Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
HK Agenda - 2023-05-02
Heritage Kitchener Committee Agenda Tuesday, May 2, 2023, 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation(a)kitchener.ca. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public record. The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow. *Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.* Chair - J. Haalboom Vice -Chair - P. Ciuciura Pages 1. Commencement 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared, please visit www. kitchener. ca/conflict to submit your written form. 3. Delegations Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. 3.1 Item 4. 1. Michelle Thach - thinkform architecture + interiors inc. 4. Discussion Items 4.1 Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-V-003, 15 m 3 44 Theresa Street, Demolition and Reconstruction of Front Porch, Shed Dormer Additions, Repair or Replacement of Windows and Doors, and Demolition of Detached Garage, DSD -2023-189 4.2 Notice of Intention to Designate 181 Frederick 10m 54 Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, DSD -2023-154 4.3 Notice of Intention to Designate 73 Shanley 15 m 148 Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, DSD -2023-170 4.4 Status Updates - Bill 23 Municipal Heritage 25 m Register Review 5. Information Items 5.1 Heritage Permit Application Tracking Sheet 156 6. Adjournment Mariah Blake Committee Administrator Page 2 of 156 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: May 2, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: April 11, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-189 SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-V-003 44 Theresa Street Demolition and Reconstruction of Front Porch, Shed Dormer Additions, Repair or Replacement of Windows and Doors, and Demolition of Detached Garage RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-V-003 to permit: a. The demolition and reconstruction of the front porch with minor design changes; b. The addition of two shed dormers on the roof of the dwelling; c. The repair or replacement of multiple windows and doors on all fagades; and d. The demolition of the rear yard detached garage and creation of a rear parking pad to accommodate additional parking spaces; at the property municipally addressed as 44 Theresa Street, BE APPROVED in accordance with the supplementary information submitted with the application and subject to the following conditions: 1. That a material sample board be submitted to Heritage Planning staff for review prior to the issuance of a building permit; 2. That the vegetation in the front yard be maintained as a visual buffer where feasible; and 3. That final building permit drawings be reviewed, and heritage clearance provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 3 of 156 REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to present a proposal for various external work at the property municipally addressed as 44 Theresa Street, as detailed in Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-V-003 and in the documents that form Attachments B and C. The intent of this work is to facilitate the conversion of the single -detached home into a duplex and improve the functionality of the subject property. • The key finding of this report is that the proposed work will not negatively impact the cultural heritage value or interest of the property or surrounding area, as it is in keeping with the architectural style and character of the subject property and complies with the policies and guidelines of the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District Plan as well as other heritage best practices. • There are no financial implications associated with this report. • Community engagement included posting this report and associated agenda in advance of the meeting and consultation with the Heritage Kitchener Committee. • This report supports the delivery of core services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-V-003 proposes the demolition and reconstruction of an existing porch, the addition of two shed dormers, the repair or replacement of windows and doors on all fagades, and the demolition of a rear detached garage and creation of additional parking spaces on the property municipally addressed as 44 Theresa Street. The building has been designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and is located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. In reviewing the merits of this application, Heritage Planning Staff note that the proposed work meets the policies and guidelines of the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District Plan, specifically those that relate to the building conversions and additions. Further, the proposed work maintains and/or restores the character and overall appearance of the subject property and is not anticipated to adversely impact the heritage attributes of the surrounding area. The proposed work will turn a vacant and derelict single -detached home into a functional duplex. BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA- 2023-V-003, which seeks permission for various external projects at the property municipally addressed as 44 Theresa Street, designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. The work proposed includes the demolition and reconstruction of the front porch with some minor design changes, the addition of two shed dormers on the roof of the dwelling, the repair or replacement of doors and windows on the different elevations of the dwelling, and the demolition of the detached garage in the rear yard and creation of a rear parking pad to accommodate additional parking spaces. This work will help facilitate the conversion of the existing single -detached home into a duplex. Page 4 of 156 W T u, Figure 1: Location Map of 44 Theresa Street, with Subject Property Outlined in Red REPORT: 44 Theresa Street is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and is located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (VPNHCD). The subject property is located on the northeast side of Theresa Street, between Victoria Street to the northwest and Jubilee Drive to the southeast. Figure 2: Front View of Subject Property Page 5 of 156 The VPAHCD Study describes the subject property as being a red brick home one and a half storeys in height, built c. 1920 in the Berlin Vernacular architectural style. It is near original in appearance, with minor changes to the porch handrail and the removal of the front balcony. The property has been vacant for some years, however, and has fallen into disrepair. The proposed work will facilitate the conversion of the existing single -detached home into a duplex. This VPAHCD Plan supports this type of building conversion and minor intensification if it is done in a manner that strengthens the character and continuity of the historic