Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage Kitchener - 1999-10-01H ERITAGE\1999-10-01 HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES OCTOBER 1, 1999 CITY OF KITCHENER Heritage Kitchener met this date, chaired by Councillor J. Haalboom, commencing at 11:45 a.m., with the following members present: Councillor T. Galloway, Ms. T. Seedhouse, Ms. P. Wagner, Mr. M. Badran and Mr. P. Bufe. Mr. B. Scott entered the meeting shortly after its commencement. Regrets: Ms. G. Engel and Ms. C. Martindale. Others present: Ms. L. Gove, Mr. G. Richardson, Mr. L. Bensason and Ms. D. Gilchrist. 1. INTRODUCTION Councillor J. Haalboom advised that a special meeting of Heritage Kitchener would be held to deal with the Alternation Application by Drewlo Holdings for the property at 209 Victoria Street South. She noted that a sub-committee meeting had been held and as a result, the developer and architect are willing to consider some changes. Mr. L. Bensason advised that there was also a neighbourhood meeting held. It was agreed that a special meeting of Heritage Kitchener would be held on Friday, October 15, 1999, commencing at 10:00 a.m. to conclude discussions on the Alteration Application by Drewlo Holdings for the property municipally known as 209 Victoria Street South. Councillor Haalboom noted the Honours and Awards Program of the Ontario Historical Society. Ms. P. Wagner spoke of the tour of Sonneck House held by A.C.O. noting that the tour was a good learning experience and she suggested a tour for members, as a learning experience, if Mr. B. Rowell could do the tour. Councillor Haalboom noted that, at the August meeting, this Committee passed a motion with respect to the Superbuild Growth Fund proposed by the Province. She spoke of a letter from Mr. Martiniuk and from the Minister of Finance. Councillor Haalboom noted that we should be hearing more on this in the future. Mr. L. Bensason advised that there are property standards issues to be deal with, with respect to St. Jerome's and the contractor met with him for advice on brick replacement for the College Street building. He noted that there would likely be Alteration Application before the Committee next month. Councillor Haalboom briefly mentioned the property at 921 Glasgow Street. 2. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS It was noted that, attached to the agenda material, was an application form for those members who wish to seek re-appointment to Heritage Kitchener for 2000. 3. SCENIC ROAD STATUS - OLD MILL ROAD Mr. L. Bensason introduced this item and pointed out the memorandum from Mr. G. Richardson attached to the agenda. He noted that Old Mill Road has been designated in the Official Plan, as a Scenic Heritage Road. This matter is in connection with an application for a zone change, made by the owners of 3040 Old Mill Road, and in considering their site plan for development of this property, it is important to determine whether this road has been designated for its scenic qualities and/or its historic alignment. Mr. Bensason then explained to the Committee the policies and circumstances under which an Official Plan amendment would be required. Councillor T. Galloway noted that Old Mill Road has been altered in the past without the need for an Official Plan amendment. He noted that the alteration was at the intersection of Mill Park Drive and Old Mill Road. The Committee had been provided, by Mr. Bensason, with hard copies of a PowerPoint presentation on the various sections of Old Mill Road along with historic maps showing the road. The printed material also included data sheets on each of five sections of Old Mill Road. Mr. Bensason then reviewed, assisted by the PowerPoint presentation, the five sections of Old Mill Road and the scoring of each section on a data sheet. Following the presentation, Mr. Bensason advised that there are two questions that the Committee must address. Is Old Mill Road of historic significance, scenic significance or both? A brief review of the history of Old Mill Road then took HERITAGE KITCHENER OCTOBER 1~ 1999 - 64 - CITY OF KITCHENER place, SCENIC ROAD STATUS - OLD MILL ROAD - CONT'D With regards to scenic considerations, Mr. Bensason then reviewed the rating of each of the five sections of Old Mill Road as follows: Area 1 - Doon Area 2 - From Area 3 - From Area 4 - From Area 5 - Roos Valley Drive to 3012 Old Mill Road - rated 60% 3012 Old Mill Road to 2016 Old Mill Road - rated 37% 2016 Old Mill Road to Pinnacle Drive - rated 70% Pinnacle Drive to Roos Street - rated 63% Street to Mill Park Drive - rated 70% Mr. Bensason then advised that it was important to look at the road overall. The Committee then reviewed the site plan submitted for the Kinzie Farm Village and Mr. Bensason explained that the re-routing would impact Area #1. Looking at the site plan, Mr. Bensason advised that it would not necessarily lose its alignment, so that the sense of where the road was once aligned would not be lost. He referred the Committee to the experience of what is being done with Pioneer Tower Road. Mr. P. Bufe stated that he felt the road had both historic and scenic significance. Councillor T. Galloway questioned whether the