subsequently, Beasley sold a 60,000 -acre tract of land to the German Company of Pennsylvania represented by Daniel Erb and Samuel Bricker in November 1803. Beasley's sale to the German Company not only cleared him of a mortgage debt, but left him with 10,000 acres of Block Two land which he continued to sell into the 183Os".68 Legal disputes and land claims continue into the 21s' century. J� 66 Haudenosau nee —This name refers to the Iroquois Confederacy comprising of these Nations: Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca and Tuscarora. 67 Filice, M. 2016. Haldimand Proclamation. 68 Waterloo Region Museum. 2017. History of Waterloo Township. 60 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 15: Joseph Brant (Thayendanegea) c. 1807. (National Gallery of Canada/5777, Accessed from The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2019). Orange-vifle Markhartt Oshawa vagi[ h it) Pickering Brampton Guelph Mississauga Toronto Ki tch en er Oak vi ll e Stratford i Ham 11 ton �_ '� CatF�arinev Wood tock Brantiord ;? iafiara Falls Landon Suffal c► ii�rrn�c This map is a vrork in pi-- ess For corrections and feedback visit l i. - --Landca Figure 16: Map showing the land associated with the Haldimand Grant (Victor Temrano, Native-Land.ca) 61 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The German Company who purchased 60,000 acres of Block 2 was made up of a group of Mennonites, predominantly from Pennsylvania .69 The last payment for their purchase to Beasley was brought from Pennsylvania, by wagon, in 1804. The German Company created "128 lots of 448 acres each and 32 lots of 83 acres each. Each shareholder's lot was randomly selected so that all would be given an equal and fair chance to win the best lots".70 With land becoming increasingly scarce in Pennsylvania and a desire to practice their beliefs in safe place, many more families started to immigrate to Waterloo Township; between 1800 and 1820, more than 100 families settled in the area. The area become known as Ebytown, after Mennonite preacher and Bishop, Benjamin Eby who, "After claiming lot 2 of the Beasley Tract he went back to Pennsylvania to marry and then, in the company of other settlers, returned to Upper Canada, reaching his homestead on 21 June 1807.1171 By 1816, the Mennonite settlers began transforming the land into productive farmland.72 It was during this time that the "Government of Upper Canada designated the settlement the Township of Waterloo".73 More settlers, particularly German Mennonites, increased in numbers through the early 191h century. With population growth came more official governance and public amenities. In "1833, the area was renamed Berlin; and in 1853 Berlin became the County Seat of the newly created County of Waterloo, elevating it to the status of village".74 In 1845 Berlin is described as, "A village in the township of Waterloo, nine miles from Galt; contains about 400 inhabitants, who are principally Germans. A newspaper is printed here, call the German - Canadian; and there is a Lutheran meeting house. Post Office- post twice a week. Professional Trades- One Physician and surgeon, one lawyer, three stores, one brewery, one printing office, two taverns, one pump maker, two blacksmith S.1171 This period of growth also saw many settlers emigrate from England, Ireland, Germany and Scotland. In 1851 the population had increased to 8,878 people with Mennonites making up 26% of the population.76 A 1861 Tremaine Map of the County of Waterloo shows a rapidly expanding Berlin surrounded by many agricultural lots, as well as extensive rail connections, to smaller settlements. One of those smaller settlements, located four kilometers north of Berlin, is the village of Bridgeport. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid. 71 Frank H. Epp. 2003. Eby, Benjamin. Dictionary of Canadian Biography. 72 Mclaughlin, Kenneth. 2017. Kitchener -Waterloo. The Canadian Encyclopedia. 73 City of Kitchener. n.d. About Kitchener. 74 Ibid. 75 Smith, William. 1846. Smith's Canadian Gazetteer. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. Pg. 15. 76 Waterloo Region Museum. 2017. History of Waterloo Township. 62 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener . ` All [i 1 � T ❑ y �.iti�G 11�iT11L N��LY0M7+�, [hT.CP L9L [.N. ^• � 8!s'kfYpg dk1[,Y 41i,{1131,'. /i.Yk, l _ �� q{ i� Figure 17: Map of the Town of Berlin 1853-1854 (ArcGIS, 2015) Figure 18: Birds eye view of Berlin c. 1892 (Waterloo Generations, Kitchener Public Library). 63 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 6.2.1 BRIDGEPORT Jacob S. Shoemaker built a dam, sawmill, and grist mill in 1829-1830 which became the centre of the settlement and business trades." As a result he was considered the founder of Bridgeport. The 1846 Canadian Gazetteer described Bridgeport as a "Village in the township of Waterloo, opposite Glasgow, contains about 100 habitant, one store, one ashery, one tavern and a blacksmith".78 Over the next decade, the population of Bridgeport grew along side the number of trades and businesses. By 1857, Lovell's directory notes the presence of thirty businesses including millers, brick makers, shoemakers, wagon makers and tavern keepers; many of these settlers were of German descents. 79 The 1913 Waterloo Historical Society reflections on early settlers of Waterloo County provides insights into one of Bridgeport successful residents, Peter Tagge. It reads: "There were several general stores in Bridgeport, the most important of them being carried on by a German. This was Peter N. Tagge, a native of Holstein, where he was born in 1816. Tagge came to Bridgeport in the early forties and was in business there for about fifteen years. He was post master, general merchant and township auditor. Tagge bought and sold grain and did a semi wholesale business with blacksmiths and others. At the height of his prosperity he is said to have done a business of about $100,000 a year, not a bad record for a Berlin merchant to-day."80 By the mid -1850's the construction of the Grand Truck Railways was underway; the first three stops in Waterloo Township included Shantz Station, Breslau and Berlin. These three stops provided access to Toronto and further encouraged settlement to the Berlin and surrounding area. Berlin soon became the centre of the township and the seat of government in 1853.81 Since Bridgeport was not a stop on the railway, its development was stifled; in 1864 Bridgeport had a population of about 400 inhabitants, which dropped to 300 by 1913.82 In 1901, W.H. Breithaupt, proposed the creation of an electric street car to provide service from Berlin to the Village of Bridgeport.83 Primarily motivated as a business scheme, Breithaupt erected a sugar beet factory between the two settlements with the idea that money could be made by "hundreds of these workers paying a daily fare to and from Berlin and Waterloo".84 He quickly realized that the small village of Bridgeport would not create significant income for his streetcar lines and decided to create a special attraction to increase usership during off-peak hours. After purchasing a portion of land from Abraham Eby's large estate, he opened Riverside Park in 1902.85 The B & BSR (Berlin & Bridgeport Street Railways) "formally opened on Aug. 9 " Waterloo Historical Society. Eighteenth Annual Report of the Waterloo Historical Society. 1930. '$ Smith, William. 1846. Smith's Canadian Gazetter. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. 79 Waterloo Historical Society. 1913. First Annual Report of the Waterloo Historical Society. 80 Waterloo Historical Society. 1913. First Annual Report of the Waterloo Historical Society. 81 Waterloo Region Museum. 2017. History of Waterloo Township. 82 Ibid. 2017. 83 Mills, Rych. 2015. Flash from the Past: Bridgeport was the 'sin city' of its day. Waterloo Region Record. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid. 64 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 1902: 4,000 people jammed the park to enjoy band music, fireworks, sports activities, and speeches".86 In 1903, Breithaupt, opened a large pavilion which would become known as "The Casino"; it had a "concert hall boasting a polished dance floor, kitchen, dining room, and long sheltered verandas with a spectacular view of the river".87 Over the years Riverside park would grow in size and popularity and users enjoyed access to baseball fields, fishing, swimming, boat rental and picnic areas. In 1923, Breithaupt sold the B & BSR to the City of Kitchener and it was integrated it into the K- W Street Railway system.88 By 1940 all streetcar service in Kitchener ended and the buildings and land associated with Riverside Park slowly disappeared. The main feature of the park, the casino, remains standing and has operated as the Golf's Steakhouse since 1976.89 In 1973, Waterloo County was replaced by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Today, Bridgeport is located within the City of Kitchener. Figure 19: Peter and Mary Tagge in 1865 (Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. Local ID P000412). 86 Mills, Rych. 2015. Flash from the Past: Bridgeport was the 'sin city' of its day. Waterloo Region Record. 87 Ibid. $$ Ibid. 89 Ibid. 65 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 20: Bridgeport Mill. 1916. (Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. Local identifier. P009605). CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 21: Photograph of Berlin & Bridgeport Electric Street Railways in 1905 (KPL Digital Collection, 1905) 66 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener M- Ma:Z97»:irMil[►Ire7.Jtffliq►1oZe]yly/►111:T►yiI1� The subject property was original part of a Crown patent given to Richard Beasley, James Wilcox and John Rousseau issued on 5 Feb 1798; the patent was for Block 2 on the Grand River which totalled 94, 012 acres.90 The subject property would eventually become Lot 59 of German Company Tract (G.C.T.). The 1861 Tremaine Map of the County of Waterloo shows lot 59 under the ownership of E & J.B. Eby (Figure 26). Elias Eby (b. 22 Feb 1810, d. June 1878) and Jacob B. Eby (b. 24 March 1826, d. 21 Dec 1882) were sons of Mennonite settlers Bishop Benjamin Eby and Mary (nee Brubacher).91 Benjamin and Mary were married 7 February 1808 and had eleven children; Benjamin had a second wife, Magdalena.92 Elias Eby was elected as a Councillor of Waterloo Township in 1850, however, he spent most of his life working as a miller and businessman.93 He was married to Maria "Anna" (nee Weber) (b. 30 July 1809, d. 9 Oct 1877) and together they had ten children.94 In 1850, Elias purchased the house, farm, and mill which was constructed by Bridgeport founded, Jacob S. Shoemaker. 91 Elias ran the mill with business partner Mr. Barnabas Devitt for many years; when their business relationship ended, Elias brother, Jacob, joined the business.96 ST , SA W te %fw4W"t94"aft in -flour. AtItca#, �'rodtirc, ' t brr, parr.5. Flax and Rape Seca. Linseed and Rapt Seed Oil, &c. OILS, BOUED & RAW, OIL CAKE', &C, naleEpony, 0, W, Figure 22: 1867 advertisement for Elias Eby mills in Bridgeport (Waterloo Generations, Person ID 121065) 90 LRO 58. Township of Waterloo. German Track Company Lot 59. Onland.ca. Patent. 91 Waterloo Generations. Bishop Benjamin Eby. Local ID 120992 91 Ibid. 93 Waterloo Generations. Elias Eby. Person ID 121065. 94 Ibid. 9s Ibid. 96 Ibid. Original source: Berlin Daily News, 3 June 1878. 67 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Jacob A. Eby was a farmer and business man who married to Lucy (nee Kaufman) on 3 September 1807; together they had fifteen children. 97 After Lucy's death, Jacob married Elizabeth Schill (b. 12 May 1848) and together they had one son.98 In 1867, Jacob he sold his share of the Bridgeport Mill and purchased the Salem Mills which he operated until 1875-76.99 It is unclear when the Eby brothers ended their ownership of the lands associated with the subject property. The 1881 Illustrated Historic Atlas for Waterloo County shows Henry Kinsie as the owner Lot 59 (100 acres); the historic atlas suggest he settled there in 1874.100 This ownership could not be confirmed and there appears to have been additional owners throughout the late 19th century. Through a bargain and sale, Peter [Shirks] sold the subject property to Thomas Pearce on 18 July 1910 for $385.00.101 The original building is believed to have been built in 1914 while the property was under the ownership of Thomas Pearce. 102 Thomas Pearce (b. 14 August 1832, Ireland, d. 1915, Kitchener) was one of nine children born to William and Eliza Pearce. 103 Thomas travelled to Canada in 1857 and studied to become a teacher at the Toronto Normal School; he received his certificate in 1858.104 He quickly took up employment with the Berlin Board and "was appointed first assistance in the Central School".101 Thomas spent thirteen years teaching, six years as an assistant Principal, seven years as Principal of Central School (1864-1871) and ended his career as the School Inspector for the County of Waterloo (1871- 1912). Thomas was inducted in the Waterloo Hall of Fame for his many contributions to education in Waterloo County. Thomas married to Clarissa Margaret 'Clara' Brown (b. 1847, Ontario) on 26 July 1866. 106 Together the couple had two known children: Lena Henry'Harrie' Pearce (b. 1870), Elizabeth Caroline Pearce (b. 1867).107 Thomas Pearce built the original section of the house as a wedding gift for his eldest daughter, [Lena] Harriet; Harriet was married to English sea captain Ernest A. Snow.108 Ernest Snow was born in England in Feb 1862 and immigrated to Canada in 1901.109 The 1911 census notes he was working as a land surveyor.110 By 1919, Snow was working as a Clerk at the Registrar office."' The SOS suggests that Harriet and Ernest lived on the property until 1939, however 97 Waterloo Generations. Jacob B. Eby. Person ID 121235 98 Ibid. 99 Ibid. loo Parsell, H. & Co. 1881. Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo & Wellington Counties Ontario 1881 & 1877. 101 LRO 58. Township of Waterloo. German Track Company Lot 59. Onland.ca. Instrument No. 19085. 102 City of Kitchener. 2009. Statement of Significance 518 Bridgeport Rd. 113 Waterloo Generations. Thomas Pearce. Person ID 192555. 101 Ibid. Original Source: Second Annual Report for the Waterloo Historical Society. los Waterloo Generations. Thomas Pearce. Person ID 192555. 106 Ibid. 101 Find a Grave. Lena Henry 'Harrie' Pearce Snow. Memorial No. 173535931. los City of Kitchener. 2009. Statement of Significance 518 Bridgeport Rd. 109 Waterloo Generations. Ernst. A. Snow. Person ID 1156841. 110 Ibid. 111 Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo Directory. 1919. Henry Vernon & Son, Publishers. Pg. 229. 68 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Land Registry documents show that Lena H. Snow sold the property (1 % acres) for $7000.00 to William H. Sims on 31 May 1937.111 Figure 23: Portrait of Thomas Pearce (KPL Digital Collection, Local Identifier P000159). William 'Bill' Harvey Sims was born on 27 June 1908 to parents Harvey James Sims and Florence Katherine Sims (nee Roos); the couple lived at 26 Ahrens Street West, City of Kitchener, at the time of Bill's birth.113 Bill's parents were highly respected members of the community. It is well documented that Harvey Sims was a close friend of William Lyon Mackenzie King. King often visited Harveys rural estate known as Sims Estate or Chicopee Estate. Harvey Sims purchased the 45 acres estate in 1920. In the 1930's he hired well known landscape architects Carl Borgstrom and H.M.S. Carver to work on the grounds on his estate. Upon Harvey's death in 1945, his eldest son, James Kenneth Davison Sims occupied the rural estate. The Sims family were well-known in Kitchener's legal circles. Bill, his brother J. Kenneth, and their father Harvey all had law practices in Kitchener. Bill Sims studied at the University of Toronto and the 1931 yearbook notes he was part of Cox Trinity Rowing Crew, Class President, Vice President of the Liberal Club, in the Historical Club; and part of the fraternity, Delta Kappa 112 LRO 58. Township of Waterloo. German Track Company Lot 59. Onland.ca. Instrument No. 31793 113 Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Registrations of Births and Stillbirths -1869-1913; Series: MS929; Reel: 22; Record Group: RG 80-2. 69 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Epsilon. 114 In 1935 William was working as a barrister living with his parents at 47 King Street West, Kitchener. 115 On 16 July 1935, twenty-seven year old Bill Sims married twenty-four year old Mary Niles Denne.116 It is unclear if Bill and Mary continued to reside at 47 King Street West for period after their marriage, however, in 1937, through a bargain and sale they purchased the subject property from the Snows. The couple referred to the house as "Hilltop House".117 Figure 24: Photo of William Sims in 1928. William was part Delta Kappa Epsilon during his studies at the University of Toronto (Ancestry.com, University of Toronto, Yearbook 1928). City directories note that Bill is living in Bridgeport and working as a lawyer in 1949.118 Bill contracted polio and used a wheelchair for a portion of his life.119 Bill died 7 January 1954 and is buried in Mount Hope Cemetery.120 Following Bill's death, the property was eventually passed to widow Mary D. Sims on 23 June 1954. The 1972 Canadian voters list suggests that Mary continues to reside in the home for may years after Bill's death (which was known as 34 Bridgeport Road at this time).121 The Sims made numerous changes to the built and natural features of the property during their ownership. In 1941 a one -and -half -storey addition and one storey garage was added to the rear 114 Ancestry.com. Canada, Selected School Yearbooks, 1901-2010 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2015. and "Canada, Selected School Yearbooks, 1908-2010"; School: University of Toronto; Year: 1931, 11' Library and Archives Canada; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. Reference Number M-4745. 116 Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Registrations of Marriages. 117 City of Kitchener. 2009. Statement of Significance 518 Bridgeport Rd. 11& Library and Archives Canada; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. Reference Number M-4843 119 Information provided by current owners. "o Findagrave.com. William Harvey5ims. Memorial ID 162405221. " Library and Archives Canada; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. Reference Number M-6169 70 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener of the house."' The SOS suggests the addition was designed by T.H. Wells of Waterloo and constructed by local builder Ball Brothers Construction. In c. 1946, the Sims did extensive landscaping to the property designed by landscape architect Carl Borgstrom. Borgstrom knew the Sims family, having worked on Harvey Sims estate more than a decade earlier. Carl A. Borgstrom was born in Sweden in 1886 and died in Meadowvale, Brampton on 15 April 1951.123 There is little information available about Borgstrom's early professional life, however one article from 1923 wrote that he "went to England and worked under the recognized masters there for several years. Later he worked in Germany, Switzerland and France" .12' After WWI he immigrated to Canada with his wife and three children; upon arriving in Canada his wife left him and he raised his three school -aged children while developing his career as a landscape architect. 125 Borgstrom's first professional work was under the firm Wilson, Bunnell and Borgstrom. Some of their work included, "...urban planning in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan (1929), plans for the Niagara Parkway Commission, design of the Banff Springs Hotel Golf Course, Alberta and the initial phase of the plan for the Northwest Entrance (York Boulevard) to Hamilton, Ontario."126 The firms working relationship lasted a few years until the impacts of the Great Depression force the firm to close in 1931. 127 According to Humphrey Carver, who joined the firm in 1930, Borgstrom suggested the pair try to continue working together and they formed Borgstrom and Carver, Landscape Architects and Town Planners. The pairs most well-known work included the designs for the northwest entrance to the City of Hamilton. This project was a monumental undertaking and one of Borgstrom's largest design projects. The pair worked on various other projects through the 1930s, including the Sime estate/Chicopee estate.128 Carl Borgstrom was a founding member of the Canadian Society of Landscape Architects. Other founding members included: Edwin Kay, Gordon Culham, Howard and Lorrie Dunington-Grubb, Frances Steinhoff, Humphrey Carver, J.V. Stensson, Helen Kippax; Douglas MacDonald, Norman Dryer and Frances McLeod .129 The initial meeting of the group took place was March 1934 at the Royal York Hotel. Borgstrom, along with the original nine members, "...were concerned with primarily defining their role, although even withing this small group, a variety of viewpoints existed. While Howard Dunington-Grubb offered a Beaux - 122 City of Kitchener. 2009. Statement of Significance 518 Bridgeport Rd. 123 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg. 1. 124 No Author. Designed Sunnyside. Saturday July 28t", 1923. its Humphrey Carver. 1984. The People and the Times: The founding of the CSLA. From, Fifty years of Landscape Architecture, The Canadian Society of Landscape Architects 1934-1984. Ceclia Paine (Ed), March 1998. 126 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg.1. Original source: Obituary for Carl Borgstom in The Hamilton Spectator,. 18 April 1951. 12' No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg. 1. 12' Humphrey Carver. 1984. The People and the Times: The founding of the CSLA. From, Fifty years of Landscape Architecture, The Canadian Society of Landscape Architects 1934-1984. Ceclia Paine (Ed), March 1998. 129 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg. 1 71 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Arts design perspective, Carver was primarily concerned with urban planning, and Borgstrom was a plantsman with an ecological approach"."' The national association evolved into independent provincial chapters and in 1968 the Ontario Association of Landscape Architect (GALA) was established."' Today the GALA administers the Ontario Association of Landscape Architecture Act (1984) and facilitates the accreditation process and regulates professional standards. Each year the OALA honour Borgstrom's legacy to the field of landscape architecture through the Carl Borgstrom Award for Service to the Environment. Borgstrom is also remembered for designing the Rock Garden at the Royal Botanical Garden He carried out private commissions through out his entire career. Some of these private commissions include the estate for Harvey J. Sims (Kitchener, 1933), the estate of George McCullagh (Thornhill c. 1938), the G. Norman Irwin garden (Whitby), the George Hancock residence (Galt), the Charles Neilson garden (Toronto) and the Cawthra-Elliott estate, Port Credit (c. 1937).132 Borgstrom was known to use native plants and was described as having the 'eye of an artist' with an intimate knowledge of the family of trees and plants. 133 For his private gardens he "... typically employed focal points such as formal pools and foundation, with low stone walls, steps and flagstones paving. He used arbours and pergolas for climbing plants. The rectilinear lines were softened by massed shrubs, trees and perennials plantings, always with an eye for rich textures, seasonal colours and appropriate scale. Vista were important, as were carefully planted stream banks. He was an expert in creek, dam and stream design and engineering." 134 In c. 1946 Borgstrom created the garden layout for Mr. and Mrs. W. Sims property (the subject property). At this time Borgstrom was working out of his home which he called "Churchville Downs' in Brampton.135 Borgstrom, along with his second wife Mable, lived on this property until his death in 1951.136 130 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg.2 131 OALA Website. 2019. History. 132 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg.3. 133 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg.2. 134 No author. CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. A. Pg.3. 131 City of Brampton. 2006. By-law 56-2006. To designate the property at 8082 Creditview Road (Creditdale Farm) as being of cultural heritage value or interest. 136 Ibid. 72 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 25: Clipping from 1923 Newspaper articles showing Carl Borgstrom (No Author, 1923) CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener According to the current owner, Mary Sims resided in the subject property well into her eighties and passed away in the house on 12 January 1992.137 Following Mary's death the property was owned by Linda and Lou Arcari. It was purchased by the current owners, Kimberly Love and Glen Drummond, in 1997. Kimberly and Glen used the property as a Bed and Breakfast, known as Snowshill Bed and Breakfast, for many years. According to an article written in the Kitchener Record, the couple found the original Borgstrom blueprints in the house and decided to do some research when a guest pointed out some rare species. The article notes that the pool was filled in before they purchase the property; this would have likely been done under Mrs. Sims ownership. The article notes that the bushes were wildly overgrown and "they couldn't even find the end of the property" when they purchased it.138 The couple altered the landscape in various ways throughout their ownership. They removed many planting and tree and added additional elements to the property. For example, they added the stone wall around the parking area, the lychgate and the tiered waterfall which runs down the back end of the elevation on the west side of the property. 139 The couple also altered the landscape trying to restore some of the feature lost over time. The article noted that "with the help of a family member with horticultural experience, they restored the rose garden with varieties that would have been 137 Waterloo Generations. Mary Niles Denne. Person ID 1167969. 138 Weidner, Johanna. Homeowner thrilled to discover backyard was designed by esteemed landscape architect. Kitchener Record, 2004 139 Ibid. 2004 73 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener available when the garden was planted"."' Kimberly Love and Glen Drummond are currently selling the subject property. 6.4 PROPERTY MORPHOLOGY One of the earliest detailed maps of Bridgeport is the 1861 Tremaine Map of the County of Waterloo (Figure 26). The map shows a handful of streets have been established in Bridgeport and are concentrated around the Grand River. The subject property, and a large portion of land surrounding it, were under the ownership of E & J.B. Eby. There is a pond and multiple tributaries from the Grand River dotted with mills and tanneries. Bridgeport Road is present on this map and according to a street digitization project, appears to have been present since at least 1853 (Figure 27) (Figure 39). The Map of the County of Waterloo from 1879 shows the growth of Berlin, Waterloo, and to a lesser degree Bridgeport (Figure 28). The Grand Trunk Railway can be seen running through Berlin as well as a rail line running between Waterloo and Berlin. Berlin and the surrounding settlement had expanded towards Bridgeport. The Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo County, from 1881, shows the subject property and surrounding lands are under the ownership of Henry Kinsie (Figure 29). A 1923 map show some details of the Village of Bridgeport including parks, gravel pits, and a racetrack. Lancaster Street and Bridgeport Road are clearly identified. The subject property was built, but does not appear on the map (Figure 30). The 1930 air photo shows the subject property prior to changes in the landscape (Figure 31). The subject property appears to be covered with large trees. The surrounding landscape consists of open lots bordered by trees and what appears to be fields used for agricultural purposes. The pond to the north of the subject property remains visible. The south side of Bridgeport Road is open and undeveloped. It is unclear in the 1945 air photo if the subject property has undergone any significant landscape changes (Figure 32). The lighter area on the photo may suggest that some trees have been removed, possibly in anticipation of landscaping plans, however, this can not be confirmed. There have been modest changes to the surrounding landscape as some larger lots appear to have undergone severance and further land divisions. The pond to the north of the subject property remains visible. The south side of Bridgeport Road remains open and undeveloped. The 1955 air photo shows a defined clearing on the subject property which reflects the current landscaping pattern (Figure 33). The pond to the north of the subject property remains visible. The south side of Bridgeport Road has undergone significant development with a new residential subdivision. 140 Ibid. 2004 74 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The 1963 air photo shows the curved driveway associated with the subject property. Further development of the residential street (Lang Crescent) to the north is evident. The pond to the north of the subject property remains visible. The remaining aerial photographs from 2005 (Figure 35) and 2019 (Figure 38) highlight the significant development in the surrounding area. The aerial photographs show Conestoga Parkway is present and the residential neighbourhoods have been further developed. North of the subject property has also undergone development and now includes Lang Crescent, Springdale Drive, and General Drive. The pond to the north is no longer visible. Figure 39 shows the development of the neighbourhood streets from 1853 to 1992. �O V I ` a fJ--' IN, -% N% "Y lE� I 111 Figure 26: 1861 Tremaine Map of Waterloo County with a red star noting the general area of the subject property (ArcG15, 2015). 75 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 27: Map showing the road present in 1853 (bolded black) (Geospatial Centre, Kitchener Historical Street Project). Og- v .4N- 14 1 IV A T s►' *. OW Figure 28: Map the County of Waterloo in 1879 (Geospatial Centre, 1879). 76 Amy Barnes Consulting `,rAggfl4Y b �` • �.r.rlls�►a� G 1 ��r ,�►J►d'I7A�li �roF� CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 29: Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo County, 1881. A red star denotes the general area of the subject property (Pa rsell. H & Co, 1881). ewiP1«OwI. Figure 30: Map of the City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo in 1923. A red star denotes general area of the subject property (Geospatial Centre, 1923). 77 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener .� SF 7 Figure 31: Air photo, 1930. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1930, IM6) Figure 32: Air photo, 1945. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1945, IM6) 78 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 33: Air photo, 1955. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1955, IM6) Figure 34: Air photo, 1963. The subject property is outline with red (Geospatial Centre, 1963, IM6) 79 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 35: Aerial of subject property and surrounding context in 2005 (Google Earth Pro, 2005) Figure 36: View of entrance and front lawn in 2009 (Google Maps, 2019). 80 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener '` Figure 37: View of western edge of property in 2009 (Google Maps, 2019). Figure 38: Aerial of subject property and surrounding context in 2019 The subject property is outline with red (Google Earth Pro, 2019). 81 Amy Barnes Consulting C' Layers Schaefer Park �® '.353 Ori dgeport r; nPark erid--Uf'hI'Lorizd a Free Church Gemetefy _ - Jae �Q 1e79 Thompson Z Park -© 1923 r•errl Gr 1943 1955 1957 ®Q 19' - CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 39: Historic Street Project showing streets from 1853-1992 (Geospatial Centre, Kitchener Historical Street Project). 82 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The cultural heritage resource incudes the built one -and -a -half storey residential structure with a one -and -a -half storey rear addition, one storey garage, and landscaped garden. 