Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2023-057 - Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) - 30-40 Margaret AvenueStaff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: February 7, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Planning Director, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7041 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: January 19, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-057 SUBJECT: Draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) 30-40 Margaret Avenue RECOMMENDATION: For information. REPORT: The Planning Division is in receipt of a draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) dated December 7, 2022 and prepared by MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited (MHBC) on behalf of Activa. The HIA is fora proposal to develop the subject property municipally addressed as 30-40 Margaret Street, which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and is in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) as well as the Civic Centre Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL). It is part of the requirements for a submitted Site Plan Application (SP22/187/M/AP). At present the subject property is vacant except for mature trees. It was formerly the site of several significant mansions, which fell into a state of disrepair and were demolished in the 1980's and 1990's. The subject property represents the single largest vacant lot in the HCD, and its size and location on a highly travelled road means any development that occurs will be distinctly visible and has the potential to significantly enhance or detract from the overall character of the neighbourhood. As such there is area specific design guidelines in Section 6.9.1 of the CCNHCD Plan that applies to the subject property, and Policy 3.3.5 (h) of the Plan requires that these guidelines be used in the review and evaluation of proposals for 30-40 Margaret Avenue, to ensure that new development is compatible with the adjacent context. The subject property is adjacent to 54 Margaret Avenue, which is identified as a District Significance A Building, and 12 Margaret Avenue / 116 Queen Street North (The Church of the Good Shepherd) which is also a District Significance A Building and designated under Part IV and V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proposal includes the development of eight blocks of townhomes for a total of 48 dwelling units and 52 parking spaces. Access is provided via Margaret Avenue in the form *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 242 of 511 of a private internal drive aisle, and most of the parking spaces are located within individual garages and not visible from the street. There is a public park proposed on the east side of the subject lands as well as surface visitor and accessibility parking spaces, and on the west side and rear of the subject lands there is proposed landscaped areas. It is also proposed that landscaping be provided at the front of the site through a planted median located within the City right-of-way, which would require an encroachment agreement. The townhomes are contemporary in design and do not include any traditional architectural features. The applicants and architects will be attending the February 7, 2023 meeting of the Heritage Kitchener Committee to answer any questions or concerns. Heritage Planning Staff are currently in the process of reviewing the HIA and will be providing detailed comments to the applicant to address any areas that require further assessment or discussion. At this time, Heritage Planning Staff are also seeking the Committee's input and comments, which will be taken into consideration as part of the complete staff review and processing related to the associated Planning Act Application. A copy of the HIA has been included as Attachment A in this report. MARGARET AVENUE Figure 1: Proposed Site Plan Page 243 of 511 o a O® _ 0 . v aOa tiP.II oOo M!!0 �8o o ei feaO �e�s!!rcflO O MOM] !!IL!.!.O lm IIolhl '1iIa' M e o 0 0 a ® o®o ® ,E��olCl. �H E ra. m O ® a O.1 0--o O ® O O a] O l ® e ® v� ;., 0) O 00 ®� 6xr ®- g d '! O O o © 00 O m m m m m m m sola 0 O m A p A 111111 RAsar � A L k1J..r1.Ld.LkIJ..b•,A:L...aLd.6.LeL.i i.;k_ ■ A Figure 5: Rendering of Front of Townhomes Figure 6: Rendering of Proposed Interface Between Site Frontage and Streetseape with Planted Median Page 245 of 511 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 council / committee meeting. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O 1990 APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager of Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) — 30-40 Margaret Avenue Page 246 of 511 Scoped tl. Heritage I -v r Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, ON Date: December 7, 2022 Prepared for: Acti va 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 Project No. 878481 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Table of Contents ProjectPersonnel.................................................................................................................................... 3 Glossaryof Abbreviations....................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................ 4 Acknowledgement of Indigenous Communities......................................................................................4 3.8 ExecutiveSummarY................................................................................................................................5 20 i.o Introduction.......................................................................................................................................6 23 i.3. Background...................................................................................................................................6 23 2.0 Methodology and Approach.............................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Methodology................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Approach.......................................................................................................................................8 26 3.o Description of Subject Lands........................................................................................................... 3.0 3.i General Description of Subject Lands.......................................................................................... 3.0 3.2 Heritage Status............................................................................................................................ 13 4.o Description of Surrounding Area.....................................................................................................15 5.o Description of Proposed Development............................................................................................ 3.8 5.3. Description of New Construction................................................................................................. 3.8 5.2 Landscape Alterations................................................................................................................. 20 6.o Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation Policy Analysis ............................................... 23 6.1 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) ..................................... 23 5.2 Site Specific Guidelines: Margaret Avenue.................................................................................. 23 6.3 Land Use Designations and Zoning Guidelines for Margaret Avenue ........................................... 25 6.4 Site/ Area Specific Design Guidelines: Margaret Avenue............................................................. 26 6.5 Guidelines for Part IV Designations within CCNHCD................................................................... 28 6.6 Guidelines for New Residential Buildings.................................................................................... 29 6.7 Other Applicable Guidelines forthe Public Realm within CCNHCD.............................................. 32 6.8 Compatibility with the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) PreferredExamples of Infill............................................................................................................... 34 7.0 Impacts of Proposed Development.................................................................................................. 38 December7, 2022 MHBC I i Page 248 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 7.3. Classifications of Impacts............................................................................................................. 38 7.2 Assessment of Beneficial and Neutral Impacts........................................................................ 38 7.3 Assessment of Adverse Impacts of the Proposed Development to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District..........................................................................................................39 7.3.3. Impact of Direct or Indirect Obstruction of Significant Views..........................................40 7.3.2 Impact of Land Disturbances..........................................................................................44 7.4 Assessment of Adverse Impacts Specific to Adjacent 54 Margaret Avenue ................................. 45 8.o Consideration of Development Alternatives, Mitigation and Conservation Measures.....................46 8.3. Alternative Development Approaches.........................................................................................46 8.2 Mitigation Measures....................................................................................................................46 8.3 Conservation Measures............................................................................................................... 47 g.o Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................................................48 3.o.o Bibliography..................................................................................................................................49 Appendix A -Map of Subject Lands....................................................................................................... 52 AppendixB -Site Plan........................................................................................................................... 53 Appendix C -Building Elevations & Renderings.................................................................................... 54 Appendix D- Tree Management Plan................................................................................................... 55 Appendix E- Designation By-law Church of the Good Shepherd........................................................ 56 Appendix F- Terms of Reference.......................................................................................................... 57 AppendixG- Curricula Vitae................................................................................................................. 58 December7, 2022 MHBC I ii Page 249 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Project Personnel Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP Lucy Chen Managing Director of Cultural Heritage Senior Heritage Planner Technician Glossary of Abbreviations CCNHCD CHVI CHL HCD HIA MHBC MHSTCI OHA O -REG g/o6 PPS 2020 SOS December7, 2022 Senior Review Research, Author Map Figures Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Cultural Heritage Interest or Value Cultural Heritage Landscape Heritage Conservation District Heritage Impact Assessment MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Cultural Industries Ontario Heritage Act Ontario Regulation 9/o6 fordetermining cultural heritage significance Provincial Policy Statement (2020) Statement of Significance MHBC 13 Page 250 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Acknowledgements This report acknowledges the assistance provided by City of Kitchener Planning Staff, the Waterloo Historical Society, the Grace Schmidt Room in the Kitchener Public Library and the Waterloo Region Museum. Acknowledgement of Indigenous Communities This Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment acknowledges that the subject property located at 30-40 Margaret Avenue, Kitchener is situated in the traditional territory of Haudenosaunee, Anishnawbe, Attiwonderonk (Neutral) nations. These lands are acknowledged as being associated with the following treaties: • The Simcoe Patent- Treaty 4, 1793 • Haldimand Treaty This documenttakes into consideration the cultural heritage of indigenous communities, including their oral traditions and history when available and related to the scope of work. Present Owner Information: Activa, c/o Alex Sumner 2823.889 Ontario Inc. 55 Columbia Street East Suite 3., Waterloo, Ontario N2J 4N7 December/, 2022 MHBC 14 Page 251 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Executive Summary The City of Kitchener requested a scoped Heritage Impact Assessment for the proposed development on the subject lands located at 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario. This report assessed the impact that the proposed development may have on the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District, including any potential impact to the individually designated property located at 12 Margaret Avenue/ 3.3.6 Queen Street (the Church of the Good Shepherd). In conclusion, the proposed development conforms to the majority of the policies and guidelines within the CCNHCD Plan (2007) and the adverse impacts are limited to a negligible impact of the removal of two (2) trees from the subject lands. Mitigation measures include tree replacement and that replanting be considered for the landscaped area between the buildings and edge of the property that abuts adjacent properties. Furthermore, frontage of the property should reflect the similar theme of a tree boulevard along the south side of Margaret Avenue, Queen Street North and Ellen Street West. Any new trees should be indigenous to the area and of a type that would provide maximum screening potential to clearly define and legitimize the boundary of the development and its separation from the adjacent cultural heritage landscape. There are no proposed repairs, alterations and demolitions to cultural heritage resources as a result of the proposed development. However, as a precautionary measure, in orderto ensure protection of both 54 and 12 Margaret Avenue (Coach House) prior and post construction, it is recommended that construction fencing be erected to deter dust and debris and any accidental damage that could occur. It would also be encouraged that points of entryto the site during construction and storage of material and equipment be located away from the immediate area of both buildings. It addition to the above, it is encouraged that the park be named after a previous land owner (i.e. William and Margaret Young, D. S. Bowlby, Dr. Cornell, Albert Augustine, Kaufman family) in orderto honourthe subject lands former historical associations. Remaining foundation stones on the property could be used creatively within the park design to support this objective. December7, 2022 MHBC 15 Page 252 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background MHBC Planning, Urban Design and Landscape Architecture ("MHBC") was retained in January 2022 by Martin Simmons Sweers Architects to undertake a scoped Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed development located at 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener hereafter referred to as the 'subject lands' (see Appendix `A'). The subject lands are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood, adjacent to the downtown core of the City of Kitchener. In November 2oo6, a heritage conservation district study was completed on the Civic Centre Neighbourhood and the following year, in August 