Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK Minutes - 2020-09-01HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER1, 2020CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee held an electronic meeting this date, commencingat 4:01p.m. Present:A. Reid -Chair Councillors D. Chapmanand J. Gazzolaand Ms. K. Huxted, Ms. S. Hossack, Ms. B. Mueller, andMessrs. P. Ciuciura, D. Gundrum, R. Parnell,S. Strohackand D. Vongphakdy. Staff:V. Grohn, Heritage Planner D. Saunderson, Committee Administrator 1.DSD-20-105-HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2020-V-014 -226 QUEEN STREET SOUTH -CONSTRUCTION OF THIRD STOREY REAR ADDITION, NEW EXTERIOR STAIRCASE, NEW SECOND STOREY BALCONY GUARD RAIL The Committee considered DevelopmentServices Department report DSD-20-105, dated August 18, 2020recommendingapproval of a third storey rear addition, new exterior staircase, and new second storey balcony guard rail on the property municipally addressed as 226 Queen Street South located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (VPAHCD), whichis designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.Ms. V. Grohn presented the Report, noting staff are recommending approval of the subject HPA including one condition as outlined in the Report. Mr. J. Gerrardwas in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. In response to questions,he advised the addition will not be visible from the street. The following motion was voted on and was Carried Unanimously. On motion byCouncillor D. Chapman- it was resolved: “That, pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2020-V-014, as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-20-105 be approved to permit the construction of a third storey rear addition, new exterior staircase, and new second storey balcony guard rail on the property municipally addressed as 226 Queen Street South, in accordance with the plans and supplementary information submitted with the application and subject to the following condition: 1.That the final building permit drawings be reviewed and heritage clearance provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.” 2.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA)–518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD The Committee considered a memorandum dated August 18, 2020 regarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as 518 Bridgeport Road. The HIA addresses a proposal for a severance at the 518 Bridgeport Road East, which is listed on the Municipal Heritage Register. Ms. V. Grohn provided opening remarks stating the draft HIA was prepared in support of a Consent Application to sever the property into three lots. She stated staff are seeking feedback from the Committee members on the HIA that will be taken into consideration as staff completes their review of the HIA and the planning applications. Ms. A. Barnes, Amy Barnes Consulting, Mr. S. Patterson, Patterson Planning Consultants Inc. and Mr. S. O’Neill were in attendance in support of the HIA. Ms. Barnes presented the HIA, which included; a background and introduction to the property; an overview of the completed Tree Survey / Tree Management Plan and Inspection Report; an evaluation summary; overview on the proposed development; the proposed impact assessment; a review of the alternatives; and, the mitigation measures and recommendations.She further advised included in the recommendationsit suggests theretained portionof the propertyincluding the historical dwelling as well as some of the garden features, be designatedunder Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 2020-18-CITY OF KITCHENER 2.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) –518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD (CONT’D) Questions were raised regarding the driveway for the existing dwelling. Ms. Barnes advised the existing driveway will be maintained through the registration of an easement on title of the newly severed property. In response to further questions, she advisedthere is a recommendation within the HIA todesignate the property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act,andthe designation should include some of the terrace area that surroundsthe dwelling. Ms. Grohn advised staff through the PlanningActApplicationfor the severanceare anticipated to request a condition to designate the retained parcel containing the heritage dwelling through that process. Questions were raised regarding the Zoning on the property and what would be required under the Comprehensive review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZby). Mr. S. Patterson advised the existing zoning requests a lot area of 929 sq.m. and a lot width of 24m. He stated under the new R1 and R2 Zoning under CRoZby those requirements are being maintained. Mr. P.Ciuciuracommented the dwelling on the retained parcelhad a unobscured vista which was demonstrated on Page 2-31 of the agenda looking from the house to the yard. He stated in his opinion, the proposed severance is cutting off that view, and that the loss of that view is a missed opportunity. Ms. Barnes noted there is a willingness on the property owner’s part to reinstate vegetation to help minimize the views to the adjacent properties. She commented there are also a number of mature trees on the easternedge of the property that will still provide a meaningfulvisual buffer. Ms. A. Reid stated in her opinion,the HIA was disappointing, noting the evaluation criteria did not provide adequate acknowledgement to the dwelling or property. She indicated the property is unique to the community and the home and vegetation assist in providing noise barriers for the adjacent properties. She provided an overview of a number of evaluation criteria within the report, including: 8.1.1.ii, 8.1.2.iii, 8.1.3.i, 8.2.2.ii, 8.2.3.i, 8.2.3.ii, Table 5 –Ownership, Table 6 -Quality of Life,all note no contribution to the heritage value of the property or are lacking sufficient detail related to the heritage significance of the dwelling. She expressed further concern with the construction of additional driveways on Bridgeport Road noting safety concerns andissues related tovehicle congestionat the intersection of Bridgeport Road and Lancaster Street. She stated in her opinion the recommended alternative in this instance should be “do nothing”. In response, Ms. Barnes advised prior to finalizing the HIA, she approached Heritage Planning staff with a list of heritage attributes for the property and they were mutually agreed upon. She noted the comments regarding theproperty hosting previous Prime Ministersand statedthat information wasnot historically accurate. She further advised the only trees proposed to be removed are those that were recommended in the Tree Preservation report. In response to the concerns raised regarding the noise buffer for the adjacent properties, she stated the property directly across the street is a church. Ms. S. Hossack stated in her opinion,the HIA was very detailed and it was clear that the property does meet the criteriafor designation. She commenteddesignation should be actively pursued. She noted it would be her preference to designate the property prior to severance to retain some control over the future development. She further advised it is her beliefthat option 4 outlined in the HIA will preserve the heritage dwelling. She questioned whether there was any archeological information for the subject property. Ms. Barnes noted an archeologicalassessment was outside of the scope of an HIA and would not be included within a heritage report. She stated during the initial review of the property nothing of archeological significancewas identified. 