7.1 EXTERIOR The original section of the building, built c. 1914, follows a rectangle plan with a three -bay, south facing, fagade. The one -and -a -half storey addition and one storey garage were added in 1941. Together, the original structure, the addition and the garage create an irregular plan. The exterior of the building appears to have undergone modest upgrades and alteration. Figure 40: Aerial of the house showing the original c. 1914 structure outlined in red (Google Earth Pro, 2020). Original Building (c. 1914) , The original portion of the building, including foundation, is made with poured concreate which has been scored to resemble cut stone. The exterior elevations are covered with mature ivy. The building has a gable end roof, overhanging eaves, a plain frieze, and soffits with wooden features which resemble exposed purlins. There is centrally placed shed style dormer on the fagade. The roof finishing, including plain frieze and soffits with wooden features resembling exposed purlins, are carried through to the dormer. The dormer has a rectangular opening with four, six -paned, single sashed, windows. The side elevations of the dormer appear to clad in cedar shingles. The roof is made with newer materials (metal shingles) and there are two chimneys located within the original structure which have opposite orientations. Both the roof 83 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener materials and chimneys were replaced c. 2018, however their original footprints were maintained. The recessed main entrance is centrally placed and accessed through a semi -elliptical opening which is covered by a flat roof. The canopy style roof is supported by wooden end brackets and the wooden features resembling exposed purlins are carried through the design. It is unclear if the entrance roof was part of the original design. The main entrance has a single leaf wooden door and the original door handle and knocker appear to be present. The door is a mix of wood and glass panes and is flanked by wide side lights which feature 12 panes of glass on the top and a large wooden panel on the lower half. The transom is made up of wooden panels. Figure 41: South elevation (fa§ade) and west elevation of the portion of the house -built c. 1914. (AB, 2020). 84 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 42: West elevation showing roofline and the variation of window openings (AB, 2020). Figure 43: Main entrance (AB, 2020) CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 85 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 44: East elevation of the portion of the house -built c. 1914 (AB, 2020) Later Additions (c.1941) A one -and -a -half storey addition is located off the north-east section of the original house. This sympathetic addition is designed to match the original building in both materials and style. It is made with cinderblock which has been painted grey and scored to resemble cut stone. The addition has a gable roof with two dormers located on the east and west elevation. The west elevation has a hipped dormer and the east side has a shed style dormer. The roof line and both dormers have overhanging eaves, a plain frieze and soffits with wooden features resembling exposed purlins which is in keeping with the rest of the building. At the rear of the building a newer wooden porch has been added. This area appears to provide access to a walk-in basement or cellar. There are two set of French doors located in the along the east elevation which provide access to the flagstone terrace. A one -storey, double bay, garage is accessed from the north-west corner and attached to the rear addition. The garage does not have decorative roof features found throughout the rest of the building. The garage follows a simple box design and flat roof and is made with cinderblock. The garage doors are made with wood with a single row of glass panes at the top. At the rear of 86 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener the house (north elevation) is an attached open shed with slopping shingled roof. The shed is currently being used for outdoor storage. All windows are casement style, single sash, with 4, 6, 8, 12, or 15 glass panes; wooden storm windows are present on both the original structure and the later addition. The windows have rectangular openings with plain concreate lug sills. The wooden windows vary in size and placement on the house and only the fa4ade provides a rhythmic and symmetrical aesthetiC141 The building does not adhere exclusively to one architectural style. It is best described as a vernacular style which are characterized by "inexpensive materials and straightforward utilitarian design" .141 The building appears to be subtilty influenced by the Arts and Crafts141 movement and Georgian Revival style. The Arts and Crafts movement was an approach to design, rather than a stand-alone architectural style. Some scholars suggest that by the time the movement reached Canada the "overlying theme was the house as a living element within the natural environment; it was based on the function of the home as a shelter for the family, not a banner building relentlessly trumpeting the owner's status".144 The Arts and Crafts movement in Canada was known to be: "informal and unpretentious, subtly sophisticated, evocative of comfy English country houses.... their walls merely expanses of ivy-covered stucco ornamented only with bank of leaded casement windows. Like the English rural cottages that they imitate, their appeal lay in the bold composition of projecting volumes, steeply pitched roofs and massive and irregularly placed chimneys; and their low, ground hugging contours, suggesting that they had been rooted in place for centuries".145 Within the Arts and Crafts movement, the landscape surrounding the building was important to the overall aesthetic. Scholars note that landscapes associated with this movement sought to replicate features common to an English garden. Some of these elements included "dense 141 The current owner noted that most windows are original and those which have been replaced were done in a sensitive manner. Wooden frames were made to match existing window frames and the glass panes re-inserted into the new wooden frames. They also noted that some of them are failing. 141 Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2020. Vernacular architecture. 141 Shannon Kyles (www.ontarioarchitecture.com) notes that "In Canada Arts and Crafts buildings are called a variety of names: English Domestic Revival, English Cottage, Cotswod Cottage, and a variety of other terms depicting the unassuming country element of craftsman design". 144 Shannon Kyles. 2000-2010. www.ontarioarchitecture.com 14s Ricketts, Maitland & Hucker. 2011. A Guide to Canadian Architectural Styles Section Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Pg. 139. 87 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener foundation plantings, fragrant boxwood, and a riot of ivy climbing stucco walls" as well as "low retaining walls of brick or drystone, and rough limestone terraces and walkways".146 The features of the Arts and Crafts movement present in the subject property include the ivy- covered exteriors, the irregular chimney placement, the low ground hugging contours, and the purposeful landscape elements which compliment a English cottage aesthetic. The building also draws upon elements associated with the Georgian Revival style 147 which appeared in Canada in 1910 and remains dominant in domestic architecture. This classical style is "distinguished by a symmetrical fagade with a decorative focus on a centrally placed entrance. This doorway is often flanked by side -lights and topped by a fanlight or by a curved or broken pediment. Sometime the main entrance is sheltered by a columned porch. Other typical motifs include, multi -pane, sash windows, a front sloping, pitched or gambrel roof and eaves ornamented with dentils."148 Georgian Revival is one of the most popular revival styles and many of its stylistic features are found in vernacular styles throughout Canada. The elements of the Georgian Revival Style which are found on the subject property include the symmetrically facade and the centrally placed and recessed decorative doorway with side lights and panelled transom which creates the focal point of the facade. The simple bunker like garage structure is not representative of the Georgian Revival Style or the Arts and Crafts movement. The garage with its hard -geometric lines is void of decorative features or windows. This purpose-built garage favours function over aesthetics and is best described as a vernacular building. lab Ibid. Pg. 141. 14' According to Ricketts, Maitland and Hucker this style mimics English and Dutch colonial architecture. 14' Ricketts, Maitland & Hucker. 2011. A Guide to Canadian Architectural Styles Section Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Pg. 150. 88 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 45: West elevation showing the rear addition and garage (AB, 2020). Figure 46: North elevation showing rear porch and open shed (AB, 2020) 89 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 47: East elevation showing rear addition and French doors (AB, 2020). Additional photographic documentation is found in Appendix C. 7.1.1 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener An inspection report was conducted for the subject property by Lobban Stround Ltd. on 3 September 2019. This report was prepared for the current owners Glen Drummond and Kimberly Love. The comprehensive report notes areas for improvements which will extend the life of the building. The full report is included in Appendix D. General recommendations include: • Repair or replace the shed roof. • Repair or replace gutters. • Improve downspouts to redirect water. • Repair or replace wood soffit/fascia in an ongoing basis. • Repair or replace the overgrown vegetation surrounding window wells. • Improve lot grading to ensure perimeter grading is sloping to drain water away from building. • Repair or replace patio, walkways, and masonry/stone landscaping. The report states: "Ensure water is directed away from the building during repairs- in particular with the patio which is built higher than ideal which increases the risk of water problems." • Improve landscaping throughout. The report states: "It is critical to trim trees, branches, shrubs and vegetation away from the building to reduce the risk of damage and pest problems". 90 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Repair or replace doors and window trim. The report states: "Various repairs and patchwork were noted and it recommends local repairs are needed." • Repair or replace siding/cladding [on fagade dormer]. The report states: "Ultimately plan on an eventual resurface with a lower maintenance cladding/siding". • Porch/Deck structure [at rear]. The report states: "The deck is not well built and near the end of the useful lifespan. Expect to remove or rebuild the deck eventually". • Repair or replace the missing door closer on attached garage. The report states: "Door connecting the house to the garage require a door closer to prevent gases from entering the house. This is a safety concern and should corrected promptly". • Repair the damage to wooden garage door. • Repair or replace electrical openings. The report states: "Any opening in the electrical panel should be covered". • Repair or replace exterior electrical wiring. The report states: "Loose conduit with an outlet on the ground noted in the garden beside the driveways". • Repair or replace Branch circuit wiring. The report states: "Wires should be terminated in a junction box or removed if they are no longer used in the electrical system to ensure safety. Extension cords should not be used as a permanent wiring installation. This is a safety concern and immediate service is recommended. Extension cord through a doorway should be removed immediately. Wires and boxes should be secured to prevent damage and electrical hazards". • Repair or replace inoperative electrical outlets. • Repair or replace underground outlets. The report states: "Ungrounded circuits were intended to be used only with 2 -Prong outlets which are no longer available. Any 3 - Prong outlets on ungrounded circuits should be replaced with Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFCI) outlets which will protect by tripping off the power in the case of an electrical ground fault or electric shock. GFCIs allow continued safe use of ungrounded circuits, but eventually anticipate replacement of the older ungrounded wires." • Repair or replace the Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter in washroom. • Replace knob and tube wiring. The report states: "Although many circuits have been replaced overtime, there is still some live Knob and Tube wiring in use in some areas. The extent of Knob and Tube wiring cannot be determined in this inspection. Insurance companies typically require replacement of Knob and Tube wiring immediately". • Removal of abandoned boilers. The report states: "There are 2 boilers which cannot be used any longer but are still connected to the rad piping system. Removal is recommended. Work on the boilers should involve an asbestos specialist first. Contact an asbestos specialist for details and costs regarding the insulation on the boilers and 91 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener plumbing and contact a boiler specialist regarding removal of the old / abandoned boilers". • Repair of replace Radiators/convectors (Rads). • Improve the insulation in the attic. • Improve the insulation in the basement. • Repair or replace the plumbing. The report states: "Galvanized steel piping is an old system which has not been commonly used for decades. The steel will be very rusty at this point and will eventually need to be updated. The plumbing may fail at any time. Contact your insurer. It is typical for insurance companies to require immediate replacement of galvanized steel water pipes inside the building". • Replace waste piping. The report states: "The drain/waste pipes are an old style system and an ageing material. Expect to replace this system eventually. The drain/waste pipes may be high maintenance until updated. Leakage and poor drainage cannot be predicted. Try to include replacement and updates with any renovations or plumbing projects that would provide better access for updates. In particular, replacement during galvanized steel piping replacement is recommended. Insurance may be an issue and replacement of drain/waste pipes may be needed in the short term to obtain insurance. • Repair or replace the faucet for the ensuite". • Improve bathtub/Tub encloser. The report states: "The enclosure needs to be sealed to prevent water damage". • Monitor floor slope. • Improve typical cosmetic damage with floors. • Improve typical cosmetic damage on walls. • Improve typical cosmetic damage on ceilings. • Provide CO and Smoke detectors. • Replace or repair windows. The report states: "Old windows currently need repairs or replacement for ease of operation and comfort. Although it is often preferred to replace windows instead of repair, some people prefer old windows despite the high maintenance and consider it typical for old homes. Obtain quotes for your preferred method of improving the windows. In particular, cracked glass, stuck windows, wood damage, damaged screens, damaged window hardware were noted. Contractors often prefer to replace old windows." • Improve basement window frames. • Replace or repair the east door. The report states: "Damage to the door was noted and repairs are needed". • Repair or replace the fireplace on first floor (south). The report states: "There is no combustion air vent, the damper needs service, and burn marks were noted above the 92 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener fireplace mantle. Further evaluation by a fireplace specialist is recommended for details and costs. Contact your insurer as improvements are often required to obtain insurance. Use of the fireplace is not recommended in the meantime". • Repair or replace fireplace on first floor (south-east). The report states: "The firebox requires service, there is no combustion air vent, the damper needs service, and burn marks were noted above the fireplace mantle. Further evaluation by a fireplace specialist is recommended for details and costs. Contact your insurer as improvements are often required to obtain insurance. Use of the fireplace is not recommended in the meantime." • Improve the basement leakage. The report states: "Evidence of prior leakage was noted. The areas were found to be dry at the time of inspection. These areas should be monitored for future leakage and repairs undertaken as needed. Compared to similar aged cellar type basements, this foundation and basement are performing better than typical". 7.2 INTERIOR The house was occupied by the current owners at the time of the site visit. Due to Covid-19 health and safety measures the interior was not included in the site inspection. The current owner did confirm that the interior has been painted all white during the Arcari ownership. The current owner noted that they modified some of the interiors in the basement to create a larger laundry room. It is recommended that an interior site visit be carried out when it is safe to do so. 7.3 LANDSCAPE The landscape associated with the subject property consists of formal designed areas and unmaintained natural areas. The house sits on the highest elevation of the property. The land slopes gently downwards away from the house to the east edge of the property. The north side of the property contains a steeply sloped wooded area with a meandering pathway. To the west of the house the landscape rises from street level to a plateau area and then slopes down to the north rear. In front of the house is a grassy front lawn area with the slope becoming steeper towards the southern edge of the property dropping significantly where it meets the street level. The precise elevations are identified in Figure 48. The subject property is accessed by a gently sloping, curved, single lane, paved driveway. The driveway is defined with low lying concreate edging. The north side of the driveway is lined with trees and shrubs which create a visual barrier into the east lawn. There are two separate flagstone walkways from the driveway into the east lawn. One of these walkways is located halfway up the driveway and appears to be a recent modification and not part of the original landscape designs. As you approach the main house, the concreate edging on the north side shifts to a low-lying flagstone wall. The flagstone wall begins at the entrance to the formal 93 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener garden and continues to the western edge of the fagade. The driveway crosses in front of the house and wraps around the west elevation. To the south of the driveway is the front lawn. The front lawn consists of an open grassy area with a handful of mature trees. Three trees are clustered directly in front of the house, while the remaining trees are found along the southern property edge. Mature lilacs cover a large portion of the lawn towards to western edge of the property. The mature trees which line the south edge of the property, along with various other plantings, create a strong visual barrier to and from the streetscape. Overall, the house has very limited visibility from Bridgeport Road, even in the winter months. The west side of the property is accessed from the parking area through a lychgate. Beyond the lychgate, the area to the south contains a row hedge, an open grassy area, a handful of trees and a slope down towards the street. The area to the north is generally open, and contains trees, a multi -tiered water feature, and small man-made pond. The lychgate, water feature and pond were recently added by the current owners. The formal garden is located directly east of the house. The manicured garden contains three. The upper terrace spans the east elevation and is created with various sized flagstones supported by a stone retaining wall. It is framed by a stone balustrade with rhythmically placed balusters. Some of the balusters show signs of deterioration. The balustrade has a centrally placed opening with wide stone stairs. The stairs lead down to a grassy level with a row of roses and manicured geometric hedges; this level also provides access, via stone steps, to the driveway. This level is defined and supported by a stone retaining wall. The stairs continue down to the open lower level where large flagstones outline the original pool perimeter. The corner stones of the concreate pool edging has been cut to provide a subtle detail and soften the hard edges of the rectangular pool. There is a flagstone ramp, and stone stairs located on the northern edge of the formal garden area. To the east of the formal garden is an open grassy lawn with gentle slope. The sloping lawn tappers off midway and large plantings and mature trees edge the eastern portion of the property. To the north of the open lawn there is a dense naturalized area. 94 Amy Barnes Consulting PART 1. PLAN 58R-1158 sz3tiRav 30 14 v `'D �b 6 PLaN a a-_ �l Ills'- 58R- .• e 9 "51 lm v �„ �•� m '�.� e �sl$'<. I PART z `v' m qn �,^.. 5 •"+ ' I t c fN . $, m rryrr s2.£12 encs (T) 4 fl Figure 48: Maps showing existing elevations of the property (MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying, 2020). CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener SKETCH ILLUSTRATING TOPOGRAPHY OF 1518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO MocDONALD TAMBLYN LORI) SURVEYING LIMITED 0 --.- METRIC LLLVAnI NDIL ax aouxurws neo xnvrsk". so.Y°rsm; caww' ns cmo Noxi iZ NOTES ,, rujcxlre oncwemu nERTExu�rcPID e rme :�m11FL w LEGEND u= 0.- r.cwnz .µ Ar 95 '10 G E R M IN V C M' A V Y h. fro T R A C T =artr t. gRlocEPoRr Roae [� LNN 223tr1 GCOa (e r)v Figure 48: Maps showing existing elevations of the property (MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying, 2020). CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener SKETCH ILLUSTRATING TOPOGRAPHY OF 1518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO MocDONALD TAMBLYN LORI) SURVEYING LIMITED 0 --.- METRIC LLLVAnI NDIL ax aouxurws neo xnvrsk". so.Y°rsm; caww' ns cmo Noxi iZ NOTES ,, rujcxlre oncwemu nERTExu�rcPID e rme :�m11FL w LEGEND u= 0.- r.cwnz .µ Ar 95 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 49: View of driveway looking west, showing the relationship between the sidewalk, front lawn, and house (AB, 2020) Figure 50: Openings located along the driveway which provides access to the open lawn (left) and opening from driveway to the formal garden terrace (right). 96 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 51: Upper flagstone terrace (left) with detail of balustrade (AB, 2020) iWi y f � Y �'�,� � ` _ . a . R - • _, rye„ f r � "K IV F s .Y . � i � Yin h,,� ri � K � `,P. r f •° °. Figure 52: Middle level of formal garden area showing geometric hedging (AB, 2020). 97 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 53: Centrally places stairs located in middle of the formal garden (left) and stone ramp located on north edge of terrace (AB, 2020). Figure 54: Pool edge with soften corners and surrounding flagstone boarder (AB, 2020). 98 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 55: Open lawn area (AB, 2020). 99 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 56: View of open lawn area from the south-east area of the property. Note the overgrown Forsythia plant on the right side. (AB, 2020). Figure 57: Wooden lychgate (AB, 2020). 100 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 58: View towards Bridgeport Road from west side of property (AB, 2020) Figure 59: View towards rear of property from west side of property (AB, 2020). Additional photographic documentation is provided in Appendix C. 101 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 7.3.1 BORGSTROM'S DESIGNED LANDSCAPE The landscape is associated with Canadian landscape architect Carl Borgstrom who designed the garden layout for Mr. and Mrs. Sims in 1946. The design did not include any reference to the west side of the property. Borgstrom created three designs: the original garden layout, a revised design of the formal garden area, and specific details for the terrace and balustrade features. The original garden layout (Figure 60) provides an aerial view of the entire layout, a cross section showing elevations for a pathway from the main house to the street, a cross section showing elevations of the terraces and open area, and a detailed image of the balustrade and retaining walls. The original garden layout had two stairs from the upper terrace, labelled "Paved terrace", which lead to the "Grass Terrace", and the lower area with the pool. The "Revised Garden Layout" (Figure 62), shows the redesigned terrace with one wide central opening. This design reflects the current layout. The revised garden layout is limited to the formal garden area. Borgstrom's garden layout and redesign does not identify species of plants or trees. For example, the plantings which separates the driveway from the open lawn are labelled "Evergreen plantings" and similarly the east edge is labelled "shrubs and tree plantings". The choreographed entrance is an important component of any landscape design. The curved and rising nature of the driveway and the placement of evergreen plantings along the northern edge create a visual separation from the formal garden and open lawn. This allows users to experience the areas of the landscape independently. Circulation patterns and the reveal of the formal garden is controlled within the design. The open lawn area provides a vista from the terrace and allows users to distinguish between the formal garden area and the natural areas. Similarly, the open lawn provides an uninterrupted vista towards the house and formal garden. When considering Borgstrom's approach to landscaping, his long-time friend and work partner Humphrey Carver wrote: "What made Carl Borgstrom exceptionally gifted in landscape architecture was, I think, his countryman's intuitive understanding of the relationship between plants and animals, between trees and human life: his sense that we all live in families, and that we all grow and change and evolve in relationship with one another. A landscape is not something that is static, designed and fixed. I don't think that we ever used the words ecology or environment because be don't need to. A feeling for the shape of the earth and the organic life within it and upon it, was an innate part of Carl's nature. 149 Landscapes are not static and require continued cultivation and human interaction. Ongoing maintenance, succession planting, and natural life cycles influence how landscapes evolve over time. Borgstrom's garden layout has had 70+ years to mature and grow. According to the current owner, for many years during the end of the Sims ownership, the property was 141 Shearer, Wendy. 2004. Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment Chicopee: Former Sims Estate, Kitchener, Ontario. Original quote cited from Le Geyt, 1997. 102 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener unmaintained. For advantageous species, this resulted in their expansion and overgrowth. This is evident some of the plantings along the east property line (i.e. Forsythia plant show in Figure 56 ) which changed the intended shape of the edging. As a result, the original focal point associated with vista from the terrace (Shown as B' on Figure 61) has been lost. The remaining garden features which are representative of Borgstrom's design include: • Spatial order surrounding the house including the terraces, formal gardens, primary walkway in and out of the formal garden, stairs and ramps, and views from the terrace to the open lawn. • the legibility of the original pool defined by the large stone edging with softened I141r•IFIFI T&9I • the balustrade and centrally placed stone stairs (noted in Borgstrom's redesigned plans). • the evergreen plantings which create a buffer and boarder the edge between the gardens, lawn, and driveway. • the open lawn area and east edging. • The gently curved and sloping driveway with mature vegetation which controls views into the formal garden and open lawn. • the unmaintained wooded area at the rear of the house. Many natural elements have matured, been removed, or are no longer representative of Borgstrom's garden layout design. This includes: • the shape of the border of plantings on the eastern edge of the property. the linear vista from the terrace stairs to the recessed seating area on eastern edge of the property. • Individual trees found throughout the property. Many of Borgstrom's proposed landscape features were never realized or have been removed. This includes: the central stairway from main entrance of the building to the street and the decorative rock garden flanked by evergreens. • the number of trees associated with the front yard. • the railing intended to accompany the stone ramp. There are several landscape features which have recently been added by the current owners. The following features are not part of Borgstrom's design: • the stone wall which boarders the parking area. • the lychgate. • the circulation pathways on the west elevation. • the tiered water feature on the west elevation. • the new plantings throughout the edges of the lawn (east elevation). • the benches and their placement of throughout the property. • the stone statues found throughout the property. 103 t r - w 9" i �(i-• i W % iLio9�- '4JL e s�. q `J KI H I Ci H v A Y I r C M t- N. t A. P L A N Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 62: Revised garden layout (Image provided by current owner) Figure 63: Revised balustrade design (Image provided by current owners) 105 Amy Barnes Consulting 7.3.2 TREE MANAGEMENT PLAN CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener A survey of the existing trees and a tree management plan was developed by MacKinnon & Associates. This was done by a certified arborist and member of the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects (GALA). The survey identified the trees on site, species, associated drip lines, and current condition. The maps shown in Figure 64 provides details of the tree inspection and survey. The following colours codes apply: Green: Trees which are unique, significant, and worth saving. Orange: Trees which are considered undesirable species. Black: Trees which are considered neutral. Red: Trees which are undesirable by condition, their survival is doubtful, or they pose a hazard. Trees identified in red are recommended for removal. The results of the survey have informed the tree management plan which is discussed further in Section 9. 106 Amy Barnes Consulting 3 PF 1. PLAN o8R 1."158 BRIDGEPORT ROAD i"ner OF LOT ss, e nnnn - re..z i) Figure 64: Tree condition survey and associated driplines for 518 Bridgeport Road (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020) CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener P"p PART 2 1 22342-005r T i, ipQ 518 Bddq.p.,t R..d, Kitchener y— —tea r,:�,� Tree Management Plan -. L1iOi18b8 107 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Z T 12�1 Z.Z: T 2.112'111 Z"171 Z7: -z ZZ: Z� L!"1111-1. Z7 Z,IrZ I (OE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER Tree Management Details MacKinnon & Figure 65: Tree management plan (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020). 108 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener L--Taaseratloa pBTnolw i2.!l Elrtlaiegmmwlci Tab �hanyp[eWoxa6a 35 Falr TNnkwwnA,3WNtleatl YarltlXes M Pi oio Sbaresuin ah Fair Pr[eerv[ TI] Dalai M Fair P.— ikncmmn u ayeeosak a0 n�sMwavnP1111 rva bah Acarne@uMp 21 fair IRS. e —IllgtpwaMsaAlacen[penpertv nmrnegnrme gee u.n.pw.rc.,Pmr�i. sA µnm aFlseanv aS Fair Piexrvc a9] Ppban'.a PseWoacatda 3A fair chin [mwn awrplarznptl®e 40 fA RmrneNMo a5 faotl Feir Prexrv[ Lsrnegurmo oae cmaomiummmswtlh indueea hak,lwwy watersmwa rnegurHo 8A AternegslMP 1S fair rvc frewrve Ikanlr8 3STp Asrnegunda 28 neguntlp ISM Fair fkmmrc Lernirg dun hill anlrg uphill SM A2rneguMa aS Fair Preurv[ Leaning roweNs prvP[+s1 23 Robania prcudoaw dS Pwr Remue Fdknup hill,aP,Ldcad hrarnhes ]W I'llme1:7 -0b F. P.—Owl nal6lna M1ytlmllnas. Yn nOW aw MernRguMo dl FW Iaemrnm HeavywatersprPh[F 31P P:o4nra pseWaza[u ]S fall Preserve 29] .grtrnegurko 2T Rwr Remore Hearyweeerspmu[s rr ^'� agBA Merneguntlp a5 PRpr Pemwre IsaPlrq pphlll, waer nalraraa ad(a[eMprppeiry 13n rmbsnla preudnaaca usyancahe ee c 1&1 PnhmiapseWoazatia IS Feir Preurve P.— Pph.n�a pseWpaaa[N 3g leanlrg uphill aaM1alnum ID3 Ra4na 65 Gpcd Preserv[ ro-amnlnaMstems xMhlr lueedhark Zfi1 Robania ereudowaria IS a¢p Psb•nra psevdoaza[a d6 Fair fair P- re Z.- Preserve PseWpamae c ve. nN eesy(smlenghmalas� c, 10, rvc iNn cmxm,4ae aaw bmmhes radnapseWoaza[aa Ewdanm atmnN tle[ay (imlwngbpoles� ZBS µnus sylx 45 Fair P.— Siypreved on ueside 20a Pnbnia eseudoamoa aN1L14111 Fair Prexrve 30%deadhundxe over heBiry hy&o lines aP6 Po4n�a pFeudoazapia 11 gpotl Preaerve Slight leen t—SMS Pntle Pnbnla preudoauaa v4f2a/1p}'a5 rva erM tlaatlbnaMF,orornanglrg by®o lliwf Td] A¢rnaguntla 1E Fair fkmme -hi. akng slope T(B PnGnw ueudomda U riW Piexrvc YYA eeeehmafaes,axrhaRlA Xyda lines afa Getllbia tri—thus 3g 600d Preurve T10 ®lalPa [pe[IFea 111 Cefelpe smeeime tnptl Pear Pemese semrNrel issues,per AenBirynyem rues ZIO µoleo sYsves[xs� ll - &,d rvc Preserve weFhan¢In¢holpe rrA poria Pa sprclua 11 rva d nup saxesmap uenpppr rvc fce AOR eeaehmlxnes ala Wvalpa ape[losa far Preserve 2]3 µnu abheaae 96 @ed Pemae U 3a8 Uulpe ipeaicae 12 Imbno P11-1 S Ffir P.