hedgerows would be preserved in their entirety. Mr. G. Richardson responded that staff are looking for a vegetation management plan and a landscaping plan. Mr. Richardson noted that because of the services and because of the price of moving services he doubted that they would be moved. He noted that the roadway would be completed and a reserve easement would be held by the City. Mr. Richardson thought that, probably, some of the hedgerows are on the right of way. The question was raised as to whether the proposal makes such a change to the road that it would no longer have the significance it once had. Mr. Bensason noted that the alignment of the road would change but the roadway itself would still exist so that there would still be a sense of what it was. Mr. P. Bufe questioned whether the scenic value of the existing road would continue after the road re-alignment. He noted that the current alignment adds to the scenic value. Mr. B. Scott felt that any development on the river side of Old Mill Road would take away from the scenic value. The Committee was then asked to address the question as to whether the re-alignment of Old Mill Road would have a major or minor impact to the significance of the road. Councillor G. Galloway suggested that it would have a minor impact. He noted that the site plan shows parking spaces fringing on the existing right of way. He suggested that he would be satisfied that the impact was minor if the existing vegetation was maintained and if the existing alignment of Old Mill Road continues to be a laneway. He stated that he would not like to see encroachments on the existing alignment, as proposed. He also noted that the City owns the right of way, now, and has some ability to negotiate. Mr. P. Bufe suggested that as long as the existing road is kept, he would not have any objection. He questioned whether the proposal to re-align the road was driven by concern for safety at the intersection. He also asked that, as long as the existing portion of Old Mill Road is kept that the hedgerows be kept as well. Mr. G. Richardson responded to Mr. P. Bufe's question stating that Traffic comments are not available at this time; although, the current intersection is not ideal. He stated that what is driving the current proposal is to consolidate the site. He also noted that the current site plan is a very preliminary site plan and that there are opportunities to shift the parking, to take the parking spaces out of the old road alignment. He also noted that the intention is to align Old Mill Road with the entrance to Conestoga College. Ms. P. Wagner reviewed the historic importance of Old Mill Road noting that it was the link with Preston and Blair. She questioned whether Old Mill Road would continue to be the name of the road and whether the portion of Old Mill Road extending through the subdivision would have a name. HERITAGE KITCHENER OCTOBER 1~ 1999 - 65 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. SCENIC ROAD STATUS - OLD MILL ROAD - CONT'D In reviewing the Committee's comments on this proposed re-alignment of Old Mill Road, the Committee summarized by noting its concern with respect to the encroachment on the historic alignment, that the vista remain open and that the hedgerows be maintained. Mr. Bensason advised that this was sufficient to take back to the Department for consideration. For the record, Heritage Kitchener wanted it reported that they are of the opinion that Old Mill Road has both historic and scenic significance. The Committee requested that, through the development process, an inventory of the existing vegetation be taken. 4. DESIGNATION PROPERTY REPORT - 31 YOUNG STREET The Committee members were in receipt of a heritage property report for the property municipally known as 31 Young Street - John Forsyth Co. Ltd. The Committee was provided, at the meeting, with reasons for designation for this property. Mr. L. Bensason advised that it was likely that a demolition application would be made for this property, in the next two to three weeks and he understood that the owners would like to demolish the entire site. Councillor T. Galloway advised that this property is on the Adaptive Re-Use List for the City of Kitchener and the City has spent a lot of time and energy on this property. He noted that because the demolition application would be received prior to the designation recommendation going forward, that he felt that it would not be caught by the new Demolition Act. He felt that the property should be designated. He felt that there were sufficient reasons in the designation property report to designate the property, as well as the fact that it is an adaptive re-use site. On a motion by Mr. M. Badran - it was resolved: "That, pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to designated the property municipally known as 31 Young Street (John Forsyth Co. Ltd.) as being of historic and architectural significance with the specific features of the designation to be as follows: Smythe Residence Designation of all exterior elevations including the rubble stone foundation; buff brick walls; all windows and window openings; wood sills; all exterior doors and door openings; brick voussoirs; roof