2007, the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (CCNHCD) was established to regulate the designated district. The subject lands are located within CCNHCD and therefore, designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). The subject lands are currently vacant; formerlythere were seven (7) dwellings on the subject lands, however, all dwellings were demolished in the late 198os and early lggos. As such, there is no protected property on the subject lands as defined by the OHA and Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020). The purpose ofthis scoped HIA isto evaluate the proposed development in terms of potential impactsto cultural heritage resources located adjacent to the property and to the overall CCNHCD. There are 17 adjacent properties to the subject lands including: 12, 54 & 64 Margaret Avenue, 116 Queen Street North and 15, 17, 21, 25, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 43 & 45 Ellen Street West. The adjacent, contiguous property located at 12 Margaret Avenue/ 116 Queen Street North (Church of the Good Shepherd) is designated under Part IV and is a protected property under the OHA and the PPS 202o. The other properties are located in the CCNHCD, however, are not listed under 'Group A' in the District, meaning that they are not considered to have high cultural heritage value. This report evaluates the proposal in the context of the City's policy framework and Provincial policy. It also uses previous reports including: a scoped HIA completed by The Land Plan Collaborative Inc. (2013), an HIA completed by MHBC in 2o1g and subsequent Cultural Heritage Protection Plan (CHPP) (2020). December7, 2022 MHBC 16 Page 253 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 2mOMethodology and Approach 2.1 Methodology The methodology of this report is based on the Terms of Reference provided by the City of Kitchener for the Scoped HIA for development on the subject lands (see Appendix `F'). The City of Kitchener's Heritage Planner requires the following content for this scoped Heritage impact Assessment: • Present owner information; • A written description of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an appropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site details. Documentation shall also include where available, current floor plans, and historical photos, drawings or other available and relevant archival material'; • An outline of proposed development, its context and how it will impact the properties (subject property and if applicable adjacent protected heritage propertieso including buildings, structures, and site details including landscaping. In particular, the potential visual and physical impact of the proposed work on the identified heritage attributes of the properties shall be assessed. • Options shall be provided that explain how the significant cultural heritage resources may be conserved. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited to, preservation/conservation in situ, adaptive re -use, integration of all or part of the heritage resource, relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the heritage resource. • A summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must be included. Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport); and, the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport). • Proposed repairs, alterations and demolitions must be justified and explained as to any loss of cultural heritage value and impact on the streetscape/neighbourhood context. • Recommendations shall be as specific as possible, describing and illustrating locations, elevations, materials, landscaping, etc. • The qualifications and background of the person(s) completing the Heritage Impact Assessment shall be included in the report. The author(s) must demonstrate a level of professional understanding and competence in the heritage conservation field of study. The report will also include a reference for any literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in the report. 1 There are no buildings orstructures on-site, however, the property has been documented with photographs. December7, 2022 MHBC 17 Page 254 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario • The summary statement should provide a full description of: ■ The significance and heritage attributes of the subject properties. ■ The identification of any impactthe proposed repair, alteration or development will have on the heritage attributes of the subject properties, including adjacent protected heritage property. ■ An explanation of what conservation or mitigative measures, or alternative development, or site alteration approaches are recommended. ■ Clarification as to why specific conservation or mitigative measures, or alternative development or site alteration approaches are not appropriate. It is important to note that the subject properties do not include any buildings or structures or particular landscape features and therefore, the analysis is based on the heritage attributes of the adjacent protected heritage property and of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan. 2.2 Approach A site visit was conducted by MHBC Staff on March 4, 2oig and October 33., 2022 to documentthe current state of the subject lands. This report reviews the following documents: • HIA by The Land Plan Collaborative Inc. (2oo8); • Scoped HIA by The Land Plan Collaborative Inc. (203.3); • Scoped HIA by MHBC (2o3.9) and Cultural Heritage Protection Plan (2020); • City of Kitchener's Official Plan: A Complete and Healthy Kitchener (203.4), • Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Study (2oo6); • Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007), • The Planning Act; • Provincial Policy Statement (2020); • The Ontario Heritage Act; • The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit which includes Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries); • Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Second Edition) • Region of Waterloo Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties This HIA assesses the proposed development in terms of its compliance with these policies, guidelines and recommendations and assesses any impacts of the development on cultural heritage value and attributes of adjacent resources. In particular, this report assesses the impact that the proposed development will have on the key heritage attributes of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. Key heritage attributes of the CCNHCD are outlined in 2.6 (Section 2.4) of the CCNHCD Plan (2007). These attributes are the defining factors of the heritage district. Key attributes are described in the physical geography and configuration of similar original buildings and their direct relationship to surrounded businesses and factories and original land development pattern of the City. It also describes December7, 2022 MHBC 18 Page 255 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario the progression of architecture and building technology exhibited by houses and other buildings, in particular the unique form of Queen Anne Style specific to the City of Kitchener dubbed "Berlin Vernacular". `Fine' examples of these are categorized by Group'A' or'B'; three quarters of the properties (3-47 properties) are categorized as Group 'C' which exhibit the standard construction and are in a condition of repair and potential restoration. The following is a list of the key attributes of the CCNHCD as defined by the District Plan (2007) on 2.7: • 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 3-800s and early 3-9oos that are largely intact; • A number of unique buildings, including churches and commercial buildings, which provide distinctive landmarks within and atthe edges ofthe District; • A significant range of recognizable architectural styles 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 laneways; • Hibner Park, Kitchener's second oldest city park, as a greenjewel in the centre of the District. December7, 2022 MHBC 19 Page 256 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 3 . 0 Description of Subject Lands 3.1 General Description of Subject Lands The subject lands are located centrally within the City of Kitchener and bound by Margaret Avenue to the south, Ellen Street West to the north, Queen Street North to the east and Victoria Street North to the west. The subject lands are currently vacant and include open space with mature trees planted in the Zorn century including Silver, Sugar, Norway, Manitoba Maple, White Mulberry, Black Walnut, Norway Spruce and Basswood. Currently, there are is one vehicular entry to access the subject lands off of Margaret Avenue. The subject lands are surrounded by residential properties to the west, north and south and a place of worship (institutional) to the east. Figure i : Map of subject lands and surrounding areas; subject lands are identified by the red dotted line (Source: City of Kitchener Interactive Map, 201.9) December7, 2022 MHBC 110 Page 257 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Figure 2: Civic Centre Neighbourhood Plan Land Use, Secondary Plan Map 9 identifying the subject lands as medium density multiple residential within the CCNHCD boundaries (see Appendix `G'); red arrow identifies subject lands (Source: City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014) The subject lands are zoned R8 55 1-R and designated as 'Medium -Density Multiple Residential' and within a'Special Area Policy" in the Secondary Plan forthe Civic Centre Neighbourhood (Map 9 of the City of Kitchener's Official Plan (2014), see Figure 2 and 3). The overall parcel area is approximately 3.o1 acres (12,198 sqm). December7, 2022 MHBC I z1 Page 258 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario h4r,T- 11, a OOT MVY167L'7U168R!17H 3 MU -1 167U,.560R g'�+� al 1., 14 R i.aa MU_ SJs -1y 1671 562R �,4 ,�0tiJ fP���27U � 12 MU -1 167k:s 660R. 1731 5i I - I.>`� F I1 F. I :u '13VW GEN IRL " 5:4 . I'� 1 a' R-0 551R I 30 ... .0 de 714, 21- A R-7 al R-5 127V �. I1 Oj 15 Kit(Y�6ha -0Pa 84 5 ;r 21 carer r SII rr CITY COMMERUAL C' � � �QIICCIf Marg alefl� 46 Placa R-0 ©, �h7F �r 13 :I 2 R 7 yir Fc Figure 3: Zoning map of the subject lands; red arrow identifies subject lands (Source: Kitchener Interactive Map, 2022) December7, 2022 MHBC 1 12 Page 259 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 3.2 Heritage Status The subject lands are not 'listed' (non -designated) or designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, however, they are designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (2oo6) (see Figure 4). The property does not include any potential built heritage resources as it is vacant. There are special policies within the HCD Plan (2oo6) that address the subject lands and future redevelopment of the lands. o�.I Lti�PK�, IL ?. d. i 5 �, UN r 1 Figure 4: Map of subject lands and surrounding areas; subject lands are identified by the red line; green line indicates the CCNHCD boundaries (Source: MHBC, 201.9). December7, 2022 MHBC 1 13 Page 260 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 3.3 Existing Conditions The current site is vacant and does not include any buildings or structures (see Figures 5-6). There are some mature trees along the rear property line and a portion of the former foundation walls of one of the former dwellings also remains. There is a vehicular parking spot via Margaret Avenue on the west side of the subject lands. Figures 5 & 6: (above) Street view of subject lands looking north-west along Margaret Avenue; (below) Street view of subject lands looking north-east along Margaret Avenue (Source: Google Earth Pro, 2021). December7, 2022 MHBC 1 14 Page 261 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 4. 0 Description of Surrounding Area 4.1 Description of General Surrounding Area The subject lands are located in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood, adjacent to the downtown core of the City of Kitchener. To the north of the subject lands are two storeys, residential dwellings along Ellen Street West and to the east is the Church of the Good Shepherd. Further to the east is the contemporary building of the Centre in the Square. To the west of the property is the heritage home at 54 Margaret Avenue, which is the last remaining house, aside from 70 Margaret Avenue, from the original row of houses on the north side of Margaret Avenue in the early loth century (see Figure 7). Figure 7: View of the surrounding area (Source: Google Earth Pro and MHBC, 201.9) The properties to the south of the subject land in include both heritage homes as well as residential apartment buildings. There is a four storey apartment building located at 43 Margaret Avenue and an 1.8 storey apartment building at ii Margaret Avenue/ ioo Queen Street North, "The Queen Margaret Apartments." December7, 2022 MHBC 1 15 Page 262 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 4.2 Description of Adjacent Cultural Heritage Resources Adjacent lands are defined by the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) Policy 2.6.1 and 2.6.3 meaning "those lands contiguous to a protected heritage property oras otherwise defined in the municipal official plan." The following Table s.o identifies adjacent designated properties and a description based on the CCNHCD Plan. Table s.o Description Heritage Status 54 Margaret Street "A flamboyant large house with Listed; Designated under Part decorative half-timber Tudor details and V(Group A); Identified as `Unique grand circularturret and conical roof Building" in Section 3.4.3 of the exposed currently on three sides. Built in CCNHCD Study (2006) c. 1904 for Herbert J. Bowman, County Clerk, later occupied by Charles J. Baetz, President of Baetz Brothers, Speciality Manufacturers, makers of floors and table lamps." 64 Margaret Street (Formerly 66 Margaret Avenue) Presently Designated under Part V a vacant lot with the exception of a one storey accessory building. William H. Breithaupt who constructed a house at 64 Margaret Street (now Margaret Avenue). The house was demolished in 2003. 116 Queen Street/ 12 Three-storey Gothic Church of the Good Designated under Part IV and Part Margaret Street Shepherd Swedenborgian church with V (see below for more information clock tower, fence and adjoining coach regarding designation). house (12 Queen Street) originated with the William Roos Estate, c.1885, Roos was a wholesale grocer. 3.5 Ellen Street West Two-storey brick house built in c 1920. Listed; Designated under Part V( Group C) 17 Ellen Street West Two-storey vernacular brick house built in Listed; Designated under Part V c.1910. (Group C) 21 Ellen Street West Two-storey stucco house built in c.1905 Listed; Designated under Part V (Group B) 25 Ellen Street West Two-storey vernacular brick house built in Listed; Designated under Part V c. 1905. (Group C) 29 Ellen Street West Two-storey brick house built in c. -19-10 Designated under Part V (Group C) 33. Ellen Street West Two and half storey, brick, Queen Anne Designated under Part V (Group C) house built in c. -19-10 with shingled gable. 33 Ellen Street West Two storey, brick and stucco, Tudor Designated under Part V (Group C) house built in c. 1925. 35 Ellen Street West Two storey, brick, Tudor house built in c. Designated under Part V (Group C) 1925. 