HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2022-321 - Heritage Permit Application HPA-2022-V-015 - 22 Weber Street WestStaff Report
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 2, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7291
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: June 29, 2022
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-321
SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2022-V-015
22 Weber Street West
Construction of a New 19 -Storey Residential Building
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2022-V-015 be refused to construct a new 19 -storey residential building on the
property municipally addressed as 22 Weber Street West, in accordance with the
supporting information submitted with the application.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to present staff's recommendation on the proposed
construction of a new 19 -storey residential building detailed in HPA-2022-V-015.
• The key finding of this report is that the consideration of this heritage permit application
is premature at this time and staff do not have enough information to determine whether
the proposed development conforms to the policies used to review new development
within the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District.
• There are no financial implications associated with this report.
• Community engagement includes posting this report and associated agenda in advance
of the meeting and consultation with the Heritage Kitchener Committee.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Heritage Permit Application HPA-2022-V-015 proposes the construction of a new nineteen -
(19) storey residential building in the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation
District. An Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment for the proposed
development were submitted in 2020. These applications have been appealed and are now
under consideration by the Ontario Land Tribunal. A Site Plan Application has not yet been
submitted. Due to this, the zoning, land use, and design of the proposed development have
not been finalized and approved. Therefore, staff do not have enough information to
recommend approval of the subject heritage permit application.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 5 of 379
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA-
2022-V-015 (Attachment A) seeking permission to construct a new 19 -storey residential
building on the property municipally addressed as 22 Weber Street West (Fig 1).
9 Chic Con to Par
56 51
g 52s0 80'
Rcckway Mennonite41 20
J R� Fe 48 :hurch Zcn r_I " 31 35 R
O Gy t 44 Church 01 16
S,*
1 Rd 8 CIVIC CENTRE X32 27
77 \` 23 74
K.P.L.
St Marys
41 28
- 68 Central Li6rar
Church Sculpture 18
96 66 StMaryS '°' 3tAn 1i S 83
Churrh VV�� Fre I t Ilan Church Governors Hous
® �n And Gaol
Downtown Community 54
Centre 21 73
151 17 War Dedication 77
CITY COMMERCIAL CORE 35 ? 149 11
_ 72 Oh
56 54 20
> .,8 52 108 141 50 -.STS
Business Le Ioprnent
46 104 Service Ontario 71-k Canada
42 The Regen cy,
...... 96 32 ��= 57
,. �� �.�(2 30 J
/�ti9��`ST C3
45 - " v
19
49 /
6260 StPetar'S 96 i
Lutheran Chureh ��
Figure 1: Location Map of 22 Weber Street West
REPORT:
The subject property is municipally addressed as 22 Weber Street West and is located on
the north side of Weber Street West between Young Street and Queen Street North (Fig.
2). The subject property is currently being used as a surface parking lot.
Page 6 of 379
Figure 2: 22 Weber Street West, 2022
The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation
District (CCNHCD) and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District
The CCNHCD is an important historical residential neighborhood that can be linked to
several key periods in the development of the City of Kitchener. This neighborhood helps
tell the story of Kitchener's phenomenal growth at the turn of the 19th century and of the
development of its extensive industrial sector. Almost two-thirds of the existing houses were
built between 1880 and 1917 and were mostly occupied by owners, managers, or workers
for some of the key industries that defined the community at the turn of the century.
The heritage attributes of the CCNHCD include:
• Its association with important business and community leaders during a key era of
development in Kitchener;
• A wealth of well maintained, finely detailed buildings from the late 1800s and early
1900s that are largely intact;
• A number of unique buildings, including churches and commercial buildings, which
provide distinctive landmarks within and at the edges of the District;
Page 7 of 379
• A significant range of recognizable architectural styles (Queen Anne, Berlin
Vernacular, Italianate, etc.) and features including attic gable roofs, decorative trim,
brick construction, porches, and other details, associated with the era in which they
were developed;
• The presence of an attractive and consistent streetscape linked by mature trees,
grassed boulevards and Ianeways; and
• Hibner Park, Kitchener's second oldest city park, in the centre of the District.
Proposed Development at 22 Weber Street West
The proposed development involves the construction of a new nineteen (19) -storey multiple
residential building on the subject property (Fig. 3). This building is proposed to have a total
of 162 units, and 24 parking spaces.
A
M
Figure 3: Proposed front (south) elevation.
There are a number of proposed materials for this construction:
- White stone cladding with glass panels for the podium;
- Mixed Red Brick for the upper levels;
- Glass spandrel panels, and clear curtain wall glazing with clear anodized aluminum.
Matters before the Ontario Land Tribunal
The current zoning and official plan designation for the site do not permit the proposed
development. A Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) application and an Official Plan
Amendment (OPA) application were submitted to the City in 2020. Supporting studies,
plans, and documents were submitted in support of the application, including a draft Heritage
Impact Assessment (HIA), a Shadow Study, proposed design renderings, a proposed site
plan, conceptual floor plans, and an Urban Design Brief. Before a decision could be made
Page 8 of 379
by Kitchener City Council with respect to the OPA and ZBA applications, the Applicant
appealed both for non -decision. These OLT appeals have not been withdrawn or resolved,
and accordingly, the zoning and land use of the subject property has not been finalized or
approved.
Site Plan Application
Through the Site Plan review process, heritage planning staff have the opportunity to
implement urban design policies from the Official Plan and Urban Design Manual, as well
as the policies and guidelines within the CCNHCD to ensure that any new development has
appropriate massing, is compatible, and respects the character of the area. As part of the
Site Plan review process, staff can include a number of cultural heritage conditions as part
of a conditional approval letter that need to be fulfilled at various stages of development.
This allows for a comprehensive review of the proposed development to ensure the final
concept is compatible and sympathetic with the character of the area.
An informal site plan was submitted to the City as part of the ZBA and OPA application, and
a second informal site plan was submitted as part of this heritage permit application. The
applicant has not submitted a formal site plan application pursuant to section 41 of the
Planning Act for review by the City. Once a site plan application is submitted, elevations,
landscaping, and other features of the site plan application may change through the site
plan review process which may result in changes to or resubmission of the heritage permit.
Without a formally submitted site plan, the heritage permit application is premature.
Draft Heritage Impact Assessment for 22 Weber Street
A draft HIA (November 2021) has been submitted to the City with the heritage permit
application (Attachment B). The HIA assessed potential impacts of the proposed
development on the CCNHCD, and immediate adjacent heritage resources. The draft HIA
concluded that the proposed development will not result in any adverse impacts related to
obstruction, isolation, change in land use, or shadows. The proposed development is
considered a neutral impact to the adjacent heritage resources within the CCNHCD, located
along Weber Street West and Roy Street. At this time, the HIA is still in the draft stage and
has not been approved by the Director of Planning.
Conformity with the CCHNCHD Policies
The CCNHCD Plan contains policies for new buildings within the district, as well as for area -
specific policies and guidelines in the CCNHCD.
Section 3.3.3 of the CCNCHCD Plan includes the following broad policies for new buildings:
(a) New buildings will respect and be compatible with the heritage character of the Civic
Centre Neighborhood, through attention to height, built form, setback, massing,
material, and other architectural elements such as doors, windows, roof lines; and
(b) Deign guidelines provided in Section 6.6 of this Plan will be used to review and
evaluate proposals for new buildings to ensure that new developments is compatible
with the adjacent context.
Page 9 of 379
There are also site-specific policies within the CCNHCD, which are meant to guide
alterations and new development. Section 3.3.5.2 contains policies relevant to the Weber
Street Area, which are:
(a) The protection and retention of existing buildings and their architectural features is
strongly encouraged.
(b) Maintain residential streetscape character through the use of appropriate built form,
materials, roof pitches, architectural design and details particularly at the interface
between Weber Street and the interior of the neighborhood;
(c) Adaptive re -use of existing buildings should be given priority over redevelopment.
Flexibility in Municipal Plan policies and zoning regulations is encouraged where
necessary to accommodate appropriate adaptive reuse options;
(d) Where redevelopment is proposed on vacant or underutilized sites, new development
shall be sensitive to and compatible with adjacent heritage resources on the street
with respect to height, massing, built form, and materials.
(e) Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake
shadow studies where they abut existing residential uses, to demonstrate that they
will not unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas.
(f) Design guidelines proposed Section 6.9.2 of this Plan (this is a typo in the Plan, the
section number is 6.9.4) will be used to review and evaluate proposals for major
alterations, additions, or new buildings to ensure that new development is compatible
with the adjacent context.
The conformity of the proposed development with the policies within Section 6.9.4 has been
summarized in the table below.
Page 10 of 379
Section 6.9.4 of the CCNHCD
Design Guideline
Conformity of the Proposed
Development
Any infill on Weber Street should maintain a
The H IA states that the "proposed
strong relationship to the street at the lower
development includes a large front entrance
levels (2 to 4 storeys) with respect to built
with glazing and masonry facing Weber
form and use.
Street West. This front entrance has been
emphasized at the pedestrian level through
the use of a 2 -storey masonry podium."
Since a site plan application has not been
approved for this application, the design of
the podium might be subject to change. At
this time, staff do not have enough or clear
information regarding whether the proposed
development will maintain a strong
relationship to the street at the lower level.
Setbacks of new development should be
18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street
consistent with adjacent buildings. Where
West are adjacent to the subject property.
significantly different setbacks exist on
18 Weber Street West has a setback of 12.6
either side, the new building should be
metres and 28 Weber Street West has a
aligned with the building that is most similar
setback of 7.2 metres.
to the predominant setback on the street.
The site plan that has been included in the
draft HIA that has been submitted with this
heritage permit application shows a setback
of approximately 2.5 metres. The site plan
that was submitted with the Zoning By-law
Amendment Application shows a setback of
approximately 0.8 metres.
Building facades at the street level should
The proposed development includes a
incorporate architectural detail, similar
contemporary design with a 2 -storey
materials and colours, and consistency with
masonry podium and upper storeys of glass
the vertical and horizontal proportions or
curtain wall and red brick.
rhythm of adjacent/nearby buildings on the
street to establish a cohesive streetscape.
Detailed building elevation review occurs at
the site plan review stage and the City has
not received a site plan application. At this
time, staff are unable to comment on
whether the proposed development would
establish a cohesive streetscape.
New development shall have entrances
The entrance to the proposed development
oriented to the street
is oriented towards Weber Street West.
Page 11 of 379
Size, placement, and proportion of window
and door openings for new buildings or
additions should be generally consistent
with those on the other buildings along the
street.
Any new buildings taller than 3 to 4 storeys
should incorporate some form of height
transition or stepbacks to minimize the
perception of height and shadow impacts to
pedestrians on the street and provide more
visual continuity. Stepbacks should be
minimum of 2 metres to provide for useable
outdoor terraces for the upper levels.
Any buildings taller than 5 storeys abutting
a residential property to the rear should be
constructed within a 45 -degree angular
plane where feasible, starting from the rear
property line, to minimize visual impacts on
adjacent property owners.
To minimize impacts on properties to the
rear of or flanking Weber Street, a rear yard
setback of 15 metres should be maintained
for new buildings as well as additions where
feasible.
According to the draft HIA submitted with
this heritage permit application, the
proposed design "includes various sizes of
rectangular and square shaped windows
and balconies in a consistent rhythm".
Detailed building elevation occurs at the site
plan review stage and the City has not
received a site plan application. As such,
staff do not have enough information at this
time to determine whether the proposed
development satisfies this guideline.
According to the renderings included in the
draft HIA, a portion of the upper storeys
have a stepback from the podium, specially
on the front fagade.
Detailed building elevation occurs at the site
plan review stage and the City has not
received a site plan application. Since there
is no approved site plan for this application,
the proposed design is subject to change.
As such, staff do not have enough
information at this time to determine
whether the proposed development
satisfies this guideline.
The HIA includes that the angular plan
analysis has been taken from the centre of
Roy Street, as opposed to the rear property
line.
The rear yard setback will be determined in
consideration of the CCNHCD angular
plane analysis, applicable zoning
requirements, and tall building guidelines at
the site plan review stage.
As such, staff do not have enough
information to determine if the proposed
angular plane analysis is sufficient at this
time.
The proposed rear year setback of the
proposed development is 15.9 m, as shown
in the site plan that was submitted with this
application.
The rear yard setback will be determined in
consideration of the CCNHCD angular
plane analysis, applicable zoning
Page 12 of 379
Heritage Planning Comments
In reviewing this application, heritage planning staff make the following comments:
• The subject property municipally addressed as 22 Weber Street West is located
within the CCNHCD and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act;
• The subject property is currently used as a surface parking lot;
• The City received ZBA and OPA applications for the proposed development, which
were appealed and are now under consideration by the OLT;
• A formal Site Plan Application has also not been submitted to the City for
consideration;
• At this time, due to the zoning, land use, and the design of the site not being
approved, staff do not have enough information to recommend approval of this
heritage permit application.
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 Kitchener committee meeting.
CONSULT — Heritage Kitchener will be consulted regarding the Heritage Permit Application.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Ontario Heritage Act, 2021
Page 13 of 379
requirements, and tall building guidelines at
the site plan review stage.
Locate garbage and other service elements
The site plan that has been submitted with
(HVAC, meters, etc.) away from the front
the heritage permit application shows
fagade so they do not have a negative
servicing to the rear of the property.
visual impact on the street of new
building/addition.
Staff are unsure at this time whether this
would be implemented in the final design as
detailed engineering design occurs as part
of the site plan review process.
Heritage Planning Comments
In reviewing this application, heritage planning staff make the following comments:
• The subject property municipally addressed as 22 Weber Street West is located
within the CCNHCD and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act;
• The subject property is currently used as a surface parking lot;
• The City received ZBA and OPA applications for the proposed development, which
were appealed and are now under consideration by the OLT;
• A formal Site Plan Application has also not been submitted to the City for
consideration;
• At this time, due to the zoning, land use, and the design of the site not being
approved, staff do not have enough information to recommend approval of this
heritage permit application.
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 Kitchener committee meeting.
CONSULT — Heritage Kitchener will be consulted regarding the Heritage Permit Application.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Ontario Heritage Act, 2021
Page 13 of 379
• Planning Act, 2021
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Heritage Permit Application HPA-2022-V-015
Attachment B — Draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for 22 Weber Street West
Page 14 of 379
2022
HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION &
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Planning Division — 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
.jR P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-2426; planningCu)-kitchener.ca
PART A: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Page 1 of 10
The following requirements are designed to assist applicants in submitting sufficient information in order that
their Heritage Permit Application may be deemed complete and processed as quickly and efficiently as possible.
If further assistance or explanation is required please contact heritage planning staff at heritage(ukitchener.ca.
1. WHAT IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION?
The Province of Ontario, through the Ontario Heritage Act, has enacted legislation to assist its citizens with
the protection and conservation of cultural heritage resources.
Once properties are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, the City is enabled to manage physical
change to the cultural heritage resources as a means of protection. The principal mechanism of management
is the Heritage Permit Application process, which allows the municipality to review site-specific applications
and determine if proposed changes will beneficially or detrimentally affect the reasons for designation and
heritage attributes.
As a general rule, the preferred alterations to heritage properties are those that repair rather than replace
original heritage attributes, and those that do not permanently damage cultural heritage resources and their
heritage attributes. Where replacement of materials or new construction is necessary, these should be
compatible with the original. Reversibility is also preferable as this allows for the future reinstatement of
heritage attributes.
According to the Ontario Heritage Act, no owner of designated property shall alter the property or permit the
alteration of the property if the alteration is likely to affect the property's heritage attributes, unless the owner
applies to the council of the municipality and receives written consent. This consent is obtained through the
approval of a Heritage Permit Application.
Heritage Permit Applications are applicable for all individually designated properties (under Part IV of the
Ontario Heritage Act) and all properties located within the boundaries of Heritage Conservation Districts
(designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act).
2. WHEN IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIRED?
Under the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, any new construction or "alteration" to a property designated
under Part IV of the Act (individually designated property) or a property designated under Part V of the Act
(within a Heritage Conservation District) requires a Heritage Permit Application. "Alteration" is defined as: "to
change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair or disturb." In addition, the approval of a
Heritage Permit Application is required for any demolition of a property designated under Part IV or V of the
Act. Please contact Heritage Planning staff directly to confirm if your specific project requires the
approval of a Heritage Permit Application.
Below are some examples of typical Part IV alterations that may require a Heritage Permit Application:
• Addition and/or alteration to an existing building or accessory building
• Replacement of windows or doors, or a change in window or door openings
• Change in siding, soffit, fascia or roofing material
• Removal and/or installation of porches, verandahs and canopies
• Removal and/or installation of cladding and chimneys
• Changes in trim, cladding, or the painting of masonry
• Repointing of brick
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
Page 2 of 10
Note: Heritage Permit Application requirements differ between Part V designations depending on the policies
and guidelines of the respective Heritage Conservation District Plans. Please refer to the City of Kitchener's
website at www.kitchener.ca/heritage to download a copy of the relevant Heritage Conservation District Plan
(Civic Centre Neighbourhood, St. Mary's, Upper Doon, and Victoria Park Area).
3. WHAT INFORMATION IS REQUIRED WITH A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION?
The information required varies with each application. The intent of the application is to ensure that Heritage
Planning staff and, where required, the Heritage Kitchener committee understand the specific details of any
proposed changes in order to be sufficiently informed so they may offer advice to the applicant and, where
required, to City Council. An incomplete application cannot be processed and the official notice of receipt (as
required under the Ontario Heritage Act) will not be issued until all of the documents have been submitted.
Failure to provide a complete application may result in deferral by Heritage Planning staff or the Heritage
Kitchener committee in order to secure additional information, which will delay final approval. At minimum,
the following information is required:
Heritage Permit Application Form
The applicant must provide a complete original copy, including signature of the owner, of the Heritage Permit
Application Form.