—: ISX.brnken 1 binachokatl, rnmrhanpinp hydmhnes Wabn'ra p[eWpxpSa I'llLeaning 2]5 ulmm ds r>tiW Prexry e mlolawn area alg µHof saNeeMrt 36 Lseae Remove pumila M GIMi-tri—thus rib 6oA Preserve Ppdndarybee n�'f°6 °rc 2TIR Ami PlamrmYtles 11 riotl Preserve a]n %nsA Nbkaslrk 43 wad Wmpw Zl8 AcernaauMo Y falx Ikmme LeanIF4lpxaMs drlbenab a19 µoussbM1enm 36 ogee Reiner[ Tl3 Ilohenia P—TT Fair Piexrvc Leanirg inm Pmperty.hundary rice 2 J woof FYaasXiP ;2 Tlllaamera�a 3Evb Rppr PemP.e ticatlhnMyf rvnLs, IeanlM, Vndeatl blames aW aHernRguntlp 3]!Z3 Tal Tlia u f I fair roe Femme Heavysp[kepng houndarv[ra 3uPlaanigu AD Fair Remse iMncmwn arncrimna al¢ Merne¢untlo k fair Poemrnre Qveehan¢In¢adkxenYholae, eanln¢Intpslle VS lA AwrglManagAIl at Geetl P... 293 µso �auu 31 Fair Remse Tien rsmm [elnsomlrkrnalls mincmwn [ea grauw TMn crpRin TSS lualaanigra R6S Fair Prexrve Nva ne suPprcuud on ueside ]ab [ea gwfa N Mmaw 18R v ea aal[a aT Pwr Ilemore BP4 deadhraiahes i 15i µm R}aauu 9p Fair Pemse ileo crown 1Ta lugl � Gb FRir Wmwa le&ons nlgn fPaer US ea aaura aA Falr Remmc sugiansnigra a Pemvae fiwiirginuirc fenrc, uin[ce M1 k� 231 luRlananign 40 suglans nlgn Fair Remote GamminartmmawetlriMudedhah raanirg aAa RnamnusuHiartlu a+tw 131 Tausn media N 6pod tied Pemrne Ptmrn aSP fualans nlera as 231 AsrneguMo IT far Falr 1lemore Remove 3wnk C2 underlhmobk7 Z4T TMpsf a]%3a Gpotl Pemrne 2. AeerneguMoa aE/LI Felfindr ry Remove 193 d8 MiussP. P. 843 MersaaM1arum 1h Poor Goptl Ptrnme Preperve �%deeehmPtlais rnaguMo i3/2l _ 891 TmusB metlia 35 845 PohanU pFeudoxaGa 31131 fair fair Preserve Preserve 5p%tleatlhrnletlles Ga-IbminaMslems Mtn induced hark a3TA fra5rws sp OZ pxae Pempve fwA nu of ASh bore± T?a Gleeia�i�untnes � Fele prexrv[ ryv Tausa media 3T 899 Teale media Ih Cvrsl Oeea Preserve Pemore aNA! PMmnus[anertlm ll 211 4xrneguMo 82 felt Fair Poemove Remove SicNcdngavhme eSA luNpenSsvlralnlans G6 Wotl peg asrnegur-0P 1S b3 A[erne is fou Poor wmwa Remove uanng uPhlll TS%eesehmnples aYalpawenwa rvc 2pA Raaalur 8lu U 8lb . 4W Puaerva 524 queme abrc sR lied Pieeerv[ co-eeminaMaeema Min intlueetl hark a6 R wn pseWPaada E3 Falr Rmferve 3ankwwntq 3p%dwd branmAs 56ta1 [lFalpe apeaws 3l road Pomwx Cn-eaminnmrtama MtXlMUMdhak Figure 66: Details list of tree species (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020). 109 Amy Barnes Consulting 8.1 ONTARIO REGULATION 9/06 Table 3: Evaluation against O. Reg. 9/06 CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, Yes The original one -and -a -half storey portion of the representative or early building was built with poured concreate c.1914 and a example of a style, sympathetic rear addition and garage added in 1941. type, expression, The building is a representative example of an early material, or I 20th century vernacular style building built with poured construction method, concreate. The building is influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement in Canada and Georgian revival style. Elements of the landscape are a unique and representative example of a Carl Borgstrom landscape design. ii. displays a high degree No The building does not display a high degree of of craftsmanship or craftsmanship or artistic merit. It was built using artistic merit, or building methods common to its construction period. iii. demonstrates a high No The building does not display a high degree of technical degree of technical or or scientific achievement. It was built using common scientific achievement. construction methods. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, has direct associations Yes The building is indirectly associated with Thomas with a theme, event, Pearce who played a prominent role in the belief, person, activity, development of the educational system in Waterloo organization or County. Thomas Pearce had the original building institution that is constructed for his daughter as a wedding present. significant to a The building is directly associated with William 'Bill' community, Sims and Mary Sims who occupied it from 1937 until 1992. Bill was the son of Harvey James Sims who was a well known and respected lawyer and community member. Bill worked as a lawyer with his father and brother, James 'Kenneth' Sims. 110 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener i. is important in defining, The property is directly associated with Carl Borgstrom The surrounding area represent a wide variety of who was a prominent Canadian landscape architect. Many elements of Borgstrom landscape design remain supporting the legible on the property. ii. yields, or has the No The property does not yield or have the potential to potential to yield, yield information that contributes to an understanding information that of the community. contributes to an The property may exhibit some archaeological understanding of a potential. Archaeology is a separate process outside of community or culture, the scope of this evaluation. An archeological or assessment by a licenced archeologist may be required as determined by City staff. iii. demonstrates or Yes It is unclear who built the original building. The reflects the work or addition was designed by T.H. Wells and built by Ball ideas of an architect, Brother Construction; however, they do not appear to artist, builder, designer be significant. or theorist who is Elements of the property reflects the work of Carl significant to a Borgstrom who is significant in the field of landscape community. architecture. Borgstrom was a well-respected landscape architect and one of the original founders of the Canadian Association of Landscape Architects. The provincial chapter is the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects. 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, No The surrounding area represent a wide variety of maintaining or architectural styles, lot sizes, setbacks and uses. There supporting the is no cohesive neighbourhood character. The property character of an area, is sympathetic to the surrounding streetscape, however, because it is not highly visible from the streetscape it is not significant or important in defining, maintaining, or supporting the character of the area. ii. is physically, No The property is not physically, functionally, visually, or functionally, visually or historically linked to it surroundings. historically linked to its surroundings, or 111 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener iii. is a landmark. No I The property is not a landmark. 8.2 CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE The property was examined as a CHL using the Regional Implementation Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape framework. This framework uses an adapted version of O. Reg 9/06. In keeping with the three -pronged approach to evaluating CHLs (Figure 12), the framework provides a series of identifiers to consider the historical integrity and the community value. The historical integrity and community value were also considered. Table 4: CHL evaluation using an adapted version of O. Reg. 9/06 Criteria for Heritage Value or Interest 1. The landscape has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative Yes Elements of the landscape are a unique and or early example of a style, type, representative example of Carl Borgstrom's expression, material, or landscape design. construction method, ii. displays a high degree of Yes The spatial order and landscape features craftsmanship or artistic merit, or associated with the terraces and formal garden display a high degree of artistic merit. iii. demonstrates a high degree of No The landscape does not demonstrate a high technical or scientific degree of technical or scientific achievement. achievement. 2. The landscape 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, Yes The landscape has a direct association with Carl Borgstrom. Carl Borgstrom was a prominent and well- respected landscape architect and one of the original founders of the Canadian Association of Landscape Architects. The provincial chapter is the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects. 112 Amy Barnes Consulting ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or CHW 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener No The landscape does not yield or have the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. iii. demonstrates or reflects the work Yes or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. The landscape may exhibit some archaeological potential. Archaeology is a separate process outside of the scope of this evaluation. An archeological assessment by a licenced archeologist may be required as determined by City staff. Elements of the landscape reflect the work of Carl Borgstrom. Carl Borgstrom is considered a significant Canadian landscape architect. 3. The landscape has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, No The landscape is not visible from the maintaining or supporting the streetscape. It is not significant or character of an area, important in defining, maintaining, or I supporting the character of the area. ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or iii. is a landmark. Table 5: Indicators of Historical Integrity Land use -The landscape has had continuity in use and/or a compatible use (agricultural, commercial, residential or institutional). No Carl Borgstrom's landscape design was added to the property c. 1946. The landscape elements are not physically, functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. No The landscape is not considered a landmark. Yes The land use associated with the subject property has remained residential since the house was built c. 1914. 113 Amy Barnes Consulting Ownership There has been a continuity of ownership or occupation of the site, dating to a historic period. Built Elements The buildings and other built elements (fences, walls, paths, bridges, corrals, pens, garden features, lighting, sidewalks, fountains, piers, etc.) have survived in their historic form and in relatively sound condition. Vegetative Elements Plantings (hedgerows, windrows, gardens, shade trees, etc.) are still evident and their traditional relationship to buildings, lanes, roadways, walks and fields are still discernible. Cultural Relationships The relationships between historic buildings and other built and designed elements (yards, fields, paths, parks, gardens, etc.) are intact. CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener No The property has had multiple owners. Yes Many elements of Borgstrom's designed landscape have survived. The spatial order and formal garden features immediately surrounding the house, remain legible and are in relatively sound condition. Yes The spatial order surrounding the house, driveway, front lawn, pathways in and out of the formal garden are still discernible. Yes The spatial order and relationship between the building and Borgstrom's formal garden and landscape features are intact. Natural Features Prominent natural Yes The prominent natural features, including features (cliff, stream, vegetation, the topography at the rear and naturalized etc.) remain intact. wooded areas remain intact. Natural Relationships The historical No The historical relationship between natural relationships to prominent natural features of the property before the features still exist both for the site landscape was altered by Borgstrom's as a whole and within the site. c.1946 is unknown. Views The existing views of and Yes Historical aerial photographs suggest there within the site can be closely has always been vegetation separating the compared to the same view in the views from Bridgeport Road into the past (certain views may have been property. The views of, and within, the site captured in historic photos). to the streetscape appear comparable. 114 Amy Barnes Consulting Ruins and overgrown elements still convey a clear'message' about the site's history. Designed Landscapes- Changes to a designed landscape can be corrected so that the property retains integrity versus being irrevocable. Table 6: Indicators of Community Value CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The designed vista from the central point of the terrace to the east edge of the property is no longer representative of the original design intent. Overgrown vegetation has impeded the view line. No There are no known ruins on the site. Yes The integrity of some of the landscape have been compromised due to natural growth cycles. These changes are reversible but require re -planting of vegetative elements and ongoing maintenance. Community Identity: The landscape No This subject property does not appear to contributes to the community's tell a story about the development of the identity and is used to tell the story of the community Landmark: The area is widely recognized as a landmark Pride and Stewardship: The community demonstrates a high degree of pride and stewardship in the area (heritage designations, plaques, voluntary upkeep) Commemoration: The area or elements within the area are name to celebrate or commemorate someone or something Bridgeport community. No The subject property is not widely recognized as a landmark. No The surrounding area does not have a high concentration of listed or designated properties. The area is comprised of residential, commercial, and spiritual uses. There is no indication of a high degree of heritage pride or stewardship. fhe subject property is not commemorated In the surrounding area. 115 Amy Barnes Consulting Public Space: The area is a site of frequent or longstanding public gatherings or events Cultural Traditions: People use the area to express their cultural traditions Quality of Life: Aspects of the landscape are valued for their impact on day to day living Local History: The place is written about in local histories or spoken about through local stories or lore Visual Depiction: The location is widely photographed or depicted in works of art (visual, literary, etc.) Genius Loci: People refer to the area as having a distinctive atmosphere or pervading 'sense of place' Community Image: The area is identified with the community image (e.g. appearing in promotions or marketing material) CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener No The subject property is not a public site for events or gatherings. No The subject property is not used by people to express cultural traditions. No The subject property does not impact the quality of life related to day to day living. No The subject property does not appear to be written about in local histories or local lore associated with it. No The subject property is not widely photographed or depicted in works of art. No The surrounding neighbourhood is a mix of housing styles and uses built at various time periods. It does not have distinctive sense of place. No The subject property is not identified within i community imaging. Tourism: The area is promoted as a No The subject property is not promoted as a tourist destination tourist destination. Planning: The area has been No The area has not been identified as having identified through another planning unique heritage qualities and distinct process as being unique character. 116 Amy Barnes Consulting 111011101 CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener A property needs to meet one of the nine criteria to be considered for designation under Part IV of the OHA. The subject property met multiple criteria identified in O. Reg 9/06 of the OHA and would be eligible for designation under the OHA. The subject property was evaluated as a potential CHL using an adapted version of O. Reg 9/06. The subject property met multiple criteria. With respect to the historical indicators, the evaluation reinforces the ongoing historical integrity of the built and natural elements of the subject property. With respect to community value indicators, the evaluation suggest that the subject property is not valued by the community at large. The areas in which the subject property meets the CHL criteria include: • The property is directly associated with Carl Borgstrom. Borgstrom is considered significant Canadian landscape architect. • Elements of the landscape are a unique and representative example of Carl Borgstrom landscape design. • The spatial order and features associated with the terraces and formal garden area display a high degree of artistic merit. The areas in which the property meets some CHL indicators include: • The land use associated with the subject property has remained residential since the house was built c. 1914. • Many built and natural elements of Borgstrom's designed landscape remain discernible and are in relatively sound condition. • The spatial order and relationship between the building and many of the designed landscaped features are intact. • The prominent natural features, including the steep topography at the rear and naturalized wooded areas, remain intact. • Significant vistas of and within the site can be closely compared to the same view in the past. Notwithstanding these findings, it is the authors professional opinion that the identified significant elements of the CHL have already been considered as part of the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (SCHVI) which has been developed for the purpose of this report and used to evaluate the potential impact of the proposed redevelopment. E-31121MSIFA III LTA 1X►111110•]ffI1110\:7_\0: III ilk] IrSel11IL%\1111111we] :a1►IIII : The cultural heritage value or interest of the 518 Bridgeport Road resides in the residence, the attached garage, the landscaped gardens, and its historical association to Thomas Pearce, Bill Sims, and Carl Borgstrom. 117 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The property, municipally known as 518 Bridgeport Road, is located in the City of Kitchener, Region of Waterloo, Ontario. It is located on the north side of Bridgeport Road, Regional Road 9, in the Bridgeport West Neighbourhood. The subject property is bounded by Lancaster Street West to the east, and Lang Crescent to the north and west. Bridgeport Road is a four -lane, two- way, arterial road, which generally runs in an east -west direction. The legal description is GCT Pt Lot 59 RP 58-R-8657 Part 1. The property includes a one -and -one-half storey residence with a rear addition and attached garage. The property has formal designed gardens. The residence is situated on the crest of a hill on a 1.43 -acre parcel. The property has a large lot and generous set back from Bridgeport Road. 8.4.2 STATEMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST The property demonstrates design/physical value as representative example of an early 201h century, poured concrete, vernacular building with influences from the Arts and Crafts movement and Georgian Revival architecture style. The residence was built c. 1914 and a one - and -a -half storey addition and a one storey garage was added in 1941. The addition was designed by local architect T.H. Wells and built by Ball Brother Construction. The three -bay residence is built with poured concreate and cinder block with concreate pargework scored to resemble square cut stones. The ivy-covered house features a gable end roof with overhanging eaves and dormers. It has recessed and decorative front entrance. Many of the features are original and intact. The house sits prominently on the highest area of the property, fronting towards Bridgeport Road. The property demonstrates historical/associative value because of its indirect association with Thomas Pearce and direct association with the Sims family. The residence was built by Thomas Pearce as a wedding gift for his daughter Lena 'Harriet' Pearce and her husband, English sea captain Ernest Snow. Thomas Pearce played a prominent role in the development of the educational system in Waterloo County. In 1937, the Snows sold the property to William 'Bill' and Mary Sims, who named the house "Hilltop House". The Sims were a well-known and respected family in Kitchener due in part to the prominence and success of Bill's father, Harvey Sims. Harvey Sims is directly associated with the property known as the Sims Estate (Chicopee Estate) which featured a Humphrey Carver and Carl Borgstrom designed landscape. Bill, along with his father and brother J. Kenneth were lawyers in Kitchener. The landscape demonstrates physical/design value and associative value because of its direct associated with Carl Borgstrom. Carl Borgstrom was a prominent landscape architect who, in addition to various private commissions, designed the Rock Garden at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton. He was one of the founding members of the Canadian Association of Landscape Architects, which evolved into provincial chapters. Carl Borgstrom designed the garden layout for the Sims in 1946. The landscaped gardens display a blend of both structure and natural forms. The gardens were built in tiers, starting with a flagstone terrace and balustrade. A few steps lead to a grassy level bounded by geometric hedges before another stairway descends to a concrete path marking the perimeter of the buried pool. The structured 118 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener tiers give way to an open lawn edged by plantings and mature trees. A steep unmaintained wooded area with a meandering path is found along the north side of the property. The heritage attributes supporting the cultural heritage value or interest of 518 Bridgeport Road are represented in the one -and -a -half -storey house and one storey garage and the designed landscape. Key heritage attributes associated with the building include: • One -and -a -half storey height and south facing orientation; • The large setback and from the street; • The use of poured concreate construction with pargework scored to resemble square cut stone; • The one storey garage; • The window openings and sills; • The original single sash wooden windows on the fagade; • The three -bay facade with original wooden door, side lights, and panelled transom; • The recessed entrance with segmentally arched opening and flat canopy with brackets, wooden soffit, and woodwork scored to resemble purlins; and • The gable roof, dormers, and roofline with overhanging eaves, wooden soffits with woodwork scored to resemble purlins. Key heritage attributes associated with Borgstrom's landscape features including: • The spatial order surrounding the house including the terraces, grass tier, primary walkway in and out of the formal garden, and stone stairs and ramp. • The curved driveway and vegetation (north side) which limits views into the formal garden and lawn; • The front lawn with mix of grass, trees and plantings; • The flagstone terrace with balustrade and retaining wall with centrally placed stone stairway; • The stone edging which defines the original pool area; • The open lawn area with sloping terrain; • The trees and plantings bordering the east edge of the property; • Vistas into and out of the terrace; and • The unmaintained wooded area at the north of the property. 119 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The proposed redevelopment seeks to sever the east and west portion of the property. The retained lot will remain the largest parcel with a frontage of 54 m; the retain portion will be 3518.3 mz in size (Figure 67). The retained portion will include the existing residence and garage, the driveway entrance (with easement), a larger portion of the front lawn, the formal garden area and terrace, the buried pool, a large portion of the open lawn, and the majority of the wooded area. The spatial order surrounding the house, formal garden area, and the front lawn will be maintained. The retention of trees and landscaping features has been heavily considered as part of the proposed redevelopment. All plantings in the formal garden will be maintained on the retained portion. Some of the species include: Juniper, Oregon Grape Holly, Rose (newer planting of hybrid tea/floribunda type), Privet, Lilac, Boxwood, Yew, Euonymus, Honeysuckle, Cotoneaster, Vinca, Peony, Bachelors Button, and Spring Bulbs. All trees noted as high quality trees, significant, or unique species (green), will be maintained throughout the entire property. Some trees have been proposed for removal. Tree which have been identified as being in poor structural condition, dead, or have Ash Borer disease (red) will be removed. As part of the proposed redevelopment, a handful of trees which are considered neutral (black) and one which is considered an undesirable species (orange) are also proposed for removal (Figure 70). Landscapes are a living element and as such, their conservation should be considered from a holistic lens. Attention to the overall intent of the design is retained and reflected in the proposed design. The proposed design seeks redevelop the property in a sensitive way and new elements are intended to not detract from Borgstrom's focal point - the formal garden area. As part of the proposed redevelopment many of the items listed in the inspection report are anticipated to be addressed at a later date. This includes correcting issues related to potential long-term water infiltration and safety items. There is a willingness to addressing these issues to extend the lifespan of the building. Furthermore, there is a willingness to designate the retained property under the Part IV of the OHA at a later date. The proposed new lots are described below. EAST LOT The proposed redevelopment seeks to create a new lot on the east portion of the subject property. The proposed lot will have a frontage of 24.0 m, which is in keeping with current zoning requirements, and will be 1050 mz in size. The placement of the building envelope has been selected to retain as many mature trees and existing plantings as possible. The proposed lot has a curved driveway to allow for the retention of the existing cluster of plantings located on the north edge of the driveway. To compensate for the drop in grade, a 0.5 meter retaining wall is proposed to ensure the existing trees and dripline will not be compromised. A retaining wall is also proposed on the west side of the driveway. The placement of the driveway opening allows for the retention of the mature tree (and dripline) located at the south-east corner of the property. This tree has been identified as significant. 120 Amy Barnes Consulting CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Retaining the natural features on both sides of the driveway will soften the visual presence and impact of the new building from the street. The building envelope has been positioned to be in line with the existing building to the west and slightly set back from the adjacent neighbouring building to the east. Multiple existing trees surrounding the building will be retained. A two-story, residential building, with two bay garages, is proposed. Detailed building design plans are show in Figure 72, Figure 73, Figure 74, and Figure 75. The proposed building materials include stone, Hardie Board siding, and asphalt roofing. The proposed building has a mansard roof which softens the height of the building. Design elements have been influenced by the surrounding architecture which include a symmetrical facade, prominent front entranceway, overhanging roof lines and dormers. WEST LOT The proposed redevelopment seeks to create a new lot on the west side of the property. The proposed lot will have a frontage of 24.0 m, which is in keeping with the current zoning requirements and will be 1238 mz in size. The building envelope is set back from the existing building. The waterfall and pond, which is are not considered a significant heritage attribute, would be removed. A retaining wall is proposed between the existing building and new lot. A curved driveway is proposed to allow for retention of certain landscaping element and to soften the visual presence from the street. Detailed building design plans are show in Figure 76, Figure 77, Figure 78, and Figure 79. The proposed design includes a two-storey, two bay garage, residential building. The proposed materials include stone, Hardie Board siding and asphalt roofing. Design elements have been influenced by the surrounding architecture and include an asymmetrical facade and roof line, gable roof, a prominent front entrance, and dormers. 121 Amy Barnes Consulting G= R V A N BRIDG-PORT RGAD CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener SRETCF ILLUSTRA-NC ELLOINc P€RMT APPLICATION #518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHLNER REGONAL MUNICIPALITY DF WATERLOO / M,,DONALD TAMELYLORD SURVEYING LIMITED / METRIC pant" EELEManON NOTE All �M s� F—? PAN SBR +58 LECIDND soIT Figure 67: Site plan showing the proposed sever lots and building envelopes (MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd., 2020). 122 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 68: Aerial view of property showing proposed severed lot (Adapted Google Map, 2020). 123 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener sNET[H Imsm/.nNG 6uroiwa PERNNr AMLICAnON #518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER REUDDAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATE = UZOO,'ALC TAMBLY LOAD '3JRYEYING uM1ED __ NETRIC �rx::�`wn°'m mrm nxr..w nosy N Nr 11 xxnnr �, m�all ox ��o�urrdc A. (lw .rux, ri fxx LF,rrr, 913I6C�EPpR- k e xw - b Figure 69: Aerial view showing propose site plan and building envelopes (Adapted from MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd., 2020). }TAfABLYN .. SILI[Y[YING " 124 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener s _.� r �. -$ z f r s s , _ L ofa —/'1' mA 30' \ � PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ze � � <IDG-EPaFf eGJD e� 578 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER Tree Management Plan MacKinnon a Associates Figure 70: Proposed tree management plan. The shaded trees will be retained. (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020). 125 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Iiul 1Kd509ddG 2&x8..1 Y.OkL gq iiyr xa6 shady pseAOapaW 35 FeR 1-1 Ttw1,—M—d-WYI.. ]A PI sylresn55 >0 Fair Prc¢rve 2h luglals sign 36 Fair P—I, Than Down u: ari.Pmh m rvn z.3 AterneNMp xl fair Remove IwaMnsYpwafoaaducenl wppem 2A %nn WAesbh ]S Falr Premme 2tl A¢rneguMo 2} Fair Remove Haavpwrter l— dl. Pm¢axlresho 85 Fair P¢ttrve x50 aodmypse0doaarda 3P fair I- clownFel, TA A¢rneguMu 36 1.1, Fair Prcxrve P¢ttrve xsxA AAer Plg0n50 II 2Nh A¢rnegurstlo 24 F9R Fair Remove Remorc -­— hill 8A MerneBUFdP ]S Fal, P.— LeaMng 2'i1 Ate-negurdo IEfA fair Remove leanllg Yp hill 9A A¢fnegurNp x5 Fnle Prcurve LeemntoweMs prtPenB 255 AobSnU pseWoao®a 43 Pour Remove Falknup hiYl, 80Xdeatl hnrehes 1W MGnia Puuloaoda 4g Falr Pmttrva Owrbarging M1ydm I-, WOW bd Ater negvndp xl Falr Remove Heaerwata!n WI-ts 11R RPGAU pseupoawtia ]S Falr Preserve 25] Asrnegunda 27 Pw, Remove Hearywa[er caruuts 12A Pnhinn Pae—m. 65 Fair Pmttrve ZSAS Ater neguMo x5 Poor Remove Will YP hill, —till*madI—Mpmp- 23a mkany pwWPawpa 26 254 Pins vFMestds 0} Poor Remove xiX tleatlhnrtlres 10R Re4nu pu.Woxa6a a5 ]Ol pinesrwbra 3] Fele Good Preurve Pmttrve ZW Mba P.'d—. 31 Falr PreFerve Leanllg Vp hill xLSL 0.ursarxha,lnum sg XIS 0.ohine puWeentid 65 faW Prcurvd W-rlpminaM skmsxtth lmlvded dark 261 Antonia Pseudoamda ?6 1.6x Rsd.ny pseudpacaw x6 Fair fair Preserve Rreeerve 1]a Robrn6apuWoamoa a6S Falr Wamon Puldrnm Ntrunk da,ap(fminngbodlxj xfaA Aoh]nia pseWoamoa 02 2.61 %raw symavy 34 Fair Fal, Pxttrve Freeerve TMncmwn,AOMdeaA dwrchef 1Ri Ra4nU pse.Woxada a6 Falr Remove Fvldende Debunk dewy lfmtgbodln) 26i Pin¢sykesvc 05 Fair P¢urve Sl�prcved on mesI. X56 —im Pae—.. 9gf1111y11 Fal, Pmttrve ]O%deadhnndaes, Doer haivgi�hydollnea x65 MMnk pSeWoaarBa lx Good Preserve Syhl lean 1pwaNS petlo AI eahanU paoWoaaoa aaV�J13125 rue &Ors dasdhnnrins. warhangly h5'd•o llgs 26] AcrneguMo 88 Fair Remove Isanir6akarg elope X6 Ceselpa tpeelose a6 ](B gob in—Mnamda ]d Fela f od Preurve P¢ttrve 10!4tleedhrerKMs,&vel darylry MyNellrSes x88 all hiamnth,, 56 Cnvd FreServe 210 DINI pe[Ima ]6 GYelpe spe[ifpe >6 Wptl ppol Rlmbx 5[fue[enll5fue]. b2rhMlirSl 110.llpes IW graben®paeWoamoa 3g ZN %n�esyMesU:s 3P mod Wpd P.- Preserve Oxrhan{Ise hoveeM WI,21l ]1] bralp,rgdma SS Falr Pmttrva MI Aohino paeWoamda 02 2R %n¢syMeStM 5} rood Very govt Pxttrvc Remove 5016 deedib—F- x13 Cal WtpeFlma 12 Fal, prereMP 2]3 Pin¢.aTheaao 9g Lead Remaae 210 —Il Men We 12 F31, Preserve 1SXbfvkM SreMYres Zl0 Ra4nU pseWoewca xa,3:l. Fair M— LeeAllylnto lawn area 215 ROGnk Puultloaopa ST F.1Remrna Vlnrehoked, uvea lunUng M1ytlmllnee 2]5 dlmispumila 05 moi Preserve x16 %0W SMe5115] i6 fegd Rem6x M aWltile Nlawn[hos aR WM Preserve —dantrce 21] %rale tyhesve !0 Poor Remove 2RA A¢rPlayno{de: 11 Good Pxttrvc ]]& %nm syls'954b 43 tyad RPmvM 2]8 Arerneryr5tlo SZ fel, Remove LeeWlnelvwaFdsdrin•wey 219 wnw tPrresw 3a teed Remove 2i9 gohin6a paeWoemde 8T Fair Preserve Leanir6 nee lM %nue vtkaspb 11 Z2l Thlaamedana 6hrLtl Pear fair Wmpn Remove g01F Matlpnrr3es ]trvnks, eaM--deaa brapwles 1901 ArernepuMo 3llb 181 Thlia amer�ona g1 Galr Fair Removre Remove Ik—,perq,hwredary Heanlsuckepn{ Boundarvhec I1lA Ivglmsni¢n -00 Fah Remove TNrtnmm xR ArerneSNnlo 0Y Falr Remove [5rerhanpaeadkxen{house, leonine 1 -the 135 AgrplahrwkdXt a2 Wni RPmpx 283 pica beau 31 Fai, Remove Tlea crown YxF C<Ills oaldeMalls ]2 Fal, Preurve Thtn[r0wrl xge %sea 8eauw ]3 Fal, Remove Thin [town 115 leglssni8n ag5 Falr Prcttrve ffi Picea Bfa 85 Fair Remove Srppmaed on meside 136 %SPa flauy 59 F rtempe 296 p ea yavw xi POoI Removre BWX deaddwR[hs 22] Picn Bleu 16 Faia Remix 18] Picea glauu SO Fair Remove Tlin crown 2x8 luglanc seam -08 Fair Remora ZRg lug ens nl{w 36 F. P.— 129 %tea gape ]9 Falr RcmO%e }89 wrgl.ranign xe Penr Remote Gvwir58 in wife fen¢,vine cM1oked 230 luglmsni8ra a0 23l fogless sign aR Fair Falr Remorc Rgmon Co-dxninam stamswStM1 irMuded hark laanirp 2i0 ahamnes wSPartlw ]0j16 291 Teausxmedia 01 Good 6Lod Remove Remove x3P kyans ni8ea a5 Fair Ikmove 29x Taru6 s.meAlP x][32 Wpd Removm 233 A¢rnepundo ]2 I30 %ynyt wrMsna ]P Fair Wad Remote Pre }monks [SuMcr]&mOON] LRS Mdus sp. -08 Pse, Remove g0%deadhrpmASei 255 AteeneBdMo ]F}LI Feie Remove¢ d93 Ater samha,vm xd Wpd Pre[erve 236 Aarnagunda 13F31 Falr Ramon 3max 691 Tmusxmedia }S 095 aeNnU pseWoaw6a 81j3] Fair Fal, Pmiervc P SO%tleadhniMSet Co-sbminaMRpmsxtth lmfeded dark 233A Fsanlwi sP 92 fkad Remmre DIdeneeo50Mbomr 686 Taasxmedia 3d fcN Pleierve 238 Gl—ielfiemnlM1as 20 119 darn,8unda 36 Feiv hh Preserve Remora s9! Taasa meAla 23 ArA Taasxmedia 18 WDA Lead Preserve Remove xIM PMmnus cHAartiw 33 211 A¢rnegando d? Geir Fain Remove Remove 8uckrdng as bee 199 dunlperlas vlr8lnlana 96 Wod Presery Awrnaguryo x6 L3 Gcerne{51Mo 3Z Pmt Rpmmw Remove Winlrgnphll Ti%dtadhfeiftMs 500 Tmasxmedia �} SO➢A WYapa tpeclosa 13 6aad Wdd P—:R4 Remove 2X1 Msalus 8lahn 50 Wod Pnvrvr 525 que,ve mtiMYS Prcxrve G-deminartmmtw5lh irWuded hark 265 �NoUpeepdpxaPa 6} Falr Pres9rve ms�kwwnp, 3]wdaad WanPdw 59w nnlva.gcl«a 31 '-M rood Wamow co -dominent ai.mr wt6rlMud.ddark Figure 71: Tree management details (MacKinnon & Associates, 2020). 