37 Ellen Street West Two and half storey, brick, Vernacular Designated under Part V (Group C) house built in c. -19-10 December7, 2022 MHBC 1 16 Page 263 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 39 Ellen Street West Two and half storey, brick, Vernacular Designated under Part V (Group C) house built in c. 1910 41 Ellen Street West Two storey, brick, Vernacular house built Listed; Designated under Part V in c. lgoo (Group B) 43 Ellen Street West Two and half storey, brick, Vernacular Listed; Designated under Part V house built in c. lgoo (Group C) 45 Ellen Street West Two and half storey, brick, Vernacular Listed; Designated under Part V house built in c. 1910 (Group C) On July 15, 1985, By-law 85-129 was passed pursuant to Section 29 of the OHA to designate under Part IV of the OHA the property located at 12 Margaret Avenue/ 116 Queen Street, "The Church of the Good Shepherd" (see Appendix `E'); this by-law outlines the designating features as follows: [This property] is designated as being of historical and architectural value that part of the aforesaid real property known as 116 Queen Street North being comprised of the portions of the wrought iron fence stretching from the drive beside the Church along Margaret Avenue to Queen Street and the section along Queen Street stretching to the Church property. This designation is acknowledged in the CCN HCID Plan as being a key attribute of the property. The cast iron fence that encircles the grounds at the Church of the Good Shepherd is an excellent example of period fencing. Originally, the fence enclosed the grounds of the home of William Roos, a prominent industrialist in the city. The Church now maintains the fence as an important link to its past, and serves as an excellent example of stewardship. (CCNHCD Plan, 2007, 4.18). Figure 8: View of the cast iron fence of the Church of the Good Shepherd located at 12 Margaret Avenue/ 116 Queen Street, Kitchener (Source: Google Earth Pro, 2022) December/, 2022 MHBC 1 17 Page 264 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 5 . 0 Description of Proposed Development 5.1 Description of New Construction The proposed development includes eight (8) blocks of townhouses with a total of 48 dwelling units and 53 parking spaces (see Figure g and Appendix `B' and `C'. Vehicular access is proposed via Margaret Avenue and continues into a private road through the development. Landscaped areas are proposed at the rear side of the development and a proposed park is proposed on the east side of the subject lands of approximately ±o.3. hectares. The new construction includes a range of materials such as: natural wood siding, natural cedar soffits, wood door, standing seam metal siding, brick veneer, aluminum framing system and architectural concrete. O m MARGARET AVENUE zz Figure g: Greyscale site plan for proposed development (MHBC, December 5, 2022) December7, 2022 MHBC 118 Page 265 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario ----------- y ---------- 0 ------- O Q -------------- ---------- (1) _—_—_—_—_—_—_—_ Q - - - - -?------------------------ -- O G o Cjj ------------------ _—_—_1—_—_—_ y ----------- 5' (z} e4ncx $ Oh Qh Figures:Lo & is: (above) Elevations of Block A (which are replicated for other blocks); (below) Coloured rendering of proposed development looking from the interior of the site (Source: Martin Simmons Sweers Architects Inc., 2022) December7, 2022 MHBC I 19 Page 266 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 5.2 Landscape Alterations The development will remove some trees located on the subject lands. A Tree Management Plan identified there were 92 trees identified on site in 2oi9, however, an update plan identifies that there are currently 20 trees on-site, 1.8 of which will be retained (see Appendix `D'). The species of trees to be retained include: • Basswood • Tree of Heaven • Norway and Sugar Maple • Black Walnut • Norway Spruce • White Cedar • White Mulberry • White Ash The trees that are proposed to be removed include an Ash Spruce (identified as Tree #20 in Figure 12) and a Norway Spruce (identified as Tree #21 in Figure 12). The Ash Spruce is identified as a 'dead' tree and the other is in fair condition; the trees are located along the rear property line. The proposed development includes a reinstated tree boulevard, private walkways, and a park abutting the adjacent Church of the Good Shepherd which includes a combination of trees and terraces. December7, 2022 MHBC 120 Page 267 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario STAa'sY -M P"TA 0NDES 2' CW.°.'An 6kREf.L A. Pi TAK s FARM;= RFARAKI* { .� 1W8PFn Ci6COF++R tk71DOFAR z�, cv. �.slu riPftPx 1 sEE 3i 711� 294&.— PLAT-- O]i36Fxft �j �ff 19 lRff 15 4 i Y OJ. BLOCK EAND G BLOCK FAND N I i PLANTER IN FRONT OF PATIO REGULARTREE SPACING -5¢e reriePmrElPd E end siodcG -smell slelure � deem edjece�R PPwerl'mes -Appnmcdmetxspe[cg - Block G hes n.iucetl depth - FCm�miel �er�n PLANTED MEDIAN - PRIVATE WALKWAY -Shmb had -1.5 nreter unit paver walkway -Reduced height mr Ppm sit ISna -Cannea%mshaved welkwry ram -VeyeGtiue WRerfor Prrvale Patiea lmm Otyvdeweyylk Ab BLOCK FAND N I i PLANTER IN FRONT OF PATIO WALKWAY -5¢e reriePmrElPd E end siodcG -15 --ft Peverwelkwey - Block G hes n.iucetl depth - FCm�miel �er�n - Cpnneds m ary aNnxelk - fnhemd ses'dertial tmnbkR - PRIVATE WALKWAY PLANTED BED TO PRIVATE PATIO -1.5 nreter unit paver walkway -Shmb bed -Cannea%mshaved welkwry ram -PmvtlesemnPleY buPo Pri peliw lmm Otyvdeweyylk PL Figures iz & 13: (above) Excerpt of Tree Management Plan identifying the trees proposed to be removed (below) Concept landscape design (Source: MHBC, 2022). December7, 2022 MHBC 12.1 Page 268 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario M V 2 Figure 14: Basic rendering of proposed landscape design for parkland adjacent to the Church of the Good Shepherd (Source: MHBC, 2022). December7, 2022 MHBC 122 Page 269 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 6-oCivic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation Policy Analysis 6.1 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) The CCNHCD Plan contains specific policies and design guidelines for the subject lands. This area is identified as one of four (4) site/area specific policies in the Plan including: Margaret Avenue, Ellen Street, Weber Street and Victoria Street. All new development should confirm to these policies and guidelines. An analysis of the proposed development and the conformity with each policy is provided below. See Appendix `B' and `C' for site plan, floor plans and architectural renderings. 6.2 Site Specific Guidelines: Margaret Avenue 3.3.5 Site Specific Policies: Margaret Avenue 3.3.5.3 MargaretAvenue A large parcel of land on the east side of Margaret Avenue is currently vacant, except for a number of mature trees. This property was home to a number of significant mansions which were allowed by their property owners to go into serious disrepair and eventually were demolished in the 198os and zggos. It represents by far the single largest vacant property in the District where development is almost certain to happen in the future. Site plan applications were submitted in the past, but to date, nothing has been constructed. Because it is such a large site and is located on one of the more highly traveled streets in the District, it has pronounced visibility with the potential to significantly enhance or detract from the overall character of the neighbourhood depending on the ultimate appearance of development on the site. The site is designated as Medium Density Multiple Residential and zoned R8, allowing fora full range of residential uses up to 24 metres (approximately 8 storeys). The Municipal Plan contains several other policies which are included below along with additional policies that are to apply to this site to ensure that new development maintains the heritage character of the District. Pnl irioc New development on the east side of Margaret Avenue shall maintain the overall residential character of the neighbourhood (Section 13.1.2.4 of Municipal Plan). December7, 2022 MHBC 123 Page 270 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Response 1: The proposed development is located centrally on Margaret Avenue between Victoria Street North and Queen Street North. A portion of the overall building is adjacenttothe parking lot of the Church of the Good Shepherd which is on the 'east side' of Margaret Avenue. Architectural details such as multiple entryways corresponding to multiple, separate residential units, stepbacks and landscape features (i.e. private walkways) have been intentionally designed to maintain the overall residential character of the neighbourhood. Underground parking is encouraged for all forms of redevelopment and is required for apartment developments, with the exception of surface visitor parking (Section 13.1.2.4 of Municipal Plan). Response 2: Parking is located in individual parking garages which are accessed via the Janeway within the centre of the development. Therefore, the parking is not visible from the public realm. There is a total of 52 parking spaces proposed. Redevelopment should be of a height, siting and design which will prevent it from encroaching on lower density dwellings located on Ellen and Ahrens Streets (Section 13.1.2.4 of Municipal Plan). Response 3: The proposed building height is approximately 3 storeys in height which is similar to the adjacent place of worship and residential houses in the area. The proposed development is approximately three (3) metres from the front yard property line which situates it close to the streetscape. The design includes a variety of heights, setbacks, forms and textures to reduce the perception of massing. Development proposals shall establish a strong, pedestrian oriented street edge that is consistent with the residential character of the District, through the use of appropriate setbacks, height, architectural features and building articulation. Response 4: The orientation and location of the proposed development promotes a strong, pedestrian oriented street edge. The separation ofthe building into several units provides a more inviting streetscape in lieu of one building mass. Any buildings proposed over 5 storeys in height may be required to undertake shadow studies to demonstrate that they will not unreasonably impact access to sunlight in rear yard amenity areas on Ellen Street. Response 5: The proposed development is less than 5 storeys and therefore, is not required. The retention and incorporation of existing trees is strongly encouraged as part of any development proposal. Response 6: A Tree Preservation Plan was prepared by MHBC Planning by a licensed landscape architect and certified arborist (see Appendix'D'). Of the 20 trees on-site, 3.8 of the trees will be retained. New trees are proposed to be placed in other parts of the site to mitigate the removal of healthytreesand the existing mature, healthy trees will be incorporated intothe overall design of the site. December7, 2022 MHBC 124 Page 271 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Traffic studies may be required to demonstrate that new development will not have a negative impact on the existing heritage character of the area with respect to any potential road width / turning lane requirements or access locations. Response 7: A Traffic Impact Study was not requested by the municipality as part of the site plan application submission. 6.3 Land Use Designations and Zoning Guidelines for Margaret Avenue 4.2.1 Land Use Designations and Zoning: Medium Density Multiple Residential Designation — Margaret Avenue "The large vacant lot on Margaret Avenue is also currently designated Medium Density Multiple Residential, which is intended to permit some integrated medium density development while maintaining the overall character of the neighbourhood. Zoning for the large vacant parcel is R8, which permits a floorspace ratio of 2 and a maximum height of 24 metres (approximately 8 storeys) for multiple dwellings. The majority of buildings beside, across from and backing onto the large vacant site on Margaret are still the original detached dwellings, primarily 2 to 2-1/2 storeys in height. One high rise apartment is situated across from the east end of the site. While the zoning would allow for construction of an 8 storey building, it would be more difficult for a building of this height to "maintain the overall character of the neighbourhood". Actual architectural and design elements, along with siting of buildings would likely play an equally important role in whether new development was compatible with the character of the neighbourhood. With the permitted floor space ratio of 2, it would be very possible to achieve the maximum floor area. within a building envelope of5 storeys or less as shown below. As a result, consideration should be given to reducing the maximum permitted height in this area to approximately 16.5 metres to reduce potential height impacts on the street and adjacent neighbours. Height impacts could also be addressed through the addition of angular planes and/orstep back requirements in the zoning by- law orguidelines to minimize building heights nearest the street. In addition, a maximum front yard setback of 10 metres is recommended to establish a street edge similar to the opposite side of MargaretAvenue. It is also recognized that there are quite a number of mature trees that are located on the property. Opportunities to retain and/or design around these trees should be encouraged. Response 7: The proposed building heights are 13.3 metres which is to maintain the overall character of the neighbourhood. The buildings are close to the street with individual entrances facing the street which is more consistent with the single detached dwellings in the immediate area. The proposed setback of approximately 3 metres establishing a similar street edge to the opposite side of Margaret Avenue. December7, 2022 MHBC 1 25 Page 272 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 6.4 Site/ Area Specific Design Guidelines: Margaret Avenue 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. 6.9.1 Margaret Avenue New development on the vacant lot on Margaret Avenue should establish a strong relationship to the street similar to that which exists on the south side of the street, by having a maximum front yard setback of io metres. Response 8: The front yard setback is approximately 3 metres and therefore, is within the maximum setback and similar to the rest of the street. Landscaping of a tree boulevard for the proposed development will also address the relationship between the trees on the south side of the street and those in front of the new building. A minimum rear yard setback of io to 15 metres is encouraged to minimize the impact of new development on existing residents on Ellen Street West, given that the topography slopes onwards from Margaret Avenue to Ellen Street. This rear yard setback is also more consistent with that of existing development on Ellen Street. Response g: The rear yard setback ranges from approximately 4 to 3.6 metres. The rear yard is intended to be landscaped. December7, 2022 MHBC 126 Page 273 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Figure 15: Coloured rendering of rear yard (Source: Martin Simmons Sweers Architects Inc., 2022). Building step backs are encouraged for any development greater than 3-4 storeys in height to minimize the impact of new development on the pedestrian environment of the street. Step backs should be a minimum of 2 metres to provide for useable outdoor terraces on the upper levels. Response 10: The proposed new construction is not greaterthan 3-4 storeys in height, however, it does include building step backsto minimize the impact of new development on the pedestrian environment of the street. There are terraces proposed to the rear of the units above the parking garages. Street level architecture of any new development on Margaret Avenue should incorporate a high degree of building articulation and architectural detail to provide interest and compatibility with existing buildings across the street. Details could include cornices, pilasters, varied roof lines, pitched roofs, gables and dormers, decorative door and window details, turrets, porches, bays and other similar features. Response 11: The proposed development is contemporary in design and does not include traditional historic architectural features. Create transitions in building width and massing by dividing the building visually into smaller units or sections that are more representative of the predominantly singlefamilynature of the neighbourhood. Response 12: This architectural design of the building uses repetitive fagade elements, such as the mirrored rhythm of building sections. The transition of building with stepbacks also breaks up and creates a rhythm along the fagade of the three buildings along Margaret Avenue (see Appendix C for architectural elevations and renderings). December7, 2022 MHBC 127 Page 274 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario The articulation of the front facades reflects width and spacing of the single detached dwellings on the south of Margaret Avenue. There are seventeen entrances to the property from the street accessed from Margaret Avenue which has the effect of creating individual front yards similar in character to the single detached dwellings on the south side of Margaret Avenue. The use of brick and/or stone is strongly encouraged for the front fagade of any new development, to establish consistency with other heritage buildings in proximity to the parcel of land; Response 13: The CCNHCD Study (2oo6) identified that brick was used in 87.02% of the properties in the district. The proposed developed will use a light cream/ buff brick veneer on the front facades. It also proposes to use wood materials which are also present in the District. Parking for new development will not be permitted in the front yard. Underground parking is strongly encouraged, or appropriately landscaped and screened surface parking at the rear or side of the development. Response 14: As per Response 2, parking is located in individual parking garages which are accessed via the laneway within the centre of the development. Therefore, the parking is not visible from the public realm. There is a total of 52 parking spaces proposed. Retention and incorporation of healthy trees currently located on the vacant land parcel is strongly encouraged to provide the new development with an 'instant' amenity and to help it blend into the heritage landscape that exists in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Design new buildings around the existing trees to the extent possible. Where trees must be removed, they should be replaced with new ones at appropriate locations in the landscape. Response 15: See Response 6. 