Written Description
The applicant must provide a complete written description of all proposed work. The description should
complement drawings, detailed construction plans, photos and any other sketches or supporting information
submitted with the application. The written description must include a list and the details of all proposed work
including, but not limited to, proposed colours, materials, sizes, etc.
Construction and Elevation Drawings
Along with construction elevation drawings (drawn to scale) the applicant may also, but not in lieu of, submit
a sketch of the proposed work made over a photograph.
Drawings must be drawn to scale and include:
a) Overall dimensions
b) Site plan depicting the location of existing buildings and the location of any proposed new building or
addition to a building
c) Elevation plan for each elevation of the building
d) Specific sizes of building elements of interest (signs, windows, awnings, etc.)
e) Detailed information including trim, siding, mouldings, etc., including sizes and profiles
f) Building materials to be used (must also be included in the written description)
g) Construction methods and means of attachment (must also be included in the written description)
Some of the above components may be scoped or waived at the discretion of Heritage Planning staff
following discussion with the applicant.
Photographs
Photographs of the building including general photos of the property, the streetscape in which the property
is located, facing streetscape and, if the property is located at an intersection, all four corners. Photos of the
specific areas that may be affected by the proposed alteration, new construction, or demolition must be
included.
Electronic copies of construction and elevation drawings, sketches, and photographs, along with
hard copies submitted with the application, are encouraged.
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
Samples
Page 3 of 10
It is recommended that applicants bring samples of the materials to be used to the Heritage Kitchener
meeting when their application is to be considered. This may include a sample of the windows, brick, siding,
roofing material, as well as paint chips to identify proposed paint colours.
Other Required Information
In some circumstances Heritage Planning staff may require additional information, such as a Heritage Impact
Assessment or Conservation Plan, to support the Heritage Permit Application. The requirement for additional
information will be identified as early on in the Heritage Permit Application process as possible. Pre -
consultation with Heritage Planning staff before formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application is strongly
encouraged.
4. WHAT CAN I DO IF MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION IS DENIED?
City of Kitchener Heritage Planning staff and the Heritage Kitchener committee endeavour to come to
solutions for every Heritage Permit Application submitted. Discussions with the applicant and revisions
usually result in successful applications.
However, if the municipality refuses your application and you choose not to resolve the issue with a revised
application, you have the option of appealing the decision to the Conservation Review Board (for alterations
to designated properties under Part IV) or the Ontario Municipal Board (for demolition of property designated
under Part IV or for any work to designated property under Part V).
5. IMPORTANT NOTES
Professional Assistance
Although it is not a requirement to obtain professional assistance in the preparation of this information, the
applicant may wish to seek such assistance from an architect, architectural technologist, draftsperson or
others familiar with the assessment of buildings and the gathering together of building documents.
Building Codes and Other By-laws
It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure compliance with all other applicable legislation, regulations and
by-laws. These items include the Ontario Building and Fire Codes, and the City's zoning and property
standards by-laws.
2022 Heritage Permit Application
Submission Deadlines
2022 Heritage Kitchener Meeting Dates
November 26, 2021
January 4, 2022
December 17, 2021
February 1, 2022
January 21, 2022
March 1, 2022
February 25, 2022
April 5, 2022
March 25, 2022
May 3, 2022
April 29, 2022
June 7, 2022
-
No July Meeting
June 24, 2022
August 2, 2022
July 29, 2022
September 6, 2022
-
No October Meeting
September 23, 2022
November 1, 2022
-
No December Meeting
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022 Page 4 of 10
6. HOW DO I PROCEED WITH SUBMITTING MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION?
a) Heritage Planning Staff are available to meet with applicants and review all documentation prior to formal
submission. Often Heritage Planning staff can assist you with historical and architectural information that
might help with your proposed changes.
b) Formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application with all supporting documentation (written
description, construction drawings, sketch plans, scale drawing, photographs) to Heritage Planning staff
are due approximately five (5) weeks prior to a Heritage Kitchener meeting (see schedule for submission
deadlines and committee meeting dates).
c) Upon confirmation of the submission of a complete application, including the owner's signature and all
supporting documentation, Heritage Planning staff will issue a Notice of Receipt, as required by the
Ontario Heritage Act, to the Applicant.
d) Heritage Planning staff determine whether the Heritage Permit Application may be processed under
delegated authority approval without the need to go to Heritage Kitchener and/or Council. Where Heritage
Permit Applications can be processed under delegated authority approval without the need to go to
Heritage Kitchener and Council, Heritage Planning staff will endeavour to process the application within
10 business days.
e) Where Heritage Permit Applications are required to go to Heritage Kitchener, Heritage Planning staff
prepare a staff Report based on good conservation practice and the designating by-law, or the guidelines
and policies in the Heritage Conservation District Plan. Preparation of the staff Report may require a site
inspection.
f) Heritage Kitchener Meeting Agenda, including staff Report, circulated to Committee members prior to
Heritage Kitchener meeting. Staff Report circulated to applicant prior to meeting.
g) Heritage Permit Application is considered at Heritage Kitchener meeting. Heritage Planning staff present
staff Report and Recommendations to Heritage Kitchener. Applicants are encouraged to attend the
Heritage Kitchener meeting in order to provide clarification and answer questions as required. Failure to
attend the Heritage Kitchener meeting may result in a deferral in order to secure additional information,
which would delay consideration of the Heritage Permit Application. Where the applicant, Heritage
Planning staff, and Heritage Kitchener support the Heritage Permit Application, the application may be
processed under delegated authority and approved by the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning.
Where the applicant, Heritage Planning staff and/or Heritage Kitchener do not support the Heritage
Permit Application, the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation will be
forwarded to Council for final decision.
h) Where the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation are forward to
Council for final decision, Council may:
1. Approve the Heritage Permit Application;
2. Approve the Heritage Permit Application on Terms and Conditions; or,
3. Refuse the Heritage Permit Application.
i) Within 30 days of receiving Notice of Council's Decision, the applicant may appeal the decision and/or
terms and conditions to the Conservation Review Board or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT).
7. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO
DESIGNATED PROPERTY
Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should indicate an understanding of the reasons for
designation and heritage attributes of the designated property and, if applicable, the surrounding area,
including the following:
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
Page 5 of 10
Setting
1. Positioning of the heritage building or structure on the property
2. Lot size related to building size
3. Streetscape (relationship to other properties and structures on the street)
Building Details
1. Proportion and massing
2. Roof type and shape
3. Materials and detailing
4. Windows and doors:
• Style
• Proportions
• Frequency or placement
5. Relationship of the heritage building to other buildings on the lot and to the streetscape
Heritage Attributes
The following applies where a Heritage Permit Application includes work on heritage attributes:
Windows and Doors
The applicant should consider in order of priority:
1. Repairing or retrofitting the existing units (information on how to make older windows more energy
efficient is available from Heritage Planning staff)
2. Replacing the units with new units matching the originals in material, design, proportion and colour
3. Replacing the units with new units that are generally in keeping with the original units
If historic window units are proposed to be replaced the application should include the following:
• Description of the condition of the existing units
• Reasons for replacing the units
• Description of the proposed new units
If approval to replace historic window units is given, the following action should be considered:
• A sample of a window removed should be stored on site in case a future owner wishes to construct
a replica of the original
• The masonry opening and/or door framing should not be disturbed
• Exterior trim should match the original
Roofing
The application should include:
• Description of proposed roofing material to be applied
• If there is a request to install a different roofing material, the applicant may wish to investigate what
the original material might have been
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
Page 6 of 10
Masonry Work
The application should include:
A description of the proposed work, materials (type/style of brick, type of mortar mix, etc.) and
methods of repair and application
• Outline the reasons for the work
Signage
The application should include:
• A general written description of the proposed signage to be installed
A scale drawing of the signage with dimensions, materials, methods of construction, colours and
means of attachment (the means of attachment should be arranged to anchor into joints between
historic masonry units or into wood building elements)
• Type of illumination, if applicable
Awnings
The application should include:
• A sketch view of the proposed awning — perhaps over a photo
A scale drawing of the awning on the building with dimensions, materials, operating mechanism,
method of construction, colours and means of attachment (the means of attachment should be
arranged to anchor into joints between masonry units or into wooden building elements)
• Type of illumination, if applicable.
8. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION
Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should describe the existing conditions, including
the existing setting and existing heritage attributes, of the designated property and the surrounding area,
specifically as they relate to the building proposed for demolition. The Heritage Permit Application should
provide a detailed rationale for the demolition, including an assessment of the current condition of the
building, and a cost comparison identifying the difference in cost to repair and restore the building versus
cost to demolish and construct a new building.
9. HERITAGE CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES
The Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work (e.g., alteration, new construction
or demolition) is consistent with the designating by-law for individual properties (Part IV) or the Heritage
Conservation District Plan for properties within a Heritage Conservation District (Part V designation). In
addition, the Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work is consistent with the
Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (available at
www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx).
For more information on Heritage Planning in the City of Kitchener please contact our heritage planning
staff at heritage(o-)-kitchener.ca.
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION &
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Planning Division — 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
.jR P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-2426; plan ningCu)-kitchener.ca
STAFF USE ONLY
Page 7 of 10
Date Received:
Accepted By:
Application Number:
H PA -2021 -
PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
1. NATURE OF APPLICATION
❑ Exterior ❑ Interior ❑ Signage
❑ Demolition 13 New Construction ❑ Alteration ❑ Relocation
2. SUBJECT PROPERTY
Municipal Address: 22 Weber Street West Kitchener
Legal Description (if know): Plan 360 Pt Lot 5
Building/Structure Type: E3 Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ Institutional
Heritage Designation: ❑ Part IV (Individual) ® Part V (Heritage Conservation District)
Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement? ❑ Yes CTNo
3. PROPERTY OWNER
Name: 30 Duke Street Limited
Address: 1001-30 Duke Street West
City/Province/Postal Code: Kitchener Ontario N2H 3W5
Phone:
Email:
4. AGENT (if applicable)
Name: Dan Currie
Company: MHBC Planning
Address: 200-540 Bingemans Centre Drive
City/Province/Postal Code: Kitchener Ontario N213 3X9
Phone
Email:
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022 Page 8 of 10
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 is no existing building, the lands are vacant. The submitted HIA provides details on the development and its
conformity with the CCNHCD
6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work:
The lands are currently vacant. The proposal is for a multi-storey, multiple unit residential building.
Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage
Conservation District Plan:
A Heritage Impact Assessment has been completed that reviews conformity of the proposed development
with the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan.
Describe how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the
Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx):
N/A
7. PROPOSED WORKS
a) Expected start date: 2023 Expected completion date: 2025
b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? 13 Yes ❑ No
- If yes, who did you speak to? Leon Bensason; Victoria Grohn
c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? ❑ Yes 13 No
- If yes, who did you speak to?
d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? ❑ Yes C$ No
e) Other related Building or Planning applications
Application number,
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Page 9 of 10
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 Division does not guarantee it to be a `complete' 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 be undertaken 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 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 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.
Signature of Owner/Agent Date: 3/29/2022
Signature of Owner/Agent: Date:
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, owner of the land that is subject of this application,
hereby authorize Dan Currie to act on my / our behalf in this regard.
Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: March 29, 2022
Signature of Owner/Agent: Date:
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).
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2022
Application Number:
Application Received:
Application Complete:
Notice of Receipt:
Notice of Decision:
90 -Day Expiry Date:
PROCESS:
❑ Heritage Planning Staff:
❑ Heritage Kitchener:
❑ Council:
Page 10 of 10
STAFF USE ONLY
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
HERITAGE
IMPACT
ASSESSMENT
REPORT
22 Weber Street West,
City of Kitchener
Date:
November, 2021
Prepared for:
30 Duke Street Limited
Prepared by:
MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson
Planning Limited (MHBC)
200-540 Bingemans Centre Drive
Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T: 519 576 3650
F: 519 576 0121
Our Hal 961 A'
AAW
a
III
MHBC
P L A N N I N G
URBAN DESIGN
& LANDSCAPE
ARCI- !M T,_'RE
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
DATE
November, 2021
PREPARED FOR
30 Duke Street Ltd.
': 9MITIM"
MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited
200-540 Bingmenas Centre Drive
Kitchener, ON N213 3X9
T: 519 576 3650
F: 519 576 0121
November2021 MHBC 11
Page 26 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
TABLE of CONTENTS
PROJECTPERSONNEL...............................................................................................................................................................................4
GLOSSARYOF ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................................................................................................4
Acknowledgement of Indigenous Communities.................................................................................................................5
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.........................................................................................................................................................................6
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
1.1 LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY....................................................................................................................................8
1.2 HERITAGE STATUS......................................................................................................................................................................10
1.2.1 Subject Property: 22 Weber Street West............................................................................................................10
1.2.2 Adjacent Lands...................................................................................................................................................................10
1.3 LAND USE AND ZONING........................................................................................................................................................11
2.0 POLICY & GUIDELINES..............................................................................................................................................................14
2.1 THE PLANNING ACT AND PPS 2020...............................................................................................................................14
2.2 ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT.......................................................................................................................................................15
2.3 REGION OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN.....................................................................................................................15
2.4 CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN..............................................................................................................................17
2.5 CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN (2007) ................18
2.6 PARTS CENTRAL PLAN.....................................................................................................................................................18
2.7 CITY OF KITCHENER TERMS OF REFERENCE, HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS..............................19
3.013ACKGROUND RESEARCH AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT................................................................................22
3.1 CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD....................................................................................................................................22
4.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ............................28
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT............................................................28
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE WEBER STREET STREETSCAPE.....................................................................................29
4.3 DESCRIPTION OF 22 WEBER STREET WEST...........................................................................................................31
4.4 DESCRIPTION OF ADJACENT LANDS.............................................................................................................................35
4.4.1 Weber Street West............................................................................................................................................................
35
4.4.2 Roy Street................................................................................................................................................................................
36
November2027 MHBC 12
Page 27 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
5.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT......................................................................................................39
6.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................................................42
6.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................................
42
6.2 CCNHCD PLAN POLICY INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................42
6.3 IMPACT ANALYSIS: 22 WEBER STREET WEST............................................................................................................43
6.3.1 CCNHCD Plan Policies that Apply to all Development............................................................................ 43
6.3.2 Weber Street Area Specific Policies.......................................................................................................................45
6.4 IMPACT ANALYSIS: ADJACENT LANDS.........................................................................................................................51
6.4.1 WEBER STREET WEST.......................................................................................................................................................51
6.4.2 IMPACT ANALYSIS: ROY STREET...............................................................................................................................52
6.5 SUMMARY OF IMPACT ANALYSIS....................................................................................................................................53
7.0 MITIGATION AND CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................55
7.1 ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS......................................................................................................................55
7.1.1 'Do Nothing' Alternative...............................................................................................................................................55
7.1.2 Redevelop Site with Decreased Height and Density................................................................................
55
7.1.3 Redevelop Site with Increased Density..............................................................................................................56
7.1.4 Redevelop Site with Alternative Designs & Materials...............................................................................56
7.2 MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................................56
8.0 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................57
9.0 WORKS CONSULTED..............................................................................................................................................................59
APPENDIX A — LOCATION MAP......................................................................................................................................................60
APPENDIX B — ANGULAR PLANE ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................................61
APPENDIXC — SHADOW STUDY....................................................................................................................................................62
APPENDIX D — SITE PLAN & RENDERINGS................................................................................................................................63
APPENDIX E — CURRICULUM VITAE..............................................................................................................................................64
November2027 MHBC 13
Page 28 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
PROJECT PERSONNEL
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP,
CAHP
Vanessa Hicks, MA, CAHP
Managing Director of Cultural
Heritage
Heritage Planner
Senior Review
Research, Author
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
H IA
Heritage Impact Assessment
HCD
Heritage Conservation District
MHBC
MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson
Planning Limited
M HSTCI
Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture
Industries
0 HA
Ontario Heritage Act
OHTK
Ontario Heritage Toolkit
0 -REG 9/06
Ontario Regulation 9/06 for determining cultural
heritage significance
PPS 2020
Provincial Policy Statement (2020)
November2027 MHBC 14
Page 29 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Acknowledgement of Indigenous
Communities
This Heritage Impact Assessment acknowledges that the subject property located at 22 Weber
Street West of the City of Kitchener, is situated territory of the Haudenosaunee, of the
Haudenosauneega Confederacy. These lands are acknowledged as being associated with the
following treaties:
• Treaty of the Haldimand Tract, Established 1793
This document takes into consideration the cultural heritage of Indigenous Communities, including
their oral traditions and history when available and related to the scope of work.
November2027 MHBC 15
Page 30 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MHBC was retained by 30 Duke Street Ltd. to undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the
subject property located at 22 Weber Street West. The purpose of this Heritage Impact Assessment
is to evaluate the proposed development in terms of potential impacts to cultural heritage
resources and provide mitigation recommendations, where necessary.
The proposed development includes the construction of a 19 storey multiple residential building
on a lot currently used as surface parking. The proposed new building does not include the
demolition or alteration of any cultural heritage resources located on-site or adjacent. As the
proposed new building is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District, any new development is subject to the policies of the CCNHCD Plan.
SUMMARY OF IMPACT ANALYSIS:
The CCNHCD Plan recognizes that Weber Street is different from the interior of the district and sets
forth policies for new development which are specific to this area. The Plan recognizes that Weber
Street West is designated High Density Commercial Residential. The Plan allows for higher density
developments provided that it a) does not result in the demolition of significant cultural heritage
resources is and b) is compatible with the character of the streetscape.