area. Further assessment is provided under the section titled Heritage Planning Comments. Proposed Work Demolition and Reconstruction of Existing Front Porch The existing front porch and balcony are in poor condition, with broken floorboards, floor joists, stair treads and handrails that pose safety risks. As such, it is proposed that the entirety of the front porch be removed and replaced. The demolition policies in the VPAHCD Plan presumes the demolition of entire structures, it does not reference the demolition of removal of portions of buildings. As such the demolition policies are not applicable to this section of the application. The reconstructed porch will be similar in design and appearance, with minor changes introduced to improve functionality. The footprint of the porch will remain the same, being 5.928 metres in length and 1.84 metres in width. The stairs to access the porch and front door are currently located on the west side of the property, opposite the driveway. It is proposed that they be moved to the front of the home to improve accessibility from vehicles. The detailed elements of the porch, including the noted post and brackets, are to be replicated though a new railing system is proposed, similar in design to other homes in the area. Pressure treated wood is to be used-, this material matches the original wood material of the porch and is appropriate for the character of the property and the surrounding area. A new railing system is to be instated on the balcony to make the space safe and usable. Figure 3-5: Architectural Drawings of Front Porch, Floor Plan and Precedent Home with Similar Porch Design Page 6 of 156 Addition of Two Shed Dormers There is policy direction within the VPAHCD pertaining to the construction of additions on properties within the HCD. These provisions recognize that additions may become necessary to homes to provide more living space to accommodate growth but note that it is important for such new construction to be complementary to the architectural style and character of the existing dwelling. In this way a good fit between the old and the new is ensured. New additions are encouraged to be constructed in a contemporary style to express today's architectural heritage, rather than directly copy the existing historic style of the property. There are more detailed policies that relate to the location, design, height, materials, roofs, chimneys, walls, entrances, windows, verandahs, and colours of building additions within the district. Building additions must adhere to these policies. This heritage permit application proposed the addition of two shed dormers to the roof of the dwelling. The shed dormers have been placed as far to the rear of the roof as feasible to reduce both their visibility from the street line and the overall impact to the roofline and principal facade of the dwelling. Each shed dormer is to be approximately 5.81 metres (19' 1 ") in length and 3.63 metres (11' 11 ") in width, adding a total of 507 usable square footage to the home. This new space will contain the kitchen, living room, and a bathroom for the second unit. The new floor construction for the attic will be anchored above the existing attic floor structure and vertically braced by the balloon framing that is extended from the original exterior wall. This provides the least disruptive methodology to raise the roof structure for more headroom clearance and minimizes impact to the existing dwelling. Figure 6: Rendering of Home with Proposed Shed Dormers (Front and East Side View) Page 7 of 156 - mm 411jumm'i --- -------- Repair or Replacement of Windows and Doors Several windows and doors on the front, rear, and side facades of the dwelling are proposed to be repaired or replaced where repair is not feasible, as determined by the professional contractor hired. This work is required as the doors and windows have rotted, are broken, or otherwise damaged and unsound. This interior of the home is exposed to the elements in several placed and the integrity, longevity, and use of the dwelling is threatened. The windows and doors on the front fagade of the home are proposed to be wood, in accordance with the preferred materials of the VPAHCD Plan and in keeping with the character of the dwelling and the area. The windows to be replaced on the rear and side fagades of the building are proposed to use a composite material but otherwise maintain the size, shape, style, and appearance of the existing original windows. The cost of replacing all windows with custom -fit wood windows is exorbitant and not feasible. The windows to be replaced with a composite material are not on a primary fagade and will not be readily visible from the street. Demolition of Rear Detached Garage In accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, a heritage permit is required to demolish a building or structure on a designated heritage property. This includes the demolition of an accessory structure such as a detached garage. Figure 10: Rear Detached Garage Page 9 of 156 The detached garage is in the rear side yard of the subject property. Though its exact construction date is unknown, it does not appear to be original to the home nor built close to the original construction date of the dwelling. The structure is in poor condition and not functional, with the vehicle turning radii being insufficient to accommodate vehicle use. Further, given both the narrow lot width and position of the dwelling on the lot and considering the width required to open vehicle doors, the existing driveway on the east side of the property cannot appropriately accommodate parking. It is proposed that the detached garage be demolished, and the rear yard re -done to include a parking pad with two vehicle spaces and professional landscaping. These parking spaces will not be visible from the street line. Figure 11: Existing Site Plan (Left) and Proposed Site Plan with Additional Parking (Right) Page 10 of 156 r ` ___ _ ?