6.5 Guidelines for Part IV Designations within CCNHCD 3.3.7 Part IV Designations A number of properties in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood are currently designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. When such properties are included in a Heritage Conservation District, the requirements of Part V of the Act take precedence over Part IV. As a result, the specific heritage attributes that are protected under Part IV are to be identified and included in the Heritage District Conservation Plan to ensure their continued protection. To address this situation, the following policies are established for properties previously designated under Part IV. December7, 2022 MHBC 128 Page 275 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Policies: The policies and guidelines of this Conservation Plan are to apply to all properties previously designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. In addition to the policies and guidelines of this Plan, all interior and exterior features previously designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, that are or may be above and beyond those features to be protected as a result of designation under Part V for the following properties are to continue to be protected in the same manner as prior to their designation under Part V. This includes: • 116 Queen Street North (fence) — Wrought iron fence Response 16: The proposed development will not negatively impact the wrought iron fence along the property of the Church of the Good Shepherd. This is analyzed in Sub -section 7.0 of this report. 6.6 Guidelines for New Residential Buildings 6.6 NEW BUILDINGS - RESIDENTIAL In addition to the large vacant tract of land on Margaret Avenue, there are a few locations in the residential core area of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District where new buildings are likely to be constructed. New or replacement buildings may be constructed in some cases as a result of fire or structural instability. In such situations, new buildings must be designed to be compatible with the heritage characteristics of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood to help retain the overall visual context of the area. Recommended Practices and Design Guidelines Match setback, footprint, size and massing patterns of the neighbourhood, particularly to the immediately adjacent neighbors. Response 17: See Responses 3 and 12. The new construction presents itself as separate units similar to the surrounding single family dwellings (including 54 Margaret Avenue) and is separated into several blocks to avoid a single mass. It also has elements of massing patterns and material that reflect the adjacent Church of the Good Shepherd. Setbacks of new development should be consistent with adjacent buildings. Where setbacks are not generally uniform, the new building should be aligned with the building that is most similar to the predominant setback on the street. Response 18: See Responses 8 & 9. The front yard setback of the adjacent church and the house at 54 Margaret Avenue are approximately 3.5 metres. However, the front yard setbacks of the buildings on the south side of Margaret Avenue are shallower and more similar to the proposed setback of the development. December7, 2022 MHBC 12g Page 276 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario New buildings and entrances must be oriented to the street and are encouraged to have architectural interest to contribute to the visual appeal of the neighbourhood. Response 19: The development will be oriented to the street and entryways, including private walkways, are proposed to encourage the visual appeal of the neighbourhood. Respond to unique conditions or location, such as corner properties, by providing architectural interest and details on both street facing facades. Response 20: The subject lands front Margaret Avenue and have designed the front elevation along the streetscape to have architectural interest and details that promote a fluid streetscape. Use roof shapes and major design elements that are complementary to surrounding buildings and heritage patterns. Response 21: The new construction includes flat, platform rooflines which reflect that of the adjacent church (at least as it relates to the battlement inspired bell tower). The parapet of the tower is mimicked by the roof terraces. The design of the blocks was intended to reflect the consistent residential streetscape in the surrounding area, particularly that of Ellen Street. Size, shape, proportion, number and placement of windows and doors should reflect common building patterns and styles of other buildings in the immediate area. Response 22: The size, shape, proportion, number and placement of windows and doors are contemporary in nature, although do take cues from surrounding buildings, particularly, those of the adjacent church which exhibits elongated, narrow window openings and asymmetrical entries with solid wood doors. The proposed entries include doors with sidelights and transom lights (the transom lights include wood slat siding). Use materials and colours that represent the texture and palette of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Response 23: The new construction includes a range of materials such as: natural wood siding, natural cedar soffits, wood door, standing seam metal siding, brick veneer, aluminum framing system and architectural concrete. Some of the materials represent the texture of the District while others are contemporary. The colour palette is proposed to be neutral which is supported by the use of some natural materials. Colours proposed include: Light cream, weathered copper, dark grey/ black, charcoal, blonde (aluminium) and natural wood colours (for the use of Cedar and other woods for architectural elements). December7, 2022 MHBC 1.30 Page 277 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Figures 16 & 17: (above) Coloured rendering of front elevation of Block'H' (Source: Martin Simmons Sweers Architects Inc., 2022); (below) View of the Church of the Good Shepherd (Source: Google Earth Pro, 2022). December7, 2022 MHBC 13.1 Page 278 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Where appropriate, incorporate in a contemporary way some of the traditional details that are standard elements in the principal facades of properties in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Such details as transoms and sidelights at doors and windows, covered porches, divided light windows and decorative details to articulate plain and flat surfaces, add character that complements the original appearance of the neighbourhood and add value to the individual property. Response 24: Details include: transoms and sidelights at doors, portico -like entry ways and the use of a variety of materials that would be reflected in the District (i.e. brick, wood). Front drive garages are strongly discouraged. Garages should be located in the rear yard whenever possible and will be subject to the design guidelines of the HCD Plan. Response 25: See Response 2. New residential or office conversion uses shall generally be of a low rise residential form, with a minimum height of 1-1/2 storeys. New buildings should not be any lower than the lowest residential heritage building on the block or taller than the highest residential heritage building on the same block. Response 26: The new construction is generally of a low-rise character, however, it is taller than the highest residential heritage building on the same block (it is more consistent with the adjacent place of worship/ institutional building). 6.7Other Applicable Guidelines for the Public Realm within CCNHCD There are other applicable guidelines within the CCNHCD Plan (2007) which are reviewed in this sub- section which relate to the overall public realm and the effect on the district by the proposed development. Mature trees are to be protected and preserved to the extent possible. (CCNHCD Plan (2o07), Public Realm, 3.3.6 (a))) Response 27: Response 16 addresses the concern of tree preservation for the overall site. Landscaping that complements the existing landscapes of the district, screens parking areas and contributes to the overall pedestrian quality is encouraged for all new development. Specific landscape elements will be governed by Site Plan Approval. (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, 3.3.6 (c)) Response 28: Landscaped areas will screen the surface parking to the rear of the property. Landscaping at the front of the building includes the signature tree boulevard and low-lying plants. Where construction and/ or construction activities on private property may impact publicly owned trees, submissions for site plan approvals/ permits shall be accompanied by a tree preservation plan clearly indicating measures to preserve the municipally owned tree and approved by Urban Forestry. December 7, 2022 MHBC 132 Page 279 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario The tree preservation plan shall be prepared by a landscape architect, certified arborist or registered professional forester (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Street Trees, Sub -section 7.3.1). Response 29: A Tree Management/ Preservation Plan is included in Appendix `D' of this report. All boulevards should be maintained as green space, serving as an important buffer between vehicular and pedestrian space within the streetscape (Public Realm, Boulevards, Sub -section 7.3.2). Response 30: The existing boulevard will be maintained as green space to serve as a buffer between vehicular and pedestrian space within the streetscape. Residents of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood are encouraged to consider the use of plant materials that were typically employed in Ontario residential landscapes during the post -Confederation and post -Victorian periods" (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Front Gardens, Sub -section 7.4.2). Response 31: Landscaping includes alternating gardens in sequence with the sections of the building; these gardens are composed of typical plant material selection for residential landscaping indicated in Table 5.1 of the CCNHCD Plan (2007). New fences should be consistent in design, materials, and scale with heritage fencing. Wood, and iron fencing are recommended over vinyl, plastic, aluminium or other more modern materials. In the event that a more decorative or ornate style of fencing can be identified as historically installed on the property, it is desirable that the fencing should be replicated (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Front Gardens, Sub -section 7.4.2). Response 32: There are retaining walls proposed along portions of the front elevations as part of the physical separation between unit entries. The walls are proposed to be architectural concrete, lightly sandblasted with clear matte sealer, however, these are intended as physical architectural elements and not as `fences'. Terraces include wrought iron picket guard which is similar to the designated iron wrought fence of the Church of the Good Shepherd. Where fences are proposed where they did not historically exist, uncomplicated heritage designs are recommended over more modern styles. Unfinished pressure treated lumber fencing and chain link fencing are discouraged in the study area, especially in the front and side yard areas where fencing material can affect the streetscape character most (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Front Gardens, Sub -section 7.4.2). Response 33: There are no fences proposed, however, as mentioned in Response 32, the terraces include wrought iron guards to be consistent with the character of the area. Size and scale of the fencing should be considered closely, and take into account distance to viewing points, viewing heights and sight lines over fencing (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Front Gardens, Sub -section 7.4.2). December 7, 2022 MHBC 133 Page 280 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Response 34: There is no proposed fence line along the front elevation of the proposed development. The retaining walls that are proposed will not block any viewing points or sight lines. Ornamental furniture should be coordinated, and if possible sourced from the same supplier in order to achieve the same economy of scale. A bench such as the MLB 3ioM bench available from Maglin Site Furniture Inc., finished in black pilaster powder coat, made from solid cast aluminium. The ML WR 200- 32 trash receptacle and MBR2oo bike rack are also available in the black powder coat finish, and coordinate with the bench (CCNHCD Plan (2oo7), Public Realm, Street Furniture, Sub -section 7.3.6). Response 35: There is no ornamental furniture proposed. 