This Heritage Impact Assessment has demonstrated that the character Weber Street West is varied
and includes buildings of a higher scale than that of the interior of the district. The proposed new
19 storey residential building is taller than that of buildings located adjacent (contiguous), but
maximises density while respecting adjacent cultural heritage resources and conforming to the
policies of the HCD Plan.
The Heritage Conservation District Plan does not apply maximum height limits for development
within the Weber Street Area. Instead the HCD Plan identifies a number of policies and guidelines
that govern the development of new buildings. The proposed development is consistent with
these policies and guidelines as follows:
• The proposed new building is contemporary in style and includes materials such as neutral
toned masonry;
• The building includes a 2 story main entrance/podium which emphasizes the pedestrian
scale;
November2021 MHBC 16
Page 31 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
• The contemporary design includes a symmetrical arrangement of square and rectangular
shaped windows in a regularly established rhythm which will not detract from the buildings
located adjacent at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West; and
• The height of the proposed new building is within the 45 degree angular plane as per the
analysis provided in Appendix B of this report.
The proposed development will not result in any adverse impacts related to obstruction, isolation,
change in land use, or shadows. The proposed development is considered a neutral impact to
adjacent heritage resources within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District
(CCNHCD) located along Weber Street West and Roy Street.
There is potential for impacts to adjacent buildings as a result of construction activities. Mitigation
recommendations for the proposed development are limited to monitoring potential vibration
impacts, if necessary.
Note to the Reader., The purpose of this executive summary is to highlight key aspects of this report and
therefore does not elaborate on other components. Please note that this report is intended to be read in
its entirety in order to gain a full understanding of its contents.
November2021 MHBC 17
Page 32 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
.O INTRODUCTION
MHBC was retained by 30 Duke Street Limited to undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for
the subject property located at 22 Weber Street West. The Heritage Impact Assessment is required
by the City of Kitchener as the subject property is included within the boundary of the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. The purpose of this Heritage Impact Assessment is
to evaluate the proposed development in terms of potential impacts to cultural heritage resources,
including adjacent properties within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District. The subject property is currently used as surface parking and as such, this HIA is focused on
potential impacts to adjacent lands and evaluates the proposal in the context of the policies for
new buildings provided in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District
(CCNHCD) Plan.
This report has been prepared as input to the planning application and development proposal. The
background information and research has provided direction on the redevelopment concept. This
report evaluates the proposal in the context of the City's policy framework and Provincial policy.
1.1 LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
The subject property is located at 22 Weber Street West and is situated on the north side of Weber
Street West, between Queen Street North and Young Street (see below).
November2021 MHBC 18
Page 33 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
r • ^ x '
Aerial Photo LEGEND
22 Weber Street West. E_,] Subject Lands
Kitchener. Ontario
Source: City of Kitchener 2!119
a
DATE: 'Fe U'Uary ="17" a
SCALE t : 9;003
FILE. 1961A
DRN. _HE5
I I
November2021 MHBC 19
Page 34 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
1.2 HERITAGE STATUS
1.2.1 Subject Property: 22 Weber Street West
The property located at 22 Weber Street West is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act
as it is located within the boundary of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District (CCNHCD). The CCNHCD Plan recognizes that this property is vacant, and does not include
any features which contribute to the character of the HCD or the Weber Street West streetscape.
The CCNHCD Plan qualifies properties in terms of their cultural heritage value and classifies them
in groups (i.e. "A", "B", "C", and "D"). The CCNHCD Plan does not assign a classification to the subject
property as it does not include any cultural heritage resources. As such, the property has not been
evaluated in this report under the criteria of Ontario Regulation 9/06 for determining cultural
heritage value or interest.
1.2.2 Adjacent Lands
The City of Kitchener Official Plan identifies that a Heritage Impact Assessment shall include
consideration for cultural heritage resources on adjacent lands. The City of Kitchener Official Plan
defines adjacent as follows:
Adjacent - lands, buildings and/or structures that are contiguous or that are directly
opposite to other lands, buildings and/or structures, separated only by a Janeway,
municipal road or other right-of-way.
For the purpose of this Heritage Impact Assessment, the above -noted policies of the City of
Kitchener Official Plan identify that the following properties are technically located adjacent to the
proposed development and should be included in the scope of this report:
• 32 Weber Street West;
• 35 Roy Street;
• 31 Roy Street;
• 27 Roy Street;
• 23 Roy Street;
• 18 Weber Street West; and
• 28 Weber Street West.
The property located at 22 Weber Street West is located adjacent to the properties at 18 Weber
Street West and 28 Weber Street West and shares a street frontage with these properties. As a result,
November2021 MHBC 110
Page 35 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
this forms the most direct relationship between any proposed new building and adjacent cultural
heritage resources. Therefore, this HIA focuses on impacts to properties located at 28 Weber Street
West, 18 Weber Street West, and provides an analysis of potential impacts to properties located on
the south side of Roy Street.
Figure 1: Excerpt of the CCNHCD Figure 3 Map, Group A & B Properties. Location of subject property
shaded in green. Properties located adjacent outlined with blue dashed line. (Source: CCNHCD Plan,
Figure 3)
1.3 LAND USE AND ZONING
The subject lands are designated High Density Commercial Residential as per the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Secondary Plan (see Figure 2). This designation recognizes the proximity of the
subject lands to downtown Kitchener (Urban Growth Centre) as well as the property's frontage on
Weber Street, which is a Regional Arterial Road and has been designated as a Planned Transit
Corridor.
November2021 M H B C 111
Page 36 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
I ti " ]VIL-1 f Ar 1_%, -Imh� .00
Figure 2: Excerpt of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan, Map 9, noting the subject property
as "High Density Commercial Residential". Approximate location of subject lands noted in red. (Source:
Kitchener Public Library)
The "High Density Commercial Residential" designation permits a range of residential, commercial
and retail uses within free standing buildings or mixed use buildings. Official Plan policies provide
for a maximum floor space ratio of 4.0 and permit high density residential development. Approved
Official Plan policies have been implemented by the Commercial Residential 3 Zone (CR -3) of By-
law 85-1.
The subject property backs onto lots on the south side of Roy Street. As shown in Figure 2, the lands
on the south side of Roy Street are designated Office Residential Conversion. The Office Residential
Conversion designation permits a range of residential uses and office commercial uses including
private home day care, home business, and hospice. The intent of the Office Residential Conversion
designation is to provide a transition from the high density development on Weber Street to the
low-rise residential uses located internal to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood.
November 2021
MHBC 112
Page 37 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
CR3 MIX -3
D-4
R-6 164U
/ / CR -1
X21
/ I-2 MIX -2 (162)
■ Da4 97R
Figure 3: Excerpt of the City of Kitchener Interactive Map, Zoning layer, identifying the subject property
within the Commercial -Residential 3 Zone. Approximate location of subject lands denoted in red. (Source:
Kitchener Public Library)
CI
November2021 MHBC 113
Page 38 of 379
P R41
RES -5
R-9 RES -7
R-6 12711
RES
-3 (159), (1)
R-6 131i9U
R-{ 1540
RES -3( 9)1 ( 0).(161)
f�
�+ CR -3 16H,
13338
R-5 1840
CR +ti �
!
CR -1
MIX -2
R-6 164U
/ / CR -1
X21
/ I-2 MIX -2 (162)
■ Da4 97R
Figure 3: Excerpt of the City of Kitchener Interactive Map, Zoning layer, identifying the subject property
within the Commercial -Residential 3 Zone. Approximate location of subject lands denoted in red. (Source:
Kitchener Public Library)
CI
November2021 MHBC 113
Page 38 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
2.O POLICY& GUIDELINES
2.1 TH E PLAN N I NG ACT AN D PPS 2020
The Planning Act makes a number of provisions respecting cultural heritage, either directly in
Section 2 of the Act or Section 3 respecting policy statements and provincial plans. In Section 2, the
Planning Act outlines 18 spheres of provincial interest that must be considered by appropriate
authorities in the planning process. One of the intentions of The PlanningAct is to "encourage the
co-operation and co-ordination among the various interests". Regarding cultural heritage,
Subsection 2(d) of the Act provides that:
The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the
Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act shall have regard to,
among othermatters, matters of provincial interestsuch as,...
(d) the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical,
archaeological orscientific interest;
The Planning Act therefore provides for the overall broad consideration of cultural heritage
resources through the land use planning process.
In support of the provincial interest identified in Subsection 2 (d) of the Planning Act, and as
provided for in Section 3, the Province has refined policy guidance for land use planning and
development matters in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS). The PPS is "intended to be read
in its entirety and the relevant policy areas are to be applied in each situation". This provides a
weighting and balancing of issues within the planning process. When addressing cultural heritage
planning, the PPS provides for the following:
2.6.7 Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage
landscapes shall be conserved.
Significant: 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
November2021 MHBC 114
Page 39 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
heritage value or interest are established by the Province under
the authority of the Ontario Heritage Act.
The subject property located at 22 Weber Street West is considered protected heritage property
under Provincial Policy Statement as all lands within the boundary of the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District are designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act and are considered significant cultural heritage resources.
2.2 ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
The Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O, 1990, c.0.18 remains the guiding legislation for the conservation of
significant cultural heritage resources in Ontario. This HIA has been guided by the criteria provided
with Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act outlines the mechanism for determining cultural
heritage value or interest.
The Ontario Heritage Act provides the framework of legislation for the designation of Heritage
Conservation Districts. The Ontario Heritage Act also requires that all development within the
heritage conservation district must be consistent with the heritage conservation district plan.
Section 42 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act prescribes that no owner of property in a designated
Heritage Conservation District may alter any part of a property or erect or demolish a building
without obtaining approval from the municipality by way of a heritage permit.
2.3 REGION OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN
Chapter 3, Section 3.G of the Regional Official Plan provides policies regarding the conservation of
cultural heritage resources which are related to the scope of this Heritage Impact Assessment as
fol lows:
3.G Cultural Heritage
Cultural heritage resources are the inheritance of natural and cultural assets that give
people a sense of place, community and personal identity. Continuity with the past
promotes creativity and cultural diversity. The region has a rich and diverse heritage,
including distinctive cultures, traditions, festivals, artisans and craftspeople, landmarks,
landscapes, properties, structures, burial sites, cemeteries, natural features and
archaeological resources. These resources provide an important means of defining and
confirming a regional identity, enhancing the quality of life of the community,
November2021 MHBC 115
Page 40 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
supporting social development and promoting economic prosperity. The Region is
committed to the conservation of its cultural heritage. This responsibility is shared with
the Federal and Provincial governments, Area Municipalities, other government
agencies, the private sector, property owners and the community.
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
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, theArea 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 ImpactAssessment 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 mayaffecta 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 orsite alteration;
(d) assessment of development orsite alteration impacts;
(e) consideration of alternatives, mitigation and conservation methods;
(f) schedule and reporting structure for implementation and monitoring; and
(g) a summary statement and conservation recommendations.
November2021 MHBC 116
Page 41 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
2,4 CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN
Section 12 of the Kitchener Official Plan (2014) provides the following policies regarding the
conservation of cultural heritage resources as it relates to the scope of this Heritage Impact
Assessment as follows:
Objectives
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.
Policies
12.C.1.7. 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 Cemeteries Act and the Municipal Act.
12, C.1.2. 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.
Heritage Conservation Districts
The following selection of policies of the City of Kitchener Official Plan provide direction regarding
change management in a designated Heritage Conservation District.
12, C.1.21. All development, redevelopment and site alteration permitted by the land use
designations and other policies of this Plon 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.
November2021 MHBC 117
Page 42 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Design/Integration
72. C. 7.46. The City will prepare guidelines as part of the Urban Design Manual to address
the conservation of cultural heritage resources in the city and to recognize the
importance of the context in which the cultural heritage resources are located.
72.C.7.47. The City may require architectural design guidelines to guide development,
redevelopment and site alteration on, adjacent to, or in close proximity to properties
designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or other cultural heritage resources.
2.5 CMC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD HERITAGE
CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN (2007)
The subject property located at 22 Weber Street West is located within the boundary of the Civic
Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) Plan, which was designated in
2007 under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. Section 1.2 of the CCNHCD Plan identifies that its
purpose is as follows,
... to protect, over the long term, areas that hove important and/or identifiable historic
and architectural resources.
While the subject property is vacant, any new construction must comply with the policies of the
CCNHCD Plan. The purpose of policies for new development on vacant lands is to ensure that it is
compatible with the character of the area and impacts to the District are minimized or avoided. The
CCNHCD Plan recognizes that there are distinctly different areas within the HCD. One of these
distinctly different areas identified in the HCD Plan includes Weber Street. The CCNHCD Plan
provides policies specific to the Weber Street Corridor, which is recognized as being designated
High Density Commercial Residential. Section 7.0 of this Heritage Impact Assessment analyzes the
conformity of the proposed development with the applicable policies of the CCNHCD Plan,
including Sections 3.3.5.2 and 6.9.4.
2.6 PARTS CENTRAL PLAN
This Heritage Impact Assessment acknowledges that the subject property located at 22 Weber
Street West is included in lands identified in the PARTS Central Plan as Mixed Use Medium Density
November2021 MHBC 118
Page 43 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
with policies and guidelines for transition between Weber Street and Roy Street. This Plan provides
guidelines regarding appropriate development.
Section 7.0 of the PARTS Central Plan regarding Cultural Heritage Resources identifies the following
as it relates to the scope of this HIA,
For development involving new building activity on or adjacent heritage property, the
built form including scale, height, massing, architectural character and materials,
should be compatible with the surrounding historic context. It is not expected that
development replicate historical styles and decoration. However, new buildings must be
able to demonstrate complementary proportions and massing in order to continue the
rhythm of traditional facade or street patterns and provide for an appropriate transition
where significantly higher densities are proposed.
Section 8.0 of the PARTS Central Plan identifies the following as it relates to cultural heritage and
transitioning,
The conservation and integration of heritage buildings, structures and uses within a
Heritage Conservation District should be achieved through appropriately scaled
development that is sensitive to the built cultural heritage.
Where Medium Density Mixed Use land designation abuts low rise residential uses, the
bulk of the massing in the Mixed use designation should abut the street thereby
providing a maximum separation between the adjacent low density uses.
Given that the subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District Plan, this HIA refers to the policies provided therein as it relates to the
proposed development. The PARTS Central Plan is not a Policy document and implementation will
be the updated Secondary Plans which are under review.
2.7 CITY OF KITCHENER TERMS OF REFERENCE,
HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
The City of Kitchener Official Plan provides the following as it relates to the requirements for
Heritage Impact Assessments:
November2021 MHBC 119
Page 44 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Heritage Impact Assessments and Heritage Conservation Plans
72.C.7.23. The City will require the submission of Heritage Impact Assessment and/ora
Heritage Conservation 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 73.C.4.6 through
73.C.4.18 inclusive;
c) on properties listed as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest
on the Municipal Heritage Register,
d) on properties listed on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings; and/or,
e) on or adjacent to an identified cultural heritage landscape.
72. C. 7.24. Where a Heritage Impact Assessment required under Policy 72. C. 7.23 relates to
a cultural heritage resource of Regional interest, the City will ensure that a copy of the
assessment is circulated to the Region for reviewprior to final consideration by the City.
72.C.1.25, A Heritage ImpactAssessment and Heritage Conservation Plan required by the
City must be prepared by a qualified person in accordance with the minimum
requirements os outlined in the City of Kitchener's Terms of Reference for Heritage Impact
Assessments and Heritage Conservation Plans.
72, C. 7.26. The contents of a Heritage Impact Assessment will be outlined in a Terms of
Reference. In general, the contents of 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 orsite alteration;
d) assessment of development orsite 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.
November2021 MHBC 120
Page 45 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
12.C.1.27. 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 ImpactAssessments and Heritage Conservation Plans required by the
City maybe scoped or waived by the City, as deemed appropriate.
November2021 MHBC 121
Page 46 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
3,013ACKGROUND
RESEARCH AND HISTORICAL
CONTEXT
3.1 CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD
The Civic Centre Neighbourhood was developed in the 19th and 20th centuries as a residential area
adjacent to Kitchener's former industrial core located south of the railway, providing homes for
those who owned or work for businesses/factories in the area.
The earliest residential buildings date from the 1850s, with the majority constructed between 1880
and 1915. The area developed slowly, experiencing significant infill in the late 1920s. The
construction of apartment buildings dotted the neighbourhood beginning in the 1960s. The
neighbourhood reflects the long development of the area from the 1850s to the recent past with
a variety of housing styles.
According to the 1853-1854 Map of Berlin surveyed by M.C. Schofield, the subject lands were part
of a large vacant parcel of land extending north towards what is now Margaret Avenue (See Figure
4).
November2027 MHBC 122
Page 47 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
A �f_ F
f�
Figure 4: Detail of M.C. Schofield map of Berlin, 1853. Approximate location of subject lands denoted in
red. (Source: Kitchener Public Library)
According to the 1875 Bird's Eye View map, the context of the subject lands had changed
considerably from 1853. New buildings are noted along Weber Street West, and Ahrens Street was
extended towards Queen Street North. Some of the buildings noted on this map at the north side
of Weber Street West, west of Queen Street North were demolished at some point to facilitate the
construction of existing buildings, including the existing St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church at 54
Queen Street North. The building noted on the subject lands was likely the house constructed for
Charles H. Ahrens.
November2021 MHBC 123
Page 48 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
•',AyttIIR4,
L
Fr .r � L ������ 1 •-
Charles H. Ahrens house
t
(Parcel 5, Plan 360), now
demotisliedl
t 4
fit
r' L � •a
Iris
Figure 5: Detail of the 1875 Bird's Eye View map of Berlin. Approximate location of subject lands noted in
red. (Source: Kitchener Public Library)
According to the 1879 map, the context of the subject property is confirmed as Parcel 5 of Ahrens
Survey, which was registered in the later half of the 19th century by Charles H. Ahrens. The 1879 map
indicates that St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church had been constructed at the north-west corner of
Queen Street North and Weber Street West. The subject property is noted as including a building
owned by Mrs. Ahrens' (widow of Charles H. Ahrens).