126 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 72: Proposed facade design for east lot. Figure 73: Proposed design for east lot showing right, left, and rear elevations. 127 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 74: Proposed first floor layout for east lot. Figure 75: Proposed second floor layout for east lot. CHI& 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 128 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Figure 76: Front and rear elevations for proposed west lot. RIGHT ELEV 7 Figure 77: Proposed design for side elevations for west lot. 129 ..:..� ���:::: a �=gym='�' ���• i tri 11111: � ::. �; .■.:.. ICAO CLU = �ttff�l������x�x�xl�x�x�x�x�x�x�x�_• �II`�iiiillllllllll 1 ��H �ro�•-��io�--'�io� �� � =te=a = -P= =gym -P = -III■ .e: teraae ■eraser■ _ -, s�as� -sera. ':III■:=�In n=� ■ro:9e®,nn_.�er-� FRONT A REAR Figure 76: Front and rear elevations for proposed west lot. RIGHT ELEV 7 Figure 77: Proposed design for side elevations for west lot. 129 Amy Barnes Consulting Figure 78: Proposed first floor layout for west lot. Figure 79: Proposed second floor plan for west lot. CHIN 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 130 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener IMPACT10 10.1 INFO SHEET #5 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS AND CONSERVATION PLANS The MTCS Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans identities seven potential negative impacts which should be considered with any proposed redevelopment. 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. Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. The following table considers any potential negative impacts on the identified heritage attributes of 518 Bridgeport Road against the proposed redevelopment. The detailed impact assessment chart is found in Appendix E. Table 7: Summary of Potential impact on heritage attributes A Destruction of any, or part The proposed redevelopment will retain all the heritage of any, significant heritage attributes associated with the building in situ. The proposed attribute or features development will retain most of the heritage attributes associated with the landscape in situ. As part of the proposed redevelopment the following heritage attributes will be removed or altered: a portion of the mix of grass, trees and plantings on the front lawn and a portion of the open lawn area with sloped terrain. Some of the trees and shrubs boarding the eastern edge of the property will be removed. 131 Amy Barnes Consulting 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 CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The proposed redevelopment does not seek to alter the historic fabric, facade, or appearance of the built resource. The proposed redevelopment will not create shadows which alter the appearance of the heritage attributes. Isolation of a heritage The proposed redevelopment will isolate the trees and shrubs attribute from its boarding the east edge of the property from the contextual surrounding environment, relationship of the existing landscape. Many of the mature context or a significant trees found along the eastern edge will be retained, however relationship the historical relationship will no longer be legible. Direct or indirect The proposed redevelopment will have an impact on the vista obstruction of significant from the terrace to the open lawn and to the trees and shrub views or vistas within, from, bordering the eastern edge of the property from. The vista to or of built and natural the open lawn will be reduced in size. features A change in land use (such The proposed redevelopment does not seek to change land as rezoning a church to a use. The proposed residential redevelopment is in keeping multi -unit residence) where with existing land use. the change in use negates the property's cultural heritage value Land Disturbances such as a Archeology (and/or any archaeological resources on the change in grade that alters property) is unknown and beyond the scope of this CHIA. soils, drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. 132 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener 10.2 CITY OF KITCHENER URBAN DESIGN MANUAL: CITY WIDE DESIGN In 2019 the City of Kitchener created an Urban Design Manual to "set forth the universal design expectations which apply to all of Kitchener" .15' The comprehensive document includes a variety of sections which discuss specific development types. The City Wide Design section was reviewed against the proposed redevelopment. The City Wide Design includes two sections: Community Design and Site Design. The majority of design principles relate to public property, nonetheless, all principles have been considered. Where a design principle is applicable, a discussion is provided. The full evaluation and discussion are included in Appendix F. The findings from the review of City Wide Design principles highlight several design principles which should be taken into consideration when finalizing the building designs, lighting, and finishes. They include: Universal Design: • Integrate Universal Design measures into the architectural expression of the building and the urban design of the site, including all ramps, handrails and other barrier free measures. No one should be made to feel that their needs are an afterthought or a burden on the design process. The Unit Scale: • Provide generous in -unit storage areas and entryways that can accommodate mobility aides, strollers, circulation for multiple people and other sensitively designed elements. • Design for future adaptability to changing demographics and lifestyles. Consider ways in which units can be specialized for different user needs and adapted for an individual user's preferences. Smart City Design: • All projects should contain sufficient, planned space for current and anticipated future needs for technology infrastructure, materials and structures. Spaces for the support of fixed cabling and other infrastructure should be easily accessible in order to facilitate future changes in use. • New buildings, public infrastructure projects and the public realm should be designed to be as functionally flexible as possible, specifically in respect to access, infrastructure and configuration of interior space in order to facilitate future changes in use. iso City of Kitchener. 2019. City Wide. Accessed online July 2020 from, https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneraI/Documents/DSD_PLAN_UDM_01_City-Wide-Design.pdf 133 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • New developments should demonstrate that their design takes account of the latest, best and emerging practices and patterns for smart cities, digital urbanism and placemaking. Design for climate change: • Incorporate renewable energy where feasible, including solar, geothermal, and wind - generation. Preserve for and accommodate new technologies as they are developed. • Optimize building design for energy performance, particularly through passive daylighting and ventilations techniques which limit the burden on mechanical systems. Buildings should target an energy performance standard 25% above building code requirements and are strongly encouraged to target net zero energy and carbon neutral design standards. • Use renewable, sustainably manufactured and locally sourced materials, wherever possible. • Use reclaimed and recycled materials, particularly those which may be salvaged on-site. • Design new buildings to withstand climate change by being resistant to extreme weather conditions, anticipating increased cooling demands through sustainable natural ventilation and efficient mechanical systems, and by being adaptable to changes in the needs of occupants over time as new technologies and lifestyle choices evolve. • Design lighting, landscaping, HVAC and other building systems and material finishes to enhance sustainability by being highly -efficient, low -emitting and adaptable through the smart controllability of systems (lighting, thermal comfort, natural light/shading, ventilation, etc.). • Design for water efficiency including Low Impact Design (LID). Prioritize a reduction in overall water use, innovative stormwater management, and grey water collection and re -use. All new development shall comply with the City of Kitchener's Integrated Stormwater Management Master Plan criteria for stormwater design. • Design for climate resiliency, including increasingly frequent and extreme weather events. • Provide LED lighting or newer, even more efficient lighting technologies. Design for wildlife • All development is to meet a Dark Sky compliant standard by using full cut-off fixtures with no uplighting (UO). A Dark Sky standard reduces light pollution, improving the well- being, health and safety of both people and wildlife and resulting in less energy usage. • Orient and place fixtures in such a way as to project light only on non -reflective surfaces. This will help reduce light pollution from reflections and glare off of glass. 134 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Migratory birds move through cities at night. In order to preserve dark skies and to lessen migratory bird strikes, consider automated lighting to reduce unnecessary interior light. • Any architectural lighting at the top of buildings is to have an automated timer shut-off. • Design the first 12m of a building to prevent bird strikes by limiting the potential for reflection of trees and sky through material choice and detailing. • Where glazing is prominent on the first 12m of a building, consider the use of treatments which can be applied to the glass surface, creating visual markers for birds. • Use awnings, canopies, recessions, projections and other architectural interventions to disrupt the reflection of trees and sky in ground floor windows. • Ventilation grates on a site also present a deadly hazard for birds. Ventilation grates should have a porosity no larger than 2cm x 2cm or should be covered with netting in order to prevent birds from falling through. • Where possible, schedule tree removals in winter to minimize impacts on seasonal wildlife habitats, including birds, bats, bees and other fauna. • Consider the needs of wildlife, particularly migratory wildlife, when designing green roofs or other sustainable infrastructure. It is often possible to achieve multiple sustainable design objectives through a single intervention when that intervention is considered holistically. Microclimates: • Design to limit the need for 'extra' mitigation measures such as screens and trellises which may not suit the project's architectural vision. Four Season & Winter City Design: • Design all buildings, streets and open spaces with regard for Kitchener's year-round weather conditions including local prevailing winds, wind speeds, precipitation trends including both rain and snow, and average access to sunlight. • Locate major glazing areas and transitional indoor and outdoor spaces-- including patios and porches-- to maximize passive solar gain and access to sunlight. Add sun shades to receive the best combination of winter warming, summer shading and daylighting potential. • Employ colourful, warm (3000k max), human -scaled site lighting and architectural accent lighting to enhance safety at night and provide a more pleasant pedestrian experience. Complete Streets 135 Amy Barnes Consulting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Barrier -Free Access. Facilitate ease of use and access for all users by incorporating universal design principles and meeting or exceeding Kitchener's standards for accessibility. Scale and Transition • Use thoughtful and creative landscape design to create compatibility. This includes the size, placement and style of public and private open spaces, using landscaping to provide screening and help established a human -scaled streetscape, and using planting beds, trees, shrubs and other landscaping to enhance setbacks and reinforce boundaries and thresholds. Culture and Natural Heritage • Rehabilitation: repair or replace heritage attributes, construct compatible and reversible additions, integrate the cultural heritage resource or components of the cultural heritage resource into a new development, or adaptively reuse the cultural heritage resource. • Ensure that the design and location of lighting, streets, signage, parking, public works facilities, grading, and other features respects the integrity and character of cultural heritage resources. Landscape • Select vegetation with regard for their tolerance to urban conditions, such as road salt or heat. Give preference to native species and a mixture of vegetation that provides visual interest and wildlife habitat and aligns with objectives for screening, safety and four season design. • Utilize landscape design to mitigate microclimatic impacts and enhance four -season viability. • Provide a minimum 3.Om wide landscape area, in addition to any walls or fences, at the edges of sites adjacent to residential or institutional properties. • Plant trees, shrubs, and ground cover on any unbuilt portions of the site that are not required for other site functions. This includes any areas reserved for future phases of development. • Use green, low impact development (LID) and stormwater management technologies wherever appropriate. • Provide landscape areas between the building and the sidewalk with plant beds, planters, trees, street furniture and walkways to the public sidewalk. • Where trees are proposed within landscaped areas, adequate soil volumes are to be planned in order that trees may achieve a mature canopy size. 136 Amy Barnes Consulting Lighting CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener • Provide uniform lighting by installing a greater number of fixtures at lower wattages and mounting heights. • Site lighting is to have a correlated colour temperature (CCT) maximum of 3000K, or demonstrated equivalent. • Provide lighting that is consistent and human -scaled. Ensure that site lighting comprehensively addresses safety objectives. Avoid creating glare, 'hot spots' or excessively shadowed areas. • Using energy efficient lamps and avoid over -lighting, while prioritizing safety. • Use bollards, wall -mounted or lower -scale pole fixtures along pedestrian paths to provide human -scaled and ambient lighting. Vehicular Access and Parking • Provide adequate lighting levels and uniform coverage in parking areas, service utility areas, and beneath cantilevered portions of the building. Driveways • Ensure pedestrian and cyclist safety and maximize visibility. 10.3 REGION OF WATERLOO: PRACTICAL GUIDELINES FOR INFILL AND NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A HERITAGE OR MATURE NEIGHBOURHOOD The Region of Waterloo created Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood within their Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties series. These guidelines were developed to address small-scale infill projects into historic surroundings. The document outlines multiple "Elements of Successful Infill" which include: • Setback • Orientation • Scale • Proportion • Rhythm • Massing • Height • Materials • Colours 137 Amy Barnes Consulting • Roof shape • Detail and Ornamentation • Landscape Features • Secondary Buildings • Parking CHIA 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener The following tables examines each of the elements to evaluate whether the proposed redevelopment meets the requirements of a successful infill adjacent to a cultural heritage resource. The full set of guidelines are provided in Appendix G. Table 8: Analysis of the 'elements of successful infill' against proposed redevelopment. 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. ORIENTATION The orientation of a building is the direction that it faces. Most historic buildings squarely front the street, with their fagade 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. East Lot: The proposed setback is in keeping with the existing house and the neighbouring house. Proposed landscaping decreases the visual presence of the new building from the streetscape. West Lot: The proposed building is setback from the existing house and is generally in line with the neighbouring property. Proposed landscaping decreases the visual presence of the new building from the streetscape. East Lot: The proposed building will be oriented towards the streetscape. This is in keeping with the existing houses on Bridgeport Road. West Lot: The proposed building will be oriented towards the streetscape. This is in keeping with the existing houses on Bridgeport Road. SCALE is the relative size of a building in East Lot: The proposed building is two storeys relation to neighbouring structures or a and designed to human scale. It is sympathetic 138 common object, such as cars. It is also the relative size of building 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 is the relationship of the dimensions of building elements, like to the surrounding area and neighbouring structures. West Lot: The proposed building is two storeys and designed to human scale. It is sympathetic to the surrounding area and neighbouring structures. 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. —, ,,,- N,oposed building respects proportions and does not replicate a historical fabric. West Lot: The proposed building respects proportions and does not replicate a historical fabric. East Lot: There is no consistent rhythm to the surrounding street. The proposed building facade has balanced and rhythmically spaced elements. The softness of the mansard roof line is sympathetic to the neighbouring properties and the surrounding area. West Lot: There is no consistent rhythm to the surrounding street. The asymmetrical nature of the roofline, windows and fagade is sympathetic MASSING is the general shape and size of a building. A building's massing significantly contributes to the character of a street, especially in areas with row houses and adjoining commercial buildings. As a result, new construction should 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 fagade projections such as bays, porches and steps. to the neighbouring properties and the surrounding area. East Lot: The massing and shape of the proposed building is respectful of the existing building and surrounding area. West Lot: The massing and shape of the proposed building is respectful of the existing building and surrounding area. HEIGHT: The height of walls, cornices, Building heights along Bridgeport Road range roofs, bays, chimneys and towers all from one -and -a -half to two -and -a -half storeys. 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, 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 East Lot: The proposed building is two storeys. The use of a mansard roof gives the appearance of a small height. Overall, the proposed height is compatible with the surrounding area. West Lot: The proposed building is two storeys. The proposed height is compatible with the surrounding area. East Lot: The proposed building material includes stone, Hardie board siding and asphalt shingles. These materials are consistent with the range of materials present throughout the surrounding neighbourhood. 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 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 West Lot: The proposed building material includes stone, Hardie board siding and asphalt shingles. These materials are consistent with the range of materials present throughout the surrounding neighbourhood. The surrounding buildings are composed of a variety of colour palettes (grey, white, red, and brown). East Lot: The proposed colour scheme for exterior material will use a heritage collection colour palette. West Lot: The proposed colour scheme for exterior material will use the heritage collection colour palette. The surrounding area is composed of a variety of styles roofline (hipped, domed, flat, end gable, front gable, asymmetrical, some with dormers and some without) with various degrees of pitch. East Lot: The proposed mansard style roof does not alter or detract from the character of the area. It is sympathetic to the surrounding buildings. West Lot: The proposed end gable roof with asymmetrical front gable is in keeping with the surrounding area. The neighbouring property has a similar style. I The detail and ornamentation of the existing property and neighbouring properties is generally expressed in the roofline and overhanging, dormers, and the prominent and defined main entrances. 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, such as garages and sheds, are important character defining elements in some historic East Lot: The proposed design provides a symmetrically and balanced fa4ade with the main entrance as the focal point. The dormer and roof lines provide architectural details but are not overpowering. The design details are sympathetic to the surrounding area. West Lot: The proposed design draws upon historic elements with a contemporary aesthetic. The door and the roof line draw upon elements found in neighbouring properties. The design details are sympathetic to the surrounding area. East Lot: The location of the building and the driveway reflect a desire to retain existing mature trees and vegetation elements. Further complimentary landscaping elements are encouraged. Driplines and root systems have been considered by the arborist and retaining wall proposed to ensure their survival. West Lot: The location of the building and the driveway reflect the desire to retain existing mature trees and vegetation elements. Further complimentary landscaping elements are encouraged. Driplines and root systems have been considered by the arborist and the retaining wall has been proposed to ensure their survival. There are no secondary buildings associated with proposed redevelopment. neighbourhoods. They add scale and visual interest to primary buildings. New structures designed for inclusion in neighbour- 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. East Lot: The proposed redevelopment will have no impact on existing parking in the area. The proposed parking is secure, visible from the house, and does not screen private or communal living areas. West Lot: The proposed redevelopment will have no impact on existing parking in the area. The proposed parking is secure, visible from the house and does not screen private or communal living areas. iFIX W1Irillt01913H•L1V_3►1•Ze1111•l4111nI*V09]I'M IIMIwife] ►[.y;1:M%NIIIQ0WO] 2111Mto] N1462WMyxi1►I CANADA The Standards and Guidelines offers guidance for decision-making when there are proposed interventions on a significant cultural heritage resource. The various conservation principles provide an overview of conservation practices but do not speak directly to impact assessments. The Standard and Guidelines have been considered within this report to help determine if the overall intent of the redevelopment is in keeping with accepted conservation practices. The primary treatment for the subject property 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" 151 There are nine standards to be considered with this treatment option. Table 9 following section examines the standards against the proposed redevelopment. Table 9: Standards and Guidelines regarding the preservation of the cultural heritage resource. "I Parks Canada. Standards and Guidelines. 2010. Pg.1 1. conserve ine neritage value or a nistoric 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. 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place and use. Do not create a false sense of 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 or no change to its character - defining elements. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize a historic place until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect and preserve archaeological resources in place Where there is potential for disturbing archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information. i ne cuiturai neritage resource is proposea to remain in situ and most of the landscape features will be retained. A portion of the open lawn area will be lost. The historic relationship with the trees and plantings bordering the east edge of the property will be lost. Newer features (added within the last 20 years) are not considered significant heritage tributes. The proposed redevelopment is seeking minimal intervention. Most of the built and natural heritage attributes will be conserved. The proposed redevelopment does not seek to add elements from other time periods. The proposed redevelopment seeks to use the property as a residential dwelling. This is in keeping with the historic use. A Conservation Plan is recommended to ensure the protection of natural and built heritage features during the construction phase. 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. 8. Maintain character -defining elements on an ongoing basis. Repair character- defining elements by 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. The proposed redevelopment does not seek to alter or change the built heritage resource. The proposed redevelopment does seek to alter the condition of some of the landscape features. The proposed redevelopment provides an opportunity to re-establish the vista and linear focal point (reduced in size) from the terrace to the lawn edge. This linear focal point has been lost over time as original plantings matured. The proposed redevelopment seeks to maintain all the attributes associate with the built heritage resource. The proposed redevelopment seeks to reinstate the vista from the terrace to the new property edge. This can be achieved through sympathetic landscaping. 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 as part of the redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment will allow for on-going maintenance of the built heritage resources which will serve to extend the life span of the building. I 10.5 EIGHT GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN THE CONSERVATION OF BUILT HERITAGE PROPERTIES Regarding the Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties created by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS), the following table considered each principle in relation to the proposed redevelopment. Table 10: Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties regarding the conservation of the cultural heritage resource. Respect for documentary evidence: do not The proposed redevelopment does not restore based on conjecture. Conservation involve any restoration of the built heritage work should be based on historic resource. esource. documentation such as historic photographs, drawings, or physical evidence. 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 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. Respect for original fabric: repair with like materials. Repair to return the resource to its prior condition, without altering its integrity. The building will remain in situ. The proposed redevelopment must consider the recommendations and professional opinions of the inspection report. It is recommended to repair (versus replace) heritage attributes where possible. There are no repairs as part of the proposed redevelopment. Future repairs should respect the original fabric. Respect for the building's history: do not The proposed redevelopment does not restore to one period at the expense of involve any restoration. another period. Do not destroy later additions to a building or structure solely to restore to a single time period. 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 There are no proposed alterations associated with the built heritage resource. The proposed redevelopment will be clearly distinguishable from the existing built heritage resource. not blur the distinction between old and new. Maintenance: with continuous care, future Ongoing maintenance is encouraged. restoration work will not be necessary. With regular upkeep, major conservation projects and their high costs can be avoided. 10.6 SUMMARY OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT The proposed severances will have a negative impact on identified heritage attributes associated with the landscape. The proposed redevelopment will reduce the size of the open lawn area and impact the historic relationship with the tree and plantings along the east edge of the property. The proposed redevelopment will have a minor impact on the current driveway as a new opening will be created. There are two significant views to consider. The first is the vista to and from the house to the open lawn and property edge. The proposed redevelopment will reduce the scale of the vista, but it will not be eliminated. Figure 80 and Figure 81 show a comparison of existing vista into the property and the anticipated vista as a result of the proposed redevelopment. The second important vista to consider is from the streetscape into the property. The proposed redevelopment will result in the creation of a new driveway on the west lots and a new driveway opening located off the existing driveway. The retention of existing trees and plantings softens the negative impacts from the proposed redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment is generally in keeping with the outlined best practices. The retention of the built heritage resource and all accompanying heritage attributes adheres to best practices. The retention of the prominent landscape features (formal garden area) and their relationship to the built heritage resources is in keeping with best practices. The proposed new buildings are sympathetic to the surrounding neighbourhood and are in keeping with best practices. The height, scale, massing, and style will not overpower the existing built heritage resource. Furthermore, the proposed redevelopment seeks to retain the most about of existing mature trees in situ. Figure 80: View into the property from the proposed edge of the retained lot (approximate) (AB, 2020) Figure 81: View of current open lawn area from eastern edge (AB, 2020). The following range of alternatives were examined. 11.1 OPTION 1 - DO NOTHING Option 1 would not allow for the severances and there would be no alteration to the property. The property and permitted use would remain as is. Since the property is not directly adjacent to a listed or designated property, recognized under the OHA, unsympathetic alterations or additions may still occur as there are no provision for regulating these changes to a listed property other than what is required under the Planning Act. Unless a Planning Act application is submitted, a Section 27 of the OHA listing does not provide protection for a cultural heritage resource beyond demolition control. Unsympathetic alterations permitted under the building code would be allowed. Furthermore, Section 27 of the OHA provides no protection for landscaping elements. Unsympathetic removal or alteration of landscaping elements would be permitted. The property will remain in its current condition. The property would remain a non -designated listed property on the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register. 