6.8 Compatibility with the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) Preferred Examples of Infill The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (OHTK) outlines acceptable infill designs within a cultural heritage landscape (see Figure 3.8). According to the OHTK, infills in designated cultural heritage landscapes are to fit in the immediate context, be of the same scale and similar setback, maintain proportions of windows and entrances similarto other cultural heritage resources and be of similar colour and material. Section 4.0 of this report completed an overall analysis of the policies in the CCNHCD Plan (2007). This analysis concluded that the proposed development is compatible with the overall character of the CCNHCD. new infill----� should fit IIS MMUO immediate �QQm �an I i 101010 �� I i _ contest r 0 tl I1 M2 p ^p o naw infill should F-7 be generallyQi]n same height QQn !1➢� I I 440 CU] I t)p00 00 ul andwidth as 1.117[71 ` 7(] m OAD + j Carl pulp l i f 0[ri10 ¢Qa m m neighbours r -1 ! ! ! new infill should have Set backs 1- -- i simiEarfv i 41" no i'- ��1'- neighbours' - --- This it a good maintain��� EIpp JOE m [1 exampleofthe proportions of windows and Doo f1t]0 900 -> _o ooa �p p� use ofsimple enlrances _ , graphic to --� demonstrate acreptablr and use Similar or l@hng m - -- ok no unacceptable infill design. materials and I �1 I' i- ' (Graphie colours Ili o Minirtry of - cul") Figure i8: Diagram showing good and bad examples of infill (OHTK, December7, 2022 MHBC 134 Page 281 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 15 la Elevation on Margaret Avenue looking north to proposed low-rise redevelopment. Height of buildings to he similar to existing building heights of three storeys near the street, up to five storeys mid -block_ Figures ig & 20: (above) Preferred example showing axonometric view of a proposed development from Sub- section 6.9.1. of the CCNHCD Plan for Margaret Avenue; (belowo Example of front elevation of preferred example along Margaret Avenue (Source: CCNHCD Plan, 6.29- 6.30). The proposed development relays similar architectural articulations as the preferred example provided in the CCNHC Plan above in Figures 1.9 and 20. Although, the development is taller than the historic residential buildings in the immediate surrounding area, it generally complies with the neighbourhood. In addition to complying with the architectural design guideline policies in the CCNHCD Plan (2007), the overall design of the proposed development also considered the preferred examples from case studies outlined in 6.33 of the CCNHCD Plan (2007). The excerpt below explains how these preferred examples are compatible for Margaret Avenue. 'More Preferred'Examples The photos below illustrate examples of development that would be considered reasonably compatible in the Civic Centre neighbourhood, in areas such as Margaret Avenue, Ellen Street, December7, 2022 MHBC 135 Page 282 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Weber Street and Victoria Street. These developments generally display good relationship to the street, sensitivity to scale, massing and built form, appropriate interpretation of roof lines, and window placement. For the most part, they also break up the buildings visually into smaller units through articulation of the front fagade and variation in building materials (CCNHCD Plan (2ooA Section 6.33). Figures Zito 24 provide a comparative analysis of the preferred examples presented in the Plan and the proposed new construction. Some similarities include separate unit entries and the use of setbacks and various projecting bays and contrast of brick and other materials. December7, 2022 MHBC 136 Page 283 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Proposed Development �I Figures 21- 24: (above left to bottom left) Preferred examples from Sub -section 9.6.5 of the CCNHCD Plan for Margaret Avenue; (right) Coloured rendering of the proposed development (Source: Martin Simmons Sweers Architects Inc., 2022) December7, 2022 MHBC 137 Page 284 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 7mO Impacts of Proposed Development 7.1 Classifications of Impacts The impacts of a proposed development or change to a cultural heritage resource may occur over a short or long-term duration, and may occur during a pre -construction phase, construction phase or post - construction phase. Impacts to a cultural heritage resource may also be site specific or widespread, and may have low, moderate or high levels of physical impact. According to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, the following constitutes negative impacts which may result from a proposed development: • Demolition of any, or part of any, heritage attributes or features; • Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance of a building; • Shadows created that obscure heritage attributes or change the viability of the associated cultural heritage landscape; • Isolation of a heritage resource or part thereof from its surrounding environment, context or a significant relationship; • Obstruction of significant identified views or vistas of, within, or from individual cultural heritage resources, • A change in land use where the change affects the property's cultural heritage value; and • Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource. In addition, this Heritage Impact Assessment assesses the impact of the proposed development on the overall Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District and assesses the compliance with the applicable policies of the CCNHCD Plan (2007). 7.2 Assessment of Beneficial and Neutral Impacts The subject lands, which historically were used for residential dwellings, are nowvacant. The vacancy has created a void along the Margaret Avenue streetscape which is within one of the City's oldest neighbourhoods. Infill in this case is recommended as a form of conservation for the general rhythm of the neighbourhood and in particularthe streetscape of Margaret Avenue. A building of good quality and architectural design can be beneficial for both the neighbourhood in terms of spatial organization and overall historical land use patterns, as well as visually provide a scenic infill in what is currently an unbalanced streetscape. December7, 2022 MHBC 138 Page 285 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario ].3 Assessment of Adverse Impacts of the Proposed Development to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District The following Table i.o analyzes the impact of proposed development to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (including its potential impact on 12 Margaret Avenue/ 116 Queen Street (Church of the Good Shepherd) which is also designated individually under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Table i.o Impacts to CCNHCD Impact Level of Impact Analysis (Unknown, Negligible, Minor, Moderate or Major) Destruction or Alteration of Negligible. The proposed development will remove Heritage Attributes two (2) trees from the existing 20 trees on site, one of which is in poor condition/ dead. Shadows No. The proposed development will not result in shadows that negatively impact the CCNHCD including landscape features (i.e. mature trees). Isolation No. The proposed development will not isolate adjacent heritage buildings or features but rather create a fluid streetscape. Direct or Indirect Obstruction No. of View , December7, 2022 The proposed development will not negatively alter the view of the western elevation of the Church of the Good Shepherd eastwardly along Margaret Avenue. It will also not affect the scenic view of the designated wrought iron fence along Margaret Avenue and Queen Street. The coach house was specifically constructed to the rear and not intended as a building of significant views. The proposed development does not obstruct the view of the eastern fagade of 54 Margaret Avenue as this was not intended to be the significant view and is currently obstructed from view by vegetation. The proposed development will not obstruct the view of rear elevations of adjacent propertiestothe rearofthe subject lands as MHBC 13-9 Page 286 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario they were not intended to be viewed (see Sub -section 7.3.1). A Change in Land Use No The land use on the subject lands will remain for residential purposes. The proposed development is approximately 29.8 metres from the adjacent coach house, 20-28 metres from properties to the rear along Ellen Street. The new construction will be approximately 9.8 metres from the dwelling at 54 Margaret Avenue which is sufficient distance to not anticipate impacts of vibrations as a result of construction (see sub -section 7.3.2). Drainage and grading should be appropriate based on an approval of an adequate drainage and grading plan. 7.3.1 Impact of Direct or Indirect Obstruction of Significant Views The Standards and Guidelines of Historic Places (Second Edition) defines in Section 4.1.5 `Visual Relationships" which is included as part of a character -defining element of a historic place and relates to an observer and their relationship with a landscape or landscape feature (viewscape) or between the relative dimensions of landscape features (scale). This policy adopts the following definition for viewscape: Viewscape can include scenes, panoramas, vistas, visual axes and sight lines. In designed landscapes, a viewscape may have been established following the rules of pictorial composition: elements are located in the foreground, middle ground and background. A Viewscape may also be the chief organizing feature when a succession of focal points is introduced to draw the pedestrian onward through a landscape. The Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport (Standards & Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties, 2014) has adopted the following definitions of a view and vista, respectively: Vista means a distant visual setting that may be experienced from more than one vantage point, and includes the components of the setting at various points in the depth of field. The Ontario Heritage Toolkit acknowledges that views of a heritage attributes can be components of its significant cultural heritage value. This can include relationships between settings, landforms, vegetation patterns, buildings, landscapes, sidewalks, streets, and gardens, for example. View means a visual setting experienced from a single vantage point, and includes the components of the setting at various points in the depth of field. December7, 2022 MHBC 140 Page 287 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Views can be either static or kinetic. Static views are those which have a fixed vantage point and view termination. Kinetic views are those related to a route (such as a road or walking trail) which includes a series of views of an object or vista. The vantage point of a view is the place in which a person is standing. The termination of the view includes the landscape or buildings which is the purpose of the view. The space between the vantage point and the termination (or object(s) being viewed) includes a foreground, middle -ground, and background. Views can also be'framed' by buildings or features. While there may be many vantage points providing views and vistas of a property, landscape, building or feature, these must be evaluated to determine whether or not they are significant. Significance is defined by PPS 203.4 as follows: Significant: means e) in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people. Therefore, a significant view must be identified as having an important contribution to the understanding of a place, event or people. The CCNHCD Plan (2007) mentions the importance of views and overall effect ofvisibiIityofthe proposed development on the District, Because it is such a large site and is located on one of the more highly traveled streets in the District, it has pronounced visibility with the potential to significantly enhance or detract from the overall character of the neighbourhood depending on the ultimate appearance of development on the site. (Sub -section 3.3.5.3 Margaret Avenue, CCNHCD Plan, 2007). Thus, it is important that the affect the proposed development has on significant views and viewscapes in the district. The following diagram identifies views, both kinetic and stationary, as well as viewscapes that may be affected by the proposed development. The CCNHCD Study (2006) reviewed views and viewscapes within the boundary of the district. The study states that, "-where street are consistent as along Ellen Street, Ahrens Street or Gordon Avenue, the views are closed but long" (Section 4.3). Consistency as part of a view and viewscapes of the district will be evaluated in this sub -section. See the following Table 2.0 for an analysis of potential impacted views and viewscapes. December7, 2022 MHBC 141 Page 288 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Table 2.o- Analysis of Views and Viewscapes View/ Viewscape Description of View Kinetic view along Margaret Avenue View No. 2 Kinetic view along Ellen Street West View No .3 Kinetic view along Queen Street North View No. 4 Stationary view of western elevation of the Church of the Good Shepherd Viewscape No. 5 Viewscape (scene) of the Church of the Good Shepherd at the intersection of Queen Street North and Margaret Avenue Analysis of Views and Viewscapes and Potential Impacts View No.s- The CCNHCD Study of 2oo6, specifically identifies in Sub -section 4.4 that scale and character does shift across Margaret Avenue. Margaret Avenue is currently composed of low, medium and high- rise buildings. The scale and character of the Avenue is a mosaic of types of architecture. The kinetic view along Margaret Avenue will change so as to fill in a space that historically was filled with residential dwellings. The impact is neutral to this view and will not adversely affect the streetscape but rather it will complete the streetscape while maintaining the overall view of the street. View No.2- The kinetic view along Ellen Street West will not be negatively impacted. The proposed development maybe visible to the rear of the residential homes. However, existing trees in the rear yards of these homes and the existing and proposed trees on subject lands will screen the building masses. December7, 2022 MHBC 142 Page 289 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario View NO -3- Queen Street North is characterized by a variety of types of architecture; there are medium/ high rise buildings existing along this street. The proposed development will not impact the kinetic view of Queen Street North. Figure 25: Rendering of proposed development along Margaret Avenue (Source: Martin Simmons Sweers Architect). View No. 4-. The view of the western facade of the Church of the Good Shepherd will not be negatively impacted due to the development. Due to the parking lot on the church property and the proposed park, the view of the north facade will still be visible. Viewscape No. 5- The CCNHCD Plan (2007) defines churches as "distinctive landmarks within and at the edges of the District" as one of the key attributes of the district .The viewscape in the form of a scene of the Church of the Good Shepherd at the intersection of Queen Street North and Margaret Avenue is a distinctive part of the district. The Gothic inspired church with by its wrought iron fence at the corner of this intersection marks its presence on both streets. This scene is presented by the wrought iron fence in the foreground, church structure in the middle ground with itsthree storey clock tower leading the viewer to the heavens as a background. The view of the wrought iron fence will be limited to the change in the background from the proposed development. The foreground including the fence and the middle ground of the landscaping and church will, however, remain the same. December7, 2022 MHBC 143 Page 290 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Figure 26 : Aerial view of the Church of the Good Shepherd; Black dotted line outlines the approximate perimeter of the designate wrought iron fence line (Google Earth Pro, 201.9) 7.3.2 Impact of Land Disturbances The proposed development is approximately 29.8 metres from the adjacent coach house, 20-28 metres from properties to the rear along Ellen Street. The new construction will be approximately 9.8 metres from the dwelling at 54 Margaret Avenue to the west which is sufficient distance to not anticipate impacts of vibrations as a result of construction. Figure 27: Overlay of site plan on aerial showing the distances between new construction and existing buildings and structures in the immediate surrounding area (Source: MHBC, 2022). December7, 2022 MHBC 144 Page 291 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario ].LF Assessment of Adverse Impacts Specific to Adjacent 54 Margaret Avenue _Table 2.0 Impacts to the Natural Heritage On-site and Surrounding CCNHCD Impact Level of Impact Analysis (Unknown, Negligible, Minor, Moderate or Major) Destruction or Alterationof No. Heritage Attributes Shadows No. Isolation No. Direct or Indirect Obstruction No. of View i A Change in Land Use Land Disturbances December7, 2022 No. The proposed development will not _destroy or alter heritage attributes. The proposed development will not cause shadows that will negatively impact the heritage attributes of the adjacent property. There is proposed development on either side of 54 Margaret Avenue. A landscaped separation has been created between the development and the existing building to reduce any impact on the building. The landscaped buffer also purposes as a transition in scale and mass. The proposed development does not obstruct the view of the front facade of 54 Margaret Avenue. This is the significant view of the property from the street. The land use on the subject lands will remain for residential purposes. The proposed development will be approximately 9.8 metres from the dwelling at 54 Margaret Avenue. This is sufficient distance such that impacts on the foundations, due to vibrations, are not expected. MHBC 145 Page 292 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 80oConsideration of Development Alternatives, Mitigation and Conservation Measures 8.1 Alternative Development Approaches The following have been identified as a range of development alternatives that may be considered as part of the heritage planning process. 