and roofline; chimney; wood soffit and fascia; and pedimented gables with collor brace pendent. Forsyth Factory and later additions (save for 1937 addition) Designation of all exterior elevations including stone and brick foundations; brick walls; pilasters and corbelled brick banding at cornice; all windows and window openings; all exterior doors and door openings; brick voussoirs; roof and roofline; and painted signage bands reading "JOHN FORSYTH CO. LTD." and "FINE SHIRTS- U N D E RWEAR-PYJAMAS". Forsyth Factory 1937 Addition Designation of all exterior elevations including penthouse; pre-cast concrete piers with vertical etchings; concrete spandrals; and datestone reading 1937; glass block walls; all windows and window openings; all exterior doors and door openings; concrete parapet wall with engraved name reading "JOHN FORSYTH"; roof and roofline." HERITAGE KITCHENER OCTOBER 1~ 1999 - 66 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. DESIGNATED PROPERTY ALTERATION APPLICATION 122 FREDERICK STREET (REGISTRY BUILDING) Mr. B. Scott declared a conflict of interest in this matter as his employer owns the property and did not participate in any discussion or voting with respect to this matter. Mr. Scott left the meeting at this time. Mr. L. Bensason reviewed the significance of this property, through the use of slides of the interior and exterior of the building, in relation to the specific features of the designation contained in the by-law. Councillor T. Galloway left the meeting at this time. Mr. D. Bourgeois and Mr. B. Krohn were in attendance to represent the request. The Committee members had been provided with a copy of the alteration application and elevation drawings and floor plans, in their agenda material. Mr. Bourgeois addressed the Committee and advised that the current proposal is an outgrowth of the failure of the St. Jerome's project. He noted that Theatre and Co. proceeded with the Goudies building, which is good for them but will not provide a community arts centre. Mr. Bourgeois then referred to the Barlow Study, which indicated that 240 nights of use could be made of a community arts centre within the first two years. It also stated that 70 -100 nights of use would take place in the first year and this would grow. Mr. Bourgeois then gave some examples of use for community arts centre including the Elora Festival who want to run workshops in the City of Kitchener. Mr. Bourgeois then gave a brief chronology of the steps taken to date towards use of the Registry Building for a community arts centre. Mr. Bourgeois suggested that the design before the Committee to date meets best efforts to maintain the integrity of the building. There is a need for changes but their proposal will intrude as little as possible into the designated features. He also noted that there needs to be some changes to systems in the building and life safety issues and a handicapped access needs to be addressed. He stated that they want to meet heritage needs but they also must meet the needs of the users and the audience. Mr. Bill Krohn, Architect, gave a brief introduction to the proposed alterations noting that the type of use proposed was not what the building was designed for. He felt there was great potential for use as a theatre; however, because of the site lines the columns would need to be removed. Mr. Krohn then reviewed the method to be used to support the building with the removal of the columns. Mr. Krohn then reviewed access and egress to and from the building and stated that they had looked at a number of ways to deal with barrier-free access. He noted that there are some limitations and reviewed the site plan. He suggested making an intervention to the front of the facade to locate a doorway in the front elevation. He noted that the designer attempted to pickup the vertical panels on the front wings of the building. The opening would allow for an entrance into a vestibule from which people could enter a lift. He noted that this proposal combines an accessible entry with the existing front entrance which creates harmony between entrances. He noted that the existing doors would remain intact. Mr. Krohn then gave an explanation of why he was not able to accommodate a barrier-free access on the sides of the building. Mr. Bourgeois then dealt with the proposed renovations to the lobby, which is designated. He noted that the wainscotting is designated and is proposed to be re-used on the sidewalls so it is not lost. There was also an explanation of the loading dock area proposed for the rear of the building. Mr. Bensason provided some preliminary comments noting that it is difficult to deal with this issue and it requires give and take. He questioned how this could work without a major impact to the significant features. Mr. Bensason referred to the lift proposed for the front of the building noting that the front elevation is the most significant and he questioned how this HERITAGE KITCHENER OCTOBER 1~ 1999 - 67 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. DESIGNATED PROPERTY ALTERATION APPLICATION 122 FREDERICK STREET (REGISTRY BUILDING) - CONT'D barrier-free access would impact the front elevation. He also noted