11.2 OPTION 2— SEVERANCE WITH THREE NEW LOTS (24M LOTS) Option 2 would seek to create three new residential lots in addition to the retained lot: two new lots on the east side and one lot on the west side. Each of the proposed lots would be 24 meters wide which is in keeping with existing zoning requirements. The retained portion would include the existing residence and garage, the driveway (with easement), a portion of the front lawn, a portion of the formal garden area, and some of the wooded area. The spatial order surrounding the house and the front lawn will be maintained. The proposed east lots would occupy the entire pool area and the open lawn would be eliminated. The lots on the east side would be accessed by newly created entrances located off the existing driveway. A significant amount of vegetation screening, located along the north side of the driveway, would be removed. Each of the new lots would have single family residence with attached garage. The existing vistas to and from the terrace would be eliminated. A third lot would be created on the west side of the property and a residential dwelling proposed. A significant number of trees and plantings would be removed, including one which has been identified as significant or unique. The property could remain a listed property on the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register, however, an updated SOS would be required to reflect the loss of several heritage attributes. Figure 82: Option 2 proposed site plan (Adapted Google Map) 11.3 OPTION 3- SEVERANCE WITH THREE NEW LOTS (18.31VI LOTS) Option 3 would seek to create three new residential lots in addition to the retained lot: two new lots on the east side and one lot on the west side. Each of the proposed lots would be 18.288 meters wide, which is not in keeping with existing zoning requirements. A zoning amendment would be required. The terrace, grass tier, and pool area would be retained with a small buffer area east of the pool edging (approximately 2 metres). The open lawn would be eliminated. The lots on the east side would be accessed by newly created entrances located off the existing driveway. A significant amount of vegetation located along the north side of the driveway would be removed. Each of the new lots would have a house with attached garage. The existing vista to and from the terrace would be significantly impacted. A third lot would be created on the west side of the property and a residential dwelling proposed. A significant number of trees and plantings would be removed, including one which has been identified as significant or unique. The property could remain a listed property on the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register, however, an updated SOS would be required to reflect the loss of several heritage attributes. Figure 83: Option 3 proposed site plan (Adapted Google Map) 11.4 OPTION 4- SEVERANCE WITH TWO NEW LOTS (24M LOTS) Option 4 seeks to sever the east and west portion of the property. The retained lot will remain the largest parcel and would include the existing residence and garage, the driveway (with easement) and vegetation along north side , a larger portion of the front lawn, the terrace and formal garden area, the buried pool area, a large portion of the open lawn, and the majority of the wooded area. This option considers the retention of trees of the entire property. All plantings in the formal garden will be maintained on the retained portion. All trees noted as high quality trees, significant or unique species will be maintained throughout the entire property. As part of this option, some trees, which are considered neutral (black) or an undesirable species (orange) will be removed. With this option, there is a willingness to address some of the issues identified in the inspection report to extend the lifespan of the building. The proposed east lot will have a frontage of 24.0 m, which is in keeping with current zoning requirements. The option seeks to retain plantings and trees to soften the visual presence and impact of the new building from the street. Details of the proposed building footprint and designs are found in Section 9. The proposed west lot will have a frontage of 24.0 m, which is in keeping with current zoning requirements. The existing waterfall and pond, which are not considered significant heritage attributes, would be removed. A retaining wall is proposed between the existing building and new lot. Details of the proposed building envelope and design are found in Section 9. A curved driveway is proposed for the east and west lot to allow for the retention of certain landscaping element and to soften the visual presence from the street. With this option there is a willingness to designate the retained property under the Part IV of the OHA at a later date. SaETTF ILLUSTRA-NC, OL -DING ' RY T APPUCATIDN /518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD CITY OF KITCHENER REGIONAL N°oNI0PALITY OF WATERLOO .acDCNALD TA.PILYN LDkO suk7grmo LIMITED ���_ / / ST'•n`y� METRIC lsF wawa �, e. wino c°a. av,a ELEYAPONmNOTEE� eai'�n+° I ..gym"s aw�:Ie ae Ase oe,rAa aw NOTESrm / Eb• roma 8 ".s x pN zzuz me, an PAST 1, P -AN SBR 1,55 h ~s 4A 4 n —4, —"1 . a tiHeo n W . rcak ;!'Ty�q aw "PAPT 1 Iovy�>] Poz� l L� •,ya.,a•A.,ay 'r°'r�, �r �� ��',°@ � _ � � �Y B��y� —__ � _. B , r S1 .ol I d@ q I 9 £ �. S +�pL �" .v�ar I�asr] • - pan] �a zzar'-�2 �) C_ R M A N p m cy ,spear � C 0 M P A N -,w BRICK;=PORT ROAp IPA„n,o, PoV }TlRM01 h11 Figure 84: Option 4 proposed site plan (MacDonald, Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd., 2020). s 9�TR ACT - �Ia .,a*r LEGERD AMC➢LORD STP N.L 5 T1 Lm.I w r oar. CITY OF KIMHENER it REEU MIAL NMIINICIFALIIY OF WAT LOCA Wa OCNALO TAMBLYN LORA S.lRVE flNG 11NITEV ME 111 I A K nwa PS[cR:FS d.NkY .'Ltl)w.f6 xnn L T w. it ry � E = P -" C a N L 'i. .,r� .. �-I F 4 '. i � . - .. T f - T F vx�e 11x1 FfF E 113 n } suRvevrvc -- - — - - .. I Nii Figure 85: Aerial view of propose site plan showing lot lines and building envelopes. 11.5 PREFERRED OPTION Option 4 is the preferred option. This option promotes the long-term protection and conservation of the significant built heritage resources through a willingness to designate the property under Part IV of the OHA at a later date. This option seeks to conserve the focal point of Borgstrom's gardens layout which includes the spatial order surrounding the house, the terraces, formal gardens, primary walkway in and out of the formal garden, buried pool, stairs, and stone ramp. This option also retains a large portion of the open lawn which allows for a meaningful vista to and from the terrace. Option 4 will ensure the existing property remains the largest lot and the relationship between the residence, front lawn, driveway, formal garden, and wooded area are maintained. Option 4 maximizes the retention of existing trees and plantings. A Conservation Plan (CP) is recommended to mitigate the negative impacts from the proposed redevelopment. The CP must follow the requirements outlined in the City of Kitchener Conservation Plans Terms of Reference, which addresses short, medium- and long-term conservation work. The retained building and landscape features must be safeguarded and secured while new development is being carried out. To mitigate the negative impacts from the alteration of heritage attributes, photographic documentation of the property is recommended. The photographic documentation should be included in the property files for the existing building as well as the new lots. It is recommended this be completed to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener staff. Additional photographic requirements should be included as part of the CP. To mitigate the negative impacts from the loss of a portion of the open lawn and trees and plants along the east property line, it is recommended that edging be created along the new lot line. This edging should include sympathetic plantings which may include native plants, evergreen shrubs or planting which already exist on the site. The City -Wide Design principles relating to landscapes should be considered when designing the new edging. The linear focal point from the terrace should be re -instated and a seating area created to emphasize the sight lines. This provides an opportunity to re-establish the vista from the terrace to the edge and from the edge to the terrace. This is in keeping with Borgstrom's original design intent which was lost over time. To safeguard the remaining heritage attributes associated with the retained property, it is recommended that the items listed in the inspection report associated with correcting areas of potential long-term water infiltration and safety be addressed. Where possible, it is recommended to restore or repair heritage attribute instead of replacing. Lastly, it is recommended that the property be designated under Part IV of the OHA. The designation will provide for the long-term conservation of the retained property and the associated heritage attributes. It is further recommended that an interior site inspection be completed prior to designation to allow for the identification of any significant interior heritage attributes. An evaluation of 518 Bridgeport Road demonstrates that it meets some of the criteria laid out in 0. Reg 9/06. An evaluation of 518 Bridgeport Road demonstrates that it meets the some of the criteria as a CHL. As part of the this report a SCHVI was created to evaluate the proposed redevelopment against any potential negative impacts. As part of the proposed redevelopment various alternatives were examined and additional research carried out to assess landscape components. Option 4, the proposed redevelopment, is the preferred option. This option seeks to retain the majority of the 518 Bridgeport Road and integrate two new residential lots. This option identifies a willingness of the potential owner to carry out noted renovations to increase the lifespan of the existing building. This option highlights a willingness of the potential owner to designate the retained portion under Part IV of the OHA at later date to ensure the long-term conservation and protection of the significant heritage resource. This option preserves most of the landscape elements, all identified significant or unique trees, and provides an opportunity to restore landscape elements which have been lost over time due to neglect or have become overgrown. Section 2.6.1 of the PPS notes that significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. Option 4 seeks to conserve all the built features, in situ, and conserve most of the landscape features. The impact assessment identifies that the proposed redevelopment will have a negative impact on some of the heritage attributes associated with the landscape. The following mitigative measures have been recommended: • A Conservation Plan. • Documentation of the property. • Conduct an interior site visit to gather photographic documentation. • Create a new east edge on the retained lot which is sympathetic to the existing landscape. • Re-established the linear focal point and vista from the terrace along the new property line. This can be achieved by creating a seated focal point which aligns with the central point of the terrace stairway. • Designate the retained portion under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. It is recommended that if the design of the new buildings changes significantly that drawing be circulated to Heritage Planning Staff for comments and considerations. It is further recommended that if the tree management plan changes significantly that it be circulated to staff as needed. Lastly, consideration for the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual and the applicable principles (identified in Section 10.2 of this report) is encouraged throughout the remaining planning and design process. Based on the foregoing analysis it is the authors' recommendation that the preferred option be permitted. The information, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report have been produced for the benefit of the owner. Permission by the author must be sought to use this report. Unless otherwise stated, the recommendations and professional opinions stated in this report are intended only for the approved users. Draft Amy Barnes MA CAHP Amy Barnes Consulting i [11I ■ :1_[41 IM :191110101111101Ii111111 IZa *61 Allen, R. & Conn, H. 2019 Joseph Brant (Thayendanegea). In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Accessed June 2020 from https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/Joseph-brant Ancestry.com 1908 Archives of Ontario; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Registrations of Births and Stillbirths -1869- 1913; Series: MS929; Reel: 22; Record Group: RG 80-2 1928 Ancestry.com. Canada, Selected School Yearbooks, 1901-2010 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2015. 1935-1980 Canada, Voters Lists, 1935-1980 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.Original data: Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935-1980. R1003- 6 -3-E (RG113-B). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 1935-1980 Ancestry.com. Canada, Voters Lists, 1935-1980 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012. Original data: Voters Lists, Federal Elections, 1935- 1980. R1003 -6-3-E (RG113-B). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 1926-1937 Ancestry.com and Genealogical Research Library (Brampton, Ontario, Canada). Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1826-1937 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010. ArcGIS 2015 1861 Tremaine Map of Waterloo County. Accessed May 2020, from, https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=47f4300eb9ba4be3a4d2fba8aefc589a Carver, Humphrey 1984 The People and the Times: The founding of the CSLA. From, Fifty years of Landscape Architecture, The Canadian Society of Landscape Architects 1934-1984. Ceclia Paine (Ed), March 1998. City of Brampton OL 2006 By-law 146-2006. To repeal By-law 56-2006 and to designate the property at 8028 Creditview Road (Creditdale Farm) as being of cultural heritage value or interest. Accessed May 2020, from https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/index.php/oha/details/file?id=1061&id=1061 City of Kitchener n. d. Heritage Brochure. Accessed April 2020 from https://www.kitchener.ca/en/building-and- development/heritage-properties.aspx#Non-designated-heritage-properties 2017 About Kitchener. Accessed April 2020 from,https://www.kitchener.ca/en/in-your- neighbourhood/about-kitchener.aspx 2018 Zoning By Law 85-1. Appendix A: Zoning Grid Schedule, Schedule 125. Accessed May 2020 from, https://app2.kitchener.ca/appdocs/Zonebylaw/PublishedCurrentText/Sections//Section%2036% 20-% 20Residential%20Two%20Zone%20(R-2). pdf 2020 City of Kitchener Interactive Map. 518 Bridgeport Road. Property Information. 2020 Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. 2020 Vernacular architecture. Accessed May 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/technology/vernacular-architecture Epp, Frank H. 2003 Eby, Benjamin. Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 8, University of Toronto/Universite Laval. Accessed April 2020, from, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/eby_benjamin_8E.html Filice, Michelle. 2016 Haldimand Proclamation. The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica Canada. Accessed 2020, from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/haldimand-proclamation. Filice, M. 2016 Haldimand Proclamation. In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Accessed June 2020 from, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/haldimand-proclamation Fi ndagrave.com n. d. William Harvey Sims. Memorial ID 162405221. Accessed May 2020 from https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/162405221/wiIIiam-harvey-sims Kitchener Public Library n. d. Thomas Pearce. Waterloo Historical Society Collection. Local identifier P000159. Accessed May 2020, from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/47203/data?n=1 1892 Town of Berlin, Canada. Accessed online June 2020 from, https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/showmedia.php?&medialD=6951&page=6503 1905 Berlin & Bridgeport Street Railway streetcars on King Street West. Kitchener Public Library collection. Local Identifier P009745. Accessed May 2020, from, http://vitacollections.ca/kpl- gsr/2937715/data?n=1 1910 https://www.kpl.org/sites/default/files/directories/Vernons-BerlinWaterloo-1910-1911.pdf 1916 Bridgeport Mill. (Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. Local identifier. P009605. Accessed online from, http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/3481259/data?n=10 1919 Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo Directory. 1919. p.229. Henry Vernon & Son, Publishers. Access online, Kitchener Public Library, from, https://www.kpl.org/sites/default/files/directories/Vernons-KW-1919.pdf 1939 Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo Directory. 1939. Thirty-fourth Edition. Vernon Directories Limited. Access online, Kitchener Public Library, from https://www.kpl.org/sites/default/files/directories/Vernons-KW-1939.pdf Knox, S.H. and Co. 1908 Postcard of the Grand Trunk Railway Station, Berlin, ON. Waterloo Historical Society. Accessed April 2020 from http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/3399769/data Kyles, Shannon 2010 Arts and Crafts. Accessed June 2020 from, http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/ArtsandCrafts.htm Lobban Stroud Ltd. 2019 Inspection Report 518 Bridgeport Road E, Kitchener ON. Completed 3 September 2019. MacDonald Tamblyn Lord Surveying Ltd. 2020 Sketch Illustrating Topography of 518 Bridgeport Road, City of Kitchener, Region of Waterloo. MacKinnon & Associates 2020 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener: Tree Management Plan. Mclaughlin, Kenneth. 2017 Kitchener-Waterloo. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Accessed April 2020, from, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo. Mills, Rych 2015 Flash from the Past: Bridgeport was the 'sin city' of its day. Waterloo Region Record. Accessed May 2020, from, https://www.therecord.com/living-story/5269330-flash-from-the-past- bridgeport-was-the-si n-city-of-its-day/ Mikel, Robert 2004 Ontario House Styles: the distinctive architecture of the provinces 18r" and 19r" century homes. James Lorimer & Company Ltd: Toronto No author n.d CSLA notes. Borgstrom, Carl. OALA Website 2017 History. Accessed May 2020 from https://www.oala.ca/profession/history/ Onland.ca n. d. LRO 58. Township of Waterloo. German Track Company Lot 59. Accessed May 2020 from, www.Onland.ca Ontario Heritage Trust 2012 Cultural Heritage Landscapes-An Introduction. Accessed online 2020 from, https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/user assets/documents/HIS-020-Cultural-heritage-landscapes- An-introduction-ENG.pdf Ricketts, Maitland & Hucker. 2011 A Guide to Canadian Architectural Styles Section Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Smith, William n. d. Smith's Canadian Gazetteer. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. Accessed November 6, 2018. https://archive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smit/page/n7 University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre 1879 County of Waterloo. Waterloo Region Historic Maps, 1853-1923. Accessed May 2020 from https://uwaterloo.ca/library/geospatial/collections/maps-and-atlases/waterloo-region- historical-maps 1923 City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo. City Engineer's Office. Kitchener, Ontario. Waterloo Region Historic Maps, 1853-1923. Accessed May 2020, from, https://uwaterloo.ca/I i bra ry/geospatia I/col lectio ns/ma ps-a nd-atlases/waterloo-region- historical-maps (n.d.) Digital Historic Air Photos of Kitchener Waterloo: 1930-1963. Accessed May 2020 from https://www.lib.uwaterloo.ca/locations/umd/proaect/i M30.htm I n. d. Kitchener Historic Street Projects (1853-1992). Accessed May 2020, from, https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webapl)viewer/i ndex. htm I?id=5a563facf4fd43d68eb6 b7c065177 6ec Unknown Author 1923 Designed Sunnyside. Saturday July 28t", 1923. Shearer, Wendy 2004 Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment Chicopee: Former Sims Estate, Kitchener, Ontario. Smith, William 1846 Smith's Canadian Gazetteer. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. Accessed May 2020 from https://archive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smit/page/n7 OALA Ontario Association of Landscape Architects 2019 History. Accessed May 2020 from, https://www.oala.ca/profession/history/ Ontario Heritage Trust 2012 Cultural Heritage Landscapes-An Introduction. Accessed May 2020 from, https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/user assets/documents/HIS-020-Cultural-heritage-Iandscapes- An-introduction-ENG.Of Parsel1. H & Co 1881 Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo & Wellington Counties Ontario 1881 & 1877. Toronto, Ontario. Accessed May 2020, from, http://digital.libra ry.mcgiILca/CountyAtlas/searchmapframes.php Tremaine, George 1861 Map of the County of Waterloo. Accessed April 2020, from, http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/hgis/countymaps/waterloo/index.htmI UNESCO 2020 The World Heritage Convention. Accessed June 2020, from. https://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ 2020 Cultural Landscapes. Accessed July 2020, https://whc.unesco.org/en/cultural landscape/ Waterloo Generations n.d Bishop Benjamin Eby. Person ID 120992. Accessed May 2020 from, https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personlD=120992&tree=generations n. d. Elias Eby. Person ID 121065. Accessed May 2020, from, https://generations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson. php?personlD=121065&tree=generations n. d. Jacob B. Eby. Person ID 121235. Accessed May 2020, from https://generations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personlD=121235&tree=generations William Harvey Sims. Person ID 1189066. Accessed May 2020, from, https://generations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personlD=1189066&tree=generations n. d. Mary Niles Denne. Person ID 1167969. Accessed May 2020, from, https://generations. regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personlD=1167969&tree=generations Waterloo Historical Society 1930 Eighteenth Annual Report of the Waterloo Historical Society. Accessed April 2020, from http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1930.pdf 1913 First Annual Report of the Waterloo Historical Society. Accessed May 2020, from, http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1913R.pdf Waterloo Historical Society Photo Collection. 1865 Peter N. and Mary Tagge. Local Identifier P000412. Accessed online from, httP://vitacoIIections.ca/kplgsr/2816781/data?g=Bridgeport&submit=Go&fct=1&grd=445&rows =20 Waterloo Region Museum 2020 History of Waterloo Township. Accessed May 2020 from, https://www.waterlooregionmuseum.ca/en/col lections-and-research/waterloo- township.aspx#notel Weidner, Johanna. 2004 Homeowner thrilled to discover backyard was designed by esteemed landscape architect. Kitchener Record. 16.2 POLICIES City of Kitchener 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan: A complete & Healthy Kitchener. Accessed April 2020, https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Docu ments/DSD_PLAN_New-Official-Plan--- CONSOLIDATED-Version-Modifications-Deferrals--Appeals.pdf 2019 Urban Design Manual: City Wide Design. Accessed July 2020 from, https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_UDM_01_City-Wide- Design.pdf Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 2006 Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process. Accessed May 2020 from, http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/Heritage Tool Kit Heritage PPS infoSheet.pdf 2007 Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties. Accessed June 2020 from, http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/InfoSheet 8%20Guiding Principles.pdf 2014 Standards & Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties: Heritage Identification and Evaluation Process. Accessed May 2020 from http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/heritage/MTCS Heritage IE Process.pdf Province of Ontario 1990 Ontario Heritage Act. Accessed May 2020 from https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90o18 1990 The Planning Act. Accessed May 2020 from https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90p13 2019 A Place to Grow: Growth for the Greater Golder Horseshoe. Accessed April 2020, from httDs://files.ontario.ca/mmah-ereater-Bolden-horseshoe-place-to-Brow-en2lish-15mav2019.Ddf 2020 The Provincial Policy Statement. Accessed May 2020 from, https://files.ontario.ca/mmah- provi ncia I-pol icy -state me nt-2020-accessible-fi na I -e n-2020-02-14. pdf Region of Waterloo 2019 Region of Waterloo Strategic Focus 2019-2023. Accessed April 2020 from, https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regional- government/resources/StratChat/Strat Plan 2019-2023 Long Version access pdf.pdf 2018 Region of Waterloo Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Landscape Conservation. Accessed online, April 2020, from https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/exploring-the- region/resources/Documents/Implementation Guideline for CHL Conservation 2017 Update. Of 2015 Regional Official Plan. Accessed April 2020 from, https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regional- government/land-use-planning.aspx 17 PROJECT PERSONNEL Amy Barnes, M.A. CAHP 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 dozens of Heritage Impact Assessments and dozens of Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports throughout Ontario. Ms. Barnes 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. She currently serves as Vice -Chair. 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. Appendix A: City of Kitchener 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 Heritaae Impact Assessment Reauirements 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 any literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in the report. 3.0 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. 4.0 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 9106. 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 9106 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 Staffs 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 518 Bridgeport Road. APPENDIX 'A': STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE Statement of Significance 518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD Municipal Address: 518 Bridgeport Road, Kitchener Legal Description: GGT Pt Lot 59 RP 58R-8657 Part 1 Year Built: 1914 Architectural Style: Vernacular with influences from Craftsman & French Colonial Revival Original Owner: Ernest Snow Original Use: Residence Condition: Excellent Description of Historic Place 518 Bridgeport Road is a ane -and -one-half storey early 20th century concrete block residence built in the Vernacular architectural style with influences from the Craftsman and French Colonial Revival style. The residence is situated on the crest of a hill on a 1.43 acre parcel of land located on the north side of Bridgeport Road between Mackie Place and Lancaster Street West in the Bridgeport West Neighbourhood of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value include the house, attached garage, and landscaped gardens. Heritage Value 518 Bridgeport Road is recognized for its aesthetic and historic value. The design, physical and contextual value relate to the architecture and construction of the residence and attached garage as well as the landscaped gardens. The house is a unique example of Vernacular architecture with influences from the Craftsman and French Canadian Colonial architectural styles. The house is in excellent condition with many intact original elements. The house features poured concrete (1910) and cinder block (1941) construction with concrete pargework that is painted grey and scored to resemble square cut stone. Architectural details are executed in wood, glass, stone, and concrete including brackets, multi -pane windows, and balustrades. The landscaped gardens display a blend of both structure and natural forms. The gardens were built in tiers, starting with a flagstone terrace and balustrade, which stretched along the length of the ivy-covered house. A few steps lead to a grassy level bounded by geometric hedges before another stairway descends to a concrete path marking the perimeter of the buried pool. The structured tiers give way to a sweeping lawn edged by curved beds and towering trees. On the north edge of the property lies a steep wooded area with a APPENDIX 'A': STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE meandering path. The gardens host rare and unique species such as the Carolinian rose, Indian bean tree, and catalpa tree. The historic and associative value relates to the historical ownership of the property as well as its association with a prominent landscape architect. The house was built in 1914 by Thomas Pearce as a wedding gift for his daughter, Harriet, who married English sea captain Ernest Snow. In 1939, the property was sold to William and Mary Sims, who named the house "Hilltop House." The Sims family was well-known in Kitchener's legal circles. William, his brother J. Kenneth, and their father Harvey all had law practices. Hilltop House was the first of two Sims family estates in Kitchener. In 1929, Harvey Sims built the second estate in the Chicopee area, which was later occupied by his son J. Kenneth Sims. In 1941, a one -and -a -half storey addition to the rear of the house was constructed by local builder Ball Brothers Construction. The architect of the addition was T.H. Wells of Waterloo. Extensive landscaping was added to the property in 1945 and designed by prominent landscape architect Carl A. Borgstrom of Churchville, Ontario. Borgstrom also designed the landscaping at the second estate. In addition to the two Sims estates, Borgstrom designed the Rock Garden at the Royal Botanical Gardens in Hamilton and was one of the founding members of the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects. Heritage Attributes The heritage value in 518 Bridgeport Road lies in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the construction and architectural style, including: a Concrete block construction with pargework that is painted grey and scored to resemble square cut stone; o All windows, window openings, and stone sills; o All exterior doors and door openings; o Segementally-arched portico entrance with flat canopy and brackets; o Roof, roofline, and dormers; a Wood soffits and brackets; and o Brick chimneys. All Borgstrom-designed landscape features, including: o Curved driveway lined with trees and shrubs; o Front lawn with grass, trees and shrubs; o Terraced grass slope on east side of property; o Flagstone walkways, stairs, ramp, and concrete balustrade; o Stone pool liner; o Coniferous and deciduous shrubs adjacent to the house, on top level of terrace; o Trees and shrubs bordering the east side of the property; and o Trees and sloped terrain of the east side of the property. APPENDIX `A': STATEMENTS OF SIGNIRCANCE East Elevation with terraced grass slopes, coniferous and deciduous trees and shrubs 7NDa�:STATEMENTS OF SIGNIRcANc£ aM= ISouh! (Front) Elevation - . . - East .-) Elevatio APPENDIX `A': STATEMENTS OF SIGNIRCANCE East Elevation with concrete balustrade, coniferous and deciduous shrubs Bc■2 sic ova •t - West (Side) Elevation East Elevation with concrete balustrade, coniferous and deciduous shrubs 7NDa�:STATEMENTS OF SIGNIRcANc£ v� - ~ � - APPENDIX'A': STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form Address: 518 Bridgeport Road Period: 1914 Recorder Name: Tim Benedict Description: Vernacular with influences from the Craftsman and French Canadian Colonial Revival architectural style Photographs: From Fagadc ® Left Facade ® Right Fagade ® Rear Farrade ® Details ® Setting ® Date: April 13, 20M Design or Physical Value Style Is this a notable, rue or unique example of a Continuity particular architectural style ortype? Construction Is this a notable, tarn;,unique or early example Unknown ❑ 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 ordetails? Setting Does this structure demonstrate a high degree N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 of technical or scientific achievement? Interior Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? RECORDER EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE NIA ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No M Yes ❑ NIA ❑ Unknown ❑ No M Yes ❑ NIA ❑ Unknown ❑ No El Yes ❑ NFA ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 NIA ❑ Unknown ❑ M ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown M No ❑ Yes ❑ NIA ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Notes - Recorder: porch woodwork, decorative brickwork, and decorative cave brackets give look of Queen Anne (modified); from gable without return eaves and rectangular transom give the took of Berlin Vernacular Subcommittee: Decorative Berlin Vernacular Notes — Subcommittee: additional research required to determine style and construction. Contextual Value RECORDER EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE Continuity Does thisaructum contribute to the continuity N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ M ❑ Yes 0 or character of the strcei,neighbourhood or ansa? Setting Is the setting or orientation of the structure N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 or landscaping noteworthy? Does itprovide aphysicai, historical, functional N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 or visual link to its surroundings? Landmark Is this aparticularly important visual landmark ❑ R N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ within the region, city or neighbourhood? ❑ C (indicate degree of dnportance) 0 N Completeness Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown M No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Notes — Subcommittee: Continuity — attractive, mature vegetation, similar setbacks to adjacent properties, not necessarily consistentwith other side of street; Setting — relationship of estate residence to garden structure (similar to Sims Estate `Chicopee'); Landmark — no differentiation between adjacent properties; Completeness — confirm presence of outbuildings and landscape features Integrity RECORDER EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE Site Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes M N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes M Nate., if relocated, i.e, refacated on its ariginad site, moved from anodier site, etc. Alterations Does this building retain most of its original materials N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 and design features? Is this a notable structure due to sympathetic WA ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 alterations that have taken place over time? Condition Is this building in good condition? NPA ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 10 NIA ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes M APPENi7DC WA STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE Historical or Associative Value & Sign Bance RECORDER EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE Does this property or structure have strong associations with and/or Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 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? NIA ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Yes ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes 0 resource orcultural 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 ofthe history ofa place, an event, ora people? Notes — Suboommince: landscape architect — Carl Borgstmm; Sims Family Appendix C: Additional Photographic documentation of 518 Bridgeport Road. Photo 1: Driveway and view of Bridgeport Street (AB, 2020). Photo 2: View of front lawn showing the open grass area and concrete edging (AB, 2020). Photo 3: Entranceway from driveway to open lawn (AB, 2020) Photo 4: View of the driveway entrance looking east from the highest elevation (AB, 2020). Photo 5: View looking south from parking areas (AB, 2020). Photo 6: The parking area is outlined by a small retaining wall which was installed by current owners (AB, 2020). %om x ism' s 9 ' Yl %' � b + Photo 9: West side of property looking south (AB, 2020). Photo 10: West side of the property looking north (AB, 2020). 