8.1.1 Do nothing This option would result in no development on the site. This is not recommended as historically the subject lands facilitated residential dwellings as part of the development of the City of Kitchener. The limited impacts of the proposed development are not cause to deny development opportunities. 7.1.2 Develop the site as proposed This option would result in the development of the site as designed in the attached site plan by MHBC Planning (see Appendix B). 8.1.3 Develop the site with an alternate design Alternative layouts and building orientation have been considered in the past with other proposed developments. The current design reflects the 'more preferred examples' outlined in the CCNHCD Plan (2007) in Section 6.9.5, architectural design guidelines; it also was developed based on previous proposals to ensure that it meets the requirements of the municipality. 8.2 Mitigation Measures The following adverse impacts have been identified as impacts related tothe proposed development are: • Negligible impact of the removal of two (2) trees from the subject lands Mitigation measures include tree replacement and that replanting be considered for the landscaped area between the buildings and edge of the property that abuts adjacent properties. Furthermore, frontage of the property should reflect the similar theme of a tree boulevard along the south side of Margaret Avenue, Queen Street North and Ellen Street West. Any new trees should be indigenous to the area and December7, 2022 MHBC 146 Page 293 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario of a type that would provide maximum screening potential to clearly define and legitimize the boundary of the development and its separation from the adjacent cultural heritage landscape. 8.3 Conservation Measures There are no proposed repairs, alterations and demolitions as a result of the proposed development, however, as a precautionary measure, in order to ensure protection of both 54 and 12 Margaret Avenue (Coach House) prior and post construction, it is recommended that construction fencing be erected to deter dust and debris and any accidental damage that could occur. It would also be encouraged that points of entry to the site during construction avoid both of these properties, if possible, and that the storage of material and equipment be located away from the immediate area of both buildings. It addition to the above, it is encouraged that the park be named after a previous land owner (i.e. William and Margaret Young, D. S. Bowlby, Dr. Cornell, Albert Augustine, Kaufman family) in orderto honourthe subject lands former historical associations. Remaining foundation stones on the property could be used creatively within the park design to support this objective. December7, 2022 MHBC 147 Page 294 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 9 . 0 Conclusions and Recommendations The City of Kitchener requested a scoped Heritage Impact Assessment for the proposed development on the subject lands located at 30-40 Margaret Avenue. This report assessed the impact that the proposed development may have on the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) including any potential impact to the individually designated property located at 12 Margaret Avenue/ 3.16 Queen Street (the Church of the Good Shepherd). In conclusion, the proposed development conforms to the majority of the policies and guidelines within the CCNHCD Plan (2007) and the adverse impacts are limited to a negligible impact of the removal of two (2) trees from the subject lands. Mitigation measures include tree replacement and that replanting be considered for the landscaped area between the buildings and edge of the property that abuts adjacent properties. Furthermore, frontage of the property should reflect the similar theme of a tree boulevard along the south side of Margaret Avenue, Queen Street North and Ellen Street West. Any new trees should be indigenous to the area and of a type that would provide maximum screening potential to clearly define and legitimize the boundary of the development and its separation from the adjacent cultural heritage landscape. There are no proposed repairs, alterations and demolitions to cultural heritage resources as a result of the proposed development. However, as a precautionary measure, in orderto ensure protection of both 54 and 12 Margaret Avenue (Coach House) prior and post construction, it is recommended that construction fencing be erected to deter dust and debris and any accidental damage that could occur. It would also be encouraged that points of entryto the site during construction and storage of material and equipment be located away from the immediate area of both buildings. It addition to the above, it is encouraged that the park be named after a previous land owner (i.e. William and Margaret Young, D. S. Bowlby, Dr. Cornell, Albert Augustine, Kaufman family) in orderto honourthe subject lands former historical associations. Remaining foundation stones on the property could be used creatively within the park design to support this objective. December7, 2022 MHBC 148 Page 295 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario 10 . 0 Bibliography Blumenson, John. "Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 3.784 to the present". Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 3.99o. Blumenson, John. Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 1874 to the Present. Fitzhenry and Whiteside,199o. City of Kitchener. Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Study, 2oo6. City of Kitchener. Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan, 2007. City of Kitchener Official Plan: A Complete and Healthy Kitchener (203.4). City of Kitchener, By-law No. 85-129. To designate the property at 3.16 Queen Street (The Church of the Good Shepherd) as being of cultural heritage value or interest (15 July, 3.985). Eby, Ezra. A Biographical History of Early Settlers and their Descendants in Waterloo Township. Kitchener, ON: Eldon D. Weber, 3.973.. English, John and Kennedth McLaughlin. Kitchener. An Illustrated History. Robin Brass Studio, 3.996. Glaeser, Adolph, Mayor George Gruestzner, John Klein, Ezra Kraft, Ludovika Isabella Lang, Jacob Mohr, Joseph Mueller, Revered Andrew Spetz, Albert Tuerk. Berlin Today 3.8o6-3.906 Official Souvenir. Courtesy of the Kitchener Public Library, S1420. Google Maps & Google Earth Pro, 2022. 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, 3.997. Heritage Resources Centre. Ontario Architectural Style Guide. University of Waterloo, Zoog. Intaglio Gravure Limited, Toronto & Montreal. Church of the Good Shepherd. Photograph. C. 3.935. Martin Simmons Architects. Site Plan & Rendering, 2022. MHBC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture. Tree Preservation Plan, October, 2022. December7, 2022 MHBC 14-9 Page 296 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario MHBC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture. Site Plan, March, 2022. MHBC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture. Landscape renderings, March, 2022. mills, rych. Kitchener (Berlin)188o-1g6o. Arcadia Publishing, 2002. Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, InfoSheet #2, Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Queens Printer for Ontario, 2oo6. Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, InfoSheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans . Queens Printer for Ontario, 2oo6. Moyer, Bill. Kitchener. Yesterday Revisited, An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications (Canada) Ltd., 1979 n/a. Busy Berlin, Jubilee Souvenir. 1897. Ontario Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport. Ontario Heritage Act Ontario Heritage Act 2005, R.S.O. lggo, c. o.18 Retrieved from the Government of Ontario website: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/c)oo3.8. Ontario Ministry of Affairs and Housing. Ontario Provincial Policy Statement 2014. S.3 the Ontario Planning Act R.S.O 1996. Retrieved from the Government of Ontario website: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page2lc.aspx Pender, Terry. "Vacant Margaret Avenue property to house condo: ACTIVA Group plans two, six -storey buildings on land made vacant 25 years ago." Waterloo Region Record. October 12, 2013. Pender, Terry. "Local developer purchases long -empty Margaret Avenue land." Waterloo Region Record. August 9, 2012. Region of Waterloo GIS Locator, 2o18. Region of Waterloo. "Infill: New Construction in Heritage Neighbourhoods". Practical Conservation Guide for Heritage Properties. (PDF) Accessed February 17, 2019. Swedenborgian Church of the Good Shepherd. Church of the Good Shepherd. Photograph. C.1955. Swedenborgian Church of the Good Shepherd. "Our Historical Journey through the Ages". http://www.shepherdsway.ca/our-history.-Accessed February 21, 2019 Unknown. Church of the Good Shepherd. Photograph. C. 1965-1970. Courtesy of the Kitchener Public Library. December/, 2022 MHBC 15o Page 297 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Uttley, W.V. (Ben), A History of Kitchener, Ontario. The Chronicle Press: Kitchener, 1937. Waterloo Generations. "Family Surname Search." http://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/searchform.php . Accessed February 14, 2019. W. V. Uttley and Gerald Noonan. A History of Kitchener., Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1975. MAPS Aerial photograph of subject lands of 193o, 3.945, 3.955 and 1963. KMZ Files. Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. C.M. Hopkins. "Map of the Town of Berlin, Waterloo County." 1879. Scale unknown. KMZ File. Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. City of Kitchener. Map 9 of the Secondary Plan. City of Kitchener's Official Plan: A Complete and Healthy Kitchener (2014). City of Kitchener. Aerial and zoning map for the subject lands. City of Kitchener Interactive E -map, 2022. Goad, Chas. E. " Kitchener (including the Village of Bridgeport". February 19o8, revised March 1925 50 sheets on 4 microfiche.G3464.K7G4751917.G63x UW Porter. Rare Book Room .1st floor. Goad, Chas. E. "Kitchener (including the Village of Bridgeport". February 19o8, revised and reprinted January 1947. Underwriters' Survey Bureau. G3464X7G475sO6.U5x Geopspatial Centre.54 sheets, 1 index on 28 pages, both sides. G3464.K7G475sO6.U5x Geospatial Centre54 sheets. H0122 UW Porter. Rare Book Room .1st floor, Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. Government of Canada. "Waterloo County: Historical Canadian County Atlas." 1881. Scale not given. McGill University Rare Books and Special Collections Division, McGill University (Digital). http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/CountyAtlas/searchmapframes.php M.C. Schofield. "Map of Part of the Town of Berlin, Capital of the County of Waterloo". 3.853-3.854. Scale Eight Chains to the Inch. KMZ File. Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. Voght, G.H. "Berlin, Province of Ontario." 1875. Lithograph. Published in in 3.989 by the City of Kitchener L.A.C.A.C. with the Kitchener Public Library. KMZ File. Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre. December7, 2022 MHBC 15.1 Page 298 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix A -Map of Subject Lands December7, 2022 MHBC 152 Page 299 of 511 1pP L A N N I N G URBAN DESIGN MHBC ARC ITDECTURE 200-540 BINGEM—S CFNTPF DK I,K,r'ENER O',Fi2B 3X9 P: 519.576.3650 F:51^,.5'..0121 : .'WW.Nt!,LCF'LAk.C3M ° }' , `t� OL it , I . .:% I '9.• `aid -'S. � -, '� .) �, � ���y* oil lr®Tlf tl�®Tl�©Y'Ymt'� !rte BLOCK C TOMHOOSE 6 UNITS MARGARET AVE Y -46 Ad ph " "Nih, 10M��aON-,10 O\ r. v PLA N N I N G URBAN DESIGN MHBC ARCHITDECTURE 900-540 RINGFM.N$"FNTP= rJ I,I,C IFNFR O',. h2R 3X9 P: 519.576.3650 F:51^,.57,..021 :.:'WN.MACF"LAN.COM Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix B -Site Plan December7, 2022 MHBC 153 Page 302 of 511 N3GX3'25 E -5151 LN U a -- w g E . 0 0 = oI ®� = /Z xz F 3Z® m�O ' o i �(D —Z32'11 3.53 m W oD 3_ - - 0® o u� - Z / Y ll O O D- o ME O eao waasi " 0 0 M�L4.49 v0E5 0 v® O 6 - 3 Z - ° % 3 F� j0 z % ij/%o n O " E / 0 - Q/ dill wW o ® o 4 !// z z 3 3� _ / oz ®� O / w <� °o ° ° Asa" t W fl3.LS OS -E N �E � E W Z) z w Q H w Q 0 cQ G E .aw !Ha� o oda wa=a o o HR poi >4 .. as -,w ""'� § io H m - - a�o- ���' Z $a o" o =� a a= WHa s ® a s am ae as aim E - a m � m T H a o § O w 7Z7H. s se o a 0 0000000 0 X04 - €= Z m PS N ,.,,..,,. Poi € O Z w 0 _ s. u a .. s s ogW _ g U Z X06?'rs by &� V ¢ 8 ae< IU 2Em z o cn .aw !Ha� o oda wa=a o o HR poi >4 .. as -,w ""'� § io H m - - a�o- ���' Z $a o" o =� a a= WHa s ® a s am ae as aim E - E zP a 3nN-A °ab NAVpV 3 w a m � m H a o § O w pC s se o a 0 0000000 0 0 ° 000 E zP a 3nN-A °ab NAVpV 3 w S - CO eeeeeeee (n a a m m _ s. u a .. s s a� zLD W a / Z O w � s OOe - o m 0 0®® 0 w II}I ihi ww a a w _►¢ Ia �� �� R � 'I� � jo_ � Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix C -Building Elevations & Renderings December7, 2022 MHBC 154 Page 304 of 511 mN O c dog gti o o m®�' OJ Z a a cs w- Z z O m =4, as sa m LL Oto o - Z ,.,,..... p Q w 0 W ~�W -LLJ 3 O g W F Q (n W F m W woa 4aw �3o am o mai ae Q�� ... �`o °.o mss_ a O z z 1. M a=a wN 2 to m a Xe �l J T o m_ 13 ° S o- a ,X\ ®- v o ® o z Z 00 o a® a o /X\ m" m" a m �g �g 18ig� s e B o- a o -_a® 8 8ig� ® ig� �- - - �- - Will z oa� a� m LL O � o ®g ® ® em o- 0 o- _ -- o y Y y ® Y 10 0 10 m � ® m �g �g ozo CC C iii m m 0 a W r a n o0 0 0 z z w O tom mso H�Pt N ,.,,..... O W w w ~�W 3� - O g W tu F Q (n W w m W woa 4aw "3o am o mai ae Q�� ... in sm o m d n n _ H a Fa m LJ I m ���I I �c • o 'SII .: WE] . e®e T7 pC„ ..T7 6� n _ �� n F 4 4 1—T 'e ....... 'e n ❑ I x r m ®„_- a� oEDa � _ s ® L B d® e e I �� o � o � o � 0 0 omo w N o w N - f ff ff Ey z _ f z - g x o - o ° ¢ U S o - i g e 2rr �s O I z 3 3 MA 0 0 o x I � 3 - O i w w Y Y z o M Q e 0i Iz C4 E 2 0 11 0 �o o U) 1 0 Ln Z z -j LL m IIII rn Wz R PS L 2P In 2E 0 oN < 2P IL z m F IS ENE ro 0 n. miM ---------- 0 now z 0 Z 0 ------------ Lin 0 o J 1� z z 0 0 0 0 IIII z IV Iz N 0i Es o� nogg oy¢ aoo m® o r'= o ig 6€$ o 2 z k m �� w Z z -im =o, aaa m o Lno- Q Upt N p w w 0 m aW c w c= ~mow - ° gW a w tae oa> g� N w s< ��W"' Y o m w woa 4aw �3o am o mai ae Q�� °.o "s_ a U z C7 .