3.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA)ADDENDUM -WILLIAMSBURGSOUTHCOMMUNITY -1255-1295 FISCHER HALLMAN ROAD & 1385 BLEAMS ROAD The Committee considered a memorandum dated August 27, 2020 regarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) Addendum regarding a proposal for a Major Modification to a Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-09201 and associated Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications. The subject property, municipally addressed as 1255-1295Fischer Hallman Road, HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 2020-19-CITY OF KITCHENER 3.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA)ADDENDUM -WILLIAMSBURGSOUTHCOMMUNITY -1255-1295 FISCHER HALLMAN ROAD & 1385 BLEAMS ROAD(CONT’D) is listed as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest andcontains a farmhouse (Henhoeffer Heritage House). The subject property is adjacent to 1385 Bleams Road (Williamsburg Schoolhouse), which is a designated property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Ms. V. Grohn provided opening remarksindicating anHIA wasprepared by Carson Woods Architect Limited dated March 2009 and revised November 2013 (2013 HIA) which was submitted in support of applications to develop and rezone the subject lands to facilitate a new subdivision.She indicated 2013 HIA was presented for comment at the April 1, 2014 Heritage Kitchener Committee meetingand subsequently the 2013 HIA was approved by the Director of Planning in 2014. She noted changes to the design of the draft plan of the subdivision, which resulted in the requirement to complete an addendum HIA.She noted the proposed changes outlined in these applications impact mitigating measures 1 and 3 above and include:an increase in height limit south of the Henhoeffer Heritage House. The 2013 HIA recommended a height limit of 8 metres for any necessary additions to the Henhoeffer House, 18 metres for buildings immediately southeast and northwest of the house, and 24 metres for the balance of the block. A revised recommended height limit schedule is now proposed to include an 11.5 metre high building block south of the Henhoeffer Heritage House; and, an increase in density on the block adjacent to 1385 Bleams Road (Williamsburg Schoolhouse). The 2013 HIA recommended a 30 metre (10 storey) height limit on the entirety of this block. The revised recommended height limit schedule includes a range in heights from 14 metres to 90.6 metres (or 4 storeys to 28 storeys) on the block adjacent to the Williamsburg Schoolhouse.Ms. Grohn further advised staff are seeking input and comments on the proposed changes to the approved Draft Plan of Subdivision and associated Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications, as outlined in the HIA Addendum. There were concerns raised regarding the length of time in which the Committee had an opportunity to review the HIA Addendum to provide meaningful feedback this date. Questions were raised on whether the matter could be deferred to the following meeting. It was noted that there were several delegations in attendance this date to present the HIA Addendum and that no motion or decision of the Committee was required. Ms. Grohn noted staff were onlyseeking input and commentsfrom the Committee this date. Messrs R. Anderson, C. Pidgeon, A. Vandersluis, J. Bannon and M. Ninomiya were in attendance in support of the HIA Addendum. Mr. Anderson provided an overview of the HIA Addendum, including: an overview of the proposed building height changes; as well as, the shadow study and its results. In response to questions, Mr. Anderson advised the Henhoeffer Heritage Housewas previously intended to be a community centre with a proposed addition. He indicated the house is not intended to be part of a condominium development and no longer requires the additional space to accommodate an addition. In response to further questions, Mr. Pidgeon indicated there is an area adjacent to the house that is intended to be designated open space.Mr. Anderson further advised there are no issues related to the heritage structure related to parking, stating the proposed adjacent developments will be fully sufficient with off-street parking. Questions were raised regarding the proposed high-rise buildings adjacent to the heritage building. Mr. Pidgeon advised the buildings on Block 1 were previously proposed to be 20m in height, they have since been reduced to 14m in height. He stated the proposed changes now have a stepped approach moving away from the heritage dwelling. He indicated the diagram provided in the HIA demonstrates the four blocks built out in their total massing. He stated that is an absolute maximum built form. He indicated the properties will need to address all Zoning requirements such as required setback and parking and will not mimic the diagram once constructed. Mr. Anderson stated the purpose of the proposed diagram was to demonstrate the impacts of shadowing on the heritage dwelling. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 2020-20-CITY OF KITCHENER 3.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA)ADDENDUM -WILLIAMSBURGSOUTHCOMMUNITY -1255-1295 FISCHER HALLMAN ROAD & 1385 BLEAMS ROAD(CONT’D) Ms. S. Hossack stated it appeared the proposed changes to the futuredevelopment lessened the impacts on the heritage dwellings. She indicated she appreciated the proposed step backs. She questioned whether the Committee would have further opportunity to comment on the proposed development further in the development phase. Ms. Grohn advised as the heritage dwelling is a Part IV property under the Ontario Heritage Act, she anticipates further opportunity as the development proceeds for the Committee’s participation. Ms. K. Huxted expressed some disappointment with the Henhoeffer Heritage Housebecoming part of a condominium development, stating it does remove the dwelling from access of the public realm. Ms. B. Muellerstated although she was appreciative of the stepped transitions of the proposed development, it would be her preference to see the Heritage Housemaintained in a low-rise country-feeltype setting. Ms. A. Reid further advised that any member having additional comments could forward them via email to Victoria Grohn at Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca.It was noted staff intend on reviewing the addendum andthe comments from the Committee, which will help in making a recommendation to the Director of Planning on whether to approve the Addendum HIA. 4.STATUS UPDATES -HERITAGE BEST PRACTICES UPDATE AND 2020PRIORITIES -HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOLLOW-UPS Ms. V. Grohn advised she had no status updates for the Committee this date. 5.ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at5:29p.m. D. Saunderson Committee Administrator