5 y� e"s, Y f wav, 14, 7Ar'Z Photo 11: West side of the property looking north (AB, 2020). Photo 12: View of waterfall added by current owners (AB, 2020). Photo 13: West edge of property (AB, 2020). - _ _ _ ` — �; , ;: �:.: ,,�,. ■�■ sir s: �. �- Photo 14: West elevation (AB, 2020). Photo 15:View of garage looking north (AB, 2020). Photo 16: Fapcle showing stone retaining wall (AB, 2020). Photo 17: Steps from driveway into formal garden area (AB, 2020). Photo 18: Grass tier with geometric hedging (AB, 2020). Vt"F�A � 7�,,r�r T� 4 , x�FU ' Photo 21: View of terrace looking north (AB, 2020) Photo 22: Balustrade (AB, 2020). Photo 23: view of formal garden area from pool edge (AB, 2020) Photo 24: View of stone ramp (AB, 2020). �r N S x L llic_ . a;. r ' 9 1 Photo 24: View of stone ramp (AB, 2020). Photo 25: View of unmaintained area on north side of property (AB, 2020). Photo 26: View of east elevation and formal garden (AB, 2020). kr r, } ", c s# } e Photo 25: View of unmaintained area on north side of property (AB, 2020). Photo 26: View of east elevation and formal garden (AB, 2020). T w f• r 1 F 1 Ai - Photo - Photo 29: North side of open lawn area. Note the overgrowth of plantings (AB, 2020). Photo 30: View of plantings on east edge of property (AB, 2020) Photo 31: View of overgrown Forsythia plant (AB, 2020). Appendix D: Inspection Report for 518 Bridgeport Road. LOBBAN STROUD Ltd. Inspections 39 Grand Avenue North, Cambridge, ON NIS 2K7 519.654.6264 or 519.841.4663 Fax: 519.622.6998 INSPECTION REPORT 518 Bridgeport Rd, E., Kitchener, ON INSPECTION DATE: September 3, 2019 INSPECTION TIME: 9:00 AM PHONE 519 373 1460 INSPECTED BY: Jim Stroud NOTE: The Inspection Report is forthe exclusive use of the client above. No use of the information by any other party is intended. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following items highlight some of the observations and findings of the inspection. This summary is not the complete report. THE FULL REPORT CONTAINS OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION. ROOFING • The metal roof is a recent update—metal roofing typically lasts for decades with minimal maintenance • The garage flat roof has been updated also • No leaking was found EXTERIOR • Minimize water at the foundation • Overgrown shrubs, trees, ivy etc. should be cut back and/or removed from the home • The landscape features including patio/walkways, walls, railings will require repairs • Exterior wood requires ongoing work • Downspout/gutter repairs needed STRUCTURE • Typical cracking noted ELECTRICAL • Various localized electrical repairs needed • Contact your insurer regarding knob and tube wiring BEATING • Contact a specialist regarding suspected asbestos, the abandoned boilers, and the costs related to removal COOLING • No central A/C INSULATION • Typical insulation levels noted for this type of building • Improvements are possible but not required — improvement will not have a fast payoff in heat savings PLUMBING + Galvanized steel piping noted —Insurance companies often require replacement for insurance • Old drain pipes and cast iron plumbing repairs are recommended with steel piping replacement INTERIOR • Windows will require ongoing work • Contact a fireplace specialist for details/costs NOTE: For the purpose of this report the front of the building is assumed to be facing South. Read our Standards of Practice and our Inspection Agreement / Scope of work at www.lobbanstroud.com Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTIONS.........................................................................................................................................................................4 LIMITATIONS.. ...... .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................................10 Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 3 DESCRIPTIONS ROOFING AND CHIMNEY(S): Sloped Roof(s) Metal Roofing Flat roofs) PVC Dormer(s) Metal Roofing Chimneys Masonry EXTERIOR: Gutters and Downspouts: Aluminum Downspout Discharge: Above grade Wall Surfaces: Stucco Exterior Wall Construction: Wood Shingles Lot Topography: Sloped away from house Roof and Ceiling Framing: Flat System Grounding: Water can collect near the foundation Retaining Walls: Masonry STRUCTURE: Foundations: Poured Concrete Building Configuration: Basement Floor Construction: Joists Exterior Wall Construction: Masonry Poured Concrete Roof and Ceiling Framing: Rafters System Grounding: Not Visible ELECTRICAL: Service Entrance Cable: Overhead Service Size (240 Volt): 100 Amp Main Disconnect Rating: 100 Amp Distribution Panel: 100 Amp Breakers Main Disconnect Location: Southwest basement System Grounding: Water pipe Copper Distribution Wire: Copper Metallic Sheathed Non -Metallic Sheathed Outlets: Grounded Ungrounded Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter None Location: Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Page 4 Lobban Stroud, LTD. Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter Outside Location: Bathrooms Some ungrounded outlets HEATING: Fuel: Natural Gas Supply Piping in House: Electricity Heating System: Boiler Walls: Electric Heaters Chimney Liner: Metal Efficiency: Mid -Efficiency Input Heat Capacity (BTU/hr): 160000 Failure Probability Low Approx. Age (years): S COOLING/HEAT PUMP: Air Conditioning Type: No A/C INSULATION: Main Attic: Fiberglass Supply Piping in House: Cellulose R-20 Walls: Not Visible Main Shut Off Value Location: None Basement Walls: None Vapour Barrier: None Found Roof Ventilation: Ridge Vent PLUMBING: Service Piping into house: Copper Supply Piping in House: Copper Plastic Galvanized Steel Main Shut Off Value Location: Northeast Basement Water Heater: I ndirect Water Heater Age (years): S Water Heater Capacity: 40 US Gal Waste Piping in House: Cast Iron Drainage Pumps: Solid Waste Pump INTERIOR: Major Floor Finishes: Hardwood Tile Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 5 Major Wall Finishes: Plaster/Drywall Major Ceiling Finishes: Plaster/Drywall Window Types: Casement Awning Fixed Window Glazing: Single Glazed Double Glazing P ri ma ry + Storm Window Exterior Doors: Solid Wood French Door Fireplaces: Masonry Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 6 LIMITATIONS NOTE: All environmental issues are excluded from this inspection. Contact an environmentaIcon sultantfor any environmental concerns. Examples of common environmental concerns include mold/mould, asbestos, radon, indoor air quality, septic systems, wells, buried oil tanks, and/or pollution. Most buildings have experienced some form of leakage at some point. Moisture problems can lead to mold growth which maybe visible or concealed. It is normal for all buildings to have some mold. To determine if mold is a problem in the building, contact an environmental consultant. Buildings from the early 1980's or older typically have components which contain asbestos. It is not possible in a Home Inspection to determine which components contain asbestos. To determine if asbestos is present in any building component, contact an environmental consultant. ROOFING AND CHIMNEY(S): Roof Inspection By: Walking on - Flat Binoculars/Telescope - Metal Viewed from roof edge - Metal Inspection Limited /Prevented by: Slope Fragile Height Chimney inspection limited by: Minimal access Inspection Exclusions: Chimney Flues EXTERIOR: Exterior Inspection By: Viewed from ground level Exterior Inspection Limited by: Vegetation and branches against the building Restricted access under porch/deck Garage inspection Limited by: Storage inthe garage STRUCTURE: Structural Inspection By: Spot check sampling of representative structural components Restricted Access To! Roof Space Inspected from Access hatch: Attic - Front attic only Interior Foundation Wall not visible: SO Percent Structural Components Concealed Finishes, Storage, and Furnishings By: No Access To: Crawl Space - Hatch at east basement is obstructed Roof Space Attic - rear ELECTRICAL: Electrical Inspection By: Spot check sampling of representative electrical components Concealed Electrical Components: Not Inspected Main Disconnect Cover: Not Removed Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 7 HEATING: Heating Inspection By: The system was visually observed during a heating cycle Inspection Limited By: Summer test procedure used Heat Exchanger is not visible/Inaccessible Heating Inspection Exclusions: Heat Loss Calculations Not Done Safety Devices Not Tested Asbestos is a common component of heating systems. Asbestos is excluded from this inspection. Contact a Specialist for any concerns of Asbestos. Buried oil tanks (Underground Storage Tanks) are excluded from this inspection. Contact a Specialist for any concerns of Underground Storage Tanks. Abandoned/old boilers not tested COOLINGMEAT PUMP: Inspection By: No central A/C Inspection exclusions: Heat gain and heat loss calculations not done Window, Wall mount, and portable A/C systems are excluded from the inspection INSULATION: Inspected From Access Hatch: Attic - front only Restricted Access To: Roof Space Wall Space Access Not Gained To: Attic Roof Space Air Barrier and Vapour Barrier: Mostly concealed. Continuity cannot be verified. PLUMBING: Plumbing Inspection By: Spot check sampling of representative plumbing components Components Not Tested: Jetted shower base Outside/garage faucet Exclusions of the Inspection: Tub/Sink overflows are not tested Watertreatment Equipment is not tested Concealed plumbing is not inspected Shut-off Valves and relief valves are not tested INTERIOR: Interior Inspection By: Where unobstructed, the finished walls, floors, ceiling are visually sampled for atypical or excessive wear/damage for this type of building. Inspection Limited By: Storage Furniture Restricted Access to: Closets/Storage areas Exclusions of the Inspection Quality of chimney draw cannot be determined Cosmetic finishes Carbon Monoxide and smoke detectors nottested Security Systems Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 8 Intercoms Centra I Vacuum Chimney Flues BASEMENT LEAKAGE: EVIDENCE OF PAST LEAKAGE LEAKAGE SEVERITYAND FREQUENCYCANNOT BE PREDICTED EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS WILL REDUCE THE RISK OF LEAKAGE. (SEE EXTERIOR SECTION ALSO) Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 9 OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ROOFING AND CHIMNEYS Sloped Roofin OBSERVATIONS: Old shed roof surface RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: North TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Old roofing has a higher risk of failure and leakage. Expect to replace the roof soon. Leakage cannot be predicted. Small shed roof off the side of the garage is quite worn but is a smaller roof area Chimney OBSERVATIONS COMMENTS: Significant recent repairs noted The chimneys have been substantially improved - it is understood that the Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. L., Kitchener Lobban stroud, LTD. Page 1D No metal roof recommendations at this time OBSERVATIONS: Good condition at all spot checks COMMENTS: Various areas of roofing and flashing were sampled and spot checked. No areas of concern were found. As routine maintenance, visually inspect the roof in spring and fall to check for damage. It is understood that the metal roof was installed recently Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 11 EXTERIOR Gutters OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COST: COMMENTS: Gutter damage Repair or replace Various Immediate GET QUOTES Gutter damage was noted. This will prevent proper drainage of roof water away from the building which can lead to leakage and water damage. Prompt service is recommended. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 12 Gutters OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Clogged gutter Improve Various Immediate (Nater will not drain properly from the gutters and roof r. _. There is a potential for Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 13 Downspouts OBSERVATIONS: Discharging near the foundation Discharging on the roof Loose downspout Disconnected downspout RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Water should be directed approximately 6' away from the foundation to reduce the risk of building leakage and water damage. Re -direct the discharge water to prevent concentrated wear and water damage on the roof. Loose and damaged downspouts will not direct the water away from the building and should be serviced soon. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 14 Soffit and Fascia OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Wood soffit/fascia Repair or replace Throughout Ongoing Exterior wood elements such as this require maintenance as an ongoing basis icluded as part of the painting work. Window well OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Local Overgrown Repair or replace Various Ongoing The window wells are overgrown and will have a risk of water and pest problems - remove the overgrown vegetation and service as needed. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 15 Lot gradin; OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Low areas at the foundation I mprove Various Ongoing Low areas nearthe foundation can collect water and increase the risk of leakage. Ensure that the pe ri meter gra ding is sloped to drain water away from the building. Patio. walkways. and masonry/stone landscanin OBSERVATIONS: Shifting noted RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COST: GET QUOTES COMMENTS: Ongoing shifting will continue over time due to seasonal freeze thaw action. Local repairs are possible to extend the lifespan of the individual landscaping elements such as the large patio, walks, railing, and driveway side walls. However, contractors often prefer major rebuilding over local repairs. Costs will vary greatly depending on the approach taken. Obtain quotes for your preferred repair approach. Ensure water is directed away from the building during repairs -in particular with the patio which is built up higher than ideal which increases the risk of water problems. f R—.2 = �: Ti's -, Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 16 Landscaping OBSERVATIONS RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Tree/shrub too close to the house Vines on the house Improve Throughout Immediate It is critical to trim trees, branches, shrubs, and vegetation away from the building to reduce the risk of damage and pest problems. Vines and ivy cause problems with buildings including water damage, window/door damage, trim damage, and pest problems. Removal of vines is recommended. Expect to find issues concealed by vines/ivy. The overgrown vegetation may conceal issues on the exterior. Anticipate repairs to the building after the overgrown vegetation is removed. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 17 Door and Window Trim OBSERVATIONS: Old Wood Trim RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COST: GET QUOTES COMMENTS: Exterior wood elements such as this require maintenance as an ongoing basis. Local wood repairs are typically included as part of the painting work. Various repairs and patchwork were noted and local repairs are currently needed. Contractors often prefer replacement of old high maintenance elements such as this -obtain quotes for your repair approach. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 18 Siding/cladding OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Old wood shingles Repair or replace So uth Unpredictable Exterior wood elements such as this require maintenance as an ongoing basis. Local wood repairs are typically included as part of the painting work. Ultimately plan on an eventual resurface with a dower maintenance cladding/siding. Stucco OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Typical cracking Monitor Various Ongoing Cracking is common in all stucco walls. average. See the Structure section also. The nature of the cracking noted is considered Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 19 Porch/Deck Structure OBSERVATIONS: Non-standard construction, rotten boards noted RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Northeast TIME LINE: Less than one year COST: GET QUOTES COMMENTS: The deck is not well built and is near the end of the useful lifespan. Expect to remove or rebuild the deck eventually and anticipate high maintenance in the meantime. Attached earaee OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Missing door closer Repair or replace Ga rage Immediate Doors connecting the house to the garage require a door closer to prevent gases from entering the house. This is a safety concern and should be corrected promptly. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 20 Garage CONDITION: Vehicle door damage RECOMMENDATION: Repair LOCATION: Ga rage TIME LINE: Immediate COST: Get quotes COMMENTS: Damage to the door was noted and repairs are needed. However, costs will depend greatly on the approach taken to remedy the damage. Foundations OBSERVATIONS: Typical cracks RECOMMENDATION: Monitor LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Ongoing COMMENTS: Foundation cracks are common in all foundations. Minor cracks as noted are not considered a structural concern. Monitor for leaks and movement overtime. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lohban Stroud, LTD. Page 21 ELECTRICAL Panel/cover OBSERVATIONS: Unprotected openings RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Southwest Basement TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Any openings in the electrical panel should be covered. This can often be easily achieved by installing a breaker, fuse, or knock -out covers as appropriate in the opening. Openings in the panel are a safety concern and immediate service is recommended. Branch circuit wirine OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Poor exterior wiring Repair or replace Southeast Immediate Proper precautions are needed for exterior wiring installations. Repairs are needed immediately to ensure safety of the system. Loose conduit with an outlet on the ground noted in the garden beside the driveway Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 22 Branch circuit wiring OBSERVATIONS: Abandoned wire Extension cord RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Loose wiring Repair or replace Various Immediate Wires should be terminated in a junction box or removed if they are no longer used in the electrical system to ensure safety. Extension cords should not be used as a permanent wiring installation. This is a safety concern and immediate service is recommended. Extension cord through a doorway should be removed immediately. Wires and boxes should be secured to prevent damaee and electrical hazards Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 23 Light fixtures OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Inoperative Repair or replace Ensuite Immediate The component could not be operated by normal controls during the inspection for reasons that could not be determined, Further investigation and inquiry is recommended. Service as needed. Check the heat lamp bulb 15` Electrical outlets OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Inoperative outlet Repair or replace Southeast Exterior Immediate The outlet was not live at the time of inspection for reasons that could not be determined. Sometimes this is due to an unknown switch, control, tripped off device, further and service as needed. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 24 Unerounded outlets OBSERVATIONS: 3 -Prong Outlet RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Ungrounded circuits were intended to be used only with 2 -Prong outlets which are no longer available. Any 3 -Prong outlets on ungrounded circuits should be replaced with Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFCI) outlets which will protect by tripping off the power in the case of an electrical ground fault or electric shock. GFCIs allow continued safe use of ungrounded circuits, but eventually anticipate replacement of the older ungrounded wires. Ground Fault Circuit Intreruoter OBSERVATIONS: Testfaulty RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Washroom TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: The test function of the device did not function properly. safety device. Service is needed immediately. k Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Page 25 This is a Malfunctioning Lobban Stroud, LTD. Knob and tube wirin CONDITION: Some knob and tube wiring in use RECOMMENDATION: Replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COST: Obtain quotes COMMENTS: Although many circuits have been replaced overtime, there is still some live Knob and Tube wiring in use in some areas. The extent of Knob and Tube wiring cannot be determined in this inspection. Insurance companies typically require replacement of immedi Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 26 HEATING Boiler OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Abandoned boilers Further evaluation required Basement Immediate There are 2 boilers which cannot be used any longer but are still connected to the rad piping system. Removal is recommended. Work on the boilers should involve an asbestos specialist first. Contact an asbestos specialist for details and costs regarding the insulation on the boilers and plumbing and contact a boiler specialist regarding removal of the old / abandoned boilers. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 27 Radiators/convectors (Rads OBSERVATIONS: Uneven heat distribution RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Rads removed and some rads are not as hot. This will create uneven heating through the home. Improvement is recommended to improve comfort. Cold rads oftenjust require minor service to bleed the rad. COOLING/HEAT PUMP Air Conditioning COMMENTS: No central A/C Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 28 INSULATION Attic Low insulation level OBSERVATIONS: Low insulation level RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Attic TIME LINE: Discretionary item COST: Cost depends on the approach taken COMMENTS: Low insulation level relative to modern standards will result in higher home energy consumption. Upgrading insulation can reduce energy bills and may improve comfort. However, upgrades should be considered an improvement rather than a repair as upgrades are not a necessity and typically do not have a fast payoff in Basement insulation OBSERVATIONS: Low insulation level RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Basement TIME LINE: Discretionary item COST: Cost depends on the approach taken COMMENTS: Low insulation level relative to modern standards will result in higher home energy consumption. Upgrading insulation can reduce energy bills and may improve comfort. However, upgrades should be considered an improvement rather than a repair as upgrades are not a necessity and typically do not have a fast payoff in energy savings. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 29 PLUMBING Piping OBSERVATIONS: Galvanized steel piping RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COST: GET QUOTES COMMENTS: Galvanized steel piping is an old system which has not been commonly used fpr decades. The steel will be very rusty at this point and will eventually need to be updated. The plumbing may fail at any time. Contact your insurer. It is typical for insurance companies to require immediate replacement of galvanized steel water pipes inside the bu i lding. Waste piping OBSERVATIONS: Old drain pipes including cast iron piping RECOMMENDATION: Replace LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COST: GET QUOTES COMMENTS: The drain/waste pipes are an old style system and an ageing material. Expect to replace this system eventually. The drain/waste pipes may be high maintenance until updated. Leakage and poor drainage cannot be predicted. Try to include replacement and updates with any renovations or plumbing projects that would provide better access for updates. In particular, replacement during galvanized steel piping replacement is recommended. Insurance may be an issue and replacement of drain/waste pipes may be needed in the short term to obtain insurance. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 30 Faucet OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Diverter not working well Repair or replace Ensuite Immediate The diverter is not working properly. This component can be replaced, but service can often correct the situation. The shower diverter was too stiff to turn tested. as a result the jetted shower base was not k f. Bathtub/Tub enclosure OBSERVATIONS: Caulk/grout needed RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Second floor Washroom TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: The enclosure needs to be sealed to prevent water damage. This is considered ongoing maintenance. Check regularly and touch-up any damaged or missing areas as needed. I Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 31 INTERIOR Floors OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Sloped Monitor Various Ongoing Sloped floors are not unusual in homes of this age and nature. While there is no evidence of significant structural concerns, significant repairs and costs should be expected if level floors are desired. Sloped floors at the rear stair area is not ideal but is suspected to be built this way. No sign of recent movement noted. Floors OBSERVATIONS: Typical flaws RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Unpredictable COMMENTS: Typical, cosmetic damage and wear noted at interior finishes. It is normal for any building to have some scuffs, cracks, stains, and general wear. Improve as desired for W "1 w Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 32 Walls OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Typical flaws I mprove Various Unpredictable Typical, cosmetic damage and wear noted at interio r f i nishes. It is normal for any building to have some scuffs, cracks, stains, and general wear. Improve as desired for cosmetic purposes. Ceilings OBSERVATIONS: Typical flaws RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Unpredictable COMMENTS: Typical, cosmetic damage and wear noted at interior finishes. It is normal for any building to have some scuffs, cracks, stains, and general wear. Improve as desired for cosmetic purposes, Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 33 CO and Smoke detectors OBSERVATIONS: Not found RECOMMENDATION: Provide LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: Smoke alarms should be provided on each level and Carbon Monoxide alarms should be provided near all bedroom areas. Newer construction requires smoke alarms in each bedroom. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 34 Windows OBSERVATIONS: Old windows RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: TIME LINE: COST: COMMENTS: Various Immediate GET QUOTES Old windows currently need repairs or replacement for ease of operation and comfort. Although it is often preferred to replace windows instead of repair, some people prefer old windows despite the high maintenance and consider it typical for old homes. Obtain quotes for your preferred method of improving the windows. In particular, cracked glass, stuck windows, wood damage, damaged screens, damaged window hardware were noted. Contractors often preferto replace old windows. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 35 Window frames OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COMMENTS: Piping and wiring through the basement window Improve Basement Unpredictable Although this may function to your satisfaction in the meantime, improvements Doors OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: LOCATION: TIME LINE: COST: COMMENTS: Door damage Repair or replace East Immediate GET QUOTES Damage to the door was noted and repairs are needed. However, costs will depend en to remedy the damage. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 36 Fireplace OBSERVATIONS: Old fireplace -burn marks noted RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: South First floor TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: There is no combustion air vent, the damper needs service, and burn marks were noted above the fireplace mantle. Further evaluation by a fireplace specialist is recommended for details and costs. Contact your insurer as improvements are often required to obtain insurance. Use of the fireplace is not recommended in the meantime. Fireplace OBSERVATIONS: Old fireplace - burn marks noted RECOMMENDATION: Repair or replace LOCATION: Southeast First floor TIME LINE: Immediate COMMENTS: The firebox requires service, there is no combustion air vent, the damper needs service, and burn marks were noted above the fireplace mantle. Further evaluation by a fireplace specialist is recommended for details and costs. Contact your insurer as improvements are often required to obtain insurance. Use of the fireplace is not recommended in the meantime. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD. Page 37 Basement leakaee OBSERVATIONS: Evidence of past leakage RECOMMENDATION: Improve LOCATION: Various TIME LINE: Ongoing COMMENTS: Evidence of prior leakage was noted. The areas were found to be dry at the time of inspection. These areas should be monitored for future leakage and repairs undertaken as needed. Compared to similar aged cellar type basements, this foundation and basement are performing better than typical. r_— This This concludes the inspection report. We trust that this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions about the inspection or the report. Jim Stroud, Lobban Stroud Ltd. Glen Drummond Kimberley Love, 518 Bridgeport Rd. E., Kitchener Lobban Stroud, LTD, Page 38 Appendix E: Impact Assessment Chart Key heritage attributes associated with the building include: One -and -a -half storey height and south facing orientation. The large setback and from the street. The use of poured concreate construction with pargework scored to resemble square cut stone. The one storey garage. The window openings and concreate sills. The original single sash wooden windows on the three bayfa�ade. The three -bay facade with original wooden door, side lights, and panelled transom; Potential Negative Impact (y/n) N Heritage Attributes i ° 03 0 i C c° a C M v +'O M M it m — v N Discussion y +' N 2 Y M v o a �o M i M U Key heritage attributes associated with the building include: One -and -a -half storey height and south facing orientation. The large setback and from the street. The use of poured concreate construction with pargework scored to resemble square cut stone. The one storey garage. The window openings and concreate sills. The original single sash wooden windows on the three bayfa�ade. The three -bay facade with original wooden door, side lights, and panelled transom; The recessed entrance with segmentally arched opening and flat canopy with brackets, wooden soffit, and N N N N woodwork scored to resemble purlins. The gable roof, dormers, and roofline with overhanging eaves, wooden soffits with woodwork scored to N N N N resemble purlins Key heritage attributes associated with Borgstrom's landscape including: The spatial order surrounding the house including the terraces, grass tier, primary walkway in and out of the N N N N formal garden, and stone stairs and ramp. The curved driveway and vegetation (north side) which y N N N limits views into the formal garden and lawn; N N N N I N I N N I N I N N N This is considered a low y impact as only a small portion of the end of the driveway will be impacted. This is considered a low The front lawn with mix of grass, trees and plantings; y N N N N N y impact as only the western portion of the front lawn will be impacted. This area is Potential Negative Impact (y/n) v a Heritage Attributes C ° C Q 3 c V i C ° � M C V O 'P Discussion Q L+ a N N M •Ol O s u M The recessed entrance with segmentally arched opening and flat canopy with brackets, wooden soffit, and N N N N woodwork scored to resemble purlins. The gable roof, dormers, and roofline with overhanging eaves, wooden soffits with woodwork scored to N N N N resemble purlins Key heritage attributes associated with Borgstrom's landscape including: The spatial order surrounding the house including the terraces, grass tier, primary walkway in and out of the N N N N formal garden, and stone stairs and ramp. The curved driveway and vegetation (north side) which y N N N limits views into the formal garden and lawn; N N N N I N I N N I N I N N N This is considered a low y impact as only a small portion of the end of the driveway will be impacted. This is considered a low The front lawn with mix of grass, trees and plantings; y N N N N N y impact as only the western portion of the front lawn will be impacted. This area is The flagstone terrace with balustrade and retaining wall N N N N N N with centrally placed stone stairway; The stone edging which defines the original pool area; N N N N N N The open lawn area with sloping terrain; Y Y N Y Y N The trees and plantings bordering the east edge of the Y Y N Y Y N property; already separated from the open lawn by mature vegetation. The front lawn surrounding the house and driveway will not be impacted. N N This is considered a medium impact. The majority of the y open lawn and sloping terrain will be retained, however a portion of it will be lost. This is considered a high impact. Many of trees will be Y retained, however, they will be isolated from their historical context and a new Potential Negative Impact (y/n) v a Heritage Attributes C ° C Q 3 c V i C � M V O 'P i C N Discussion Q L+ a N N M •Ol O s U M The flagstone terrace with balustrade and retaining wall N N N N N N with centrally placed stone stairway; The stone edging which defines the original pool area; N N N N N N The open lawn area with sloping terrain; Y Y N Y Y N The trees and plantings bordering the east edge of the Y Y N Y Y N property; already separated from the open lawn by mature vegetation. The front lawn surrounding the house and driveway will not be impacted. N N This is considered a medium impact. The majority of the y open lawn and sloping terrain will be retained, however a portion of it will be lost. This is considered a high impact. Many of trees will be Y retained, however, they will be isolated from their historical context and a new Vistas into and out of the terrace; and The unmaintained wooded area at the north of the property. property edge will be created. This is considered a medium N impact. The vista in and out of the terrace will be reduced in size. ML Potential Negative Impact (y/n) v a Heritage Attributes C ° C Q 3 c V i C ° � M C V O 'P Discussion Q L+ a N N M •Ol O s u M Vistas into and out of the terrace; and The unmaintained wooded area at the north of the property. property edge will be created. This is considered a medium N impact. The vista in and out of the terrace will be reduced in size. ML Appendix F: Detailed review of the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual: City Wide Design. Design Principle Discussion 01.2.1 Inclusive Design SAFETY Creating an inclusive city is not possible without first creating The proposed redevelopment will a safe city. City builders have a responsibility to maximize the adhere to safety standards and real and perceived safety of all who live, work, and play in building code requirements. Kitchener. Safety is a critical, city-wide design parameter for all buildings, streets and shared spaces. Prioritize safety for pedestrians, cyclists, public transit users Not applicable. The proposed and motorists in that order. Prioritize passive, integrated redevelopment is on private design techniques (site lighting, landscaping, built -form, property. parking and access) over physical barriers and security technologies wherever possible. Use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) This is beyond the scope of this principles to design all spaces, including transit stops, to a CHIA. City staff will determine if a high standard for safety. A CPTED Report may be required for CPTED report is required. any development, to be approved by City staff. No building, street or shared space is to be designed in The proposed redevelopment does isolation from its surroundings. Design for the specific not isolate the existing and proposed contextual constraints and opportunities of a site and buildings from its surroundings. consider both current and planned future conditions for the area when designing for safety. Design sites to provide clear, continuous and highly visible The proposed redevelopment does pedestrian pathways that connect the public realm with not impact the existing sidewalk or building entrances, are barrier -free, and minimize conflict access to the private property. with vehicles. Design all public spaces to increase the presence of people, Not applicable. The proposed and design all sites and buildings to maximize the ability of redevelopment is on private occupants to provide natural surveillance onto the public property. realm. When designing the built form and site function elements on The proposed redevelopment does a project, do not create any potential entrapment areas, not create any entrapment areas, dead -ends, or hidden/obscured spaces. Building users and/or Design Principle Discussion the public should always have multiple means of egress dead ends, or hidden/obscured should a potentially unsafe situation arise. spaces. Design all elements of a site to be identifiable and clearly All elements of the proposed delineated. This should be performed through passive design redevelopment are identifiable and elements but may also include appropriate signage. clearly delineated. Building entrances and exterior shared spaces should be The proposed redevelopment clearly defined and visible from the public realm, evenly lit, includes defined entrances which are human scaled and under natural surveillance from building anticipated to be evenly lit and occupants. provide natural surveillance from building occupants through windows. The retention of existing vegetation and trees, and the curved nature of the proposed driveways may prohibit direct views from the public realm. UNIVERSAL DESIGN An inclusive city is one in which all spaces are designed to be The proposed redevelopment is on equitable and flexible for all users. private property. The proposed redevelopment is designed to be flexible for a variety of users. Wherever possible, design spaces such that all users are able The proposed redevelopment is on to encounter, navigate and experience the space without private property. The proposed restriction. Where this is not possible, all users should have redevelopment allows a variety of equivalent means to use these spaces, and no one should be users to navigate and experience the singled out or excluded. space without restriction. Design all spaces to serve the full range of users' physical, The proposed redevelopment is on mental and sensory abilities, including such things as; private property. This design anticipating differences in pace of movement and types of principle does not directly apply to mobility; minimizing the physical effort required to use the private property. space; being sensitive to varying reactions to visual and auditory stimuli and; providing texture and tactility for the sensory impaired. Design spaces such that they are intuitive, welcoming and safe The proposed new lots will provide to use for persons of all abilities, backgrounds, cultures, clear visual delineation between languages and identities. This means designing for visual different types of spaces (public, clarity for people unfamiliar with Kitchener, including visitors Design Principle Discussion and newly arriving Canadians. It includes intuitive wayfinding private, front -of -house, back -of - that doesn't rely on complex written direction and provides house). clear visual delineation between different types of spaces (public, private, front -of -house, back -of -house). Integrate Universal Design measures into the architectural This design principle has been expression of the building and the urban design of the site, considered and helps inform including all ramps, handrails and other barrier free measures. recommendations. No one should be made to feel that their needs are an afterthought or a burden on the design process. Ensure that the site user experience is created for the The proposed redevelopment is on enjoyment of all, including consideration of sight lines for private property. Site lines will be children and users of wheelchairs and other mobility aides. influenced by the retention of existing vegetation and trees. The site allows for future modification for accessibility at the discretion of the owner/s. Emphasize life safety, mobility independence, and quality of The proposed redevelopment will life measures for those who are most vulnerable to potential adhere to safety standards and hazards. building code requirements. AFFORDABILITY Pursue all opportunities to incorporate affordable housing Not applicable. The proposed into residential and mixed-use projects. redevelopment is not a mixed-use project. Avoid "Poor doors", or separate entrances/lobbies for There are no 'poor doors' associated affordable units (where a mix of affordable and market units with the proposed redevelopment. exist within a multi -residential or mixed-use building). Likewise, access to shared spaces and other common Not applicable. The proposed amenities is to be provided equally to all residents regardless redevelopment is on private of status. property. Affordable housing should be provided in a full range of unit Not applicable. The proposed sizes, types and tenures. redevelopment is on private property. Design Principle Discussion AGE & FAMILY FRIENDLY DESIGN Age and family friendly design practices are those which The proposed redevelopment can be enhance the mobility, independence and quality of life for considered a family friendly design. older people and families at the Neighbourhood, Building and The proposed redevelopment allows Unit scales. They promote active lifestyles, encourage social for future modifications at the interaction and instil a sense of community pride. Age and discretion of the owner/s. family friendly design prioritizes the ability for older adults to age -in-place, and for families to grow -in-place. All development in Kitchener should be designed as age and The proposed redevelopment allows family friendly. Where seniors and/or children are not for future modifications at the intended users or the target demographic, their needs must discretion of the owner/s. still be addressed, to ensure equitable and flexible use of the urban environment for all. THE NEIGHBOURHOOD SCALE Design for the mobility and independence of children and The proposed redevelopment is on older adults. private property and does not impact the mobility of children and adults on the neighbourhood scale. Provide a mix of housing types, sizes and tenures in each The housing type (single family neighbourhood, including seniors housing options for both residential) is influence by lot size independent and assisted living to create options for aging -in- and zoning requirements. place. Locate retirement, long term care homes and institutional Not applicable. The proposed uses in the neighbourhood centre and in close proximity to redevelopment is on private community services, personal services and commercial uses. property. Provide small but frequent community spaces to promote and Not applicable. The proposed advertise volunteer opportunities and community events. redevelopment is on private property. Locate child care facilities and schools near pedestrian, cycling Not applicable. The proposed and transit routes to maximize mobility autonomy. Consider redevelopment is on private adjacency to parks, community centres and recreation property. facilities. Design Principle Discussion Design comfortable streets that encourage older adults and Not applicable. The proposed families to linger and socialize. redevelopment is on private property. Provide a range of public art as well as park, open space and Not applicable. The proposed shared space elements that are flexible, educational, redevelopment is on private interactive and inclusive to allow for a range of activities property. including; resting, walking, socializing, physical activity and access to nature. Accommodate imaginative play, encourage a sense of adventure and reward curiosity in people of all ages and abilities. Design the public realm with frequent rest areas, including Not applicable. The proposed barrier -free seating, weather protection and shade trees. redevelopment is on private Ensure comfortable wind conditions for users. property. Maintain the public realm with adequate lighting and curbs Not applicable. The proposed that are suitable for barrier -free travel, including tactile redevelopment is on private surfaces for the visually impaired. Ensure that site works property. involving utilities in the public right-of-way do not encumber users' ability to navigate their urban environment. Provide frequent crosswalks that are intuitively designed for Not applicable. The proposed pedestrians and obvious to drivers. redevelopment is on private property. Prioritize winter maintenance for those most impacted by Not applicable. The proposed adverse conditions, including persons with mobility aides and redevelopment is on private families with strollers. property. Create opportunities for cycling to be the preferred choice for Not applicable. The proposed trips that are less than 5 km. Support an all ages and abilities redevelopment is on private cycling network, particularly near schools. property. Design for 'last -mile mobility', to ensure that there are no Not applicable. The proposed unintentional barriers between transit stops or pedestrian redevelopment is on private pathways and user destination points that may discourage property. active transit use among sensitive users. Where feasible, public washrooms and water fountains should Not applicable. The proposed be provided and open year-round. They are to be universally redevelopment is on private accessible, include family washroom and changing facilities property. Design Principle Discussion that support safe and equitable access for persons of all identities and abilities. THE BUILDING SCALE Provide a mix of unit types and sizes (studio, one, two and Not applicable. The proposed three-bedroom units) to accommodate all types of people and redevelopment includes two single - families and to provide up-sizing and downsizing family residential homes which do opportunities for those who want to remain in place not have individual units. throughout different stages of life. Provide indoor and outdoor amenity areas with a variety of Indoor areas follow typical activities for all occupants. Consider ways in which amenity residential buildings design. The spaces can be designed to accommodate the needs of older outdoor amenity space is designed adults and young people simultaneously, as positive social to accommodate a variety of interaction between generations can have significant mental occupants. health benefits for all. Locate amenity spaces adjacent to circulation spaces and with The location of the outdoor amenity the greatest degree of permeability possible, prioritizing both spaces associated with each new lot real and perceived safety. are influenced by the natural settings, the retention of existing trees, and set back of the building envelope. When planning a site with multiple buildings, maximize the Not applicable. The proposed utility of amenity spaces by sharing facilities among all users, redevelopment is on private where possible. property. There is no shared space. Building lobbies and other interstitial spaces should be large The proposed redevelopment is and flexible enough to accommodate social encounters and to designed to be flexible enough to avoid frustrating the movement of those with mobility aides, meet the needs of the owner/s. families with child equipment or individuals carrying groceries. Where feasible, provide additional communal or individual The proposed redevelopment is storage, prioritizing floors with larger units. Explore designed to meet the storage needs opportunities for stroller or mobility device storage in the of the owner/s. It is keeping with base of buildings where the floorplate tends to be the largest. typical residential design. Design Principle Discussion THE UNIT SCALE Provide generous in -unit storage areas and entryways that The proposed redevelopment is in can accommodate mobility aides, strollers, circulation for keeping with typical residential multiple people and other sensitively designed elements. design. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Provide private outdoor spaces where possible and design The proposed redevelopment them to maximize sunlight, accessibility, safety, flexibility and provides private outdoor space for to minimize uncomfortable wind conditions. each lot. Consider the provision of oversized balconies, patios and The proposed redevelopment will terraces with screening that extends living space to the not impact the terraces on the outdoors. retained lot. The proposed new lots will include outdoor living space. Design for future adaptability to changing demographics and This design principle has been lifestyles. Consider ways in which units can be specialized for considered and helps inform different user needs and adapted for an individual user's recommendations. preferences. SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to public spaces and social infrastructure. ARTS AND CULTURE All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to public spaces and arts and cu Itu re. 0.1.22 SMART CITY DESIGN SMART CITY DESIGN All projects should contain sufficient, planned space for This is beyond the scope of this current and anticipated future needs for technology CHIA. This design principle has been infrastructure, materials and structures. Spaces for the considered and helps inform support of fixed cabling and other infrastructure should be recommendations. easily accessible in order to facilitate future changes in use. Design Principle Discussion New buildings, public infrastructure projects and the public This is beyond the scope of this realm should be designed to be as functionally flexible as CHIA. This design principle has been possible, specifically in respect to access, infrastructure and considered and helps inform configuration of interior space in order to facilitate future recommendations. changes in use. Temporary measures, including changes to the urban Not applicable. The proposed environment, should be explored when testing smart redevelopment is on private technologies. Technology evolves quickly and the city should property. be open and adaptable to experimenting with new ideas designed to improve the quality of life. New developments should demonstrate that their design This is beyond the scope of this takes account of the latest, best and emerging practices and CHIA. This design principle has been patterns for smart cities, digital urbanism and placemaking. considered and helps inform recommendations. Planning and other policies governing the use of urban space Not applicable. The proposed and structures should facilitate innovation and changes in use, redevelopment is on private including temporary changes of use. property. Technology changes in mobility, such as e -bikes, e -scooters, Not applicable. The proposed on -demand ride hailing, autonomous vehicles, etc. have been redevelopment is on private changing the way we use urban spaces. Transportation is property. evolving and needs to be in a position to embrace that change. Consultation on plans, projects or new developments should This CHIA will be review by the explore the capabilities of social media and other relevant municipal heritage committee engagement technologies to ensure that local communities (Heritage Kitchener). The planning are given appropriate opportunities to contribute to their process allows for public design. engagement. SMART CITY INITIATIVES All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to public spaces and public infrastructures. 01.2.3 DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABILITY HEALTH & WELL BEING Design Principle Discussion Design communities to support and encourage walking and Not applicable. The proposed cycling. Provide compact block patterns and highly connected redevelopment is on private street networks. Promote safe, active transportation and property. public transit use as a priority travel option. Provide green spaces, gathering places, and recreational Not applicable. The proposed facilities and opportunities for persons of all ages, identities, redevelopment is on private abilities, and cultural traditions. Conserve and enhance property. existing public spaces. Provide street trees along all streets with sufficient soil The proposed redevelopment seeks volume to ensure a healthy, mature canopy. Maximize tree to retain existing vegetation and planting wherever possible. Ensure natural and built shade trees. This will ensure a healthy tree features are available at outdoor public spaces. canopy and provide shade. Ensure safe and convenient access to health care, social Not applicable. The proposed services and healthy food options. redevelopment does not impact access to health care, social service of healthy food options. Mitigate against noise -related impacts, including noise A conservation plan is proposed to created by vehicular traffic, building construction, mitigate any noise -related impacts incompatible land uses and site access/servicing areas. from construction. Create complete communities that include mixed densities Not applicable. The proposed and affordable housing options for people of all ages and redevelopment is on private socioeconomic status. property and guided by existing zoning requirements. Provide safe, convenient access to social, educational and The proposed development does not faith -based community resources impact access to social, educational, and faith -based community resources. Provide thoughtful outdoor recreation opportunities for Not applicable. The proposed people of all ages including children's playground equipment, redevelopment is on private sport and fitness equipment, programmed areas such as property. basketball courts, volleyball pits, skate -parks, skating rinks, climbing walls, and other creative options which encourage participation and provide for easy access, use and participation. Design Principle Discussion DESIGN FOR CLIMATE CHANGE Design sites to maximize their relationship to sustainable Not applicable. The proposed transportation options, prioritizing pedestrian and cyclists redevelopment is on private utility and public transit access. property. Incorporate renewable energy where feasible, including solar, This is beyond the scope of this geothermal, and wind -generation. Preserve for and CHIA. This design principle has been accommodate new technologies as they are developed. considered and helps inform recommendations. Pursue district energy opportunities for feasible locations at Not applicable. The proposed the multi -site and neighbourhood scales. redevelopment is on private property. Optimize building design for energy performance, particularly This is beyond the scope of this through passive daylighting and ventilations techniques which CHIA. This design principle has been limit the burden on mechanical systems. Buildings should considered and helps inform target an energy performance standard 25% above building recommendations. code requirements and are strongly encouraged to target net zero energy and carbon neutral design standards. Use renewable, sustainably manufactured and locally sourced This is beyond the scope of this materials, wherever possible. CHIA. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Use reclaimed and recycled materials, particularly those which This design principle has been may be salvaged on-site. considered and helps inform recommendations. Avoid demolition of buildings which may be adaptively reused No demolition of buildings are and have good design elements, particularly larger buildings associated with the proposed for which demolition and removal is expensive and wasteful. redevelopment. Instead, incorporate these buildings into new development through renovation and addition. Design new buildings to withstand climate change by being This is beyond the scope of this resistant to extreme weather conditions, anticipating CHIA. This design principle has been increased cooling demands through sustainable natural considered and helps inform ventilation and efficient mechanical systems, and by being recommendations. Design Principle Discussion adaptable to changes in the needs of occupants over time as new technologies and lifestyle choices evolve. Design lighting, landscaping, HVAC and other building systems This is beyond the scope of this and material finishes to enhance sustainability by being CHIA. This design principle has been highly -efficient, low -emitting and adaptable through the considered and helps inform smart controllability of systems (lighting, thermal comfort, recommendations. natural light/shading, ventilation, etc.). Design for water efficiency including Low Impact Design (LID). This is beyond the scope of this Prioritize a reduction in overall water use, innovative CHIA. This design principle has been stormwater management, and grey water collection and re- considered and helps inform use. All new development shall comply with the City of recommendations. Kitchener's Integrated Stormwater Management Master Plan criteria for stormwater design. Use green or high -albedo roofs for any large, flat roof Not applicable. No flat roofs are surfaces. Green roofs covering at least 25% of the total roof proposed as part of the proposed surface are preferred and should be implemented wherever redevelopment. possible. Exterior green walls should also be implemented where opportunities exist to do so. Design for pedestrian, cyclist and transit user adaptation to Not applicable. The proposed climate change through built form and landscaping which redevelopment is on private provides access to sunlight and shade, respite from heat, and property. protection from cumulative wind impacts. Design for climate resiliency, including increasingly frequent This is beyond the scope of this and extreme weather events. CHIA. This design principle has been considered and helps inform in recommendations. Provide LED lighting or newer, even more efficient lighting This design principle has been technologies. considered and helps inform recommendations. DESIGN FOR WILDLIFE A wide array of birds and wildlife share our urban The proposed redevelopment seeks environment, and their needs should be appropriately to retaining many of the existing considered when designing for Kitchener so that they may trees and mature vegetation which continue to thrive. supports birds and wildlife. Design Principle Discussion All site and landscape design should conserve, enhance and The proposed redevelopment seeks promote biodiversity of all forms and at all scales. to retaining many of the existing trees and mature vegetation which supports biodiversity. All development is to meet a Dark Sky compliant standard by This is beyond the scope of this using full cut-off fixtures with no uplighting (UO). A Dark Sky CHIA. This design principle has been standard reduces light pollution, improving the well-being, considered and helps inform health and safety of both people and wildlife and resulting in recommendations. less energy usage. Orient and place fixtures in such a way as to project light only This is beyond the scope of this on non -reflective surfaces. This will help reduce light pollution CHIA. This design principle has been from reflections and glare off of glass. considered and helps inform recommendations. Migratory birds move through cities at night. In order to This is beyond the scope of this preserve dark skies and to lessen migratory bird strikes, CHIA. This design principle has been consider automated lighting to reduce unnecessary interior considered and helps inform light. recommendations. Any architectural lighting at the top of buildings is to have an This is beyond the scope of this automated timer shut-off. CHIA. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Design the first 12m of a building to prevent bird strikes by This is beyond the scope of this limiting the potential for reflection of trees and sky through CHIA. This design principle has been material choice and detailing. considered and helps inform recommendations. Where glazing is prominent on the first 12m of a building, This is beyond the scope of this consider the use of treatments which can be applied to the CHIA. This design principle has been glass surface, creating visual markers for birds. considered and helps inform recommendations. Use awnings, canopies, recessions, projections and other This is beyond the scope of this architectural interventions to disrupt the reflection of trees CHIA. This design principle has been and sky in ground floor windows. considered and helps inform recommendations. Ventilation grates on a site also present a deadly hazard for This is beyond the scope of this birds. Ventilation grates should have a porosity no larger than CHIA. This design principle has been Design Principle Discussion 2cm x 2cm or should be covered with netting in order to considered and helps inform prevent birds from falling through. recommendations. Design sites to a accommodate existing migratory paths for The proposed redevelopment will local wildlife. retain a large portion of the existing tree canopy. This will accommodate migratory birds and wildlife. Where possible, schedule tree removals in winter to minimize This design principle has been impacts on seasonal wildlife habitats, including birds, bats, considered and helps inform bees and other fauna. recommendations. Consider the needs of wildlife, particularly migratory wildlife, This is beyond the scope of this when designing green roofs or other sustainable CHIA. This design principle has been infrastructure. It is often possible to achieve multiple considered and helps inform sustainable design objectives through a single intervention recommendations. when that intervention is considered holistically. MICROCLIMATES Mitigate against unwanted microclimatic impacts including Not applicable. The proposed wind, snow and shadow. Accommodate walking, cycling and redevelopment is on private transit use during all anticipated weather conditions and property. provide shelter and refuge for pedestrians Staff may require Wind and/or a Shadow studies wherever This is beyond the scope of this potential impacts may exist. The recommendations from CHIA. City of Kitchener staff will these studies are to be implemented through the site and determine if a Wind and/or Shadow building design. study is required as part of the site and building design. Design buildings to mitigate cumulative wind impacts through This is beyond the scope of this base design, stepbacks, projections, balcony design, building CHIA. City of Kitchener staff will massing and architectural articulation. Additionally, include determine if additional mitigative site wind mitigation measures such as vegetation and wind measures are needed. screening features. Provide for pedestrian and public refuge through canopies, Not applicable. The proposed colonnades and sheltered areas to offer protection from rain, redevelopment is on private wind, snow, and to provide shade. property. Design Principle Discussion Create compact, sensitively designed built forms which limit The proposed buildings do not shadowing on the public realm and adjacent properties. create shadows on the public realm or adjacent properties. Design to limit the need for 'extra' mitigation measures such The proposed redevelopment seeks as screens and trellises which may not suit the project's to include vegetative screening architectural vision. between the retained lot and the new lot on east side. No additional mitigative measures are proposed. FOUR SEASON & WINTER CITY DESIGN Design all buildings, streets and open spaces with regard for This is beyond the scope of this Kitchener's year-round weather conditions including local CHIA. This design principle has been prevailing winds, wind speeds, precipitation trends including considered and helps inform both rain and snow, and average access to sunlight. recommendations. Locate major glazing areas and transitional indoor and This is beyond the scope of this outdoor spaces-- including patios and porches-- to maximize CHIA. This design principle has been passive solar gain and access to sunlight. Add sun shades to considered and helps inform receive the best combination of winter warming, summer recommendations. shading and daylighting potential. Employ colourful, warm (3000k max), human -scaled site This is beyond the scope of this lighting and architectural accent lighting to enhance safety at CHIA. This design principle has been night and provide a more pleasant pedestrian experience. considered and helps inform recommendations. Bold, colourful materials and accents can also be employed to The proposed redevelopment seeks help brighten the urban environment during grey, dim winter to use colours from the heritage conditions. collection palette which are sympathetic to the existing heritage resource. Give preference to deciduous trees to the south and The proposed redevelopment seeks southwest of buildings or shared space where shade is to retain existing mature trees which desired. Deciduous trees will provide shade in the summer provide natural sun shade. This will while allowing sunlight to filter through in the winter. include a variety of species including deciduous trees. Design Principle Discussion Give preference to coniferous vegetation on the north and The proposed redevelopment seeks west sides of open outdoor spaces to protect areas from to retain mature trees which will prevailing winter winds. provide a natural barrier to prevailing winds. This will include a variety of species including coniferous vegetation. Strategically deploy masonry, concrete and other heat The proposed redevelopment absorbing materials to act as either interior or exterior heat- includes masonry and retaining mass walls, absorbing heat during the day and radiating it walls. The placement is directly back out at night. influenced by the landscape, topography, and needs of the new lots. COMPLETE STREETS Safety. Support safety and security with predictable, Not applicable. The proposed unobstructed routes that are connected by readily apparent redevelopment is on private and convenient crossings. Design streetscapes to promote a property. perceived and actual safe experience through at -grade active uses, lighting, slow vehicular movement speeds and other CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) measures. Multi -Modal Access. Provide safe access and offer convenient Not applicable. The proposed travel choices for users of all modes of transportation within redevelopment is on private the right-of-way. property. Spaces For Public Life. Create visually interesting and flexible Not applicable. The proposed public spaces for social, commercial and recreational activities redevelopment is on private that encourage people to spend time in the public realm. property. Provide for creatively designed, well integrated, easily accessible public bicycle parking and/or bike sharing stations Memorable Experiences. Create a distinctive, recognizable Not applicable. The proposed identity that provides meaning, assists wayfinding, reflects redevelopment is on private local history and supports a broad range of cultural traditions property. and identities. Ecological Sustainability. Extend the urban forest to enhance A conservation plan is recommended the community's long-term ecological function and assist in to minimize environmental impact increasing tree canopy coverage. Minimize environmental associated with construction. Design Principle Discussion impacts created through the design, construction and maintenance of streets. Convenient Connections. Facilitate efficient, convenient Not applicable. The proposed connections among all travel modes to all destinations. redevelopment is on private Provide for safe and convenient temporary conditions during property. periods of construction. Barrier -Free Access. Facilitate ease of use and access for all This design principle has been users by incorporating universal design principles and meeting considered and helps inform or exceeding Kitchener's standards for accessibility. recommendations. A Sense of Enclosure. Establish appropriate proportions of The proposed redevelopment is on street width to abutting building facade height to create a private property and has a large sense of enclosure and comfort for pedestrians. setback from the street. Maintainable. Plan and design for the ongoing maintenance Not applicable. The proposed of streetscapes, including trees/landscaping, sidewalks and redevelopment is on private bike lanes within the public realm. property. Improve Public Health. Design streets in ways that Not applicable. The proposed incorporate physical activity and health -conscious living into redevelopment is on private people's everyday routines, by considering the movement property. needs and desired amenities for active users. Coordinated. Design streets to accommodate the full range of Not applicable. The proposed utilities in a coordinated, comprehensive manner to ensure an redevelopment is on private attractive, uncluttered streetscape that is designed for property. people. This includes trees, stormwater management, natural gas, hydro, telecoms, and any other utilities. STREET DESIGN All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to public streets, pedestrian access, and cyclist routes. FOCAL POINTS AND GATEWAYS Use massing and architectural expression to create landmark Not applicable. The property is not a structures in locations that terminate views or streets. Use landmark and does not terminate Viewshed Analysis for prominent developments to views. empirically determine their visual impact and design with this in mind. Design Principle Discussion Protect existing views and vistas to and from existing and The vista to and from the existing planned built and natural landmarks. built heritage resource to the east property edge will be altered by the proposed redevelopment. It will be reduced in overall size. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Create new opportunities for focal points and gateways A new property edge is proposed to through the location of streets, intersections, walkways, separate the retained lot and the lookouts, built form and site design. new lots. On the proposed east lot, this will provide an opportunity to reinstate a focal point which has been lost over time. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Frame intersections by locating buildings and concentrating Not applicable. The property is not mass close to the street corner. located at an intersection. Provide public art in prominent locations to create Not applicable. The proposed recognizable focal points and gateways. redevelopment is on private property. WAYFINDING All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to how people orient and navigate the city. 01.2.6 PARKS & OPEN SPACE All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to public parks and public open spaces. 0.1.2.7 COMPATIBILITY SCALE AND TRANSITION Provide transitions in mass, height and density between areas The height of the proposed buildings of different scales and densities in order to mitigate potential is compatible with the height of impacts and preserve compatibility. buildings found in the surrounding area and adjacent properties. Design Principle Discussion Use periodic breaks in the street line facade, architectural The proposed redevelopment variety in materials, massing and detailing or minor variations includes the creation of two new lots in building setback, rhythm and alignment to add interest to and the retention of the existing lot. the streetscape, and to provide spaces for activities adjacent The facades are not contiguous and to the sidewalk. each lot will add architectural and natural interest to the streetscape. Provide strongly articulated buildings and respect the rhythm The proposed redevelopment is and pattern of the existing and planned context of the area. respectful of the rhythm and pattern This can be accomplished through the design of openings, of the surrounding area. materials, architectural features, details and projections, and balcony/amenity space design. Stepback the upper floors of taller buildings to create a Not applicable. The proposed human -scaled public realm, provide access to sunlight and redevelopment does not include any create adequate separation. tall buildings. The height and scale are in keeping with the surrounding area. Concentrate height and mass at nodes, street corners, and Not applicable. The proposed along corridors and arterial streets. redevelopment is in keeping with the height of surrounding buildings. Use thoughtful and creative landscape design to create Landscaping features are compatibility. This includes the size, placement and style of recommended to provide a natural public and private open spaces, using landscaping to provide edging between the retained lot and screening and help established a human -scaled streetscape, the proposed lots. This design and using planting beds, trees, shrubs and other landscaping principle has been considered and to enhance setbacks and reinforce boundaries and thresholds. helps inform recommendations. NEW DEVELOPMENT IN EXISTING NEIGHBOURHOODS Design infill buildings at a compatible scale with existing and The scale and set back of the planned surroundings. New buildings should respect planned proposed buildings are compatible and established heights and setbacks in the neighbourhood. with the surrounding neighbourhood. Ensure compatibility by providing appropriate building mass, The massing, design features, and design features and materials. materials of the proposed buildings are respectful of the existing building and surrounding area. Design Principle Discussion Use materials that are compatible with those found in the The proposed building material existing neighbourhood and maintain the rhythm of existing includes stone, Hardie board siding building separations and other spatial relationships. and asphalt shingles. These materials are consistent with the range of materials present throughout the neighbourhood. Complement existing facade openings (size, dimension, The detail and ornamentation of the orientation, rhythm and articulation), horizontal and vertical existing property and neighbouring massing elements, architectural features, stepbacks and properties is generally expressed in materiality. the roofline and overhanging eaves, dormers, and the prominent and defined main entrances. The proposed design is influence by the surrounding architecture. Use design elements compatible to those within the existing The proposed design is influence by neighbourhood, but do not replicate. the surrounding architecture. It does not seek to replicate neighbouring design elements. Vehicular parking and circulation is to respect existing and The proposed vehicular parking desired neighbourhood conditions. respects existing neighbourhood conditions. CULTURAL & NATURAL HERITAGE Preservation: protect, maintain and stabilize the heritage The proposed redevelopment seeks value of a cultural heritage resource including its context and to protect and maintain the built setting. heritage resources and associated heritage attributes. The majority of the surrounding landscape, including the formal garden area, will be preserved. Rehabilitation: repair or replace heritage attributes, construct This design principle has been compatible and reversible additions, integrate the cultural considered and helps inform heritage resource or components of the cultural heritage recommendations. resource into a new development, or adaptively reuse the cultural heritage resource. Design Principle Discussion Restoration: accurately reveal, recover or represent the state There are not restoration needs of a historic place or individual component as it appeared at a identified as part of the proposed particular period in history, while protecting its heritage value. redevelopment. New development on a site with a cultural heritage resource All significant built heritage and additions to cultural heritage resources should integrate resources will be conserved. The new, contrasting building materials in ways which respect the proposed new buildings are physical integrity of the cultural heritage resource. Conserve heritage and visually compatible with, value by being physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to, and distinguishable subordinate to, and distinguishable from the cultural heritage from the built heritage resource. resource. The majority of the significant landscape elements have been integrated into the proposed redevelopment. Sensitively rehabilitate cultural heritage resources to ensure This design principle has been equitable and inclusive usability for all while mitigating considered and helps inform impacts on heritage attributes. recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements in a sensitive way. New development near cultural heritage resources is to be This design principle has been compatible, with a high level of urban design, particularly as it considered and helps inform relates to views, streetscape character, and material recommendations. The proposed selection. new development has taken into consideration material selection, urban design, neighbourhood character, and views. Ensure that the design and location of lighting, streets, The new proposed buildings are signage, parking, public works facilities, grading, and other respectful of the integrity of the built features respects the integrity and character of cultural heritage resource. This design heritage resources. principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Proposals contemplating development on a property This CHIA satisfies this requirement. containing a cultural heritage resource or adjacent to protected heritage property may be required to provide a Heritage Impact Assessment and/or Conservation Plan as part of the application review process. Design Principle Discussion NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates to recognized natural heritage resources. The property does include a Natural Heritage Resource as defined by the Official Plans definition of Natural Heritage Features. SITE DESIGN 01.3.1. BUILT FORM MASSING Design massing to conserve and enhance local contextual The proposed massing for the new conditions, including significant buildings, open spaces, civic buildings will not impact the existing resources and pedestrian safety and comfort. built heritage resource and formal garden area. The proposed massing is in keeping with the surrounding context. Concentrate height and mass where it creates the best public The height and massing of the realm opportunities and the fewest unwanted impacts on proposed new buildings does not surroundings. impact the surroundings. It is in keeping with the surrounding context. Use projections, recesses, arcades, awnings, colour, materials The proposed redevelopment is and textures to reduce or diversify a building's perceived design to minimize perceived massing.it massing on the east lot through roof style. The western lot has been designed to be in keeping with neighbouring properties. Design massing to create visual interest, forge a sense of The proposed new building design identity and reinforce a human scale. creates visual interest and reinforce a human scale. Locate primary building entries to be visible and directly The proposed redevelopment has accessible from the public street. primary building entrances which will be visible and accessible from the public street. Design all elevations to provide transparency, architectural There are no blank walls or continuity, visual interest and natural surveillance onto underdeveloped facades associated Design Principle Discussion surrounding public and shared spaces. Consider the privacy of with the proposed redevelopment. building occupants and neighbours when designing all The proposed building designs elevations. Avoid blank walls or underdeveloped facades, as provide architectural continuity and most buildings have visual impacts in all directions. visual interest to the surrounding context. The privacy of the occupants and neighbours is increased with the retention of existing trees and vegetation. Changes in material or colour alone are not enough to provide The various architectural elements articulation on a building. Such changes should accompany (dormers, windows, roof lines etc.), changes in the building mass, or at a minimum, be separated overall design, colours, and material by significant three-dimensional architectural elements. selection provide articulation to the proposed buildings. Design street facing facades with greater transparency and The propose buildings have street articulation at a human scale. facing facades and have been designed to a human scale. Design the built form with regard for adjacent properties to The proposed new building design is create coherent streetscapes. in keeping with the adjacent properties. It will not detract from the existing streetscape. Design the scale of buildings to offer a welcoming Not applicable. The proposed environment for pedestrians. Large blocks should be broken redevelopment is on private up with multiple buildings, generally not longer than 70m property. New lots are proposed at each. 24m which is in keeping with zoning requirements. In most circumstances, buildings should occupy the majority The proposed new buildings occupy of the lot frontage. the majority of the lot frontage. Ensure that all accessory building features and components Not applicable. There are no are well integrated into the building design and do not proposed accessory buildings. negatively impact the streetscape. 01.3.2. SHARED SPACES All of the design principles associate with the section were reviewed and are not applicable. This section relates specially to shared spaces. The proposed redevelopment is on private property. LANDSCAPING Design Principle Discussion Use continuous landscaping to reinforce pedestrian areas The existing pathways in the wooded within a site. area will not be impacted by the proposed design. Select vegetation with regard for their tolerance to urban This design principle has been conditions, such as road salt or heat. Give preference to considered and helps inform native species and a mixture of vegetation that provides visual recommendations about the interest and wildlife habitat and aligns with objectives for integration of new landscape screening, safety and four season design. elements. Utilize landscape design to mitigate microclimatic impacts and This design principle has been enhance four -season viability. considered and helps inform recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Design landscape and hardscape elements to provide colour, This design principle has been having regard for seasonal changes. considered and helps inform recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Provide a minimum 3.Om wide landscape area, in addition to This design principle has been any walls or fences, at the edges of sites adjacent to considered and helps inform residential or institutional properties. recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Plant trees, shrubs, and ground cover on any unbuilt portions This design principle has been of the site that are not required for other site functions. This considered and helps inform includes any areas reserved for future phases of development. recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Use green, low impact development (LID) and stormwater This design principle has been management technologies wherever appropriate. considered and helps inform recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Protect and feature heritage, specimen and mature trees on All significant trees will be retained. site by minimizing grade changes, protecting against This includes the unique species construction impacts and preserving permeable surfaces. identified in the tree management plan. A conservation plan will address any potential impacts from construction. Design Principle Discussion Provide landscape areas between the building and the This design principle has been sidewalk with plant beds, planters, trees, street furniture and considered and helps inform walkways to the public sidewalk. recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Where trees are proposed within landscaped areas, adequate This design principle has been soil volumes are to be planned in order that trees may achieve considered and helps inform a mature canopy size. recommendations about the integration of new landscape elements. Coordinate and integrate all landscaping with above and Not applicable. The proposed below grade utilities, telecom equipment and transit redevelopment does not impact infrastructure including stops and waiting areas. telecom equipment or transit infrastructure. URBAN FORESTRY Provide landscaping that positively contributes to Kitchener's The retention of many existing trees urban forestry objectives. positively contributes to the urban forest canopy. Provide enhanced boulevard treatment by planting large Not applicable. The proposed canopy street trees where adequate soil volumes are available redevelopment is not adjacent to a or can be provided, consistent with the City's urban forestry boulevard. objectives. Where boulevard locations and lot frontages are restricted, Not applicable. The proposed consider a range of alternative suitable locations for public redevelopment is not adjacent to a and private trees. boulevard. Retain and incorporate existing trees and other natural The proposed redevelopment seeks features into new development planning where possible, to retain and incorporate existing using tree protection and conservation techniques to protect trees and other natural features into the integrity of the root soil zone as well as the existing the new development. The existing growing and drainage characteristics of the site. dripline and tree management plan were taking into consideration. A conservation plan is recommended to ensure effective conservation of natural features during the construction period. SIGNS All of the design principles associate with the section were reviewed and are not applicable. There are no signs associated with the proposed redevelopment. Design Principle Discussion PUBLIC ART All of these principles were reviewed and are not applicable. There is no public art proposed as part of the proposed redevelopment. LIGHTING Design site lighting for all building and user needs, including The proposed lighting for the new the public realm, pedestrian and amenity areas, transit stops, buildings is in keeping with typical parking areas, servicing areas and building entry and egress residential buildings. areas. Supplement site lighting with human -scaled lighting fixtures The proposed lighting for the new (either standalone or affixed to buildings) in order to buildings is in keeping with typical accentuate and animate buildings and shared spaces, provide residential buildings. enhanced safety for pedestrians and increase opportunities for active use programming. Design lighting to minimize glare and light spilling onto The proposed lighting for the new surrounding areas. All site lighting- including porch and other buildings is in keeping with typical wall mounted lighting-- is to be full cut-off (uplight zero or UO) residential buildings. and dark sky compliant. Provide lighting that is appropriate to the street character and The proposed lighting for the new ground -floor use, with a focus on pedestrian areas. buildings is in keeping with typical residential buildings. Use pedestrian scaled lighting to clearly identify pedestrian Not applicable. The proposed routes, and illuminate public spaces. development is on private property. Provide uniform lighting by installing a greater number of This design principle has been fixtures at lower wattages and mounting heights. considered and helps inform recommendations. Site lighting is to have a correlated colour temperature (CCT) This design principle has been maximum of 3000K, or demonstrated equivalent. considered and helps inform recommendations Provide lighting that is consistent and human -scaled. Ensure This design principle has been that site lighting comprehensively addresses safety objectives. considered and helps inform Avoid creating glare, 'hot spots' or excessively shadowed recommendations. areas. Using energy efficient lamps and avoid over -lighting, while This design principle has been prioritizing safety. considered and helps inform recommendations. Design Principle Discussion Use bollards, wall -mounted or lower -scale pole fixtures along This design principle has been pedestrian paths to provide human -scaled and ambient considered and helps inform lighting. recommendations. VEHICULAR ACCESS& PARKING Plan parking areas to be flexible and adaptable to future The proposed parking is in keeping conditions including decreasing dependence on private with typical residential buildings. vehicles, increasing usage of carshare, rideshare, public transit, active transportation, electric and self -driving vehicles, increasing severe weather events brought on by climate change, and the increasing scarcity and value of land. Avoid placing parking between a building and the street or Parking is proposed to be attached anywhere within the front yard. at the side of the new buildings. Provide parking at the side and rear of buildings. Parking is proposed to be attached at the side of the new buildings. Clearly define primary vehicle routes on the site through the The driveways will be clearly defined use of signage, curbing, bollards, and line painting. Separate by curbs, retaining walls and/or parking areas from primary vehicle routes and driveway natural vegetation. entrances to streets. Provide conveniently accessible and easily visible locations for Not applicable. The proposed bicycle parking. redevelopment is on private property. The inclusion of designated bike parking will be at the discretion of the property owner/s. Locate parking areas for barrier -free parking spaces in close The proposed parking is barrier free proximity to building entrances. and attached to the side of new buildings. Parking areas are to accommodate the safe movement of Parking is proposed to be attached pedestrians both on and off site. at the side of the new buildings. This provides the safe movement in and out of parking areas. Provide landscaping around the perimeter of parking areas The proposed redevelopment will and laneways. integrate existing landscaping elements along proposed driveways. Use landscaping to screen parking areas, to avoid illumination The proposed redevelopment design of adjacent properties and the public realm from automobile includes curved driveways. This will headlights. work to help screen the garage and parking areas. The placement of the garages also seeks to avoid Design Principle Discussion illumination of the headlights on the adjacent properties. Provide raised traffic islands to break up large parking areas, Not applicable. The proposed to a suitable scale and sized to accommodate shrub and tree parking is on private property. planting. Select planting material that is easy to maintain, hardy and pollution and drought tolerant. Ensure parking lot planting does not obstruct views of Not applicable. The proposed approaching traffic, pedestrians and cyclists. parking is on private property. Avoid the creation of entrapment areas and dead end parking No entrapment areas or dead-end aisles. parking aisles are proposed. Provide adequate lighting levels and uniform coverage in This design principle has been parking areas, service utility areas, and beneath cantilevered considered and helps inform portions of the building. recommendations. Link parking areas on abutting commercial properties to Not applicable. Only one parking provide for movement between lots. area is proposed for each new lot. Provide intuitive and comfortable access for park-and-ride or Not applicable. The proposed multi -modal transit users, particularly if a transit stop is redevelopment is on private adjacent to or located on a site. property. Above grade structured parking has similar impacts on the Not applicable. The proposed urban environment as any other building typology or use and redevelopment is on private will be held to the same design standards. See the Design for property. Structured Parking section of this manual for more detailed guidelines. DRIVEWAYS Driveway access should be located off of side streets or lanes Not applicable. There are no side wherever possible. streets or lanes associated with the property. Share and consolidate vehicular access to parking areas Not applicable. Only one driveway is between adjacent properties in order to reduce the extent of proposed for each new lot. interruption along the sidewalk and the streetscape. Maximize the distance between site access driveways as well The proposed redevelopment is not as the distance between site access driveways and street located directly at an intersection. intersections. Locate driveways with regard for the function of The proposed new east lot will share the site and the public right-of-way. a small portion of the driveway with the retained lot. The west lot will create a new driveway. Design Principle Discussion Ensure pedestrian and cyclist safety and maximize visibility. This design principle has been considered and helps inform recommendations. Driveways are not to conflict with transit stop locations. Not applicable. The proposed redevelopment is on private property. Provide pedestrian crossings over driveways in a contrasting, Not applicable. The proposed alternative material. redevelopment is not associated with a pedestrian crossing. EMERGENCY ACCESS The design principles associated with this section are beyond the scope of this CHIA. City of Kitchener planning staff will determine requirements related to emergency access. SERVICING AND UTILITIES The design principles associated with this section are beyond the scope of this CHIA. City of Kitchener planning staff will determine requirements related to servicing and utilities. WASTE & RECYCLING The design principles associated with this section are beyond the scope of this CHIA. City of Kitchener planning staff will determine requirements related to waste and recycling. SNOW STORAGE The design principles associated with this section are beyond the scope of this CHIA. City of Kitchener planning staff will determine requirements related to snow removal and storage. Appendix G: Region of Waterloo Practical Guidelines for Infill and New Construction in a Heritage or Mature Neighbourhood. L M"N\f P17"a Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties Mew Covttcac, (/Oil /fit 11cro-Ira." /Ve, 4X oa-1,4f oh In this guide: Small-scale Historic Infill r Elements of Successful Infill Design Setback Orientation Y scale Proportion Rhythm r Massing Height Materials Colour Roof Shape Detail and Ornamentation Landscape features Secondary Buildings Parking r Neighbourhood Composition Neighbourhood Amenities r' Demolition 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. 1454224 Page 1 of 9 Small-scale Historic Infill L7 //(/I/ Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage P 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 ■ Raw 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 Proportion Height Orientation Rhythm Materials Scale Massing Colour 1454224 Page 2 of 9 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage 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. 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 fagade 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 - mage: Site lines used to determine visibility of taller infill at the back of a common object, such as cars. It is of as seen from the street (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, also the relative size of building 7006, p.4i 1454224 Page 3 of 9 L M7-f%/W 7-�= 1, 1 4 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage 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 fagade 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 rBn�T a street, especially in areas with TTtM 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 Height ll(illl Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage The height of walls, cornices, roofs, bays, chimneys and towers all contribute to the I I character of a building and neighbourhood. a New buildings should be designed to respect Li existing building heights, although they do not LJ necessarily need to be exactly the same Image: Undesirable example of infill housing. The new height. Generally, if a new building is more construction is substantially larger than adjacent heritage than half -to -one storey higher or lower than buildings (Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd, 2906, existing buildings that are all the same height, 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 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 M Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage 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 r— garages and sheds, are i3 "El o t 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 Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Pry 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 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." htto://ottawa.ca/sites/ottawa.ca/files/miprated/files/cao133008.odf 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 Pr , http://www.edmonton.ca/city government/urban planning and design/residential- infiILaspx Helen Lardner Conservation & Design Pty Ltd. (June 2006). "Guidelines for infill development in heritage areas in Hobsons Bay." www. hobsons bay.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/infil Is-in-seeking-a-balance-for-oregon- h i stori c -d i stri cts/4.VOOx59 h Ovls Saint John Heritage. (2010). "Practical Conservation Guideline: Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-law." City of Saint John, Planning & Development. http://www,saintoohn.ca/site/media/SaintJohn/By-Law°/420Eng,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