< Mos w a N a=a w" v7 0lu g 2E m a e ens u 7 1MVP t jTT �E 1:0j,a o -J i �m 1 n —� a 13 i �e A ii� � �o n � 4 ....... � o — J . ic ®� �J - m $ Ta — g 7777 �$ m� Lj a m o 0 �mm _ ° — ° LL °o � �o ^ z ° o w <,> ° rw a a � - =a �P m II z m dF— sa Elm _ z z °o ° o o w � w Y Y U U O® e� O® m� m� Q 1 o j o z 0 G ®I I C) a 0 T" 0 (DIG o 0 0 o o ,1 o 0 a 1 1 o b e 0ID 1 o- 'I O b 0- o _ 0 o o Y U O e Q Ii o 0 i o� omE ®oE C 0 _... , m G ®I I Q Ii o 0 i o� omE ®oE C 0 _... , m G C) d o 0 T" 0 (DIG o 0 0 o o ,1 o 0 a 1 1 o b e 0ID 1 o- 'I O b 0- o _ 0 o o o -t l I I z E) o 0 01 o 4 j o w 0 0,1 0 �c o a C) 5 O a Oe �Q"'r'i (D o 0 0 0 1 _ 0 O 0 1 0 p 0 a J �0 0 ¢ 0 I —C ¢ 0 01 O O a O- 1 oO b O O— - 4 I 4` o 3 4 W s 0 0 co W W so so3 o0 0 =oa o 0 3o a w ix w o 0 0 o Jo o 0 o o a0 0 0 W0 O 0 D o 0 Ii o 0 G aE � w T" 0 (DIG o w G o ,1 o 1 Oo m 3 4 W s 0 0 co W W so so3 o0 0 =oa o 0 3o a w ix w o 0 0 o Jo o 0 o o a0 0 0 W0 O 0 D o 0 Ii o r(DE)o17 aE T" 0 (DIG o o ,1 o 1 o of x,00 o- 'I O b O 0I C) _ } OID I � O 010 O I z �O — ID u z o w o g w �c o a Z 5 O a Oe �Q"'r'i Oe J m oN OIC o o o' �0 Ii o r(DE)o17 aE O 0 (DIG o o ,1 1 o of x,00 o- 'I O b O 0I C) } OID I � O 010 O I z �O — ID u z o w o g w �c o a 5 O a Oe �Q"'r'i Oe d g z zov) LU —gW W In 9l 91 Q m� m o QQ e� m 0 1 Cl C4 I o -o r F o - 4I O II I • „ m Y Oo m Q w4, 4 Q14' �k m Q p o ■ °. ° m m 0 Q IDm 4® �� m- m m m o o� - m o0 Q m� m o QQ e� m 0 O Cl II I o -o r F o - 4I O II I 3 „ m Y Oo 3 4 co 0 0 LL p 5 s — CC $ O W W soso3 oo go o =_oa o o o= 3o a w WXw J o 60 0 0 JO 0 0 0 0 ao 0 O WO ao 0 o 0 0 z 0 e a m 0 p C) O O 9-2 m - m KA O F 1 O w 0 O O 3 U Oo m - 3 4 0 0 W W so so3 >�� ix J 0 0 0 0 JO 0 0 0 0 a0 0 0 WO 0 0 0 0 0 1111111111111 ��� � _ • O ■ m m m o� Iv ■ '° � � m o m 1 ®� ® o m Om m ® • Ott_ �® ® mi_. mso - ® ®'- MEN o m o m m m ��O 661 z 0 e a m 0 p C) O O 9-2 m - m KA O F 1 O w 0 O O 3 U Oo m - 3 4 0 0 W W so so3 >�� ix J 0 0 0 0 JO 0 0 0 0 a0 0 0 WO 0 0 0 0 0 Z O O � m o &--LO I O 0--bf � o b o b � Y o 0o i m� ID d ID (D to oo b o 0 0 0 O O C) 0 Z O O w O e m it it it it it � & 3 4 co W s 0 0 LL p W W so so3 o0 0 =oa o 0 3o a w ix w 0 0 0 0 JO 0 0 0 0 a0 O O WO 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 IV o Z 0 Iz 0 o w z J w �2R ww ° g w 11 0 11 LOA 0 61AGM 0 "WEE IN Iml§ 6 eke, -0 M � I a 0 Ml. 0 0 0 Komi 0 0 0 0 HIM 6 �Z 1r° Do srY 0 D 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 AN Go IMP, F a 1 pip. 0 0 0 0 0 00 Lim—, gm_,.,0 0 0 0 O N �xqlq wa 0® 0 0 0 0 Go EKE, rp WIN a mil 00 - I 0 El 0 a Oil ® , illlllla`aWLl,iii�iii'°'r° _ ® �- _ 00 0 00 e � ® O 0 I le O 0 0 0_ _ O O ® ® ■ PIN ® �ee�® ® ■ Lim ���i1a�°o o o o e—_ ° ■ID -0 0 p�l'i o 0 0 0 ° '�� 0 r ° ®SAW --- �= ■ � Iii+ili°Nti��!� � I ® ■ � �e� p. 0 00 ° 0 O o 0 e_ ® o° ® a®as o OA o ®= i ® ■ Fm 0 e 0 ■ ® " 'per 0 0. 0000 0 00 �_ I y ' 0 ® _ N� Ali ° �® �■= 00 0 `a�O1 Era O; ® 00 ® ■O® a ® r� O ® ® `a° ®40 ■®�� ° :.0... �� ■ lu 00 L101 jr. 00 — - OEM, 00 0 0 0 O o ®.0 III � rl ea`— u I)I JI aanainixxmiiaxilt,l,h$II'aon®v ® = os I ® i o i ® o 0 0 °• o ■ o e US TF �A - ® 1 __ �. n o ■ u, �I� 4 �0'1�1911I�'ro'"'�.. o O 0 �0 Oi 0 0 O 0 0 0 O.p[ O _ MofiLM1u El I o T- Q lz CO z U) z 0 . . .. ... . mwow zP Ij LLJ w o -g Cl) 0 o LLJ T. o N 2E m z o U) Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix D- Tree Management Plan December7, 2022 MHBC 155 Page 318 of 511 s"qy we„ Nva sa:sa` � w z bz - O C, W = 6 W w a F �G d =�M1J o -No M1�ti4 N age - _� H H H g HbH H bH H eH - ) W a W Z F y ° 3ma =90 aa3og 0009 aY�g3 o§ �2a �0= 0 Y as s '3 oa_m�o'§�?a dz s o a r ^, nen ' n n N '9�.. n n O¢� g w ^ F e a o m � a o o � ; -- 1 ��/ • s v � Y F s € u \a o 0 e I 1/ \ 1 6a a a \ ^ o a = I � e � x m w Y wxa:^.n xse d ` a y rn • O e f ^ m v � f o w� �> 9 g J a n� m • LL oho o . a a v �T �a 8• e 4 a ^ �"O _ _ a e � � x " m s ' _ s ® a ^ v u E i s \ o Q 4 aw d� Ea= k U I b op ¢ �- - - _ \ )�( > § ■ K; LU Z _ >� 2 ��` = E �}\ \ \� .��.< \ £�.. �■�■�■�|�■�■� �■� ■■ ■■ Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix E- Designation By-law Church of the Good Shepherd December7, 2022 MHBC 156 Page 321 of 511 •A-4agdoxd Lpanto aLp O; buTip;aa}S laaXIS UaK�- btioTe uoT408S ata pue IZas+S uaaM 0-4 an—AV -4az'b.z2'L•J bUOTe LpjnLC) aq-4 apTsaLX anT3p airy uT)sj %UTLp-49x4a ODUa; UGIT 4gbno.7M atR ;0 SUoruOd 9IR go pasTAdaoL, buTaq q4joL%l jj)qj?S uaanp 9TT sp uroL.n{ )�jxadozd Teas psesaxo3e airy jo wed geLtl anTeA TeLn4a4TLTaze pup OTaor4sTLL 3o buTaq se pa}eubtsdp ST aiai{L 'T :SMOTTo3 se sW.Ieua .zauaIP TN ;o 14TO aLi .4o UoT-4ezocuoD at}L .4o TTa-10D aii ;Idagm iL MON :I}TTadTortiml�i aq; 30 X=aTD ata mxJn paaaos uaaq sear uoi-4eubTsap pasodoad ag-4 o4 uot4aaC(. j 40 aoTlot1 0u SKdS-4kkA Ck& :s�raara anT}noasuo0 aaii.� �o gopa ao3 aauo A�TTpdTaTui7iu age UT v T -r osTo Tezauab buTneq IWQdwAau a u-1p9geTTqr4d a4 03 UQT-4tw-4ul d0 aoTjo\i guns Nampa spq pup 'paqumsap iag4eU-Fa.WLJ asau n-4.xa..iaxd Tea.z pT�azoy2 aL14 30 zed qvq; a-1 TeanWiD4T�sp p—OT,10 . �o L»�zva Se a}punisLki 04 LioTlua4ul 30 aOTIciy r 'UOT-2PUllod abL-4-PaH OT.IUZUp ai4 uodn pae 'xauaip TA 3o A}To airy uT L[�ION WOX4S uaaLY7 dTi se ATTecnTDTtmiu Lwoux sesxwa-Td pue spiel aLC4 30 ,zaumc ai4 UO panus al o-4 pasnmD seg xatraLfia4TIJ 30 �4TD ai(} 3o wTpezodzoo aid, 3o TTaunca air} y d3tiSkIM UW :�sara�uT �o an -[e4 TeYn�a4TLroZe pue 0Tao�sTLr. ;o aq 0-4 'uoa wq4 samlan a-48 pue SBuTpTTrir TT$ &nPrr[OuT 'Awadoxd Teaj a4EL. Tsap C4 O—T-ALL -4OpUa a4 &-4-Fj 2ULOLUr%% V jU TTOULLUV aLC4 SOWPOL UR 'LEE aa -4d -O ' UJ6T ' LJ' Z;' d -4314 ane4T-Aati OT.1744W aq-4 30 6Z L OT4--*aS StifM3BM (an -[2n Tgxn-4ca4Tipue Pm TQOTso4sTq ;O bmaq Se z9uagz4TA f0 Aq TD aLT; LIC L[4IOpi '4aa3;S uaanp 9 -El se tu4o k ATTedTaTurru A'�adOld a,[} go wed a-euFJzsap -; rveT Aq a buTag) 2LIMML11 ao AC LID alive ao NoilvaodwD 5iv ao -e J 's.B daGiaq "WI Ali s /-O� LD 0 N N co N 0) m n s �! LO 0 co (N (o N 0) m n 20Aew ' 30 Aep {{L�� S-rg4 sauauagrx 3o Agri aq4 uT saa ge UUS'SF d sxaam an'[gn0asuoo aas{g .4o gpVs) .w* Quu AgTUMUIL) ay4 ui uotge jnDJtZ) N-Iduaj 1JUZARq aedsdsr iau aces aq4 uT pa{sT-Eclnd as 0; 11121 -Aa sTq; 3o 6uTssled aq4 40 ):>i4Lu asnao a4 pue uor}Ypiuua abegrsaH oi3E4uO --LP uo puu A4,auojd pTesaxo3a aL[4 -p 3arreo aq4 w pan,zas aq og tw-1-Aa srq} ;o A w a asnieD 0g tazzsoggne ngaSay WE AlaTD ate, 'C • a0t;3o Ax}sTfiaa pueT la—ld aq} uz (gsed a suuog ea.za pageu6isap pTw atm qOT 30) ogazau ..V,.a�npac[0S uT pagposep A-4.1adold aq-4 30 at0gra -P gsutebe paaagsTuaA aq 04 n+eT Ag sTq� _40 A= a asnkD og pazTxog-4ne L,,dxaq st XOgTaTTOS AgT' aciL -Z P -4guI Ur Wq-4 sa Guam aq4 aq ora papuaqur mr pUeT 3o j-,.Ild prep) 'PUL'I 3o I—ed Nayisosap uiazal "i3 3o '4?'JITT AIJ84saf4 aqq PUL, aSuTuroCpE AT,-42rp ,Ur ue 30 }saM ar[� � punuan� �aJt zein ;*U}Y ri nls�{ a4xud aK; "w' 30a3 Z'631 3o aaue4sTp I ATaoq4JoN burpuaUa t.Rprra ieTnorpued-Ted uana u -r 9 puel 30 ciuzs a tiUTaLt i7I4 :i0I pies 30 4jed Jana nay-yo-3gb?2{ e '88SZi3-K xagWnl Wauau4suT se pa.za,�sTbas Paaa UT 4"Y' has Se V16 40'1 pias 30 31- Dano ne;.� 3o-��r�{ a ;UL doalais '-4uauidaua-JDO 30 prod aqz 3 S'£UG '3s saanuruz saazbap t3S t{} 'ate aq4 &Y.>Teja � =anuand 'aaJEbzt� 3o �n,;iI Alzati�zOM pias at{} ttr �UTOci E o3 4aa3 6'b8l 'VIZ 4-I pies 40 ;TUll A1xa4sed at{} u -4T- IaITe-mci '3s:jm sagnu-ml SE sadabop OE �{ na; L3i1uiL =Wrod E 014 4aa3 5'9I '49ea 8d4Iu Tw S saaai,ap oS gltx,y aJ:j:jd, =4uruu e o4 -4003 I'GI '4sa.1 sa4nurw Cl saaabap IE lona,; :;::.",L ":UI i 2 04 -4--3 06 'ATJ---4GOM UOT:anpOxa s;i pUe SZZ WI 30 4TLrLC Alz-q4JoLv ares atm uUOII '4sam sa-4nUTw dy saaJcap d of 7J, i 'SLG 4uI PTRS 3o 4 -PATI ATxdq-4JCli auk uY 4u.Lx-' e o -4aai SI '4s -et[ sa4nurtu cI saaJbap 4UTOd s o; 4aa3 ZEJ 'SZZ qoI preS 3o gFgT .CT-IOT4z V -LR g4 -Fm IaTIip-iled '48aM sa'anu[w b SaaaWp bmoots :•r.xu�rur• Pry 30 grulrT ATra4ssa aLR UT W -rod a o4 4--I3 8't 8j '�Jls uaanU 3o '4rmrl ATa04saM prem aq4 buoTe '4mt' 1a3nutul zI saa bap I£ 4ma0N L43bcl ,i, =tiLE oeid Prem uo ty"s se -4aaJIS uaanC) 30 ;p:rcl ATaa eaM aq} pue anuanV 4D-112 tW 30 4MIMT ATzaq:"gU aq4 Aq p04-9sJalur ST a -r$ aJ�4�•� EZZ W-! pzps 30 DWUa A[za3sL-aq-}Ltps aq-4 4E DiIDN j ooTza�aM 30 A}TZ rar�9+i T�r�2I a� UT Pue JauegD4 30 � D a� UT (zauap4Tt 30 A}TD 9LP 203 SGS9L Jaquz4q }uamlquul se paaa�srbai ISE 'CN mT-A£! Aq PBsoTD) sawl pua 8-4,-e24!3 85 -4orl 30 aaed pLm tL£ upld paaa-4sTbag 4IZ put: a eG '!344 sial 0 �L4.1 pue VC:Z pua £ZZ SWI 30 Cha8oduu0 bUraq 'orn Ub 30 aouTnOJd aq4 UT i7km OOTJa4tiM 30 A4ti>xIrOTmj" TErsotba8 "14 uT 'Jaual{0-4-PA 30 n-4?,i aLL} ur buTaq pue BUTA-{ 'ager)-4rs sasnraJd pUa P=T 30 8432X4 ao Razuw ure4jao asog4 211tI[l�iVIS (1NK `YI1t '' 7'0 _ JI S, L.K,4 3 Maps Z. rn 0 N (o N 0) m n P -4guI Ur Wq-4 sa Guam aq4 aq ora papuaqur mr pUeT 3o j-,.Ild prep) 'PUL'I 3o I—ed Nayisosap uiazal "i3 3o '4?'JITT AIJ84saf4 aqq PUL, aSuTuroCpE AT,-42rp ,Ur ue 30 }saM ar[� � punuan� �aJt zein ;*U}Y ri nls�{ a4xud aK; "w' 30a3 Z'631 3o aaue4sTp I ATaoq4JoN burpuaUa t.Rprra ieTnorpued-Ted uana u -r 9 puel 30 ciuzs a tiUTaLt i7I4 :i0I pies 30 4jed Jana nay-yo-3gb?2{ e '88SZi3-K xagWnl Wauau4suT se pa.za,�sTbas Paaa UT 4"Y' has Se V16 40'1 pias 30 31- Dano ne;.� 3o-��r�{ a ;UL doalais '-4uauidaua-JDO 30 prod aqz 3 S'£UG '3s saanuruz saazbap t3S t{} 'ate aq4 &Y.>Teja � =anuand 'aaJEbzt� 3o �n,;iI Alzati�zOM pias at{} ttr �UTOci E o3 4aa3 6'b8l 'VIZ 4-I pies 40 ;TUll A1xa4sed at{} u -4T- IaITe-mci '3s:jm sagnu-ml SE sadabop OE �{ na; L3i1uiL =Wrod E 014 4aa3 5'9I '49ea 8d4Iu Tw S saaai,ap oS gltx,y aJ:j:jd, =4uruu e o4 -4003 I'GI '4sa.1 sa4nurw Cl saaabap IE lona,; :;::.",L ":UI i 2 04 -4--3 06 'ATJ---4GOM UOT:anpOxa s;i pUe SZZ WI 30 4TLrLC Alz-q4JoLv ares atm uUOII '4sam sa-4nUTw dy saaJcap d of 7J, i 'SLG 4uI PTRS 3o 4 -PATI ATxdq-4JCli auk uY 4u.Lx-' e o -4aai SI '4s -et[ sa4nurtu cI saaJbap 4UTOd s o; 4aa3 ZEJ 'SZZ qoI preS 3o gFgT .CT-IOT4z V -LR g4 -Fm IaTIip-iled '48aM sa'anu[w b SaaaWp bmoots :•r.xu�rur• Pry 30 grulrT ATra4ssa aLR UT W -rod a o4 4--I3 8't 8j '�Jls uaanU 3o '4rmrl ATa04saM prem aq4 buoTe '4mt' 1a3nutul zI saa bap I£ 4ma0N L43bcl ,i, =tiLE oeid Prem uo ty"s se -4aaJIS uaanC) 30 ;p:rcl ATaa eaM aq} pue anuanV 4D-112 tW 30 4MIMT ATzaq:"gU aq4 Aq p04-9sJalur ST a -r$ aJ�4�•� EZZ W-! pzps 30 DWUa A[za3sL-aq-}Ltps aq-4 4E DiIDN j ooTza�aM 30 A}TZ rar�9+i T�r�2I a� UT Pue JauegD4 30 � D a� UT (zauap4Tt 30 A}TD 9LP 203 SGS9L Jaquz4q }uamlquul se paaa�srbai ISE 'CN mT-A£! Aq PBsoTD) sawl pua 8-4,-e24!3 85 -4orl 30 aaed pLm tL£ upld paaa-4sTbag 4IZ put: a eG '!344 sial 0 �L4.1 pue VC:Z pua £ZZ SWI 30 Cha8oduu0 bUraq 'orn Ub 30 aouTnOJd aq4 UT i7km OOTJa4tiM 30 A4ti>xIrOTmj" TErsotba8 "14 uT 'Jaual{0-4-PA 30 n-4?,i aLL} ur buTaq pue BUTA-{ 'ager)-4rs sasnraJd pUa P=T 30 8432X4 ao Razuw ure4jao asog4 211tI[l�iVIS (1NK `YI1t '' 7'0 _ JI S, L.K,4 3 Maps Z. Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix F- Terms of Reference December7, 2022 MHBC 157 Page 325 of 511 City of Kitchener PRE -SUBMISSION CONSULTATION COMMENT FORM Project Address: 30-40 Margaret Avenue Date of Meeting: May 26, 2022 Application Type: Site Plan Comments Of: Heritage Planning Commenter's Name: Jessica Vieira Email: Jessica.Vieira@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7839 Date of Comments: May 12, 2022 ❑X I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion) ❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns) 1. Site Specific Comments & Issues: The following comments provided by Heritage Planning staff are based on the pre -submission application packaged received April 1, 2022. The package concerns a proposal for 30-40 Margaret Avenue by Activa Holdings Inc which involves the development of 48 3 -storey cluster townhomes. Heritage Status The subject property municipally addressed as 30 Margaret Avenue is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (HCD). The property is also located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL). There are no buildings present on the property. 54 Margaret Avenue adjacent to the west side yard and 12 Margaret Avenue / 116 Queen Street North adjacent to the east side yard are classified under the 'A' Building Group, which means that they are structures with a high significance to the district. Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decision of Council be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Policy 2.6.1 of the PPS states that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. The PPS defines significant as resources that have been A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 326 of 511 determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event or a people, and notes that while some significant resources may already be identified and inventoried by official sources, the significance of others can only be determined after evaluation. The City's Official Plan also contains policies which require development to have regard for cultural heritage resources. As part of this, is establishes requirements for the submission of studies as part of complete planning applications, such as Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs). It should also be noted that the Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD Plan contains site specific policies for Margaret Avenue (Section 3.3.5.3). These policies require new development to maintain the overall residential character of the neighbourhood and be appropriate in height and siting to reduce impacts to adjacent dwellings. Policy 3.3.5.3 (h) also requires that the guidelines provided in Section 6.9.1 of this Plan be used to review and evaluate the proposal. Heritage Impact Assessment A scoped Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is required. Within the scoped HIA, the heritage guidelines, principles, and standards that will be used to guide the development of the site are to be identified. The scoped HIA will also evaluate any impacts of the proposed development on cultural heritage resources, including built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. Associated mitigative measures are which avoid or reduce impacts to a satisfactory level are to be recommended and reflected in the design of the proposed development. As per Info Sheet No. 5 of the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries' Heritage Toolkit publication Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, potential negative impacts to cultural heritage resources include, but are not limited to: • Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes or features; • Alteration that is not sympathetic or is incompatible with the historic fabric, appearance and context; • Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute; • Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context, or a significant relationship; and • Direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or to cultural heritage resources. Similarly, measures to mitigate potential impacts as referenced in Info Sheet No. 5 of the Ministry's Heritage Toolkit include: • Alternative development approaches; • Design that harmonizes mass, setback, setting, and materials; • Limiting height and density; and A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 327 of 511 • Allowing only compatible infill. In keeping with the Ministry and City guidelines on the preparation of HIAs, the following key components will need to be addressed: • Historic research, site analysis and evaluation • Description of the planning application and proposed development. • Assessment of the impact of the heigh, built form, setbacks, massing, and other design details on the Margaret Avenue streetscape and on the integrity of the character of the CCHCD in general. • Assessment on how the details of the proposed design (architecture, materials, colours, specifications, lighting, etc) address the CCNHCD Plan policies and guidelines • Concluding value and summary statements. As the subject property is a vacant lot, the identification of the significance of cultural heritage resources on the subject properties (design/physical value, historic/associative value, contextual value), including a listing of heritage attributes and if applicable the identification of significant views and vistas, and recommendations for conservation of identified attributes is not required. The following is also expected to be included within the HIA: • Anticipated impacts to 54 Margaret Avenue identified and appropriate