� w,.x I Eta m. wl � sl I wl I I I3 uY> elAl➢IMG I THERESA STREET THERESA STREET EG8TING' ❑ 11-111"1177 PLAY r ' t PRGPOBm 9!E PIAN Figure 11: Existing Site Plan (Left) and Proposed Site Plan with Additional Parking (Right) Page 10 of 156 Heritage Planning Comments In reviewing the merits of the application, heritage planning staff note the following: Area of Proposed Work Comment Building Conversion The proposed complies with the following VPAHCD Plan policies (Duplexing) as they relate to building conversion: • Building - Conversions shall be achieved so as not to disrupt or remove key features or introduce new features not in keeping with the historic building style. o No key features are proposed to be removed. Where elements such as windows or doors are being replaced, they match the originals in terms of style, size, shape, and design. The dormers will not be prominently visible from the street line and does not deter from the style or character of the subject building. • Landscaping - Original front garden landscaping should be conserved and enhanced. If it is a house conversion, a domestic scale landscape shall be achieved with shrubs and flower borders. o The property owner had indicated that he intends to retain the mature tree in the front yard. Landscaping in the front is to be further improved with the addition of a new walkway with permeable pavers. • Access The access driveway shall be kept single lane where possible. o There are no proposed changes to the access driveway. The addition of the parking spaces will have no impact. • Parking Priority shall be given to locating car parking at the rear of the building with the provision of a drop-off space in front or to the side if required. Large areas of asphalt in front of the building are strongly discouraged. o The proposed two parking spaces are to be in the rear. No additional asphalt or parking is proposed for the front. Porch • The proposed demolition and reconstruction of the front porch is necessary due to the deterioration and instability of the existing porch. Page 11 of 156 Area of Proposed Comment Work Porch The guidelines of the VPAHCD Plan that relate to verandahs encourage replacement to match the original design. The appearance of the original will be largely maintained and replicated, including the detailed elements like the notched posts and brackets which provide the dwelling with its unique character. The changed location of the stairs will improve functionality and accessibility and is not anticipated to negatively impact the character or heritage value of the property and surrounding area. Well shingle handrails are a distinctive feature of the VPAHCD and the guidelines encourage they be conserved rather than replaced with an open spindle handrail, there is precedent in the area for the new railing system that is contemplated and its design is appropriate for the character of the Berlin Vernacular style of the home. Shed Dormer The two shed dormers are proposed to create additional Additions livable space and better accommodate the second dwelling unit within the home. With the addition of the dormers, the attic space can contain the kitchen, living area, and a bathroom for the second unit. Shed Dormer The new shed dormers will only be prominently visible Additions when travelling in a northwesterly direction down Theresa Street (Figure 8). The mature tree located in the front yard, short front -yard setback, and narrow street width means that the dormers will not be easily visible when viewing the home from the front. The presence of the mature tree and the narrow distance between the subject dwelling and adjacent home mean the dormers will not be easily visible when travelling in a southeasterly direction down Theresa Street. Shed Dormer The proposed shed dormers comply with the following VPAHCD Additions Plan policies as they relate to building additions: • Location - Additions shall be located to the rear or rear side of the existing historic building so as to maintain the original principal fagade as a visual entity. o The shed dormers have been located as far to the rear of the roof as feasible to ensure they are as unobtrusive as possible. They will not be easily visible from the front or west -side. • Design —A clear distinction between old and new building design is encouraged. Contemporary design for additions is encouraged that is complementary in terms of scale, Page 12 of 156 Area of Proposed Work Comment mass, and texture to the existing or neighboring historic building. o The shed dormers will be distinctive from the original building as they are not a typical element of the Berlin Vernacular architectural style. Further, a more modern material will be used for cladding. The proposed scale and massing of the shed dormers respects the existing dwelling, being significantly smaller. • Roofs — the roof of the addition shall be similar or complementary to the existing historic building or style in the Area. o The slope of the roof of the shed dormers is complementary to the slope of the roof of the dwelling. Further, the original roofline as seen from the front of the property is maintained. • Chimney - Original historic chimneys shall be conserved or rebuilt to match the original where feasible. In additions, masonry chimneys should be given priority over metal. o The existing chimney will not be impacted as no portions need to be removed to accommodate the proposed change. • Windows - The appearance, placement, and proportion of height to width of windows shall be similar or complementary to the existing historic building style or as established in the vicinity. o The windows of the proposed addition are in keeping with the windows of the existing dwelling, being of a similar design, size, and proportion. • Colours - Colours of paint and materials shall be appropriate to the historic style of the building or as established in the Area. o The colours on the proposed addition are in keeping with the historic style of the building and with other buildings within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. Repair / Replacement • The windows and doors are in extremely poor condition of Windows/Doors and exposing the interior to the elements, threatening the integrity, longevity, and usability of the home. As such the proposed repairs or replacements are necessary. Page 13 of 156 Area of Proposed Comment Work Repair / Replacement The front windows and doors will be replaced with custom - of Windows/Doors fit wood replicas that match the original in terms of size, shape, style, and material, per the guidelines of the VPAHCD Plan. The windows on the other fagades will be of a composite material as the cost of custom -fit wood windows makes replacing all windows in such a manner unfeasible. The appearance of these windows however will be maintained. Demolition of Garage The proposed demolition of the detached garage and and Construction of construction of two additional parking spaces is required Parking Pad to accommodate functional and sufficient vehicle parking on site. Demolition of Garage The detached garage does not appear to be an original and Construction of structure to the site nor built close to the construction date Parking Pad of the dwelling. Demolition of Garage . As the new parking spaces are located in the rear yard, and Construction of they will not be visible from the street and do not introduce Parking Pad any new large areas of asphalt in front of the building. All Work . The proposed work will allow a vacant and derelict single - detached home to be used as a functional and maintained duplex. All Work . The proposed work is not anticipated to adversely impact the integrity or heritage character of either the property, the Theresa Street streetscape, or the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. 