According to land registry records, the Executors of Mrs. Ahrens sold to George Potter in 1906. The
descendants of Potter sold to James K. Sims and Albert W. Boos "as Trustees" (likely for the church)
in 1956. The legal description of the property refers to Instrument No. 917350, when the property
was sold by Marathon Realty Co. in 1987. At this time, the property was valued at $550,000.00.
The CCNHCD study identifies that the existing building located at 18 Weber Street West (adjacent
to the subject lands) was constructed for Herbert J. Bowman in 1896 (on Parcel 4 of Ahrens survey).
' Also spelled "Aherns"
November 2021
MHBC 124
Page 49 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
This property is noted as being vacant on the 1879 map (See Figure 6). The existing building located
at 28 Weber Street West (adjacent property to the west of the subject lands) was constructed in the
1870s for John Moffatt (Parcel 6, Ahrens Survey). This building is clearly visible on the map below,
west of Parcel 5. The CCNHCD Study identifies that the Zion Evangelical Church was not
constructed until 1893.
low
PF 14�V
M# d
-J
Figure 6: Detail of the 1879 Bird's Eye View map of Berlin. Approximate location of subject lands denoted
in red. (Source: Kitchener Public Library)
The 1955 aerial photograph does not clearly depict the features of Weber Street West, or the subject
property. The north side of Weber Street appears to include buildings and mature trees in the
context of the subject lands, suggesting that it was not yet used for surface parking.
November2021 MHBC 125
Page 50 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 7: Excerpt of the 1955 aerial photograph of Kitchener, Ontario. Approximate location of subject
lands denoted in red. (Source: University of Waterloo)
The aerial photograph shown in Figure 8 indicates that by 1997 the property was used for surface
parking and all buildings had been demolished. The Civic Centre Neighbourhood was designated
in 2007 and all properties within the boundary of the HCD were designated under Part V of the
Ontario Heritage Act.
November2021 MHBC 126
Page 51 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
'� �► ii � F
Figure 8: Excerpt of the 1997 aerial photograph of Kitchener, Ontario. Approximate location of subject
lands denoted in red. (Source: City of Kitchener Interactive Map)
November2027 MHBC 127
Page 52 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
4.O DETAILED DESCRIPTION
OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL
HERITAGE RESOURCES
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF LANDSCAPE AND
SURROUNDING CONTEXT
The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan states that the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood is characterized by mature trees along boulevards and linear streets with
consistent building setbacks. Laneways are found throughout the District, which reflect the historic
pattern of movement. Yards are well maintained and often display plantings, trees, fences, and
hedges. Public parks are dotted throughout the CCNHCD, including Hibner Park and Civic Centre
Park, both of which are located west of the subject lands (CCNHCD Plan, 2007).
The District contains a range of architectural styles, reflecting the development of the area
beginning in the mid. 19th century. The neighbourhood includes buildings in the vernacular style
of architecture, reflecting local influences and materials. Overall, the landscape and setting
contribute to tell the story of Kitchener's growth at the turn of the 19th century and the
development of local industry (CCNHCD Plan, 2007).
The CCNHCD Study and Plan recognize that the District is made-up of different areas which have
unique character. These areas are located at the perimeter of the District and are intended to
incorporate higher density developments along Victoria Street and Weber Street, for example. The
following (Section 4.2) provides a description of the character of Weber Street.
November2021 MHBC 128
Page 53 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE WEBER STREET
STREETSCAPE
The existing built form of Weber Street West (within the CCNHCD boundary) is a result of its
evolution over time. Weber Street West includes 19th century residential buildings as well as 20th
century developments. The 19th century buildings were formerly surrounded by landscaped open
space, which has, in some cases, been converted to large areas of surface parking. Weber Street has
been widened and as a result, does not reflect the same intimate streetscape as that of the
residential streets at the interior of the district.
The addition of 20th century buildings having a range of uses including residential, institutional and
commercial transformed this area from primarily residential to that of mixed-use. As a result, the
existing built form of Weber Street West includes a range of architectural styles, scale/heights, and
setbacks and there is no consistent built form. The late 19th and early 20th century buildings (i.e.
adjacent churches and residential buildings at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West) are
constructed of masonry in a range of colours. These buildings share a commonality in terms of
materials and continue to support the overall varied nature of the streetscape in terms of its built
form.
The south side of Weber Street West is designated as part of Downtown Kitchener and as a result,
includes higher density contemporary developments than that of the north side, which includes a
range of low to medium density buildings.
Figure 9 — View of Weber Street West, looking east from Ontario Street North (Source: MHBC, 2020)
November2021 MHBC 129
Page 54 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure X - View of Weber Street West, looking west near intersection of Weber Street West and Ontario
Street North (Source: MHBC, 2020)
The CCNHCD HCD Study acknowledges that the context of Weber Street is distinctly different than
that of any other area. Section 4.6 of the Study provides the following description of Weber Street,
CCNHCD Study, Section 4.6, Streets and Lanes,
Weber Street, particularly in proximity to Victoria Street, contains many buildings of the
same character as Victoria Street. Traffic is not as fast paced on Weber Street, and is not
as heavy as on Victoria. There are also no boulevards on Weber Street, and the street is
noticeably devoid of street trees. Although the absence of trees and grassed boulevards
sets the street apart from the interior of the district, both Weber and Water Streets differ
from Victoria in terms of scale and intimacy. The vast expanse of pavement on Victoria
Street creates a hostile environment for pedestrians, whereas Water and Weber Streets
maintain a more pedestrian scale. The remainder of the streets in the study area often
have an intimate, residential feeling to them. Many of them are tree -lined, and have a
distinctively picturesque quality about them. An absence of street trees is perhaps most
noticeable along the northern portion of Queen Street as well as on Water and College
Streets.
Section 3.3.5.2 of the CCNHCD Plan also describes the Weber Street Area as including heritage
buildings which are generally larger than the rest of the District. The HCD Plan also recognizes that
the streetscape includes two churches, small scale apartments (3-4 storeys), and a number of other
larger residences that have been converted to multiple residential units or office/commercial uses.
November2021 MHBC 130
Page 55 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 10 — View of Weber Street West looking west from Ontario Street North (west of the subject
property) (Source: MHBC, 2020)
While the CCNHCD Study identifies that Weber Street is distinctly different than that of the interior
of the District, Section 7.1 provides the reasons for which Weber Street was included in the
boundary. This includes a) the presence of a number of "well-preserved, finely detailed buildings",
and b) that nearly half of the oldest buildings in the neighbourhood (constructed prior to 1879) are
located on Weber Street.
4.3 DESCRIPTION OF 22 WEBER STREET WEST
The subject property located at 22 Weber Street West is currently used for surface parking and does
not include any built features. Section 2.4 of the CCNHCD Plan does not identify that the subject
lands includes any cultural heritage resources or features which are part of the architecture,
streetscape, or historical associations of the overall District.
November2021 MHBC 131
Page 56 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 11: Three -Dimensional Aerial Photo noting the location of the subject property in red (Source:
Google Maps, accessed 2020)
November2021 MHBC 132
Page 57 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 12 — View of subject property looking north-wesL turn Une f iUl Ln Si(Je ui Vveuer 5)U ee,
(Source: MHBC, 2020)
November2021 MHBC 133
Page 58 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 13 — View of subject property looking north-west from the south side of Weber Street West.
Location of subject property noted with red arrow. (Source: MHBC, 2020)
Figure 14 — View of subject property at 22 Weber Street West looking north-east from south side of Weber
Street West. Location of subject property noted with red arrow. (Source: MHBC, 2020)
November2021 MHBC 134
Page 59 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
4.4 DESCRIPTION OF ADJACENT LANDS
As noted in Section 1.2.2 of this report, the following properties are located adjacent (contiguous)
to the proposed development:
• 35 Roy Street;
• 31 Roy Street;
• 27 Roy Street;
• 23 Roy Street;
• 32 Weber Street West;
• 18 Weber Street West (2'/z storey vernacular, constructed 1896 by H. J. Bowman); and
• 28 Weber Street West (built 1877 by John Moffat).
4.4.1 Weber Street West
As noted previously in this report, the built form of Weber Street West streetscape varies in terms
of architectural styles, materials, and setbacks.
Address Description Photograph
32 Weber The property at 32 Weber Street West -
Street West shares a portion of its east property line
with the subject property.
The property at 32 Weber Street includes
the former Zion United Church. This E�
building is noted in the CCNHCD Plan as a I —
Gothic church constructed in 1893 (Group M+
�I
November2021 MHBC 135
Page 60 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
i ne property at zb vveoer street west
shares its entire east property line with the
subject property. The CCNHCD Plan
identifies this as a 2 'h storey 2nd Empire
Building constructed in 1877 by John
Moffat (Group "B").
The property at 18 Weber Street West
shares its entire west property line with the
subject property. The CCNHCD Plan
identifies the existing building as 2 'h
storeys, Vernacular, Constructed 1896 for
H.J. Bowman.
4.4.2 Roy Street
Roy Street is divided into a north and south side. The north side of the street is designated low
density residential, and the south side of the street is designated Residential Office Conversion. The
residential office conversion at the south side of the street serves as a buffer between the High
Density Commercial Residential designation and the Low Density residential designation. The built
form of Roy Street is much more consistentthan that of Weber Street West, having a narrow street,
consistent heights, styles, setbacks, materials, and mature trees along the boulevard.
November2021
MHBC 136
Page 61 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Address Description Photograph
35 Roy The south-east corner of the property at 35
Street Roy Street is located adjacent to the
subject property.
The property at 35 Roy Street is noted in
the CCNHCD Plan as a 2 'h storey r ~
vernacular building constructed c. 1900
(Group "B").
lip:
31 Roy The rear property line at 31 Roy Street is
Street contiguous with the subject property. The
CCNHCD Plan identifies the building as a 2
'/z storey Queen Anne dwelling
constructed c. 1895 (Group "A").
r
27 Roy The rear property line at 27 Roy Street is
Street contiguous with the subject property. The
CCNHCD Plan identifies the building as a 2
storey Vernacular dwelling constructed c. 4
1895 (Group "B").
,r"
November2021 MHBC 137
Page 62 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
23 Roy The south-west corner of the property at
Street 23 Roy Street is located adjacent to the
subject property.
The property at 23 Roy Street is noted in
the CCNHCD Plan as a 2 '/z storey Queen
Anne building constructed c. 1896 (Group
„B„
November2021 MHBC 138
Page 63 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
5. O DESCRIPTION OF
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed development of the subject property can be described as the construction of a new
nineteen (19) storey multiple residential building having 162 total units with a Floor Space Ratio
(FSR) of 7.79. The proposed development includes 24 parking spaces at grade and is a total of 58.6
metres in height. Narrow laneways on either side of the building provide access to parking towards
the rear of the lot.
The proposed design is contemporary and includes a range of materials including masonry and
glazing with neutral tones. The design includes various sizes of rectangular and square shaped
windows and balconies in with a consistent rhythm.
The building proposes a shallow front yard setback, with a generous rear yard setback of
approximately 15.9 metres.
The proposed development requires variances to allow for a FSR of 7.79 whereas 4.0 is permitted.
November2021 MHBC 139
Page 64 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
' !
P
r,\ea•• i a , - a
a
I �
24 PARKING SPACES TOTAL
----- - �--- ---- ----------
13F - - ----
BF —
i I
MR faCrC1F HR}RyGE I
I I
I
L_-_T_-___�
It r —� ---� -- ----� —�
I
oil 1 BF 1 I
i I
In,
�crri m4rtr
EX 2 STOREY
BRICK BUILDING \
■
v.�4,r Fe. •e•an icear T� II
fL —
■
a.
r c _ • r
Figure 15 — Proposed Site Plan. (Source: +VH Architects, The Ventin Group Ltd., 2021)
November 2021
MHBC 140
Page 65 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Figure 16 - Rendering of proposed development looking north towards front elevation (Source:
+VH Architects, The Ventin Group Ltd., 2021)
2 story
Podium
(4,6m)
Figure 17 -Detail of proposed front elevation (Source: +VH Architects, The Ventin Group Ltd.,
2020)
November 2021
MHBC 141
Page 66 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
6.O IMPACT ANALYSIS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The following provides a list of potential sources of adverse impacts to cultural heritage resources
which are identified in the Ontario Heritage Toolkit:
• Destruction: of any, or part of any significant heritage attributes 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 plantings, 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 of 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, and drainage patterns that
adversely affect an archaeological resource.
The following sub -sections of this report provide an analysis of the impacts which may occur as a
result of a proposed development. The following impact analysis is organized into two main
sections. This includes a) whether or not the proposed development is in conformity with the
policies of the HCD Plan regarding new development in the Weber Street area, and b) potential
impacts on adjacent properties as per the list of potential sources of impacts outlined by the
MHSTCI Ontario Heritage Toolkit (provided above).
6.2 CCNHCD PLAN POLICY INTRODUCTION
The CCNHCD Plan provides policies intended to guide change within the heritage conservation
district. These policies include those which conserve cultural heritage resources, and those which
guide compatible new development. The CCNHCD Plan provides policies specific to the Weber
November2021 MHBC 142
Page 67 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Street Corridor, which is recognized as being designated High Density Commercial Residential and
different than the balance of the district. The CCNHCD Plan provides guidelines for new
development along Weber Street. The following provides an analysis of impacts as a result of the
proposed new 19 storey building and addresses the policies provided in the CCNHCD Plan.
6.3 IMPACT ANALYSIS: 22 WEBER STREET WEST
The following analysis of impacts addresses Policies provided in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood
Heritage Conservation District Plan. This includes Sections 3.3.1 regarding development pattern
and land use, Section 3.3.5.2 regarding policies specific to the Weber Street Area as well as Section
6.9.4 which provides specific design guidelines for new development. The following sub -sections
have been organized into a) general policies of the CCNHCD Plan that apply to all development,
and b) policies that apply to development in the Weber Street Area.
6.3.1 CCNHCD Plan Policies that Apply to all Development
Section 3.3 of the CCNHCD Plan provides policies for conservation and change management. This
includes (but is not limited to) policies related to the construction of new buildings and demolition
of existing buildings.
Section 3.3.1 of the CCNHCD Plan provides a response to the following policies regarding
development pattern and land use.
3.3.7 Development Pattern and Land Use
The vast majority of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood was originally developed as single family
residential. Despite the fact that pockets of it have since been redeveloped for high-density
apartment buildings, or converted to office or commercial uses, it remains a neighborhood of
primarily original detached housing, 2 to 2-1/2 storeys in height on lots of sufficiently generous
size that parking and driveways are generally to the side of dwellings. Setbacks of original
heritage buildings are relatively uniform at the individual street level, as are building height
and scale. To maintain the general consistency of the land uses and development pattern in the
District, the following policies are proposed.
Policies:
(a) Maintain the residential amenity and human scale of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood by
ensuring that the low density residential land use character remains dominant;
November2021 MHBC 143
Page 68 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
The areas of the CCNHCD which are identified as being characterized as low density
residential at the interior of the District will remain unchanged. The proposed development
is located at the perimeter of the District.
(b) New land uses in the interior of the neighbourhood that are out of keeping with the general
residential character of the District, or would have a negative impact on it, are discouraged;
This policy does not apply to the proposed development as the subject property is
not located in the interior of the District.
(c) Higher intensity uses or redevelopment opportunities should be focused at the perimeter, or
outside of, the District primarily in appropriate locations in the Victoria Street Mixed Use
Corridor or Weber Street;
The proposed development is located at the perimeter of the District, along Weber
Street which is recognized as an area designated as High Density Commercial
Residential in the HCD Plan. The proposed development is therefore consistent with
this policy of the CCHNCD Plan regarding development pattern and land use.
(d) Where new uses or intensification is proposed, adaptive reuse of the existing heritage
building stock should be considered wherever feasible;
This policy does not apply as the subject property is currently surface parking and
does not include any existing heritage buildings which could be considered for
adaptive re -use.
(e) For all areas designated as Low Rise Residential Preservation, Low Rise Multiple Residential
and Low Density Multiple Residential, severances which would create new lots are strongly
discouraged, unless the resulting properties are of similar size and depth to existing adjacent
lots;
This policy does not apply to the proposed development as it is not located in an
area designated low rise residential and does not require a severance.
(f) Where original detached residential buildingsare lost due to unfortunate circumstances such
as severe structural instability, fire or other reasons, the setback of replacement buildings
should be the same as or close to the same as the original building;
November2021 MHBC 144
Page 69 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
The building previous located on the subject property was demolished prior to
1997 and its setbacks are unknown. However, the proposed 2.5 metre front yard
setback of the new building is compatible with the setbacks of existing buildings
located adjacent (i.e. at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West) and is
consistent with the varied setbacks which are an established as part of the
streetscape along the north side of Weber Street West. As noted previously in this
report, the setbacks along Weber Street West vary greatly and there is no consistent
setback along the street.
(g) Parking for new or replacement dwellings is to be located in driveways at the side of the
dwelling or in garages at the rear of the main building whenever possible. New attached
garages extending beyond the front of the dwelling are discouraged;
The proposed new building includes access to parking provided at the rear via
laneways at the side of the building. Parking areas do not extend beyond the front
of the building.
(h) Existing laneways are to be maintained to provide access to properties and to retain the
historical development pattern of the neighborhood.
This policy does not apply as the subject property does not include any existing
laneways which are important to the historical development pattern of the
neighbourhood.
6.3.2 Weber Street Area Specific Policies
The CCNHCD Plan provides policies regarding site specific areas for the entirety of Weber Street
West within the CCNHCD boundary. The following provides a review of how the proposed
development is in conformity with the policies of the CCNHCD for the Weber Street area.
3.3.5.2 Weber Street Area
Weber Street contains nearly half of the oldest buildings in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood,
making it one of the most important streets in the District from an architectural and historic
perspective. The size and scale of heritage buildings on Weber Street is generally larger than the
rest of the District, and includes two churches, small scale apartments (3 - 4 storeys) and a
number of other larger residences that have been converted to multiple residential units or
office/commercial uses. The Municipal Plan designates most of the street as High Density
November2021 MHBC 145
Page 70 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Commercial Residential, with the designation extending slightly in some areas. The following
policies are to apply to the whole of Weber Street within the District as well as to those sections
of the High Density Commercial Residential designation that extend into the District on College
and Young Streets.
Policies:
(a) The protection and retention of existing heritage buildings and their architectural features
is strongly encouraged.
This policy does not apply as the subject property is surface parking and does not
include any heritage buildings or features.
(b) Maintain residential streetscape character through the use of appropriate built form,
materials, roof pitches, architectural design and details particularly at the interface between
Weber Street and the interior of the neighbourhood;
The north side of Weber Street West is characterised by uses ranging from
residential, institutional, and mixed-use. It includes two large places of worship and
their associated surface parking lots and purpose-built multiple residential
buildings. Remaining single detached dwellings have been converted to multiple
residential dwellings or non-residential uses. Asa result, the character and built form
of the Weber Street area is different than the rest of the District. The use of the
proposed building as a multiple residential building is consistent with the other
uses on the street. The building setback from the street, the location of parking at
the rear, and the building materials are consistentwith the existing character, albeit
at nineteen stories the building is taller than the others in the Weber Street area.
(c) Adaptive reuse of existing buildings should be given priority over redevelopment. Flexibility
in Municipal Plan policies and zoning regulations is encouraged where necessary to
accommodate appropriate adaptive reuse options.
This policy does not apply to the redevelopment of the subject property as there is
no existing heritage building located on-site which could be considered for
adaptive re -use.
(d) Where redevelopment is proposed on vacant or underutilized sites, new development shall
be sensitive to and compatible with adjacent heritage resources on the street with respect to
height, massing, built form and materials.
November2021 MHBC 146
Page 71 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
�il'�i��1f11�1
Figure 18 - View of higher density development and contemporary buildings located south-east of the
subject property near the intersection of Queen Street and Weber Street(Source: MHBC, 2019)
The Heritage Conservation District Plan considers that tall buildings may be
developed within the Weber Street Area, consistent with the Secondary Plan
policies and Zoning By-law which identify this area is for high density mixed use.
Taller, higher density buildings can be "compatible" with lower density
developments. Compatible is not intended to mean "same as", but whether or not
a taller building can co -exist with lower density developments without adverse
impacts. Whether or not a new development is compatible or not is determined by
the policies provided in the CCNHCD Plan. The proposed new building which is 19
storeys is of a higher density than the adjacent cultural heritage resources at 18
Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West. The CCNHCD Plan recognizes that
the character of Weber Street is different than that of the interior of the District and
includes higher density developments. Further, that "...infill development fronting
on Weber could potentially be compatible even if taller than 4-5 storeys." (Section
4.2.1 of the CCNHCD Plan). The proposed new building meets the policies of the
CCNHCD Plan as it is a) it is located at the perimeter of the District, where higher
density developments are anticipated b) is consistent with the 45 degree angular
plane policy and does not result in impacts related to shadowing on rear yards.
Further analysis regarding the angular plane analysis and shadows is provided in
the following sections of this report.
November2021
MHBC 147
Page 72 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
(e) Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake shadow
studies where they abut existing residential uses, to demonstrate that they will not
unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas.
The shadow study provided in Appendix C of this report demonstrates that
shadows will be cast onto abutting lands to the north. The shadows during the
spring and summer are primarily cast on the adjacent Office Residential lands on
the south side of Roy Street, with minimal shadows extending to the front yards of
the low rise residential areas of the District during the Spring to Fall seasons. More
extensive shadows will be cast during the winter season when the sun is low in the
sky. Given that the tower is narrow, the shadowing on front yards on the north side
of Roy Street does not last for more than a few hours. The heritage attributes are
not negatively impacted and shadows do not unreasonably impact on access to
sunlight in rear yard amenity areas of the residential designated lands.
(f) Design guidelines provided in Section 6.9.2 of this Plan will be used to review and evaluate
proposals for major alterations, additions or new buildings to ensure that new development is
compatible with the adjacent context.
The following provides a review of the design guidelines provided in Section 6.9.2
of the CCNHCD Plan as it relates to the proposed development.
6.9 SITE/AREA SPECIFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES
There are several sites, as previously identified in the policies and implementation sections of
this report, that have a distinct character and/or some development expectation or potential
over the long term. To ensure that future development, should it occur, is compatible with the
District, the following guidelines should be considered during the building and site design in
these areas.
6.9.4 Weber Street
• Any infill development on Weber Street should maintain a strong relationship to the street at
the lower levels (2 to 4 storeys) with respect to built form and use.
The proposed development includes a large front entrance with glazing and
masonry facing Weber Street West. This front entrance has been emphasized at the
pedestrian level through the use of a 2 -storey masonry podium (See Figure 17).
November2021 MHBC 148
Page 73 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
• Setbacks of new development should be consistent with adjacent buildings. Where
significantly different setbacks exist on either side, the new building should be aligned with the
building that is most similar to the predominant setback on the street.
There is no consistent front yard setback along the north side of Weber Street West.
The existing building at 18 Weber Street West is setback approximately 12 metres
from the street. The building at 28 Weber Street W is setback approximately 8.6
metres from the street. The proposed new building has a shallow front yard setback,
which respects the two varying setbacks of these adjacent buildings and is
consistent with the character of Weber Street West.
• Building facades at the street level should incorporate architectural detail, similar materials
and colours, and consistency with the vertical and horizontal proportions orrhythm ofadjacent
/nearby buildings on the street to establish a cohesive streetscape.
Weber Street West includes a range of materials, colours, and architectural styles
indicative of their period of construction. Therefore, there is no consistent or
dominant design standard. The two buildings located adjacent to the subject
property at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West are of the Vernacular
and Second Empire architectural styles and are constructed of brick. The proposed
building includes neutral shades of masonry, including red brick masonry above the
podium which will reflect the adjacent buildings constructed of masonry.
• Newdevelopment shall have entrances oriented to the street.
The 2 storey podium and main entrance is oriented south towards Weber Street
West.
• Size, placement and proportion of window and door openings for new buildings or additions
should be generally consistent with those on other buildings along the street.
There is no consistent design in terms of placement and proportion of window and
door openings along Weber Street West. The design of the new building includes
a square and rectangular shaped contemporary windows with a consistent rhythm
and is compatible with the streetscape.
• Any new buildings taller than 3 to 4 storeys should incorporate some form of height transition
or stepbacks to minimize the perception of height and shadow impacts to pedestrians on the
November2021 MHBC 149
Page 74 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
street and provide more visual continuity. Stepbacks should be a minimum of 2 metres to
provide for useable outdoor terraces for the upper levels.
This front entrance has been em phasized at the pedestrian level through the use of
a 2 -storey masonry podium. The proposed design is such that the majority of the
building mass is pushed towards Weber Street West in order to conform to the 45
degree angular plane policy (see below for further analysis).
• Any buildings taller than 5 storeys abutting a residential property to the rear should be
constructed within a 45 degree angular plane where feasible, starting from the rear property
line, to minimize visual impacts on adjacent property owners.
Section 4.2.1 of the CCNHCD Plan regarding Land Use Designations and Zoning
identifies that the High Density Commercial Residential designation along Weber
Street has the potential to be in conflict with the intent of the HCD Plan in terms of
height and density. The rear of the subject lands abut propertiesthat are designated
Office Residential Conversion. The subject lands do not abut the Low Rise
Residential designated areas that make up the interior of the Heritage District.
Section 5.2.3 of the HCD Study as well as the policies of the Secondary Plan identify
that the Office Residential Conversion lands are intended to provide a buffer and
transition between the higher density uses on Weber Street and the low rise
residential areas in the Heritage District. The intent of the angular plane guideline is
to ensure that tall buildings don't negatively impact the character of low rise
residential properties and jeopardize their continued residential use. The proposed
development meets the 45 degree angular plane guideline when measured from
the edge of the Low Rise Residential properties on Roy Street (See angular plane
analysis provided in Appendix B of this report).
CCN HCD Study 5.2.3 Land Use Designations and Zoning
The Office -Residential Conversion designation is intended to preserve existing structures and
to serve as a transition area between the higher intensity uses along Weber and Queen Street
and the Low Rise Residential — Preservation designation.
An angular plane analysis measures the angular plane beginning at the north side
of Roy Street rather than the south side in order to account for the south side of Roy
Street which is designated Office Residential Conversion and is considered a buffer
zone between the High Density Commercial Residential Area and the Low Density
November2021 MHBC 150
Page 75 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Residential Areas. The angular plane analysis identifies that the proposed new 19
storey building is within the permitted range of the 45 degree angular plane.
• To minimize impacts on properties to the rear of or flanking Weber Street, a rear yard setback
of 15 metres should be maintained for new buildings as well as additions where feasible.
The proposed new building has a rear yard setback of 15.9 metres.
• Locate loading, garbage and other service elements (HVAC, meters, etc.) away from the front
facade so they do not have a negative visual impact on the street or new building /addition.
Loading, garbage, and other services are located away from the front faQade
towards the rear of the lot.
6.4 IMPACT ANALYSIS: ADJACENT LANDS
The following provides an analysis of potential impacts as a result of the proposed development
on adjacent lands. This includes the adjacent properties located along Weber Street West and Roy
Street. Potential sources of impacts include those listed in Section 7.1 of this report. Policies
provided in the CCNHCD Plan regarding the impact of proposed new buildings on adjacent lands
were addressed in the previous section of this report (i.e. related to angular plane analyses, shadow
studies, etc.).
The following analysis of the above -noted policies is divided into two sections regarding adjacent
properties located along a) Weber Street West and b) Roy Street.
6.4.1 WEBER STREET WEST
The proposed new building will not result in the destruction or alteration of any heritage buildings
or features located adjacent, including the buildings located at 18 Street West and 28 Weber Street
West. As noted previously in this report, shadows as a result of the proposed new building will not
impact any heritage resources located along Weber Street West. The proposed new building will
not result in the isolation of any heritage attributes as the subject property is currently vacant and
therefore does not include any features which would have a relationship to any adjacent property.
The proposed new building includes side yard setbacks at the east and west property lines which
provide generous space between the proposed new building and the existing building at 28 Weber
Street West. As a result, the proposed side yard setbacks will allow the side elevations of the
November2021 MHBC 151
Page 76 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
buildings at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street west to continue to be visible from the
public realm (See Figures 19 & 20). These elevations may be obstructed for a short period of time
as one traverse Weber Street West, but will be visible again as one passes the proposed new
building in either direction. This is consistent with the character of the street due to varied setbacks
and is not anticipated to result in adverse impacts to the character of Weber Street West.
i
Figures 19 & 20 - (left) View of subject property with east elevation of 28 Weber Street West
noted in red, (right) View of subject property with west elevation of 18 Weber Street West noted
in red, (Source: MHBC, 2020)
No adverse impacts are anticipated in terms of changes in land use as it will remain residential while
accommodating higher densities permitted by the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law. There is
potential for land disturbances as a result of construction activities at 22 Weber Street West on
adjacent heritage buildings on Weber Street West which require mitigation recommendations.
6.4.2 IMPACT ANALYSIS: ROY STREET
The proposed new 19 story building will result in shadows cast to the north. As a result, shadows
will be cast on the rear yard of properties located at 35 Roy Street, 31 Roy Street, 27 Roy Street and
23 Roy Street mid-day throughout the year. These shadows will not result in adverse impacts to any
cultural heritage attributes.
The proposed new building will not result in the isolation of any heritage features as the subject
property is vacant. Land use will remain residential and will not result in adverse impacts. There is
potential for land disturbances as a result of construction activities at 22 Weber Street West on
adjacent heritage buildings on Roy Street which require mitigation recommendations.
November2021 MHBC 152
Page 77 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
6.5 SUMMARY OF IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following provides a summary of the impact analysis as it relates to a) conformity with the
policies of the CCNHCD Plan regarding new development, and development within the Weber
Street policy area, and b) impacts to adjacent heritage resources.
6.5.1 Conformity with the Policies of the CCNHCD Plan
The impact analysis provided in the previous sections of this report have highlighted that the intent
of policies provided in the CCNHCD Plan is to provide policies for change management and the
conservation of cultural heritage resources. The CCNHCD Plan identifies that there are situations
where higher density new developments may be considered. The CCNHCD Plan identifies that
higher density developments should be located in specific areas of the District, including Weber
Street as it is located at the perimeter and is designated High Density Commercial Residential.
Further, the CCNHCD Plan identifies that the character of Weber Street is different than that of the
interior of the District and could incorporate new development of higher densities provided that it
does not result in the demolition of existing heritage buildings and is complementary in terms of
scale, massing, setbacks, design, etc. The analysis provided in Section 6.0 of this report
demonstrates that the proposed new 19 storey multi -residential building is consistent with policies
in Section 3.3.1 of the CCNHCD Plan regarding development pattern and land use as the site is
considered vacant and underutilized. The CCNHCD Plan does not regulate height. Instead, it
indicates that new buildings along Weber Street should be sensitive to, and compatible with
adjacent heritage resources. The proposed new building which is 19 storeys is compatible with the
existing built form of Weber Street West in terms of scale and massing as a) it is located at the
perimeter of the District, where higher density developments are anticipated b) it will not result in
disrupting any consistent building height, as the Weber Street West streetscape varies considerably
and is located within close proximity to higher intensity land uses in the Downtown. The proposed
development is also consistent with the specific design guidelines for new buildings provided in
Section 6.9.2 of the CCNHCD Plan including the requirement for buildings to comply with a 45
degree angular plane in order to provide a transition between higher density developments along
Weber Street West and the low rise residential areas at the interior of the District.
6.5.2 Impacts to Adjacent Heritage Resources
The proposed development will not result in impacts to adjacent heritage resources. No heritage
resources will be demolished, or altered and will not result in impacts related to shadows,
obstruction, or land use. Existing churches located along Weber Street North, including the St.
Andrew's Presbyterian Church at 54 Queen Street North and the Zion United Church at 32 Weber
November2021 MHBC 153
Page 78 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
Street West will remain prominently visible along the Weber Street West streetscape. There is
potential for land disturbances regarding vibration impacts during construction activities which
can be avoided by vibration monitoring.
Destruction No.
No.
No,
Alteration No.
No.
No.
No. Shadows cast to the
No. Shadows cast to
No. Shadows cast to the
Shadows
north-west are minimal
the north-east arenorth
minimal and will not
during mid-day, and
and will not result in
result in adverse
will not result in adverse
adverse impacts.
impacts.
im acts.
Isolation
No.
No
No
No. The proposed
No. The proposed
development will not
development will not
No. The buildings are not
Obstruction
obstruct the building at 28
obstruct the building
visible from Weber Street
Weber Street West,
at 78 Weber Street
West.
West, including thewest
including the east facade.
facade.
Change in Land
No.
No.
No.
Use
Land
Potential for vibration
Potential for vibration
Potential for vibration
Disturbances
impacts- mitigation may
impacts- mitigation
impacts- mitigation may
be required.
may be required.
be required.
November2021 MHBC 154
Page 79 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
7.O MITIGATIONAND
CONSERVATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS
The following sub -sections of this report provide recommendations regarding alternative
development approaches as it relates to the proposed development.
7.1.1 'Do Nothing' Alternative
The do nothing alternative would result in no development on the lands. This would have no
impact on heritage resources as the property is vacant. It is important to note that Section 7.4.4 of
the CCNHCD Plan identifies that paved parking areas have the potential to detract from the
character of the District. The image provided in Section 7.4.4 which demonstrates this specifically
uses the existing parking area at 22 Weber Street West as an example. The Plan identifies that areas
such as this should be screened from view with landscaping (low hedges or fencing) and that
permeable types of paving are preferred in order to minimize impactsto the streetscape. Therefore,
the 'do nothing' approach would result in a site which has been identified in the CCNHCD Plan as
having potential for improvement in order to meet the policies and guidelines regarding vehicle
parking.
7.1.2 Redevelop Site with Decreased Height and Density
This alternative would result in a new multiple -residential building with fewer storeys and less
height. This alternative would conform to the existing 4.0 FSR. This alternative would not result in
less impact to heritage resources since a 19 storey building complies with policies of the Heritage
Conservation District regarding height — i.e. the 45 degree angular plane. If the lower height was
November2021 MHBC 155
Page 80 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
accommodated by constructing a wider building, there maybe increased impact due to reduction
in the rear yard setback.
7.1.3 Redevelop Site with Increased Density
This alternative would result in constructing a new multiple -residential building with increased
height. A building constructed in excess of 19 storeys would not comply with the 45 degree angular
plane guideline.
7.1.4 Redevelop Site with Alternative Designs & Materials
This option includes the construction of an alternative design of a building while achieving the
same FSR. This option would require a larger lot and the acquisition of adjacent properties, such as
those located at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West. The demolition of these two
buildings to allow for a larger building footprint would decrease the building height and FSR while
maximizing density. This option would result in significant adverse impacts as the buildings located
at 28 Weber Street West and 18 Weber Street West are identified as important cultural heritage
resources in the CCNHCD Plan.
7.2 MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Mitigation recommendations as it relates to identified impacts are limited to potential land
disturbances as a result of construction activities. These potential impacts to adjacent buildings can
be avoided through vibration monitoring. It is recommended that the proposed development
include an inspection of the adjacent properties located at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber
Street West prior and post construction activities.
November2021 MHBC 156
Page 81 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
8.O CONCLUSIONS&
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed development includes the construction of a 19 storey multiple residential building
on a lot currently used as surface parking. The proposed new building does not include the
demolition or alteration of any cultural heritage resources located on-site or adjacent. As the
proposed new building is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, any new development is subject
to the policies of the CCNHCD Plan.
The CCNHCD Plan recognizes that Weber Street is different from the interior of the district and sets
forth policies for new development which are specific to this area. The Plan recognizes that Weber
Street West is designated High Density Commercial Residential and that higher density
developments can be considered provided that it does not result in the demolition of significant
cultural heritage resources is and is compatible with the character of the streetscape.
This Heritage Impact Assessment has demonstrated that Weber Street West is characterized by a
range of architectural styles, materials, colours, setbacks, and buildings of a higher scale than that
of the interior of the district. The proposed new 19 storey residential building is taller than adjacent
buildings, but maximises density while respecting adjacent cultural heritage resources. The
proposed new building is contemporary in style and includes materials such as neutral toned
masonry. The building includes a 2 story main entrance/podium which emphasizes the pedestrian
scale. The contemporary design includes a symmetrical arrangement of square and rectangular
shaped windows in a regularly established rhythm which will not detract from the buildings located
adjacent at 18 Weber Street West and 28 Weber Street West.
The proposed development will not result in any adverse impacts related to obstruction, isolation,
change in land use, or shadows. The proposed development is considered a neutral impact to
adjacent heritage resources within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District
(CCNHCD) located along Weber Street West and Roy Street.
November2021 MHBC 157
Page 82 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
There is potential for impacts to adjacent buildings as a result of construction activities. Mitigation
recommendations for the proposed development are limited to monitoring vibration impacts
during construction.
Respectfully submitted,
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
MHBC, Partner
November 2021
Vanessa Hicks, MA, CAHP
MHBC, Heritage Planner
MHBC 158
Page 83 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
9.O WORKSCONSULTED
Blumenson, John. Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 1874 to the Present.
Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 1990.
City of Kitchener. Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Study, 2006.
City of Kitchener. Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan, 2007.
Eby, Ezra. A Biographical History of Early Settlers and their Descendants in Waterloo Township. Kitchener,
ON: Fldon D. Weber, 1971.
English, John and Kenneth McLaughlin. Kitchener: An Illustrated History. Robin Brass Studio, 1996.
Government of Canada. Parks Canada. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic
Places in Canada. 2010.
Hayes, Geoffrey. Waterloo County: An Illustrated History. Waterloo Historical Society, 1997.
Heritage Resources Centre. Ontario Architectural Style Guide. University of Waterloo, 2009.
Mills, Rych. Kitchener (Berlin) 1880-1960. Arcadia Publishing, 2002.
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. InfoSheet#S Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation
Plans, 2006
Moyer, Bill. Kitchener: Yesterday Revisited, An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications (Canada) Ltd.,
1979.
n/a. Busy Berlin, Jubilee Souvenir. 1897.
Ontario Ministry of Culture. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning
Process, InfoSheet#2, Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Queens Printer for Ontario, 2006.
Uttley, W.V. (Ben), A History of Kitchener, Ontario. The Chronicle Press: Kitchener, 1937.
W. V. Uttley and Gerald Noonan. A HistoryofKitchener., Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1975.
November2021 MHBC 159
Page 84 of 379
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
APPENDIX A
LOCATION MAP
November2021 MHBC 160
Page 85 of 379
s
Location Plan LEGEND
22 Weber Street West,
Subject Lands
Kitchener, Ontario
s
s
DATE: February 27,2019
SCALE 1 :5,000 c
FILE: 1961A
DRN: LHB
K\1961A-22 WEBER ST\REPORT\LOCATION PLAN
FEBRUARY 27 2019 DWG
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
APPENDIX 13- ANGULAR PLANE ANALYSIS
November2021 MHBC 161
Page 87 of 379
;K " D
N
2 m
m oo C
z r
m;uD
Cl);u
z� '13
r
cmn D
Z
m
D
z
D
r
cn
0
0
m
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
A
A
/
/
/
PROPERTY_
/
LINE
/
V
3
/
�A
91
o
/
/
o
Am
/ T
im
z
50
Oh
aimm
PROPERTYao
U)ir
LINE
1Z
N
c
,m
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
APPENDIXC- SHADOW STUDY
November2021 MHBC 162
Page 89 of 379
(E�
y
QQ
Q.
w 0
luS
CQ '^
G V+
I�
V1 C
i ✓Q
Q)
[i N
S cN
03
0m
m
N (n
C �
Q.
(D QC
N G
Dl cn
rL
O i
L
� N
3 N
� N C
N lC C
N
I I =4 W
Om
z�
m N
< 4
_r4d
r
D Cl)
m
m
3 Q.
v
o
C
QA
m
Q
i
N
N
NN
W c
(D
� W
N
;�
m v+
< -I
(gyp
' N
m
0Cl)
G a
N Q.
m
n
m
N
N
F+ cc
W G
�
� W
N
��
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
APPENDIX D- SITE PLAN &RENDERINGS
November2027 MHBC 163
Page 94 of 379
o Gym �0�� NNNT mcn j mzu-nT rD
�7
0z7 °'CO N ASI Cl JD O �u�! <Zu
D
DO r OomNm��pDn
DC p W X D C D w Om- 0)D z'��� o O o
"�-0(n10)
-0
mnm0
co 0>R m 0) 00 om�zppo ND 0 p00z - �7c 0) > wm u Cn O 0
OD DmD W m Mo= --i- pzN0) m om 0 Dnm
�7r m m O N cn �u () D N
Dz C)Q-n2 "' z m-0UJDm (D DD
C 7
N O D W C n D m N o j N 0)
n n a n co
w Cn z D � m cn z c�ii W a
a 6) ii O -jn C) cn A �
3 A z = D D
C m c) w
N Mn D N z
C/ o O t C D
\ o C o
D m
m 0
V � � O
O D
D r 1
mn sa
a y
N oo z2
- O
r
32 Qs cn
W
�um
n X
� N
C -j
11 E
eM
ILIm
r r------
1
10
0
0
---
-0 CL09 - "
(�
a
m ,sass"-
a
�:I m
5
0
3500
D� a3
ASPHALT PRIAEVVAY
—
— - a 26
—
o Gym �0�� NNNT mcn j mzu-nT rD
�7
0z7 °'CO N ASI Cl JD O �u�! <Zu
D
DO r OomNm��pDn
DC p W X D C D w Om- 0)D z'��� o O o
"�-0(n10)
-0
mnm0
co 0>R m 0) 00 om�zppo ND 0 p00z - �7c 0) > wm u Cn O 0
OD DmD W m Mo= --i- pzN0) m om 0 Dnm
�7r m m O N cn �u () D N
Dz C)Q-n2 "' z m-0UJDm (D DD
C 7
N O D W C n D m N o j N 0)
n n a n co
w Cn z D � m cn z c�ii W a
a 6) ii O -jn C) cn A �
3 A z = D D
C m c) w
N Mn D N z
C/ o O t C D
\ o C o
D m
m 0
V � � O
O D
D r 1
mn sa
a y
N oo z2
- O
r
32 Qs cn
^ J �
/ k
X o
~ \cn>
R ]
OD — 0
\
r'
3 -n
\ k
8 q 6700 6500 6500 6500 6500
/ >
3
\
s_ olve>
� "
�
�
�
:> -_
} 3§\}1 § a
a Cl) N m
D °1
m m xm ' m
� v v - m
s m n <
a) O
v O m
N Q N 7 O_ IT 7
N (p
o m y o W m
< v � n � Z -
o n v
N �. n �.
O
3-0
T
(D 01 "
CD
3(a Q
CD N N
= A
3 3
rn
LIT
IlL
N
O
3
(O W v (j) cn
m
n oo c) <
CD v m m m v v
v 707 v v v N o
N
0 0 N 0 W
O_ N
Q QCD
J
w 3 00
O = 01
O N <
7 N C .-.
Q
<
NCD
N �I
A
W
O
3
m
CD
v
oI
� I
I I I I
N
W
ole ml� I� v12 UIQ ml2, -IT, a12, �I� ole .0 Wl g 2
► ° g ° g
VG ARCHITECTS Q 2
THE VENTIN GROUP LTD ol
m
N O a
3 4
O
Heritage Impact Assessment,
22 Weber Street West, City of Kitchener
APPENDIX E
CURRICULUM VITAE
November2021 MHBC 164
Page 98 of 379
EDUCATION
2oo6
Masters of Arts (Planning)
University of Waterloo
1.998
Bachelor of Environmental Studies
University of Waterloo
1.998
Bachelor of Arts (Art History)
University of Saskatchewan
CONTACT
54o Bingemans Centre Drive,
Suite 200
Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T 519 576 3650 X 744
F 519 576 0121
dcurrie@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.com
CURRICULUMVITAE
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
Dan Currie, a Partner and Managing Director of MHBC's Cultural Heritage Division,
joined MHBC Planning in 2oo9, after having worked in various positions in the
public sector since 1.997. Dan provides a variety of planning services for public and
private sector clients including a wide range of cultural heritage policy and
planning work including strategic planning, heritage policy, heritage conservation
district studies and plans, heritage master plans, cultural heritage evaluations,
heritage impact assessments and cultural heritage landscape studies.
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Full Member, Canadian Institute of Planners
Full Member, Ontario Professional Planners Institute
Professional Member, Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Heritage Conservation District Studies and Plans
Alton Heritage Conservation District Study, Caledon (underway)
Port Stanley Heritage Conservation District Plan (underway)
Port Credit Heritage Conservation District Plan, Mississauga
Town of Cobourg Heritage Conservation District Plan updates
Rondeau Heritage Conservation District Study & Plan, Chatham Kent,
Barriefield Heritage Conservation District Plan Update, Kingston
Victoria Square Heritage Conservation District Study, Markham
Bala Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan, Township of Muskoka Lakes
Downtown Meaford Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan
Brooklyn and College Hill Heritage Conservation District Plan, Guelph
Garden District Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan, Toronto
Heritage Master Plans and Management Plans
City of Guelph Cultural Heritage Action Plan
Town of Cobourg Heritage Master Plan
Burlington Heights Heritage Lands Management Plan
City of London Western Counties Cultural Heritage Plan
Cultural Heritage Evaluations
MacDonald Mowatt House, University of Toronto
Page 99 of 379
CONTACT
54o Bingemans Centre Drive,
Suite 200
Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T 519 576 3650 X 744
F 519 576 0121
dcurrie@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.com
CURRICULUMVITAE
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
City of Kitchener Heritage Property Inventory Update
Niagara Parks Commission Queen Victoria Park Cultural Heritage Evaluation
Designation of Main Street Presbyterian Church, Town of Erin
Designation of St Johns Anglican Church, Norwich
Cultural Heritage Landscape evaluation, former Burlingham Farmstead, Prince
Edward County
Heritage Impact Assessments
Heritage Impact Assessment for Pier 8, Hamilton
Homer Watson House Heritage Impact Assessment, Kitchener
Expansion of Schneider Haus National Historic Site, Kitchener
Redevelopment of former industrial facility, 57 Lakeport Road, Port Dalhousie
Redevelopment of former amusement park, Boblo Island
Redevelopment of historic Waterloo Post Office
Redevelopment of former Brick Brewery, Waterloo
Redevelopment of former American Standard factory, Cambridge
Redevelopment of former Goldie and McCullough factory, Cambridge
Mount Pleasant Islamic Centre, Brampton
Demolition of former farmhouse at 1.0536 McCowan Road, Markham
Heritage Assessments for Infrastructure Projects and Environmental Assessments
Heritage Assessment of 1.o Bridges within Rockcliffe Special Policy Area, Toronto
Blenheim Road Realignment Collector Road EA, Cambridge
Badley Bridge EA, Elora
Black Bridge Road EA, Cambridge
Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment of Twenty Mile Creek Arch
Bridge, Town of Lincoln
Heritage Evaluation of Deer River, Girven, Burnt Dam and Macintosh Bridges,
Peterborough County
Conservation Plans
Black Bridge Strategic Conservation Plan, Cambridge
Conservation Plan for Log house, Beurgetz Ave, Kitchener
Conservation and Construction Protection Plan - 54 Margaret Avenue, Kitchener
Page 100 of 379
CONTACT
54o Bingemans Centre Drive,
Suite 200
Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T 519 576 3650 X 744
F 519 576 0121
dcurrie@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.com
CURRICULUMVITAE
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
Tribunal Hearings: Local Planning Appeal Tribunal & Conservation Review Board
Port Credit Heritage Conservation District (LPAT)
Demolition 1.74 St Paul Street (Collingwood Heritage District) (LPAT)
Brooklyn and College Hill HCD Plan (LPAT)
Rondeau HCD Plan (LPAT)
Designation of io8 Moore Street, Bradford (CRB)
Redevelopment of property at 64 Grand Ave, Cambridge (LPAT)
Youngblood subdivision, Elora (LPAT)
Designation of St Johns Church, Norwich (CRB - underway)
MASTER PLANS, GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND POLICY STUDIES
Township of West Lincoln East Smithville Secondary Plan
Town of Frontenac Islands Marysville Secondary Plan
Niagara -on -the -Lake Corridor Design Guidelines
Cambridge West Master Environmental Servicing Plan
Township of West Lincoln Settlement Area Expansion Analysis
Ministry of Infrastructure Review of Performance Indicators for the Growth Plan
Township of Tiny Residential Land Use Study
Port Severn Settlement Area Boundary Review
City of Cambridge Green Building Policy
Township of West Lincoln Intensification Study & Employment Land Strategy
Ministry of the Environment Review of the D -Series Land Use Guidelines
Meadowlands Conservation Area Management Plan
City of Cambridge Trails Master Plan
City of Kawartha Lakes Growth Management Strategy
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Provide consulting services and prepare planning applications for private sector
clients for:
• Draft plans of subdivision
• Consent
• Official Plan Amendment
• Zoning By-law Amendment
• Minor Variance
• Site Plan
Page 101 of 379
CURRICULUMVITAE
Vanessa Hicks, M.A., C.A.H.P.
Associate
EDUCATION Vanessa Hicks is a Senior Heritage Planner and Associate with MHBC. Vanessa
and joined the firm after having gained experience as a Manager of Heritage
2016 Planning in the public realm where she was responsible for working with
Master of Arts in Planning, Heritage Advisory Committees in managing heritage resources, Heritage
specializing in Heritage Conservation Districts, designations, special events and heritage projects.
Planning Vanessa is a full member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals
University of Waterloo, (CAHP) and graduated from the University of Waterloo with a Masters Degree
School of Planning
in Planning, specializing in heritage planning and conservation. Vanessa
2010 provides a variety of research and report writing services for public and private
Bachelor of Arts (Honours) sector clients. She has experience in historical research, inventory work,
in Historical/Industrial evaluation and analysis on a variety of projects, including Heritage
Archaeology Conservation Districts (HCDs), Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs), Cultural
Wilfrid Laurier University Heritage Evaluation Reports (CHERs), Conservation Plans (CPS), Documentation
and Salvage Reports, and Commemoration Projects (i.e. plaques).
CREDENTIALS
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Canadian Association of
Heritage Professionals (full June 2016 - Cultural Heritage Specialist/ Heritage Planner
member) Present MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Ltd.
CONTACT
540 Bingemans Centre Drive,
Suite 200
Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T 519 576 3650 x 728
F 519 576 0121
vhicks@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.com
2012- Program Manager, Heritage Planning
2016 Town of Aurora
May 2012 - Heritage Planning Assistant
October 2012 Town of Grimsby
2007- Archaeologist
2010 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd.
1
Page 102 of 379
200-540 BINGEMANS CENTRE DRIVE KITCHENER / ONTARIO /N2B3X9 / T:519.576.3650 / F:519-576-0121 / WWW.MHBCPLAN.COM
MHBC
PLANNING
URBAN DESIGN
& LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTUPE
Review of 22 Weber Street West
Heritage Impact Assessment
(November 2021 version, as revised and re -submitted April 29, 2022)
for consideration by
City of Kitchener Planning Division
Prepared for Friends of Olde Berlin Town
July 2022
Martindale Planning Services
Urban Planning, Heritage
& Development Consultants
23 Elizabeth Street
Ajax, Ontario
Canada
L1T 2X1
Phone: (905) 427-7574
Email: bob@martindaleplanning.ca
www.martindaleplanning.ca
Artistic rendition based on a preliminary,
non-binding conceptual design
Page 104 of 379
2
This update to my review of the 22 Weber Street West OPA & ZBLA applications (dated November
2021) has been prepared at the request of Friends of Olde Berlin Town for the City of Kitchener's
review of the Heritage Permit Application for the proposed development at 22 Weber Street West.
The applicant's consultant's Heritage Impact Assessment of April 29, 2022 is little changed from their
version of November 2021. As such, the findings of my March 2022 report stand. I have corrected a
few typos and the like in my prior report, but have otherwise made no material changes. I address the
clear material change in the applicant's consultant's revised HIA — the proposed front yard setback of
2.5 m — as compared to the 0.8m proposed under the OPA and ZBLA applications — in Addendum A. I
also include, in Addendum B, a set of maximum/minimum zoning standards for 22 Weber St W that I
believe ensure that the neighbouring heritage resources can endure, as required by law.
My opinion on the application is unchanged: that the proposed zoning and development at 22 Weber
St W are not a) consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, b) in conformity with the Growth Plan
and the regional and municipal Official Plans, c) in compliance with zoning by-laws nor d) consistent
with the policies and guidelines of the Civic Centre Heritage District Plan (HDP). I furthermore do not
believe that the proposed zoning and development would constitute good planning.
Page 105 of 379
3
Heritage Review of 22 Weber Street West
OPA & ZBLA Applications
(November 2021 version)
for consideration by
City of Kitchener Planning Division
Prepared for Friends of Olde Berlin Town
Martindale Planning Services
Urban Planning, Heritage
& Development Consultants
23 Elizabeth Street
Ajax, Ontario
Canada
L1T 2X1
Phone: (905) 427-7574
Email: bob@martindaleplanning.ca
www.martindaleplanning.ca
March 2022
Artistic rendition based on a preliminary,
non-binding conceptual design
Page 106 of 379
0
Table of Contents
Introduction and Background.....................................................................................................
5
TheProposed Application..........................................................................................................
5
PolicyContext............................................................................................................................
6
Consistency with the HDP: High Level Review..........................................................................
7
Consistency with the HDP: Policy by Policy Review..................................................................
9
ImpactAnalysis.......................................................................................................................
13
Mitigation and Conservation Recommendations.....................................................................
14
Conclusion...............................................................................................................................
15
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae..................................................................................................
16
Appendix B: References..........................................................................................................
17
Appendix C: Setbacks and Heights.........................................................................................
18
Appendix D: Uses along the South Side of Roy Street............................................................
19
Appendix E: Streetscape Views...............................................................................................
20
Addendum A: Revised Streetscape Views..............................................................................
23
Addendum B: Proposed Zoning Standards - 22 Weber Street West ......................................
26
Page 107 of 379
Introduction and Background
This report has been prepared at the request of Friends of Olde Berlin Town for the City of Kitchener's
review of the proposed development at 22 Weber Street West in the City of Kitchener with regard to
heritage considerations.
For brevity's sake, this report intentionally does not cover the same ground as the Applicant's Heritage
Impact Assessment (HIA) on areas of agreement. With regard to the applicable legislation, policies and
guidelines, this report focuses on upper-level legislation and policy. Beyond the Heritage District Plan,
a complete, detailed analysis of municipal policy and guidelines are beyond the scope of this report.
I am a land use planner with a specialty in heritage planning, and am certified as a Registered
Professional Planner (RPP). In addition, I am a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage
Professionals (CAHP) in the "Planner" category and currently serve on the Board of Directors of its
largest chapter, the Ontario Association of Heritage Professionals (OAHP). My Curriculum Vitae is
included as Appendix A. I have been previously involved in heritage projects in Kitchener and am
familiar with the context.
In developing this report, I have reviewed the applicant's consultants' HIA and other planning
justification reports in conjunction with the relevant sources identified in Appendix B.
I visited the site and area on June 2, 2021 to review the context of the proposed development.
In my opinion, the proposed zoning and development at 22 Weber St W are not consistent with the
Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the Growth Plan and the regional and municipal Official
Plans, in compliance with zoning by-laws nor consistent with the policies and guidelines of the Civic
Centre Heritage District Plan (HDP). I furthermore do not believe that the proposed zoning and
development would constitute good planning.
The Proposed Application
The subject lands consist of a 0.14 ha property located on the north side of Weber St W, between
Young St and Queen St N. The lands are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District and across a Regional Road from the Urban Growth Centre. The lot is presently
used as a commercial surface parking lot.
The Applicant is proposing to develop a 19 -storey multiple residential building with 162 units. The
parking is proposed to be located at grade behind and under the building. Vehicular and pedestrian
access to the development is proposed to be from Weber St W. The Applicant has indicated in the
Planning Justification Report that a draft plan of condominium application will be submitted.
The Application proposes to amend the existing zoning bylaw as follows:
a. The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 7.8.
b. The minimum front yard shall be 0.8 metres.
c. The minimum rear yard shall be 15 metres.
d. The minimum ground floor height shall be 4.5 metres.
e. A total of 24 parking spaces shall be provided including 8 visitor parking spaces
Page 108 of 379
N
Policy Context
My comments on policy context are limited to countering selected arguments in the Applicant's
consultants' reports which may otherwise lead the reader down a path with which I do not agree.
I disagree with the HIA's interpretation of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Part III, Page 2 of the
PPS states,
"The Provincial Policy Statement is more than a set of individual policies. It is to be read in
its entirety and the relevant policies are to be applied to each situation."
In my opinion, the PPS is not suggesting there be "a weighting and balancing of issues within the
planning process", as the HIA suggests (p. 14). Rather, the PPS is clarifying the need for adherence to
all legislation within a broader planning framework. Abiding by one policy does not grant permission
to ignore or contradict another. It is also important to note that to satisfy the PPS, each and every PPS
objective need not be achieved on any single site. Even more specifically to this case, it is not the
intent of the PPS to maximize intensification at the expense of heritage preservation and compatibility.
The PPS directs (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"
The HIA does not demonstrate that the heritage attributes of the district will be conserved. As such,
the proposed amendments are not consistent with the PPS.
The Growth Plan also does not support maximization of density at the expense of heritage
conservation. It sets out two relevant requirements to conserve heritage.
• "Conserve and promote cultural heritage resources to support the social, economic, and cultural
well-being of all communities, including First Nations and Metis communities" (1.2.1 (bullet # 9),
and
• "Cultural heritage resources will be conserved in order to foster a sense of place and benefit
communities, particularly in strategic growth areas" (4.2.7.1).
The HIA does not demonstrate that the heritage attributes of the district will be conserved. As such,
the proposed amendments are not consistent with the Growth Plan.
The Waterloo Region Official Plan (ROP) also sets out requirements to ensure that the pursuit of
density does not override the requirement to conserve heritage, including section 2.D.1.e):
"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. "
Page 109 of 379
7
The HIA does not demonstrate that the heritage attributes of the district will be conserved. As such,
the proposed amendments do not conform to the ROP.
The proposed amendments, therefore, are not consistent or in conformity with upper-level policy.
Consistency with the HDP: High Level Review
The HIA points out that "the subject lands are designated High Density Commercial Residential as per
the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan" (p. 11) and asserts the HDP "recognizes that Weber
Street West is designated High Density Commercial Residential" (pp. 6, 18, 43, 44, 53 and 57). One
may be misled to believe from these assertions that the HDP accepts the direction of the 1994
Secondary Plan. In fact, the HDP explicitly states the opposite:
"The High Density Commercial Residential designation, located on Weber Street and
extending slightly into College and Young Streets has the potential to be in conflict with the
intent of the heritage conservation district plan" (p 4.6).
To prevent potential redevelopment along Weber from having a negative impact on the District, the
HDP calls for the subject lands to be zoned CR -2, with a maximum Floor Space Index (FSI) of 2 (pp 4.6-
4.7 and Figure 5).
I wish to clarify that, in my opinion, the 2008 HDP provides new direction that is not necessarily
consistent with the 1994 Secondary Plan. The HDP direction, in my view, supersedes the Secondary
Plan, both in date and intent in the event of any conflict. As such, the maximum allowable FSI as per
the existing Secondary Plan and zoning is not license to exceed other zoning limits or the HDPs
requirements.
On a broader level, I see the HIA's arguments pertaining to land use and zoning as perhaps germane to
a Planning Justification Report, but much less so to an HIA where the primary interest is in determining
consistency with the HDP. I believe these arguments would have been most applicable in an appeal of
the HDP. All appeals of the HDP were settled in 2009 and the law does not provide for a fresh appeal
at this time.
In my opinion, any suggestion that zoning bylaws take priority over a heritage district plan's
requirements is simply not true. Section 41.2.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act reads
"In the event of a conflict between a heritage conservation district plan and a municipal by-
law that affects the designated district, the plan prevails to the extent of the conflict."
A few other specific points warrant discussion:
1. Page 9 of the Record of Pre -Submission Consultation states that "the scoped HIA will need to
address the potential impact of height, built form, setbacks, and massing of the proposed development
on the Weber Street West streetscape and on the integrity of the CCNHCD in general," including
angular plane analysis, a scaled 3D massing model from both approaches on Weber St West and will
[also] need to address the HDP guidelines for new buildings and for infill development on Weber St W.
Page 110 of 379
A
The HIA denies that there will be an impact due to height, built form, setbacks, and massing and only
sees potential impact to adjacent buildings due to construction activities (pp. 7 and 53).
I do not concur with the HIA's findings that
"[t]he proposed development will not result in any adverse impacts related to obstruction,
isolation, change in land use, or shadows. The proposed development is considered a
neutral impact to adjacent heritage resources within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood
Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) located along Weber Street West and Roy Street"
(p. 7).
2. The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Study has no standing. Those
portions of its recommendations passed into law are represented in the HDP. The observations
contained in the text cannot be presumed to be policy statements incorporated into the HDP.
3. 1 disagree with the HIA author's assertions that it is the intent of the HDP "to incorporate higher
density development along Victoria Street and Weber Street" (p. 28). It is the intent of the HDP to
ensure that the District and its heritage resources endure and that any new development is
compatible.
"Heritage Conservation Districts offer a way to protect, over the long term, areas that have important
and/or identifiable historic and architectural resources." (HDP, p. 1.2). The policies and guidelines are
intended to ensure the long term survival of the historic and architectural resources, not to provide a
template for its change.
4. As discussed above, the HDP does not support or condone the High Density Commercial Residential
designation along Weber.
5. Contrary to the HIA's claim otherwise on page 47, the HDP does not consider that tall buildings
(buildings of more than 8 storeys) may be developed within the Weber Street Area. No tall buildings
have been permitted to be built in the HD since the establishment of the HDP.
6. Contrary to the Urban Design Brief's assertions otherwise (p. 35),
• the redevelopment of lots within the Heritage District presently occupied by heritage buildings
is a real possibility; and,
• the consolidation of 18 Weber and 54 Queen is a real possibility.
7. 1 dispute the HIA's statement that
"The proposed new building which is 19 storeys is compatible with the existing built form
of Weber Street West in terms of scale and massing as a) it is located at the perimeter of
the District, where higher density developments are anticipated b) it will not result in
disrupting any consistent building height, as the Weber Street West streetscape varies
considerably and is located within close proximity to higher intensity land uses in the
Downtown" (HIA, p. 53).
Page 111 of 379
1
The proposed zoning and development would disrupt the existing consistent pattern of height, which
ranges from 1-4 storeys along Weber Street West inside the Heritage District (see Appendix Q. The
Application requests 475% -- almost five times -- of the upper end of the range of existing heights.
Consistency with the HDP: Policy by Policy Review
This report assesses the consistency of the proposed zoning and development with the following six
applicable and actionable requirements of the HDP.
1. District Wide Policy 3.3.3 (a)
"New buildings will respect and be compatible with the heritage character of the Civic
Centre Neighbourhood, through attention to height, built form, setback, massing, material
and other architectural elements such as doors, windows, roof lines."
• The proposed build is a new build.
• The proposed build is not compatible in terms of height.
o All the buildings on the blocks bounded by Weber, Young, Ahrens, and Queen, including Roy
are of 3% storeys or less.
o Although the Heritage District does include four developments in excess of four storeys,
they were all constructed prior to the establishment of the HDP, and therefore not subject
to the Plan's provisions.
o In my opinion, any height differential greater than three times the average heights and/or
floor space indices of the immediately adjacent buildings within a heritage district would
generally be considered incompatible, unless there are extenuating circumstances such as
significant differences in lot size or unusual screening provisions that lessen the impact.
• The proposed build is not compatible in terms of setback from Weber.
o The buildings within the Heritage District fronting on Weber have an average (mean)
setback of 5.9m from the inner edge of the sidewalk and a median setback of 5m from the
inner edge of the sidewalk (see Appendix Q.
o The proposed zoning seeks a front yard setback of 0.8m from the property line or 2.7m
from the inner edge of the sidewalk.
• The proposed front yard setback would lead to obstruction of views of the streetscape and
isolation of each portion of the streetscape from the balance on the other side of 22 Weber St W.
The proposed zoning is insufficient to ensure that the streetscape can be taken in, as a whole, from
either side of 22 Weber St W, while positioned in the Heritage District, in the public realm. The
proposal would divide the Weber St streetscape into two halves, each isolated from the other. The
proposed Application seeks to insert an obstruction into a streetscape that is presently cohesive.
The Application treats the heritage resources at 18 and 28 Weber as individual resources, but
denies their contribution to a greater whole. It is a failing to acknowledge the difference between
preserving a singular heritage resource and a heritage district.
Page 112 of 379
10
• The Application is therefore inconsistent with HDP policy 3.3.3 (a).
2. Site -Specific Weber Street Policy 3.3.5.2.d)
"Where redevelopment is proposed on vacant or underutilized sites, new development shall
be sensitive to and compatible with adjacent heritage resources on the street with respect
to height, massing, built form and materials."
• The proposed development is a redevelopment on a vacant site.
• The proposed development is not compatible with adjacent heritage resources on the street
with respect to height.
• The adjacent heritage resources on Weber at 18 and 28 Weber St Ware each 2% storeys in
height.
o In my opinion, any height differential greater than three times the average heights of the
immediately adjacent buildings within a heritage district would generally be considered
incompatible, unless there are extenuating circumstances such as significant differences in
lot size or unusual screening provisions that lessen the impact.
• The Application is therefore inconsistent with policy 3.3.5.2.d)
3. Site -Specific Weber Street policy 3.3.5.2.e)
"Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake shadow
studies where they abut existing residential uses, to demonstrate that they will not
unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas."
• The proposed build is over 5 storeys.
• The proposed build abuts existing residential uses at 23, 27 (under renovation), 31 and 35 Roy
St.
• The proposed build would unreasonably impact on access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas
for some of the houses on Roy St. during the spring and fall seasons at noon, 2:00 and 4:00
• Reasonable limits would be small or no shadows in the summer, and shadows only in early
morning or late afternoon during the spring and fall, in my opinion.
• The Application is inconsistent with the HDP's shadowing policy.
4. Site/Area Specific Design Guideline 6.9.4, bullet #2 (p. 6.32)
"Setbacks of new development should be consistent with adjacent buildings. Where
significantly different setbacks exist on either side, the new building should be aligned with
the building that is most similar to the predominant setback on the street."
The response given in the HIA is:
Page 113 of 379
11
"There is no consistent front yard setback along the north side of Weber Street West. The
existing building at 18 Weber Street West is setback approximately 12 metres from the
street. The building at 28 Weber Street W is setback approximately 8.6 metres from the
street. The proposed new building has a shallow front yard setback, which respects the two
varying setbacks of these adjacent buildings and is consistent with the character of Weber
Street West."
• The proposed development is a new development.
• The Application seeks a front yard setback of 0.8m.
• Of the two flanking buildings, the setback at 28 Weber Street West is most similar to the
predominant setback on the street.
• 28 Weber Street West is setback 9.2m from the . inner edge of the sidewalk.
• The HDP calls for the development to be aligned with 28 Weber Street West at 9.2m from the
inner edge of the sidewalk.
• Front yard setbacks along the north side of Weber are sufficiently consistent to permit a view of
a cohesive streetscape, as discussed in response to District Wide Policy 3.3.3 (a).
• The Application is inconsistent with -design guideline 6.9.4, bullet #2.
5. Site/Area Specific Design Guideline 6.9.4, bullet #6 (p. 6.32)
"Any new buildings taller than 3 to 4 storeys should incorporate some form of height
transition or stepbacks to minimize the perception of height and shadow impacts to
pedestrians on the street and provide more visual continuity. Stepbacks should be a
minimum of 2 metres to provide for useable outdoor terraces for the upper levels."
• The proposed build is taller than 3 or 4 storeys.
• No stepback is provided. The minimal recess from Weber St W above the '2 -storey masonry
podium' of the proposed build is nullified by the projecting glassed section one storey higher.
• The Application is inconsistent with design guideline 6.9.4, bullet #6.
6. Site/Area Specific Design Guideline 6.9.4, bullet #7 (p. 6.32)
"Any buildings taller than 5 storeys abutting a residential property to the rear should be
constructed within a 45 degree angular plane where feasible, starting from the rear
property line, to minimize visual impacts on adjacent property owners."
• The proposed build is taller than 5 storeys.
• Abutting properties to the rear are residential.
• It is feasible to build within a 45 degree angular plane, starting from the rear property line.
• The proposed build would not be constructed within a 45 degree angular plane, starting from
the rear property line (see Appendix B of HIA).
• The Application is inconsistent with design guideline 6.9.4, bullet #7.
Page 114 of 379
12
The HIA asserts that the legal intent of the 45 degree angular plane analysis is "to ensure that tall
buildings don't negatively impact the character of low rise residential properties and jeopardize their
continued residential use" and that the abutting properties to the rear are not residential, by virtue of
their land use designation (p. 50).
I disagree with the HIA. The arguments presented lean on the Heritage Conservation District Study,
not the HDP, and on the 1994 Secondary Plan. The Heritage Conservation District Study has no
standing. Those portions of its recommendations that were passed into law are represented in the
HDP. As I have stated previously, in my opinion, the HDP provides new direction contrary to the 1994
Secondary Plan, direction that supersedes the 28 year-old Secondary Plan, both in date and intent, in
the event of any conflict.
HDP requirement 6.9.4, bullet #7 states, "Any buildings taller than 5 storeys abutting a residential
property to the rear..." It makes no mention of land use designation nor of zoning. I believe that this
policy is referring to uses existing at the time the HDP was created, not to any possible future
redeveloped uses. The properties along Roy St to the rear of 22 Weber St W were either fully or
partially residential at the time the HDP was enacted. Furthermore, without suggesting that I agree
that an exploration of land -use is relevant to an understanding of the HDP, the properties to the rear of
22 Weber St W, 23-35 Roy (odd numbers) are all residential properties. And they are zoned the same
low-rise residential zone (R-5) as the majority of the interior of the district.
The HIA seeks to establish that, due to their Office Residential Conversion land -use designation, the
properties are not due the protections afforded by 6.9.4, bullet #7. 1 disagree. There is no support for
this position within the HDP. The chief aim of the HDP, again, is "to protect, over the long term, areas
that have important and/or identifiable historic and architectural resources." (HDP, 1.2). The Roy St
properties are designated heritage resources under the HDP and require a compatible context for their
ongoing existence.
The HDP makes no mention of whether a Weber St W development abuts a Low -Rise Residential
Preservation vs an Office Residential Conversion designation. Nor could it. Not a single Weber St
property abuts a Low -Rise Residential Preservation designated property. The potential for abutting a
residential property that was not designated Office Residential Conversion would not arise. See land
use map at
https://www.kitchener.colenlresourcesGenerallDocumentsIDSD PLAN NPR—Civic_ Centre_Existing_la
nd use.pdf
Hence, in my opinion, the interpretation proposed by the HIA should not be accepted.
I disagree with the HIA's suggestion that the Office Residential Conversion properties are a sacrificial
transition area, not intended to be afforded a reasonable transition. The HIA provides evidence
against its own finding when it cites the Section 5.2.3 of the HCD Study, "The Office -Residential
Conversion designation is intended to preserve existing structures." If these structures are not
afforded an appropriate environment and transitions on nearby properties, they cannot be expected to
endure.
I reiterate my position that the HDP clearly states that the point of origin for the angular plane analysis
is the rear property line.
Page 115 of 379
13
The Application is inconsistent with this design guideline, in my opinion.
m pact Analysis
The proposed zoning and development would disrupt the existing setting, including a consistent
pattern of height and setbacks. One of the HDP's guiding principles is to preserve traditional settings,
found in section 3.4 of the Plan:
"A building is intimately connected to its site and to the neighbouring landscape and
buildings. Land, gardens, outbuildings and fences form a setting that should be considered
during plans for restoration or change. An individual building is perceived as part of a
grouping and requires its neighbours to illustrate the original design intent. When buildings
need to change there is a supportive setting that should be maintained."
The existing, consistent pattern of height ranges from 1-4 storeys along Weber St W inside the Heritage
District. The application requests 475% of the upper end of the range of existing heights. The request
would dwarf the surrounding builds. Today, the eye is attracted to the church steeples which poke
above four or five storeys, as the tallest structures on the streetscape. The harmony of the original
community can be seen between the homes and places of worship that remain. Were the proposed
development to gain approval, the prominence of the churches would be compromised, and the period
architecture of these late 19th and early 20th century edifices would be overshadowed by the modern
architecture of the apartment building. Accordingly, the context necessary to appreciate the Heritage
District's resources would be lost.
The proposed front yard setback is insufficient to ensure that the streetscape can be taken in, as a
whole, from either side of 22 Weber St W, in the public realm. The proposed front yard setback would
lead to obstruction of views of the streetscape. The Application would divide the Weber St
streetscape into two halves, on either side of 22 Weber St W, each isolated from the other. The public
views of the individual heritage resources at 18 and 28 Weber would be diminished, but, even more
importantly, their contribution to the greater whole would be denied. The proposed application seeks
to insert an obstruction into the streetscape that is presently cohesive. With the loss, and the
precedent set for future losses elsewhere throughout the District, it is unclear what might remain. The
proposal constitutes a fundamental challenge to the District's survival.
With respect to shadowing issues, the proposed application would unreasonably impact on access to
sunlight in rear yard amenity areas. The shadow studies included as Appendix C of the HIA show that
the rear yards of the residents behind 22 Weber St W would be shadowed for two-thirds of the
afternoon in spring and summer, and the entire afternoon in winter.
I also recognize the request made of individual property owners as expressed in section 3.1 of the HDP:
"Encourag[e] individual building owners to understand the broader context of heritage
preservation, and recognize that buildings should outlive their individual owners and each
owner or tenant should consider themselves stewards of the building for future owners and
users."
Page 116 of 379
14
This is a substantial ask of property owners, and the Province, Region and City are fortunate to have a
community of property owners that embraces this philosophy. Cooperation and support are required
from the Province of Ontario, Region of Waterloo and the City of Kitchener to foster and maintain this
partnership by preserving the context that supports the use of the buildings.
I find the applicant's description of heritage impact very limiting and arbitrary, as it dismisses very real
issues in its attempt to justify the height and massing of the proposed building. On the contrary, I
would address impact in the following manner.
The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit identifies five types of heritage impact resulting from new construction
or alterations within a heritage district or adjacent to one or more heritage resources:
• Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes or features;
• Alterations that are not sympathetic to or incompatible with the historic fabric and appearance
of a heritage resource;
• The creation of shadows that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability
of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;
• The isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or a significant
relationship;
• The direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and
naturalfeatures.
The impacts of a 19 -storey apartment building on the Weber St W streetscape and the Heritage District
in general are substantial and potentially precedent -setting. In terms of streetscape impact, the
proposed structure would:
a) Tower over the neighbouring buildings, both of which are 2 % storeys, creating problems with
compatibility and overlook;
b) Destroy the "rhythm" of the Weber St streetscape and lessen the prominence of the two
churches beside the adjoining building;
c) Interfere with the vista of Weber St W from Queen St, as visually illustrated in Figure 5,
Appendix D to this report;
d) Create adverse shadow impacts during the spring and fall equinoxes;
e) Set an unfortunate precedent if approved, as it would be difficult for the City to deny other
deviations from the Heritage District Plan along this block of Weber St W.
The proposed development would not be compatible with the rest of the Heritage District to the north,
particularly the 1% to 2% storey houses on Roy St. It fails to provide an appropriate transition between
the (anticipated) high-rise buildings on the south side of Weber St W and the low-rise heritage -
protected builds on Roy St.
Mitigation and Conservation Recommendations
It is my opinion that the HIA's analysis of the Alternative Development Options (HIA, p. 55) is built upon
an unsupportable premise — that the Application is consistent with the HDP. As I have demonstrated, it
is not consistent with the HDP's directives 3.3.3 a); 3.3.5.2. d) and e); and 6.9.4, bullets 2, 6 and 7.
Page 117 of 379
15
I also note the false dichotomy presented by the HIA on page 55, that there is any necessary
connection between a) limiting the height and b) decreasing the setback areas. As stated earlier, the
zoning regulations may be limited by the HDP, which prevails in the event of a conflict.
Conclusion
As the proposed amendments are not consistent with the HDP's directives, it is not consistent/in
conformity with the HDP, the PPS, the Growth Plan and the ROP. I furthermore do not believe that the
proposed amendments would constitute good planning.
I recommend that the City of Kitchener oppose the applications at the OLT.
Conditions of Approva
Should the OLT choose to approve the applications, I recommend that the City of Kitchener seek, as a
condition of the Tribunal's approval, an approved Heritage Permit Application.
Page 118 of 379
UR
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae
Robert A. Martindale, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
23 Elizabeth St.
Ajax, Ontario L1T 2X1
Principal, Martindale Planning Services
EDUCATION
B.A., Urban Studies Program (Political Science major), York University, 1972
PROFESSIONAL AND PERSONAL AFFILIATIONS
• Member, Canadian Institute of Planners and Ontario Professional Planning Institute
• Member, Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP)
• Member, Ontario Association of Heritage Professionals (OAHP)
• Former Chair, Heritage Ajax Advisory Committee (LACAC)
• Member, Architectural Conservancy of Ontario (Toronto Chapter)
• Past Member, Stakeholders' Advisory Committee, Ajax Official Plan Review
• Past Member, Board of Directors, Community Heritage Ontario (CHO)
• Member, Board of Directors, Association of Heritage Professionals (OAHP)
EXPERIENCE
1994 - present Principal, Martindale Planning Services (Ajax)
1989-1994 Manager of Planning, The Greer Galloway Group Inc. (Oshawa)
1988-1989 General Manager, Regom Developments Inc. (Ajax)
1976-1987 Planning Director, Town of Ajax
1974-1976 Senior Planner, Region of Durham
1973-1974 Planner, Township of Pickering
1971-1973 Planning Technician, Town of Markham
Page 119 of 379
17
Appendix B: References
• City of Kitchener. (2021). Civic Centre Neighbourhood Planning Review. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/strategic-plans-and-projects/civic-centre.aspx
• City of Kitchener. (2021). Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/strategic-plans-and-projects/planning-around-rapidtransit.aspx
• City of Kitchener. (2019). City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/development-and-construction/zoning-bylaw.aspx
• City of Kitchener. (2019). City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/development-and-construction/urban-design.aspx
• City of Kitchener. (2018). City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/development-and-construction/zoning-bylaw.aspx
• City of Kitchener. (2014). City of Kitchener Official Plan. Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_City_of_Kitchener_Official
—Plan _2014.pdf
• Ministry of Culture. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process,
Info Sheet #2, Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Queens Printer for Ontario, 2006.
• Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2020). Provincial Policy Statement. Government of
Ontario. Retrieved from https://www.ontario.ca/page/provincial-policystatement-2020
• Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2020). A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater
Golden Horseshoe. Government of Ontario. Retrieved from
https://www.ontario.ca/document/place-grow-growth-plan-greater-golden horseshoe
• Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. InfoSheet#5 Heritage Impact Assessments and
Conservation Plans, 2006
• Regional Municipality of Waterloo Property Parcels [computer file]. Toronto, Ontario: Teranet
Incorporated, [2018]. Available: University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre
• Region of Waterloo. (2015). Official Plan for the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Retrieved from
https://www. region ofwaterloo.ca/en/regional-government/landuse-
• planning.aspx#Regional-Official-Plan
• Stantec. (2007). Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan. City of Kitchener.
Retrieved from
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_Heritage_Plan_Civic_Cent
re.pdf
Page 120 of 379
Appendix C: Setbacks and Heights
Setback of Primary Building Face to Inner Edge of Sidewalk
No.
Street
Height
Built
Setback (m)
Block
54
Queen N
3
1906
-0.5
Queen to Young
18
Weber W
2%
1896
14.7
Queen to Young
22
Weber W
NA
NA
2.7
Queen to Young
28
Weber W
2%
1877
9.2
Queen to Young
32
Weber W
3
1893
11.5
Queen to Young
44
Weber W
2%
1877
4.6
Queen to Young
48
Weber W
4
c. 1930
4.8
Queen to Young
50-52
Weber W
1%
c. 1875
5.0
Queen to Young
56
Weber W
2%
1889
2.6
Queen to Young
58
Weber W
2%
c. 1885
7.9
Young to College
64
Weber W
2%
c. 1885
8.6
Young to College
74
Weber W
2
c. 1947
4.9
Young to College
78
Weber W
2
c. 1858
3.0
Young to College
80
Weber W
1
c. 1900
1.4
College to Water
84
Weber W
2
1887
5.2
College to Water
Averaae Setback of Primary Buildina Face to Inner Edae of Sidewalk (meters)
6.5 Mean setback between Queen and Young
5.9 Mean setback along Weber in whole Heritage District
4.9 Median setback between Queen and Young
5.0 Median setback along Weber in whole HCD
Source
City of Kitchener "Interactive Mapping",
https://maps.kitchener.ca/OnPointExternal/RMap/Default.aspx#
Note
Setbacks are measured relative to the sidewalk so as to provide a consistent frame of
reference. The property line is not a continuous straight line between Queen and Water.
Page 121 of 379
19
Appendix D: Uses along the South Side of Roy Street
Address
Unit
Name
Business
Resident
Source
11
Solo Program
x
Vernon's
23
Schreiber Benefit Consultants
x
Vernon's
23
1
Schreiber Benefit Consultants
x
Vernon's
27
1
Trotter Cameron D
x
Owner
27
2
x
x
Owner
27
3
x
Owner
31
Thayer E
x
Vernon's
35
1
Harrison Pet Productions
x
Vernon's
35
2
Gage Health Systems
x
Vernon's
35
3
Cecilia's Hair Studio
x
Vernon's
35
4
Brouwer R
x
Vernon's
41
Reask W
x
Vernon's
51
Downs M
x
Vernon's
53
Buck C Richard, Smith Hunt Buck,
Hunt Roger M, Herold Richard,
Gothard J C M
x
Vernon's
57
Mattson J
x
Vernon's
61
1
Allen C
x
Vernon's
61
2
Marquette M
x
Vernon's
61
3
Jaques J
x
Vernon's
61
4
Mcburney R
x
Vernon's
61
5
Lockhart C
x
Vernon's
65
1
Treimanis C
x
Vernon's
65
2
Jocys G
x
Vernon's
65
3A
Taylor A
x
Vernon's
Page 122 of 379
20
Appendix E: Streetscape Views
Figure 1: View from south side of Weber looking across to the subject property on the north
side of Weber Street West. Source: Google street views. Note the heights ranging from 2'/2 to
3'/2 storeys, not including church spires.
Figure 2: Close-up from Figure 1. Note how the "Queen Margaret" towers are not visible
above the rooflines of the 2'/2 storey builds fronting on Weber.
Page 123 of 379
MS.doW
51
21
!s 4M
0
Figure 3: 2020 Aerial Imagery of the properties fronting on Weber Street West, between
Queen Street North and Young Street. Source: "Interactive Mapping",
https:Hmaps.kitchener.ca/OnPointExternal/RMap/Default.aspx
%M�
28 Weber
Setback -7.4 m
-k I I \
5m Median Setback
alone Weber St W
22 Weber St W18 Weber St W
0.8m Applicant Proposed Setback
I ft
Figure 4: Aerial view Close-up from Figure 3 depicting the Applicant -proposed setback relative
to the median setback and the setback at 28 Weber Street West.
Page 124 of 379
4
I
22
Figure 5. 3D Rendition of Proposed building with a Front yard setback of 0.8m from property
line as viewed from the sidewalk in front of 18 Weber Street West.
F'
Figure 6. 3D Rendition of Proposed building with a Front yard setback of 7.Om from property
line as viewed from the sidewalk in front of 18 Weber Street West.
Page 125 of 379
23
Addendum A: Revised Streetscape Views
The applicant revised their requested front -yard setback in their updated HIA of April 29, 2022. The
applicant's requested front yard setback in their OPA and ZBLA is 0.8m. In the HIA of April 29, the
applicant requests a front yard setback of 2.5m. As addressed in my report, the proposed setback is
not in compliance with the HDP and would lead to obstruction of views of the streetscape and isolation
of each portion of the streetscape from the balance on the other side of 22 Weber St W. The proposed
setback is insufficient to ensure that the streetscape can be taken in, as a whole, from either side of 22
Weber St W, while positioned in the Heritage District, in the public realm. The proposal would divide
the Weber St streetscape into two halves, each isolated from the other. The proposed Application
seeks to insert an obstruction into a streetscape that is presently cohesive. The Application treats the
heritage resources at 18 and 28-44 Weber (even numbers only), as individual resources, but denies
their contribution to a greater whole. It is a failing to acknowledge the difference between preserving
a singular heritage resource and a heritage district.
28 Weber St WI 22 Weber St W I 18 Weber St W
Setback " 7.4m Setback —13 m
i za `ter--.•---- ,.. }
---------------------ri.
------------------
lam — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
i
7m setback as required by HDP
5m median setback along Weber St W
Oj 2.Sm applicant -proposed setback via April 29, 2022 HIA
0.8m applicant -proposed setback via proposed OPA and ZBLA
Figure 7: Aerial view Close-up from Figure 3 depicting the Applicant -proposed setback in the
revised HIA relative to the median setback and the setback at 28 Weber Street West.
Page 126 of 379
24
Figure 8: The applicant -proposed build amidst the existing streetscape as depicted in the City
of Kitchener 3-D conceptual model. The red lines depict the maximum building envelope
under the City -proposed Secondary Plan. The green line shows the height of the peak of the
church roofs relative to the applicant -proposed build.
Page 127 of 379
25
"Setbacks of
new
development
�--
should be
consistent with
adjacent
_
buildings. Where
significantly
d ifferen t
7m setback,
'� �'
setbacks exist on _- _
I ! per Heritage
District Plan
either side, the
new building
should be
aligned with the
,.—
building that is
most similar to
the predominant
setback on the
street.
2.5m
setback, per
6.9.4, bullet #2,
applicant's
HIA proposal
Figure 9. 3D renditions of the applicant -proposed build, updated from Figures 5 and 6 to reflect
applicant's new proposal for the front -yard setback. The upper image shows a front yard
setback in accordance with the Heritage District Plan. The lower image shows the applicant -
proposed front yard setback. Note the extent of heritage resources available to be seen in
each instance.
Page 128 of 379
26
Addendum B: Proposed Zoning Limits
The following zoning limits reflect the maximum/minimum values that can be achieved at 22
Weber Street West, while maintaining conformity with the Heritage District Plan in the built
environment as of June 2022.
Minimum front yard setback
7.0 m
(from Weber St. property line)
Maximum height of stepback
the lesser of the 4t" storey or 13 m
from Weber St.
Minimum depth of stepback
2.0 m
from Weber St.
Maximum building height
15.0 metres; however, the building height may be
increased to a maximum of 26.0 metres provided
that for each additional metre of building height
beyond 15 metres, a minimum of 1 metre of
additional setback from the rear lot line is provided
for those portions of the building with a height in
excess of 15 metres
Maximum number of storeys
8 storeys
Minimum setback from rear
15 m
property line
Minimum side yard setbacks
3.0 m
Minimum lot width
27.176 m
Minimum lot area
1392 m2
Maximum floor space ratio
3.9
(FSR)
Page 129 of 379