Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2021-60 - Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-015 - 59 Marianne Dorn TrailREPORT TO:Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING:May 4, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Bustamante, Rosa, Director of Planning,519-741-2200ext. 7319 PREPARED BY:Grohn, Victoria, Heritage Planner,519-741-2200ext. 7041 WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward 4 DATE OF REPORT:April 20, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD-2021-60 SUBJECT:Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-015 59 Marianne Dorn Trail Masonry, soffit, and roof repairs and installation of skylights RECOMMENDATION: Thatpursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-015 be approved to permit masonry, soffit and roof repairs and the installation of skylights on the property municipally addressed as 59 Marianne Dorn Trail, in accordance with the supplementary information submitted with the application and subject to the following conditions: 1.That a test panel of the proposed masonry work be undertaken to the satisfaction of City Heritage Planning staff before proceeding with such work on the entire building; and 2.That final building permit drawings be reviewed and heritage clearance provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of any required building permit. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to present the alterations detailed in HPA-2021-IV-015. The key finding of this report is that the alterations will not adversely affect the heritage character of the building or property. There are no financial implications associated with this report. Community engagement includedconsultation with the Heritage Kitchener committee. This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 3 - 1 BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA- 2021-IV-015 which is seeking permission to undertake masonry, soffit and roof repairs and install skylights on the property municipally addressed as 59 Marianne Dorn Trail. The subject property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Actand was formerly addressed as 324 Old Huron Road. REPORT: The subject property is located on the southeast side of Marianne Dorn Trail in the Brigadoon community, near Templewood Drive and Old Huron Road. The property was designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act in 2013. Location Map: 59 Marianne Dorn Trail th The property features a one-and-a-half storey mid-19century stone cottage built in the Georgian architectural style. The property is associated with the Wildfong family, early settlers of the Biehn and Bechtel Tracts. Designation by-law 2013-114 identifiesthatthe heritage value of the property resides in the following heritage attributes: All building elevations; Symmetrical façade; Stone construction, including random-coursed fieldstone walls; Door openings, including front door with transom; Window openings, including unusually small window openings; Vestiges of whitewash under rear porch wall; Roof and roofline (excluding rear shed dormer), including: o Gable roof; 3 - 2 o Roof pitch, and o Return eaves; and Brick oven in former basement kitchen. Front Elevation: 59 Marianne Dorn Trail Masonry and Soffit Repairs The property owner has identified holes within the fieldstone walls which require sealing to reduce moisture and other potential damages. The previous property owners attempted to address these damages by using spray foam and stuffing holes with cloth material. The current owners are seeking to properly repoint the fieldstone walls using mortar deemed appropriate by an experienced mason. These works are proposed to be generally located along the front façadeof the property. Existing Holes in Fieldstone Walls 3 - 3 The property owner has also identified deficiencies to the existing soffits. To ensure further deterioration does not occur, the owner is proposing to repair and/or replace the soffits using wood cut to size and painted white to match the existing. Soffits Requiring Repairs/Replacement Roof Repair and Skylights The roof of the property is visibly sagging where beams have broken. The property owner proposes to reinforce the interior of the roofwith wood and change the way the load of the roof is carried. The owner, in consultation with a structural engineer, proposes to install ridge beams supported with pillars instead of the existing tie beam system. While these alterations are interior to the existing dwelling, and typically such works do not require approvals through the Heritage Permit process, the pitch of the roof is an identified heritage attribute of this property and these changes will positively affect this attribute and restore the original pitch of the roof. In addition, the property owners propose the installation of two south-facing skylights, approximately 22.5 inches by 46.5 inches in size to accommodate additional light into the second storey of the home. The owner is proposing skylights so as not to adversely affect the stone façade of the dwelling nor the symmetrically placed window openings. The skylights will not be visible from the public right-of-way, however this is an alteration that affects an identified heritage attribute of the property by creating a new window opening. 3 - 4 Image of Proposed South-Facing Skylights Additional Works The property owner is proposing the construction of a fence around a portion of the property and a knee-high wall across the front of theproperty. While these works are noted in the Heritage Permit Application form submitted, additional information about these works is required, particularly with respect to location, material, and dimensions. As such, these works are not subject to HPA-2021-IV-015 and will be considered as part of a future Heritage Permit Application. Additionally, the property owners are also proposing a privacy screen across the rear of the property. While not subject to a Heritage Permit Application given the location and type of structure, it is noted that this privacy screen is proposed to be constructed of wood, be approximately 9 feet height high and constructed in two segments, 31 feet and 11 feet respectively, for a total of 42 feet in length.This is in keeping with the City’s Fence By-law requirements. Heritage Planning Comments In reviewing the merits of the application, Heritage Planning staff note the following: The proposal to repair the fieldstone walls using materials and methods consistent with good conservation practices follows Parks Canada’s Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada; The property owner proposes to use an experienced and qualified mason to undertake the stone masonry repairs; The soffit repair/replacement will be consistent with the existing; The interior roof repairs will restore the original pitch of the roof and positively affect this identified heritage attribute; The installation of south-facing skylights will not be visible from the front of the dwelling and will not negatively affect the attributes of the property; The works proposed will not adversely affect the heritage character of the building and property. In accordance with the Heritage Permit Application form, the approval of an application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation, including, but not limited to, the requirements of the 3 - 5 Ontario Building Code and Zoning By-law. In this regard, staff confirm that a Building Permit is required to undertake the roof repairs. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM – This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchenercommittee meeting. CONSULT – Heritage Kitchener has been consulted regarding the subject Heritage Permit Application. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: Ontario Heritage Act APPROVEDBY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-015 3 - 6 HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS th Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca STAFF USE ONLY Date Received:Accepted By:Application Number: HPA-2021- PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 1.NATURE OF APPLICATION ExteriorInteriorSignage DemolitionNew ConstructionAlterationRelocation 2.SUBJECT PROPERTY Municipal Address:59 Marianne Dorn Trail Legal Description (if know): Reference Plan 58R-17549, formally known as a portion of 324 Old Huron Road Building/Structure Type: Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement?YesNo 3.PROPERTY OWNER Name:Sebastian Amadeus Prins Address:59 Marianne Dorn Trail City/Province/Postal Code:Kitchener, ON, N2R 0H4 Phone:1.647.687.9049 Email:sebastian.prins@gmail.com 4.AGENT (if applicable) Name:Click or tap here to enter text. Company Address:Click or tap here to enter text. City/Province/Postal Code:Click or tap here to enter text. Phone:Click or tap here to enter text. Email:Click or tap here to enter text. 3 - 7 5.WRITTEN DESCRIPTION Provide a written description of the project including any conservation methods proposed. Provide such detail as materials to be used, measurements, paint colours, decorative details, whether any original building fabric is to be removed or replaced, etc. Use additional pages as required. Please refer to the City of Kitchener Heritage Permit Application Submission Guidelines for further direction. There are three items, each to be considered individually, which we would like to undertake. Item 1: Façade repair There are multiple holes/gaps/openings which require sealing to reduce possible moisture/pest entry and related damages. The previous owner seems to have used spray foam (which does notmatch the aesthetics of the façade) or stuffed holes with old clothing. Proper repointing with lime mortar is required to restore the façade and prevent deterioration of the heritage value of the home. In addition, the soffits need to be repaired/replacedto prevent continued deterioration. Style would be maintained, with wood cut to size, and painted white to match. For both repairs described under Item 1, see the at for images of damage, as well as image of what current stonework/soffits look like.If particular project is in keeping with the objectives of that grant. Item 2: Fencing We are keen to put up some fences on the property. The first proposed fence is a high,nearly six foodwooden panel fence between the adjacent properties for backyard privacyon the north and south side of the property.The south side of the property already has a low, chain link fence, with the northside of the property having no fence whatsoever.There is already a high wooden fence on the west side of the property. We propose leaving the eastern side of the property unfenced, as there is contextual heritage value in view of the ravine historically as a source of water, and now as a view. Across the front of the property, we would like to consider a low, knee-high stone wall. We would match the construction of the knee- using similarly sized fieldstone, with ample mortar between stones. In addition, we want a small, sidewalk-facing stone bench built into the wall. If the city is open to it, we would be keen to have a heritage plaqueorsignpostspeaking to the history of the property adjacent to the stone bench.This plaque/signpost settlement and construction of the cottage, as well as note the Georgianarchitectural elements. will highlight location and provide sample photos to help the reader understand style. Item 3: Roof Repair and Skylight One of the protected elements under By-Law 2013-114is the pitch of the roof.Dueto a lack ofmaintenance, the roof is visiblysagging where beams have broken.In order to repair and enhance the support,a structural engineer hired on behalf of the homeownersuggests 3 - 8 reinforcingthe interior of the roof with wood, and changing the way theload is carried moving away from the current tie beamsystem,to a ridgebeamsupported with pillars running to through to the roof. Given the poor insulation of the roof, this is an opportunity to move away from the existing blown insulation (which, at a minimum would need to be redistributedto ensure better heat retention) to spray foam insulation, which can have highR-values with lower depth. Finally, the homeowners hope to use this opportunity to instaltwo south facing skylights in the house -neither visible from the road, installed in a fashion to preserveoverall house symmetry(along the median plane). This will highlight location and provide sample photos to help the reader understand proposed style. Thestructural engineers stamped design is attached as Item 4. For the verticalbeams proposed in thedrawings, thehomeownerwill use beams matching the existing vertical beams. 6.REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work: Item 1 is necessary. If not taken in a timely fashion, it increases the chance of additional damage to the façade/roof related to moistureand/or pest (entry and related damages). The current attempts to repair the façade are non-conforming to the heritage act (e.g. spray foam on the exterior diminishes the heritage value of the property, and is not a period method of repair). In addition, attempts to fill holes with old clothing is both a stop gap, as well as diminishes the heritage value of the property (detracts from the overall look). Item 2 is not necessary. It provides the current owners with some increased privacy, and barrier between the property line and the road (safety, for future kids, pets, etc).The owners have attempted to enhance theheritage value of the property while meeting our personal goals by building a front wall that echoes the period style and has a location where the history of theWildfong cottage can be celebrated (stone bench, and plaque/signpost location). Item 3 is necessary.If not taken in a timely fashion, it will increase the wear and tear on portions of the shingling and roof in sagging portions. Withoutthis work, the pitch of the roof will not conform to the originalpitch protected in By-law 2013-114.As a less necessary aspect,to be considered individually, the homeowner would liketo add additional natural light upstairs, with no modification to the heritage stone wall (as, skylight is through the roof, which is made of modern materials). Installation would be only on the south facing slope of the roof, which is not visible from the road when viewing the property (as, north facing slope of the roof is visible).The skylight selected would not bowed out from the roofit would lay flat, and be inline with the pitch. 3 - 9 Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage Conservation District Plan: For Item 1: While this involves interacting with a protected element of the property, repair must be completed for long-term upkeep. It is untenable to leave cracks in the mortar for extended periods of time. The owners propose repair in a fashion that is consistent with the heritage aesthetic of the property, including the use of lime mortar in the pointing of the brick. We do not believe the soffits are a protected feature of the property. The owners propose using woodcut to size and painted the same white accent colour of the rest of the wood on the roof. Given the relative simplicity of this repair, and the understanding that the feature is not protected, the owners propose doing the repair themselves. For Item 2: By-Law 2013-114 articulates that there is contextual value in the stone cottages proximity to the valley landscape originally for functional purposes (proximity to water), and now to provide a view of the valley landscape. In acknowledgement of this, the property owners have not proposed any fencing on the eastern line of the property. This would keepan unobstructed view of the ravine, preserving heritage value. In addition, to enhance the heritage value, and celebrate the historical significance, the property owners are proposing for the western fence to be a knee-high stone structure, mirroring the random-coursed fieldstone construction of the house. In addition, the proposal includes an external, sidewalk facing, stone bench which could feature a historical plaque/signpostcottage andGeorgian architectural style. For Item 3: The roof pitch is a protected item under By-law 2013-114it is clear from the exterior that additional work is needed to ensure the restoration of the roof pitch.This work is needed to bring the pitch of the roof back to the originalpitch. While the roof line, gable roof, roof pitch and return eaves are all protected under By-law 2013-114, the roofing itself is of modern make, with the shingling having been redone in 2015. To add more sunlight to the upstairs floor, without impacting the stone façade, or the symmetrically placedwindow openings in the stone face, we are proposing the addition of two skylights. To maintain the strong visual of a historical home on the property, we are proposing the installation of two south facing skylights.This would mean that a pedestrian or vehicle driving by the house would not be able to see the skylights on the roof. In addition, we 3 - 10 propose that the skylights be placed in a fashion maintains symmetry when viewed from the Given that the by- a skylight modifies a non-protected portion of the house, and can be done in a tasteful fashion, that preserves the curbside heritage aesthetic of the Wildfong cottage. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada(click for link) Click or tap here to enter text. 7.PROPOSED WORKS st a)Expected start date:April 1, 2021 st Expected completion date:August 31, 2021 b)Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff?Yes No If yes, who did you speak to? Victoria Grohnand Michelle Drake. In addition, both attendedthe site for avisual inspection of these proposals. c)Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff?Yes No If yes, who did you speak to? Thehomeowner is in the early stages of applying for a building permit for Item 3, specifically theroof repaircomponent.It is the homeding that no permits are required forItems 1 or 2façade repair, and building a fence (so long as they are under the municipality designated height) do not require a building permit. d)Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work?Yes No e)Other related Building or Planning applications: Click or tap here to enter text. Application number:Click or tap here to enter text. 8.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this application by the City of Kitchener -Planning application. The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will beundertaken and the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Actshall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any 3 - 11 by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could result in a fine being imposed or imprisonment as provided for under the Ontario Heritage Act. Recoverable Signature X March 16, 2021 Signature of Owner/Agent: Signed by: Sebastian Prins X Signature of Owner/Agent: 3 - 12 9.AUTHORIZATION If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must be completed: I / We, Click or tap here to enter text., owner of the land that is subject of this application, hereby authorize Click or taphere to enter text.to act on my / our behalf in this regard. X Signature of Owner/Agent: X Signature of Owner/Agent: The personal information on this form is collected under the legal authority of Section 33(2), Section 42(2), and Section 42(2.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The information will be used for the purposes of administering the Heritage Permit Application and ensuring appropriate service of notice of receipt under Section 33(3) and Section 42(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act. If you have any questions about this collection of personal information, please contact the Manager of Corporate Records, Legislated Services Division, City of Kitchener (519-741-2769). 3 - 13 STAFF USE ONLY Application Number: Click or tap here to enter text. Application Received:Click or tap here to enter text. Application Complete:Click or tap here to enter text. Notice of Receipt:Click or tap here to enter text. Notice of Decision:Click or tap here to enter text. 90-Day Expiry Date:Click or tap here to enter text. PROCESS: Heritage Planning Staff:Click or tap here to enter text. Heritage Kitchener:Click or tap here to enter text. Council:Click or tap here to enter text. 3 - 14 LƷĻƒ Њ 3 - 15 LƷĻƒ Ќ 3 - 16 Nbs!37-!3132 3 - 17 Nbs!37-!3132 3 - 18