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. Page 14 of 156 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Council / Committee meeting. CONSULT — The Heritage Kitchener Committee will be consulted regarding the subject Heritage Permit Application. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act • Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District Plan REVIEWED BY: Natalie Goss, Manager, Policy & Research APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — HPA-2023-V-003 Form Attachment B — HPA-2023-V-003 Drawings Attachment C — HPA-2023-V-003 Written Supporting Documents Page 15 of 156 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Planning Division — 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor �`�'ITC1HFl�� P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca PART A: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Page 1 of 10 The following requirements are designed to assist applicants in submitting sufficient information in order thal their Heritage Permit Application may be deemed complete and processed as quickly and efficiently as possible. If further assistance or explanation is required please contact heritage planning staff at heritage(o-)kitchener.ca. 1. WHAT IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? The Province of Ontario, through the Ontario Heritage Act, has enacted legislation to assist its citizens with the protection and conservation of cultural heritage resources. Once properties are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, the City is enabled to manage physical change to the cultural heritage resources as a means of protection. The principal mechanism of management is the Heritage Permit Application process, which allows the municipality to review site-specific applications and determine if proposed changes will beneficially or detrimentally affect the reasons for designation and heritage attributes. As a general rule, the preferred alterations to heritage properties are those that repair rather than replace original heritage attributes, and those that do not permanently damage cultural heritage resources and their heritage attributes. Where replacement of materials or new construction is necessary, these should be compatible with the original. Reversibility is also preferable as this allows for the future reinstatement of heritage attributes. According to the Ontario Heritage Act, no owner of designated property shall alter the property or permit the alteration of the property if the alteration is likely to affect the property's heritage attributes, unless the owner applies to the council of the municipality and receives written consent. This consent is obtained through the approval of a Heritage Permit Application. Heritage Permit Applications are applicable for all individually designated properties (under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act) and all properties located within the boundaries of Heritage Conservation Districts (designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act). 2. WHEN IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIRED? Under the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, any new construction or "alteration" to a property designated under Part IV of the Act (individually designated property) or a property designated under Part V of the Act (within a Heritage Conservation District) requires a Heritage Permit Application. "Alteration" is defined as: "to change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair or disturb." In addition, the approval of a Heritage Permit Application is required for any demolition of a property designated under Part IV or V of the Act. Please contact Heritage Planning staff directly to confirm if your specific project requires the approval of a Heritage Permit Application. Below are some examples of typical Part IV alterations that may require a Heritage Permit Application: • Addition and/or alteration to an existing building or accessory building • Replacement of windows or doors, or a change in window or door openings • Change in siding, soffit, fascia or roofing material • Removal and/or installation of porches, verandahs and canopies • Removal and/or installation of cladding and chimneys • Changes in trim, cladding, or the painting of masonry • Repointing of brick Working together 9 Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Page 2 of 10 Note: Heritage Permit Application requirements differ between Part V designations depending on the policies and guidelines of the respective Heritage Conservation District Plans. Please refer to the City of Kitchener's website at www.kitchener.ca/heritage to download a copy of the relevant Heritage Conservation District Plan (Civic Centre Neighbourhood, St. Mary's, Upper Doon, and Victoria Park Area). 3. WHAT INFORMATION IS REQUIRED WITH A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? The information required varies with each application. The intent of the application is to ensure that Heritage Planning staff and, where required, the Heritage Kitchener committee understand the specific details of any proposed changes in order to be sufficiently informed so they may offer advice to the applicant and, where required, to City Council. An incomplete application cannot be processed and the official notice of receipt (as required under the Ontario Heritage Act) will not be issued until all of the documents have been submitted. Failure to provide a complete application may result in deferral by Heritage Planning staff or the Heritage Kitchener committee in order to secure additional information, which will delay final approval. At minimum, the following information is required: Heritage Permit Application Form The applicant must provide a complete original copy, including signature of the owner, of the Heritage Permit Application Form. Written Description The applicant must provide a complete written description of all proposed work. The description should complement drawings, detailed construction plans, photos and any other sketches or supporting information submitted with the application. The written description must include a list and the details of all proposed work including, but not limited to, proposed colours, materials, sizes, etc. Construction and Elevation Drawings Along with construction elevation drawings (drawn to scale) the applicant may also, but not in lieu of, submit a sketch of the proposed work made over a photograph. Drawings must be drawn to scale and include: a) Overall dimensions b) Site plan depicting the location of existing buildings and the location of any proposed new building or addition to a building c) Elevation plan for each elevation of the building d) Specific sizes of building elements of interest (signs, windows, awnings, etc.) e) Detailed information including trim, siding, mouldings, etc., including sizes and profiles f) Building materials to be used (must also be included in the written description) g) Construction methods and means of attachment (must also be included in the written description) Some of the above components may be scoped or waived at the discretion of Heritage Planning staff following discussion with the applicant. Photographs Photographs of the building including general photos of the property, the streetscape in which the property is located, facing streetscape and, if the property is located at an intersection, all four corners. Photos of the specific areas that may be affected by the proposed alteration, new construction, or demolition must be included. Electronic copies of construction and elevation drawings, sketches, and photographs, along with hard copies submitted with the application, are encouraged. Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Samples Page 3 of 10 It is recommended that applicants bring samples of the materials to be used to the Heritage Kitchener meeting when their application is to be considered. This may include a sample of the windows, brick, siding, roofing material, as well as paint chips to identify proposed paint colours. Other Required Information In some circumstances Heritage Planning staff may require additional information, such as a Heritage Impact Assessment or Conservation Plan, to support the Heritage Permit Application. The requirement for additional information will be identified as early on in the Heritage Permit Application process as possible. Pre - consultation with Heritage Planning staff before formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application is strongly encouraged. 4. WHAT CAN I DO IF MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION IS DENIED? City of Kitchener Heritage Planning staff and the Heritage Kitchener committee endeavour to come to solutions for every Heritage Permit Application submitted. Discussions with the applicant and revisions usually result in successful applications. However, if the municipality refuses your application and you choose not to resolve the issue with a revised application, you have the option of appealing the decision to the Conservation Review Board (for alterations to designated properties under Part IV) or the Ontario Municipal Board (for demolition of property designated under Part IV or for any work to designated property under Part V). 5. IMPORTANT NOTES Professional Assistance Although it is not a requirement to obtain professional assistance in the preparation of this information, the applicant may wish to seek such assistance from an architect, architectural technologist, draftsperson or others familiar with the assessment of buildings and the gathering together of building documents. Building Codes and Other By-laws It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure compliance with all other applicable legislation, regulations and by-laws. These items include the Ontario Building and Fire Codes, and the City's zoning and property standards by-laws. 2023 Heritage Permit Application Submission Deadlines 2023 Heritage Kitchener Meeting Dates November 25, 2022 January 3, 2023 December 30, 2022 February 7, 2023 January 27, 2023 March 7, 2023 February 24, 2023 April 4, 2023 March 24, 2023 May 2, 2023 April 28, 2023 June 6, 2023 - No July Meeting June 23, 2023 August 1, 2023 July 28, 2023 September 5, 2023 August 25, 2023 October 3, 2023 September 29, 2023 November 7, 2023 - No December Meeting Working together 9 Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Page 4 of 10 6. HOW DO I PROCEED WITH SUBMITTING MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? a) Heritage Planning Staff are available to meet with applicants and review all documentation prior to formal submission. Often Heritage Planning staff can assist you with historical and architectural information that might help with your proposed changes. b) Formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application with all supporting documentation (written description, construction drawings, sketch plans, scale drawing, photographs) to Heritage Planning staff are due approximately five (5) weeks prior to a Heritage Kitchener meeting (see schedule for submission deadlines and committee meeting dates). c) Upon confirmation of the submission of a complete application, including the owner's signature and all supporting documentation, Heritage Planning staff will issue a Notice of Receipt, as required by the Ontario Heritage Act, to the Applicant. d) Heritage Planning staff determine whether the Heritage Permit Application may be processed under delegated authority approval without the need to go to Heritage Kitchener and/or Council. Where Heritage Permit Applications can be processed under delegated authority approval without the need to go to Heritage Kitchener and Council, Heritage Planning staff will endeavour to process the application within 10 business days. e) Where Heritage Permit Applications are required to go to Heritage Kitchener, Heritage Planning staff prepare a staff Report based on good conservation practice and the designating by-law, or the guidelines and policies in the Heritage Conservation District Plan. Preparation of the staff Report may require a site inspection. f) Heritage Kitchener Meeting Agenda, including staff Report, circulated to Committee members prior to Heritage Kitchener meeting. Staff Report circulated to applicant prior to meeting. g) Heritage Permit Application is considered at Heritage Kitchener meeting. Heritage Planning staff present staff Report and Recommendations to Heritage Kitchener. Applicants are encouraged to attend the Heritage Kitchener meeting in order to provide clarification and answer questions as required. Failure to attend the Heritage Kitchener meeting may result in a deferral in order to secure additional information, which would delay consideration of the Heritage Permit Application. Where the applicant, Heritage Planning staff, and Heritage Kitchener support the Heritage Permit Application, the application may be processed under delegated authority and approved by the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning. Where the applicant, Heritage Planning staff and/or Heritage Kitchener do not support the Heritage Permit Application, the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation will be forwarded to Council for final decision. h) Where the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation are forward to Council for final decision, Council may: 1. Approve the Heritage Permit Application; 2. Approve the Heritage Permit Application on Terms and Conditions; or, 3. Refuse the Heritage Permit Application. i) Within 30 days of receiving Notice of Council's Decision, the applicant may appeal the decision and/or terms and conditions to the Conservation Review Board or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). 7. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO DESIGNATED PROPERTY Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should indicate an understanding of the reasons for designation and heritage attributes of the designated property and, if applicable, the surrounding area, including the following: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Setting 1. Positioning of the heritage building or structure on the property 2. Lot size related to building size 3. Streetscape (relationship to other properties and structures on the street) Building Details 1. Proportion and massing 2. Roof type and shape 3. Materials and detailing 4. Windows and doors: • Style • Proportions • Frequency or placement 5. Relationship of the heritage building to other buildings on the lot and to the streetscape Heritage Attributes The following applies where a Heritage Permit Application includes work on heritage attributes: Windows and Doors The applicant should consider in order of priority: Page 5 of 10 1. Repairing or retrofitting the existing units (information on how to make older windows more energy efficient is available from Heritage Planning staff) 2. Replacing the units with new units matching the originals in material, design, proportion and colour 3. Replacing the units with new units that are generally in keeping with the original units If historic window units are proposed to be replaced the application should include the following: • Description of the condition of the existing units • Reasons for replacing the units • Description of the proposed new units If approval to replace historic window units is given, the following action should be considered: • A sample of a window removed should be stored on site in case a future owner wishes to construct a replica of the original • The masonry opening and/or door framing should not be disturbed • Exterior trim should match the original Roofing The application should include: • Description of proposed roofing material to be applied • If there is a request to install a different roofing material, the applicant may wish to investigate what the original material might have been Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Masonry Work The application should include: Page 6 of 10 A description of the proposed work, materials (type/style of brick, type of mortar mix, etc.) and methods of repair and application • Outline the reasons for the work Signage The application should include: • A general written description of the proposed signage to be installed A scale drawing of the signage with dimensions, materials means of attachment (the means of attachment should be historic masonry units or into wood building elements) • Type of illumination, if applicable Awnings The application should include: , methods of construction, colours and arranged to anchor into joints between • A sketch view of the proposed awning — perhaps over a photo A scale drawing of the awning on the building with dimensions, materials, operating mechanism, method of construction, colours and means of attachment (the means of attachment should be arranged to anchor into joints between masonry units or into wooden building elements) • Type of illumination, if applicable. 8. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should describe the existing conditions, including the existing setting and existing heritage attributes, of the designated property and the surrounding area, specifically as they relate to the building proposed for demolition. The Heritage Permit Application should provide a detailed rationale for the demolition, including an assessment of the current condition of the building, and a cost comparison identifying the difference in cost to repair and restore the building versus cost to demolish and construct a new building. 9. HERITAGE CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES The Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work (e.g., alteration, new construction or demolition) is consistent with the designating by-law for individual properties (Part IV) or the Heritage Conservation District Plan for properties within a Heritage Conservation District (Part V designation). In addition, the Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work is consistent with the Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (available at www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx). For more information on Heritage Planning in the City of Kitchener please contact our heritage planning staff at heritageakitchener.ca. Working together 9 Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 J HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Planning Division — 200 King Street West, 6th Floor KITC;HENER P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca STAFF USE ONLY Page 7 of 10 Date Received: Accepted By: Application Number: H PA - PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 1. NATURE OF APPLICATION ® Exterior ® Interior ❑ Signage ❑ Demolition ® New Construction ❑ Alteration ❑ Relocation 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY Municipal Address: 44 Theresa Street, Kitchener, ON N2G 1M1 Legal Description (if know): PT LT 20-21 PL 49 KITCHENER AS IN 574852; KITCHENER Building/Structure Type: ® Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ Institutional Heritage Designation: ❑ Part IV (Individual) ® Part V (Heritage Conservation District) Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement? ® Yes ❑ No 3. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Adam Bendig Address: 58 Randerson Ave City/Province/Postal Code: Kitchener Phone: 519-766-3370 Email: adambendigrealestate@gmail.com 4. AGENT (if applicable) Name: Simone Panziera Company: thinkform architecture + interiors inc. Address: 881 Queen's Boulevard City/Province/Postal Code: Kitchener, ON N2M lA8 Phone: 226-476-1428 Email: simon Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Page 8 of 10 5. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION Provide a written description of the project including any conservation methods proposed. Provide such detail as materials to be used, measurements, paint colours, decorative details, whether any original building fabric is to be removed or replaced, etc. Use additional pages as required. Please refer to the City of Kitchener Heritage Permit Application Submission Guidelines for further direction. This project includes the interior and exterior renovation of an existing home to restore the functional requirements for the owners. The original building features that are deteriorated are to be repaired in an ap- propriate manner according to the age and style of the original building. 6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work: The building can not be used to its full capacity safely in its current state. For example, the attic doesn't meet minimum code requirements. ®he restoration of the interior will allow for the tenants to use the space safely and effectively. To accommodate additional dwelling units & required parking spaces. Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage Conservation District Plan: ®he proposal is consistent with Part V by maintaining the appropriate style of the home, avoiding new mate -rials and methods, retaining and restoring heritage attributes (keeeping exist. windows and doors), incorpo-rating similar building forms, etc., avoiding concealing original attributes, and keeping accurate W6Ae how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (www. h istoricp laces. ca/en/pag es/stan d a rd s -n o rmes. aspx): ®he proposal is consistent through the understanding of the built features, assessing the overall condition of built features, protecting and maintaining the built features using non-destructive methods, retaining sound built features, repairing a deteriorated building feature, and proper documentation of interventions. 7. PROPOSED WORKS a) Expected start date: May 10, 2023 Expected completion date: Tune 10, 2023 b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? M Yes ❑ No - If yes, who did you speak to? Jessica Vieira c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? ❑ Yes M No - If yes, who did you speak to? d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? ❑ Yes M No e) Other related Building or Planning applications: Application number Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Page 9 of 10 The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this application by the City of Kitchener - Planning Division does not guarantee it to be a `complete' application. The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will be undertaken and the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could result in a fine being imposed. as provided for under the Ontario Heritage Act. �� Signature of Owner/Agent: Qd.auMDate: 3/23/2023 Signature of Owner/Ag 9. AUTHORIZATION Simone Panziera ( Date: March 24, 2023 If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must be completed: Adam Bendig I /We, owner of the land that is subject of this application, hereby authorize Simone Panziera/ thinkform architecture to act on my / our behalf in this regard. Signature of Owner/Agen Date: UF37 3/23/2023 _K51B1461 ... Signature of Owner/Agent: Simone Panziera 1 Date: March 24, 2023 The personal information on this form is collected under the legal authority of Section 33(2), Section 42(2), and Section 42(2.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The information will be used for the purposes of administering the Heritage Permit Application and ensuring appropriate service of notice of receipt under Section 33(3) and Section 42(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act. If you have any questions about this collection of personal information, please contact the Manager of Corporate Records, Legislated Services Division, City of Kitchener (519-741-2769). Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B59AF5B-9764-40D2-A6DC-992FBF57F451 2023 Application Number: Application Received: Application Complete: Notice of Receipt: Notice of Decision: 90 -Day Expiry Date: PROCESS: ❑ Heritage Planning Staff: ❑ Heritage Kitchener: ❑ Council: STAFF USE ONLY Page 10 of 10 Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage z � - O + - E LU z z + _ Q w - J Ir Cl)U Q �� zO W � Oa Q J W o` Z I Q Co 0 C z U:5ww doo m LLJ OLLJ w Q w Uz O U (D :iE� O C G cr S co m QHcoY z cl) O ry LL rW V Z U U 06 w CO z U 0 0 O Q LU QW O 0 >O oY U Z 000 N LU 0 Q� — Y ry w 0 -Q N w = Z 0 Z O O 0 w HOZ D LL J Z Z_ Lu0 Z_ Q O 0 CO CO- } (D O , J O W O ry (Y) Ur N O Q N Q W Go z Cl) Q W Q Q O cn LL F7 - H O 0 Q O 'o O Lu 0 0 W Lu OU CC U m Q Cf) cn Cf) 021 O J Z Z Z H Z cn O O O z z 0 C7 H H H O H z 0 z % O_ H 00 0 Lu 0 QLu �: Q W f J~ W W W m cn J W w cn Ir 0 D D D D O W D cn 0 W W CD W CD W z z z O O z O z (D Z Cf) Cf) CW d� d� W O O U XXX cc ['rXccXcOc LU w w w a a w a w a N N V V Ir Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Of�U I qjQ fsyp.. IN _ summa mho _s _ 12 88 wm�w,���x�m azozo- O aNn nla3doad _ 3 oboo£ N — zrw Qo im x Q / m o z z O a Qw U w <w ~ a Q zo zz O w z F o N wQ wm a =1� 1010 o a o «pa z 41 z O w ui _ � o� W a w u ow 1 <0 QQ Q 3,obos£N — — — — — aNn nla3doad _ 3 oboo£ N — zrw Qo im x Q / Qw w zo zz o N wQ wm a =1� «pa 41 w ui -1 w u ow 1 <0 QQ Q 3,obos£N — — — — — - < a a — 3Ni, n1a3doad .hzfi 3 0 e y e i I I w y 'o O I I I I � zl I 10 j dl ¢3 3NII nla3doa—- 8- 16 lfi — — — 3 �Obo6£ N — — — — — — — --- - ------ -- I� �i� - i �Q <U� III X c� I z /SII ¢ �o w¢o m W I II u'l I LU ___ Od 0= =0 0= =0 =XW CO wQ U < 0 Q a WQ Q dU) Z O 0 U 11 Q i 3 = za 0a 10 fezl 19C611 - M =0 - 1. E<Uo'—Q0 x 3A1 71213d0ad seem 11 6 xL- tbz o,l oI oQ .zfi 3i felzl] 3o761 (sial l] [seas] m z lll-sE l fi-QBE{-.Ll IZI l Y Q W U O T I 6Z7 l-�Zfi I � Q Z 'o F W i Q� a0w o Z c Ir Z owxFs — —v m wa ir W¢ LU w LUIblfi] Ib$EI] 116 IWI 19981 l] fi-BE 11615 u>Lx IIIIi IIIl�Illi IIIlInlsIl O2O ] 0- zO o6bl,-�weL. w I11611 W �O X II xW 01 I b-9 IT OIII IGEI IGILI � -- zI II I—d 0I0O- N-- Z0LL�ZFy 0= 111 zw zaf[9s. [9999,1z ] „ -- IHIII 1191191611 116 91 b bi l—�1 ] X It bell 6 I-d I-I I6LII] SS 191611 66 010861 C, C, Q j a zFzmOZFw'�mo 9.1 81111 BS] w 0o IlfiLl] IBLL] I69E1 Ifib] 1 ILL6Z1 r S omo 6-6 o Q� a0w m s-sb [sblL] Z s,L I� p p �o wu� <w —QU 0 cls Z K Q Q [base] � O a � o �g w O w � � Z D � Z � 0 � 8A49 W -_ - v;o ="80`x_ 3 S 8 @a [b lEL l] I I I I I I I I I I I I ` I I I I I I I I I I = I I I I I z Q a POM II I I O g e I I I U j I y u I w � .cm shay -HO - a r I� I66ZE1 [sea] 6ssb] ..01-AL.b,EI I I - I w , z II z U I GQ o o a L afiL] o-sL X s r.¢ Ll r = — — — — — [sebe] s r.¢ N-1 rfiss] rfififib] ----- --�,I - SII 0m g m Ilo p II w U z mO- < 0 m -J cl w = li m a m c sea ------- O J z a 0 0 a z Z w v r o -� l l- _mo yLs] mo, BBL] fi m ^m _ `v cD C Z K _ _u rfiLl --____--_ ----------- �b9 mE Q = mP F I 6_4E � 6] w X II O I p" 0" Pu O m E O- m l _� fLsbel Z w„ I ��o o E FFFF= .L-.11 F rr II II m rn sze] 0. Ib Ib o — - __ -----J X'� rbEEE] [ease] foss] Is lBl l] 6 -BE m s-sb [sblL] Z s,L I� p p �o wu� <w —QU 0 cls Z K Q Q [base] � O a � o �g w O w � � Z D � Z � 0 � W Q � s-sb [sblL] s,L I� p p �o wu� [base] [lass] � F z N � � � �a <w w w O Q 0= 0= = IBLLb] be = L- IBs IE] IQ O Z m 8 W co �& - DO— [L9E l] foss] Iblfi] 0 m t= o Is l8l l] fi-,BE [eLaL] IbLE I] - _� oll IbfiLs] z ' Q H a II 00 - - �= -x - 9 e - [blal [leer 9 C, = ry - 7 x U lfil] I98b1] b-,9 a C, l -,b U Q F — „l W m z a 16-1 11 6 P,I „e -,l „P,9L .e .e-,9 .b -,E ILBEI] Ilfifi] IBLL] Lfi6] L-,fi ILLLE] IBLL] 9 r,1 I9s8E] IBLL] „8-,E ITP [Ls9l] s,e fess] L,e ~ z mL] w �= Du Oi [ fi P, 1161 ILLfi1] 19 Lss] 19-0 fi-,BE ILbL6 19,9E m� [ b e � F z N � � � �a <w w w O Q 0= 0= = IBLLb] be = L- IBs IE] IQ O Z (7 m (7 m �a �a 0= 0= = IBLLb] be = L- IBs