that it would not be desirable to have a barrier-free entrance that is far removed from the main entrance. Mr. Bensason advised that staff believe that the barrier-free access can be provided on the police side of the building. He stated that it is a workable solution but may not be the best. Mr. Krohn responded that they might need a retaining wall on that side of the building to level the ground. He questioned whether this option is appropriate and desirable. He stated that functionally, it was not a problem but there would be a stigma attached noting that people with physical handicaps must go around to the side of the building. He questioned what would give the best result all round at the end of the day. A discussion then took place with respect to the columns in the interior of the building. Mr. Krohn noted that any alternative use of the building would likely find the columns a problem. Mr. Bensason explained the alternative supports which could be used to take the place of the columns. Mr. Krohn commented on the beams, which would have to be used, and how they would be installed. Councillor J. Haalboom advised that she would have to leave the meeting at this time and questioned whether this discussion could continue at the special meeting established for October 15, 1999. Mr. Bourgeois advised that he need to move forward on this project. Councillor J. Haalboom left the meeting at this time and Ms. P. Wagner, Vice Chair, assumed the Chair. The Committee then questioned the introduction of a platform (loading dock) of the rear elevation and whether the two windows would be lost. The Committee also questioned whether there was opportunity to introduce the platform without removing the two windows. Mr. Krohn advised that they would aim to maintain those windows above the platform. He stated that they would like to maintain the windows at the sill line; however, the project has not advanced enough to know if that would work. Mr. P. Bufe questioned whether all the windows would remain. Mr. D. Bourgeois responded that this is being done on a shoe string budget and all the people involved are interested in this heritage building. He noted that the details have not been developed at this time because they are still working on the general concept and they will deal with the details at a later stage. Mr. Bensason questioned the walls at the end of the lobby and whether the openings would go all the way to the top. Mr. Bourgeois responded that they would be maintaining the ceiling and the moulding. Mr. Bensason noted that the marble walls were also an issue and Mr. Krohn advised that the marble would be re-used in the new openings and gave an explanation of how this would be done. Mr. Bourgeois advised that if these openings were not allowed they would have to introduce a new wall and hallway into the auditorium portion of the building. The question was raised as to where the box office would be located and Mr. Bourgeois advised that it would be a box office on wheels and would not have a permanent location. Mr. Bensason questioned how the building would be re-used if, in five years, this group decides it does not want a theatre here. Mr. Bourgeois responded that, as a charitable organization, they are responsible for charitable dollars and they cannot afford to be putting $300,000.00 into this building for the short term. He stated that it would be a fifteen to twenty- five year commitment if they do go ahead. Further discussion took place with respect to the flooring particularly in the lobby area where they intend to cut doorways in the marble walls, and the impact that this would have on the terrazzo floor. Discussion also took place with respect to the ceiling in the auditorium area and the lighting grid proposed to be suspended from the ceiling. HERITAGE KITCHENER OCTOBER 1~ 1999 - 68 - CITY OF KITCHENER Ms. P. Wagner advised that she wished to draw the discussion to conclusion and questioned DESIGNATED PROPERTY ALTERATION APPLICATION 122 FREDERICK STREET (REGISTRY BUILDING) - CONT'D what the proponents were looking for. Mr. Bourgeois advised that they need to know if the design concept is acceptable before they put out any money for anything further. He questioned whether the Committee accepts the proposed use and whether they would be willing to work with J. M. Drama. He questioned if the design concept was generally acceptable. Mr. Bufe responded that his major concern was the new front access and that he would rather see it at the side of the building. He noted that he was quite impressed with the proposal. Mr. Bourgeois stated that he would like to work with the Committee to work out the details and suggested perhaps a Saturday afternoon or an evening meeting. Mr. Bourgeois stated that he would like to have approval in principle, of the design concept, and he noted that he would be making a presentation to the City's Community Services Committee on October 25th and, would have to apply for Federal funding by October 31st. Mr. Bufe suggested further discussion at the special Heritage Kitchener meeting scheduled for October 15th. ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m. Dianne H. Gilchrist Committee Administrator