mitigation measures proposed; • Anticipated impacts to 12 Margaret Avenue / 116 Queen Street North identified and appropriate mitigation measures proposed; and • Anticipated impacts to the properties located at the rear of the subject land which are also designated under Part V of the OHA, and appropriate mitigation measures proposed. A scoped terms of reference has been provided. Cultural Heritage Protection Plan A Cultural Heritage Protection Plan (CHPP) will be required. The CHPP should detail the measures to be undertaken prior to and during grading, construction, servicing or other development activity to eliminate or mitigate impacts to the adjacent heritage properties (54 Margarete Avenue and 12 Margaret Avenue / 116 Queen St N). The following components should also be addressed, in accordance with the City's standard terms of reference for CHPP's: • Analysis of the cultural heritage resource(s), including documentation, identification of cultural heritage attributes, assessment of resource conditions and deficiencies; • Short-, medium- and long-term conservation measures, interventions and implementation strategies including appropriate conservation principles and practices, methods and materials, and the qualifications of the contractors and trades involved in undertaking such work; and A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 328 of 511 • Security and monitoring requirements, including measures to protect the resource/attributes during phases of construction or development. A scoped terms of reference for the CHPP can be provided upon request. Heritage Permit Application Projects that are likely to affect the heritage attributes of a heritage conservation district require a Heritage Permit Application (HPA), in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act. This includes the construction of new buildings. Section 4.5.1 of the CCNHCD Plan also notes that approval is required for new buildings constructed on vacant properties. As such, a Heritage Permit Application will be required. Design Comments As mentioned previously, under Policy 3.3.5.3 (h) of the CCNHCD Plan, the guidelines of Section 6.9.1 are to be used in proposals for new buildings, to ensure that new development is compatible with the adjacent context. Highlighted policies include: • New development is to establish a strong relationship to the street similar to what exists on the south side of the street • Developments are to establish a strong, pedestrian oriented street edge • Minimum rear yard setbacks of 10 to 15 metres are desired to minimize the impact of new development on existing residents on Ellen Street West. In considering the above, it is recommended that all building massing be concentrated to the front of the subject lands. Appropriate landscaping and stepbacks at the front of the site should be incorporated as well. 2. Plans. Studies and Reports to submit as part of a complete Planning Act Application: • Elevation Drawings and 3d Massing Model • Heritage Impact Assessment • Cultural Heritage Protection Plan • Heritage planning staff would also like to request to be circulated a copy of the Planning Justification Report and/or Urban Design Brief 3. Anticipated Requirements of full Site Plan Approval: • Approved Heritage Permit Application A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 329 of 511 • Approved Heritage Impact Assessment • Approved Cultural Heritage Protection Plan • Special condition of site plan approval o Review and approve elevations in conjunction with urban designer o Implementation of the recommendations of the HIA and CHPP 4. Anticipated Fees: Not applicable A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 330 of 511 Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener, Ontario Appendix G- Curricula Vitae December7, 2022 MHBC 158 Page 331 of 511 CONTACT 54o Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B3X9 T 519 576 3650 X 744 F 519 576 0121 dcurrie@mhbcplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP Cultural Heritage Evaluations Morningstar Mill, St Catherines MacDonald Mowatt House, University of Toronto 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, 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 332 of 511 CONTACT 54o Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B3X9 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: Redevelopment of 21.7 King Street, Waterloo (OLT) Redevelopment of 1.2 Pearl Street, Burlington (OLT) Designation of 30 Ontario Street, St Catharines (CRB) Designation of 27 Prideaux Street, Niagara on the Lake (CRB) Redevelopment of Langmaids Island, Lake of Bays (LPAT) Port Credit Heritage Conservation District (LPAT) Demolition 1.74 St Paul Street (Collingwood Heritage District) (LPAT) Brooklyn and College Hill HCD Plan (OMB) Rondeau HCD Plan (LPAT) Designation of io8 Moore Street, Bradford (CRB) Redevelopment of property at 64 Grand Ave, Cambridge (LPAT) Youngblood subdivision, Elora (LPAT) Downtown Meaford HCD Plan (OMB) Designation of St Johns Church, Norwich (CRB - underway) LAND USE PLANNING Provide consulting services for municipal and private sector clients for: • Secondary Plans • Draft plans of subdivision • Consent • Official Plan Amendment • Zoning By-law Amendment • Minor Variance • Site Plan Page 333 of 511 EDUCATION 2011 Higher Education Diploma Cultural Development/ Gaelic Studies Sabhal M6r Ostaig, University of the Highlands and Islands 2012 Bachelor of Arts Joint Advanced Major in Celtic Studies and Anthropology Saint Francis Xavier University 2014 Master of Arts World Heritage and Cultural Projects for Development The International Training Centre of the ILO in partnership with the University of Turin, Politecnico di Torino, University of Paris 1 Pantheon - Sorbonne, UNESCO, ICCROM, Macquarie University www.linkedin.com/in/rachelredshaw CONTACT 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9 T 519 576 3650 x751 F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP Rachel Redshaw, a Senior Heritage Planner with MHBC, joined the firm in 2018. Ms. Redshaw has a Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology and Celtic Studies and a Master of Arts in World Heritage and Cultural Projects for Development. Ms. Redshaw completed her Master's in Turin, Italy; the Master's program was established by UNESCO in conjunction with the University of Turin and the International Training Centre of the ILO. Rachel is professional member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). Ms. Redshaw provides a variety of heritage planning services for public and private sector clients. Ms. Redshaw has worked for years completing cultural heritage planning in a municipal setting. She has worked in municipal building and planning departments and for the private sector to gain a diverse knowledge of building and planning in respect to how they apply to cultural heritage. Rachel enjoys being involved in the local community and has been involved in the collection of oral history, in English and Gaelic, and local records for their protection and conservation and occasionally lecturers on related topics. Her passion for history and experience in archives, museums, municipal building and planning departments supports her ability to provide exceptional cultural heritage services. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Professional Member, Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP) PROFESSIONAL HISTORY 2022 - Present Senior Heritage Planner, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited 2018-2022 Heritage Planner, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited 2018 Building Permit Coordinator, (Contract) Township of Wellesley 2018 Building Permit Coordinator (Contract) 1 Page 334 of 511 CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP RSM Building Consultants 2017 Deputy Clerk, Township of North Dumfries 2015-2016 Building/ Planning Clerk Township of North Dumfries 2009-2014 Historical Researcher & Planner Township of North Dumfries 2012 Translator, Archives of Ontario 2012 Cultural Heritage Events Facilitator (Reminiscence Journey) and Executive Assistant, Waterloo Region Plowing Match and Rural Expo 2011 Curatorial Research Assistant Highland Village Museum/ Baile nan Gaidheal Page 335 of 511 PROFESSIONAL/COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS 2022 -Present Professional Member, Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals 2017-2020 Member, AMCTO 2018-2019 Member of Publications Committee, Waterloo Historical Society 2018 Member, Architectural Conservancy of Ontario- Cambridge 2018 -2019 Secretary, Toronto Gaelic Society 2012 -2017 Member (Former Co -Chair & Co -Founder), North Dumfries Historical Preservation Society 2011 -2014 Member, North Dumfries Municipal Heritage Committee 2013 Greenfield Heritage Conservation District, Sub -committee, Doors Open Waterloo Region CONTACT 2012 Volunteer Historical Interpreter, Doon Heritage Village, Ken 540BingemansCentre Drive, Seiling Waterloo Region Museum Suite 200 2008-2012 Member, Celtic Collections, Angus L. Macdonald Library Kitchener, 650x7511N N2B 2012-2013 Member Public Relations Mill Race Folk Society ( )� F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com 2 Page 335 of 511 CONTACT 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9 T 519 576 3650 x751 F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP 2011 Member, University of Waterloo Sub -steering Committee for HCD Study, Village of Ayr, North Dumfries 2010-2011 Member (volunteer archivist), Antigonish Heritage Museum AWARDS / PUBLICATIONS / RECOGNITION 2019 Waterloo Historical Society Publication, Old Shaw: The Story of a Kindly Waterloo County Roamer 2014 Master's Dissertation, The Rise of the City: Social Business Incubation in the City of Hamilton 2014 Lecture, A Scot's Nirvana, Homer Watson House and Gallery 2013 Lecture, The Virtual Voice of the Pasta The Use of Online Oral Accounts for a Holistic Understanding of History, University of Guelph Spring Colloquium 2012-2013 Gaelic Events Facilitator, University of Guelph 2012-2015 Intermediate Gaelic Facilitator, St. Michael's College, University of Toronto 2012 Nach eil ann tuilleadh: An Nos Cr aig nan Gaidheal (BA Thesis) Thesis written in Scottish Gaelic evaluating disappearing Gaelic rites of passage in Nova Scotia. 2012 Waterloo Historical Society Publication, Harvesting Bees and Feasting Tables: Fit for the Men, Women and Children of Dickie Settlement and Area, Township of North Dumfries 2007-2012 25 historical publications in the Ayr News (access to some articles http://ayrnews.ca/recent ) PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSES 2021 Certificate for Indigenous Relations Training Program with University of Calgary 2020 Condo Director Training Certificate (CAO) 2018 Building Officials and the Law (OBOA Course) 2017-2018 AMCTO Training (MAP 1) 2017 AODA Training 3 Page 336 of 511 CONTACT 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9 T 519 576 3650 x751 F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP 2010 Irish Archaeological Field School Certificate COMPUTER SKILLS Microsoft Word Office Bluebeam Revu 2017 ArcGIS Keystone (PRINSYS) Municipal Connect Adobe Photoshop Illustrator ABBYY Fine Reader 11 Book Drive SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE 2018-2022 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS Promenade at Clifton Hill, Niagara Falls (Niagara Parks Commission) 16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener (Former Economical Insurance Building) Peterborough Lift Lock and Trent -Severn Waterway (TSW), National Historic Sites, Development for 380 Armour Road, City of Peterborough Middlesex County Court House, National Historic Site, for development at 50 King Street McDougall Cottage and National Historic Site, for development at 93 Grand Avenue South, City of Kitchener City of Waterloo Former Post Office, Development for 35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo, Phase II Consumers' Gas Station B, Development for 450 Eastern Avenue, City of Toronto 82 Weber Street and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener 39 Wellington Street West, City of Brampton 4 Page 337 of 511 CONTACT 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9 T 519 576 3650 x751 F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP 543 Ridout Street North, City of London 34 Manley Street, Village of Ayr, Township of North Dumfries Quinte's Isle Campark, 558 Welbanks Road, Prince Edward County (OLT) 174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (OLT) 45 Duke Street, City of Kitchener 383-385 Pearl Street, City of Burlington St. Patrick's Catholic Elementary School, (SPCES), 20 East Avenue South, City of Hamilton 250 Allendale Road, City of Cambridge 249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan Specific for Relocation of Heritage Buildings 1395 Main Street, City of Kitchener 10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham CULTURAL HERITAGE SCREENING REPORT Kelso Conservation Area, Halton County 5" Side Road, County Road 53, Simcoe County Waterdown Trunk Watermain Twinning Project, City of Hamilton CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORTS 52 King Street North, City of Kitchener Sarnia Collegiate Institute and Technical School (SCITS), 275 Wellington, City of Sarnia (Municipal contingency study) 10536 McCowan Road, City of Markham Former Burns Presbyterian Church, 155 Main Street, Town of Erin (Designation Report) Former St. Paul's Anglican Church, 23 Dover Street, Town of Otterville, Norwich Township (OLT) 6170 Fallsview Boulevard, City of Niagara Falls CONSERVATION PLANS City of Waterloo Former Post Office, 35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo 82 Weber Street East, City of Kitchener 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener 107 Young Street, City of Kitchener Page 338 of 511 CONTACT 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9 T 519 576 3650 x751 F 519 576 0121 rredshaw@mhb cplan.com www.mhbcplan.com CURRICULUMVITAE Rachel Redshaw, MA, H.E. Dipl., CAHP 1395 Main Street, City of Kitchener 10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham Cultural Heritage Conservation Protection Plans (Temporary protection for heritage building during construction) 16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener (included Stabilization, Demolition and Risk Management Plan) 12 & 54 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener 45 Duke Street, City of Kitchener 82 Weber Street West and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener 660 Sunningdale Road, London DOCUMENTATION AND SALVAGE REPORTS 16-20 Queen Street North, City of Kitchener 57 Lakeport Road City of St. Catharines Gaslight District, 64 Grand Avenue South, City of Cambridge 242-262 Queen Street South, City of Kitchener 721 Franklin Boulevard, City of Cambridge HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATIONS 16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener 50 King Street, London 35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo (Old Post Office), Phase II (alteration to building with a municipal heritage easement, Section 37, OHA) 50-56 Weber Street West & 107 Young Street, City of Kitchener (demolition and new construction within HCD) 30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener (new construction within HCD) 249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan (alteration within HCD) 174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (demolition within HCD) HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS/ MASTER PLANS/ HERITAGE CHARACTER STUDY Elgin, Central and Memorial Neighbourhoods, Municipality of Clarington Stouffville Heritage Conservation District Study (Project Lead 2021-2022) Town of Aurora Heritage Register Update Page 339 of 511 200-540 BINGEMANS CENTRE DRIVE KITCHENER / ONTARIO /N2B3X9 / T:519.576.3650 / F:519-576-0121 / WWW.MHBCPLAN.COM MHBC PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE