Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK Minutes - 2021-05-04HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 4, 2021CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee metelectronicallythis date, commencing at 4:02p.m. Present:S. Hossack-Chair Councillors D. Chapman, J. Gazzola, C. Michaud,and D. Gundrum, D. Vongphakdy, J. Haalboom, J. Baker, M. Asling, M. Abid, P. Ciuciura, R. Schwarz, V. Mance. Staff:M. Drake, Senior Heritage & Project Planner V. Grohn, Heritage Planner G. Stevenson, Senior Planner D. Saunderson, Committee Administrator 1.DSD-2021-58-NOTICE OF INTENTION TO DESIGNATE -518 BRIDGEPORT ROAD The Committee considered DevelopmentServices Department report DSD-2021-58, dated April 9, 2021recommendingNotice of Intention to designate 518 Bridgeport Road as being of cultural value or interest, under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. M. Drake presented the Report. Raj Vinepal,property owner,was in attendance in support of thestaff recommendation and responded to questions from the Committee, notinghe did not fully understand the designation process, but he was supportive of the building being protected. M. Asling entered the meeting at this time. In response to questions, M. Drake advised the property was assessed through a Heritage Impact Assessment that was submitted in support of a Planning Act application. Through that Planning Act,approval staff requested that the property be designated. J.Haalboomindicated the property, including the newly severed parcelsare well landscaped and questioned whetherthe designation includedreference to thelandscaping or the landscaping design. In response to questions,M. Drake provided an overview of all of the heritage attributes associated with the landscapingthat areintended to be noted in the designation.J. Haalboom questioned with the severance of the property, how would that impact the proposed designation and the landscaping that wasidentified as significant. M. Drake indicatedthe severance applications have already been completed and the two new lotshave been established. M. Drake noted prior to building permits being obtainedfor the new properties municipally addressed as 510 and 524 Bridgeport Road,the property municipally addressed as 518 Bridgeport Road, which is the retained parcel from the severance applicationneeds to be designated. In response to questions, M. Drake stated the features outlined in the statement of significance are all contained on the property municipally addressed as 518 Bridgeport Road. It was noted any recommendation arising from this matter would be forwarded to Council for their consideration on May 17, 2021. On motion byJ. Haalboom- it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to designate the property municipally addressed as 518 Bridgeport Road as being of cultural heritage value or interest, as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-2021-58.” 2.DSD-2021-61-ADDENDUM HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2021-IV-012 -171 FREDERICK STREET (SUDDABY PUBLIC SCHOOL) -PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO FRONT FAÇADE The Committee considered Development Services Department report DSD-2021-61, dated April 16, 2021 recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application (HPA) HPA-2021-IV-012 to permit the replacement of the approximately 85existingwood windows with aluminum clad wood windows on the front façade of the property municipally addressed as 171 Frederick Street HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 4, 2021-23-CITY OF KITCHENER 2.DSD-2021-61-ADDENDUM HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2021-IV-012 -171 FREDERICK STREET (SUDDABY PUBLIC SCHOOL) -PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO FRONT FAÇADE (CONT’D) commonly known as Suddaby Public School. The property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. M. Drake presented the Report, advising staff are recommending approval of the HPA, subject to conditions outlined in the Report. Josh Bedard and Dale Wideman, Waterloo Region District School Board, were in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. In response to questions, M. Drake advised one new sample will be installed and reviewed in comparisonto the existing windowsto confirm they arewell replicated. M. Drakestatedin the interest of supporting the schools project timeline, they are allowing some of the HPA approval steps to come after receiving the Committee’sapproval. D. Wideman noted he was in support ofthe recommendation, acknowledging that it allowed that check and balanceapproachto confirm the intention of their HPAand that properapprovalsareachieved.In response to questions, D. Wideman indicated the window will have three components:the simulated divided light exterior grill, the grill between the glass and an interior grill made of wood. D. Wideman further advised there should be no difference from the existing front façade once the new windows have been installed. R. Schwarz stated she was in support of this application and the transition for the building with thefuturegoalbeing the installationof air conditioning, noting theseimprovementswill protect the long-term use of thisbuilding. D. Gundrum declared a pecuniary interest as a member of his family is a staff member at the school and did not participate in any voting or discussion regarding this matter. The following motion was voted on and was Carriedunanimously. On motion by J. Baker- it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-012 requesting permission to replace the existing wood windows on the front façade of 171 Frederick Street (Suddaby Public School) with aluminum clad wood windows as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-2021-61, in accordance with specifications described in the following documents: (a) the application form and drawings dated February 26, 2021 as contained in Appendix A; (b) the slide deck from the presentation to Heritage Kitchener dated April 6, 2021 as contained in Appendix B; and, (c) the email providing information to complete the application dated April 13, 2021 as contained in Appendix C, be approved,subject to the following conditions: i)That documentation in the form of current photographs and measured drawings be prepared and submitted for each individual window on the front elevation prior to the removal of any windows; ii)That a full-scale sample window be produced for review on site by Heritage Planning staff and related heritage clearance issued by staff to proceed prior to the removal of any windows; iii)That the final shop drawings for the windows be submitted for review and heritage clearance issued by staff to proceed prior to the installation of any windows; and further, iv)That one sample window on the 2nd or 3rd floor be installed for heritage clearance by staff prior to proceeding with the installation of the remaining windows.” HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 4, 2021-24-CITY OF KITCHENER 3.DSD-2021-60-HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA-2021-IV-015 -59 MARIANNE DORN TRAIL -MASONRY, SOFFIT AND ROOF REPAIRS, AND INSTALLATION OF SYKLIGHTS The Committee considered DevelopmentServices Department report DSD-2021-60, datedApril 20, 2021recommending approval of Heritage Permit Application (HPA) HPA-2021-IV-015 to permit masonry, soffit and roof repairs as well asthe installation of skylights on the property municipally addressedas 59 Marianne Dorn Trail. The subject property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and was formerly addressed as 324 Old Huron Road. V. Grohn presented the Report, advising staff are recommending approval of the HPA, subject to conditions outlined in the Report.V. Grohn further advised a fence and exterior wall were noted in the HPA but staff requested additional information related to those matters, noting they would bebrought back to the Committeefor considerationat a future meeting. Sebastian Prins,property owner,was in attendance in support of the HPA and the staff recommendation.In response to questions, V. Grohn noted there have been other instances within the City where skylights have been approved on heritage properties.V. Grohn indicated where property owners have requested a desire to install skylights, staff have generally requested that they not be viewable from the public realm and where possibleflush with the roof. Questions were raised regarding the roof repair.S. Prins advised a structural engineer reviewed the condition of the roof. S. Prins advised there is two structural columns that will need to be installed toprovidesupporttothe roof, noting the vertical axishavedeteriorated and will need to be rehabilitated. In response to questions, the proposed roof rehabilitation would reinstate the original roof pitch in a more cost-effectivemanor, rather than trying to use a similar construction method that was originally used. Councillor C. Michaud entered the meeting at this time. The following motion was voted on and was Carried unanimously. On motion by D.Vongphakdy- it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2021-IV-015 be approved, as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-2021-60,to permit masonry, soffit and roof repairs and the installation of skylights on the property municipally addressed as 59 Marianne Dorn Trail, in accordance withthe 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 further, 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.” 4.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -35-43 SHELDON AVENUE NORTH -CONSTRUCTION OF A 3-STOREY BUILDING The Committee considered a memorandum dated April 22, 2021 regarding a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property municipally addressed as 35 and 43 Sheldon Avenue North. The subject properties are not listed or designated under the Ontario Heritage Actbut are of heritage interest. V. Grohn provided opening remarks, stating an HIA has been submitted in support of a current Planning Act application and staff areseeking the Committee’s feedback this date, which will be taken into consideration as part of staff’s review of theHIAto address potential impactsof the proposed Planning Act applications in regard tothe existing cultural heritage resourcesand theirheritage attributes. HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 4, 2021-25-CITY OF KITCHENER 4.DRAFT HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) -35-43 SHELDON AVENUE NORTH -CONSTRUCTION OF A 3-STOREY BUILDING (CONT’D) Owen Scott,CHC Limited,Sandy Dietrich-Bell,oneROOFYouth Services and John MacDonald, JohnMacdonaldArchitectwere in attendance in support of the HIA. O.Scott presented the HIA, statingit was prepared to determine impact of a development proposal by oneROOF Youth Services to construct athree-storey residential building in the rear yards of 35 and 43 Sheldon Avenue Northto provide at-risk-youth housing support for the Region ofWaterloo.O. Scott provided an overview ofthe HIA including: the current condition of the subject properties; a brief history since construction; a review of their heritage significant in relation to Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06; a review of the development proposal; as well as, the recommendations contained within the HIA. O. Scott further advised the Tudor Revival houses at the properties municipally addressed as 35 and 43 Sheldon Avenue North meet all three Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 criteria for significance and are worthy of designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Both dwellingsshould be protected by a heritage designation by-lawand the by-law should take into account the roof lines, the front and end facades of 43 Sheldon, and the front, east end and west end facades (excluding the former garage) of 35 Sheldon as well asthe shared front yard landscape including the features within, i.e. fountain, walkways, driveway and plant materials. Questions were raised regarding whether the proposed three-storey building would have any shadowing impacts on the heritage dwellings. O. Scott noted there would be some shadowing in the rear yards of the buildings depending on time of day, but there would be no adverse impacts to the heritage attributes. In response to further questions, O. Scott indicated to the rear of the properties is currently a large parking lot. Councillor D. Chapman noted she was in support of the project. Questions were raised regarding the process and why staff were not recommending heritage designation at this time. V. Grohn statedboth35 and 43 Sheldon Avenuewill be designated through Planning Act applications conditions of approval, 43 Sheldon Avenue through the severance process and 35 Sheldon Avenue through the Site Plan Approval process. J. Haalboom questioned if emergency response was required for the new building in the rear of the property, where would access be obtained. J. MacDonaldnoted the new building will have access between the centre of theexistingdwellings, there has also been a hydrant located in close proximity to the driveway to assist with emergency response, and the building will also have a sprinkler system. S. Hossackstated she was in support of the development, noting theproperties under the same ownership will add further protections for the shared landscaping features. 5.HERITAGE KITCHENER 2021-2022 WORK PLAN The Committee considered the Heritage Kitchener 2019-2020 Work Plan, which includes the activities intended to be completed by Heritage Planning staff and the Committee for the 2021- 2022 Advisory Committee term. V. Grohn and M. Drakeaddressed the Committee, advising the 2021-2022Draft Work Planhas been included in the Committee agenda this date.V. Grohnreviewed the document, stating the Committee is responsible for completing core business, which is outlined in the Committee’s Terms of Reference, including: making recommendations to City Council related to heritage designation; listing properties on the Municipal Heritage Register; and, consideration of Heritage Permit Applications.V. Grohn noted this would be the opportunity to brainstorm additional items that the Committee may wish to undertake during the 2021-2022 term of the Committee. M. Drake advised members need to give consideration when making suggestions that work beyond the monthlymeetingsmay be required by members to achieve various initiatives. The members had a brainstorming session, noting items of consideration: HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 4, 2021-26-CITY OF KITCHENER undertaking heritage initiatives that would assist in decolonizing heritage to provide a greater sense of communityand making heritage more inclusiveto all residents within the City; reviewing the current processes related to heritage conservation through an affordable housing lens; consideration for reviewing the membership outlined in the terms of reference to expand the diversity of the Committee; increasing heritage promotion efforts; o specificheritagepromotion items referenced for consideration: promotion of Homer Watson’s birthplace; willow lake located within Lower Doon; and creation of a virtual heritage walk, similar to a Jane’s walk. In response to questions, M. Drake advised Cultural Heritage Landscapes will be brought forward to the Committee for consideration through the Secondary Plan review project. V. Grohn noted many great suggestions were raised this date.She noted from this discussion Committee members are encouraged to considertangible actionsthat the Committee could undertake to address these matters.M. Drake further advised consideration would also need to be given to who may help to lead the proposed action items, stating Committee members will need to help lead the initiatives beyond the regular monthly meeting.It was noted additional time would be provided at the June 1, 2021 Heritage Kitchener meeting to further review the work plan. 6.STATUS UPDATES -HERITAGE BEST PRACTICES UPDATE AND 2021PRIORITIES -HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOLLOW-UPS V. Grohn and M. Drakeadvised there were no status updates this date. 7.ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:07p.m. D. Saunderson Committee Administrator