IE] .,.r=. wJoj�uIyIQ o x _ WQwFzwwz —ll—owmiFa-�w seJ — b-1E.'wLe sa9] E ] .f.e,rofiebssfil] E]Tmmw. I.lC_bolEgbWapI.] lam l,aF[[.fs.lefi ueoea u l l ] wUOa0wa - - o -zaUGaaa0LLozO_ mu� zaya0p Pq U in, "- QW WF a co a pWO�O 8 oIr w ow U o O z O >O z a W m zw p 41 --------------- El 1-d wZa C r�[-] 1LoLlId oo o 11uE=111=1s] J lE - 1E m [so] 9a O 1690 I 0 U W a W 20, LLWaO0. ILL 9 11-9l 11 UsW 911 O ii xs Q a �!wre ��x�m azozo- O �� V l/ � CV o <w O Q Q oo w _ w m g z o 4� o P w �� V l/ � .,.r=. WJoj�uIyIQ �!wre ��x�m azozo- � O 1—H [s�ss7 -- � I [sose] of z, I [eose] z I I s -s � IIAz] [em I o>— o�a�>s io dill I I I I II II I I II I II I II El I I EllI II I I I I I I I I I O z w w z O oo O oma>= F I a a I o aso I — I I fsosel ____ N II o �-- - om I yu s O O o on ossl ] .m -s o O II I I 0 o O _ii I � [s1so 11 m -se N9s I [ozse7o I [o �ez7 [sose] I 11-1 z [es z7 [se�s7 .o,I [sme] Ell EE k I� II I I � II II I Z FEII V / V / V / z� z O I I p II F II F a � a I w I w w w I I F I I I I I I F [sso ]=O [see ] p Ti o I& _ p' & p b Go rn o O CV o <w Q Q oo W cl - W �y€ - ol 0 z &g 4EH W a � P o Q a 1—H [s�ss7 -- � I [sose] of z, I [eose] z I I s -s � IIAz] [em I o>— o�a�>s io dill I I I I II II I I II I II I II El I I EllI II I I I I I I I I I O z w w z O oo O oma>= F I a a I o aso I — I I fsosel ____ N II o �-- - om I yu s O O o on ossl ] .m -s o O II I I 0 o O _ii I � [s1so 11 m -se N9s I [ozse7o I [o �ez7 [sose] I 11-1 z [es z7 [se�s7 .o,I [sme] Ell EE k I� II I I � II II I Z FEII V / V / V / z� z O I I p II F II F a � a I w I w w w I I F I I I I I I F [sso ]=O [see ] p Ti o I& _ p' & p b Go rn <w Z o o � Q o y -g -i5 Mga`-a U o -ev_ o€qa 2� - _ -2 2s _eco F 1010 -kUm v � p x a a z W ®�H I,I [9191 [1E111 1—d1 0 I IIDIII N < � 0� I lo_ I I N IEW. I I I I - o N I I I I _ 19, 199661 ] s 9191 111111 8-1E 11 16-1 I s [1991] 6 9 IRE [ 9l1 -.s I [fi991] s E 9-.s [s1111 1� [1611 11911 .�s I [ 4-1 bsol I � z 9 < z 1—d o ~ w FLNF E WF - o1-6 Z I I I I I I <w Z o o � Q U � F � W o - — - < w 11_10 - Z ° in � Q _ H ooaf_ - ��._ J p § m 0 Ir I—d S -ll (ILII] Ifi6bL] IL99L] 0 0 Om 0� �a I g uo= m III IfilLl] I rh � r� o I IL U Q Z 0 I I - II OIII G F U y F - II I I feveel I I I I w o 9,u o y u p� mg Ilblb] �E ��� IEIEZI I I—d I S 7 IL99L1 I S 911 �I = Y H, o z o m � o U y _ o F erm— Y� � o y F IIS & I y Q W moII I I I I I th i n kfo rm '1�1_ architecture + interiors inc Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6th Floor P.O.Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 Attention: Heritage Planning April 6th, 2023 Dear Heritage Planning, Re: Renovations to Duplex 44 Theresa St. (Kitchener) written proposal Thank you kindly for reviewing the renovations to Duplex 44 Theresa St, Kitchener ON. As requested by the Heritage Planning staff, we are providing a written description of all proposed work. The description is in conjunction with the submitted architectural drawings and includes photo documentation of all existing and proposed areas of work, supporting documents, a list of proposed materials, and a cost estimation for review. Proposed Work: The scope of work consists of minor interior and major exterior renovations of the existing home (44 Theresa St, Kitchener) to restore the functional requirements for the owners. This includes renovating the roof to incorporate two shed dormers, changing and replacing the existing porch and balcony, demolishing the existing car garage, minor landscaping to perform with the newly proposed porch, front yard, and rear yard and minor interior restoration and repairs to accommodate an additional parking space to comply to the minimum parking spaces per dwelling unit by-law in the region of Kitchener. Due to faulty floor construction and limited headroom clearance, the existing attic space does not provide use. Based on our site review, there is only 76 usable square -footage in the attic space with the required 7 - feet headroom clearance (Fig.01). The newly proposed dormers that comply with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, introduce a new space with 507 usable square -footage. The new space will be utilized as a living and gathering space for family activities and hobbies. The existing porch and balcony propose a safety risk because of the broken floorboards, floor joist, stair treads, and handrail (Fig.02) 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pal ofM of 156 0 th i n kform architecture + interiors inc Fig. 01 Photograph of the existing attic. written proposal Fig. 02 Photograph of the existing balcony. Fig. 03 Precedence. Photograph of neighbour's porch. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page 2ofi� of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal The proposed changes are to remove and replace the existing porch with a new of similar materials as the existing elements. The current balcony off the second floor does not have handrails and proposes a fall risk for users. In addition, the demolition of the car garage will be necessary as it currently does not serve as shelter for the owner's vehicle. The vehicle turning radii to exit from the car garage to the Ianeway is not sufficient, thus preventing its use (Refer to drawing A-101). Presently, the owners park their vehicles at the front of the Ianeway, which inconveniences the neighbour. The neighbour and owner are unable to utilize the Ianeway at the same time as it does not meet the minimum requirements to have side-by-side parking. It is proposed that the existing car garage be demolished, and the rear yard will be professionally landscaped to include two parking spots and new vegetation. The inadequate number of parking spaces has led to additional parking spots being introduced at the rear of the building. To increase the usable space of the existing building for potential dwelling units, it was proposed to have the new addition be expanded from the attic and not at the rear of the building. The minor interior renovation is to repair the existing conditions and replace any components that are no longer operable or safe for use. Such as, but not limited to, replacing broken windows, replacing all the existing narrow stairs, replacing damaged interior and exterior doors, replacing damaged electrical and mechanical systems, restoring the use of the attic space for the new owners, and restructuring the attic floor joist. By completing the proposed work, the new owners will be able to live in their homes safely and effectively. (Fig.03)(Fig.04)(Fig.05)(Fig.06)(Fig.07) 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pagof 9 of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc Fig. 03 Photograph of the existing closet in the bedroom. Fig. 05 Photograph of existing mechanical systems. written proposal Fig. 04 Photograph of existing stairs to attic. Fig. 06 Photograph of existing basement conditions. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pagofe 6 of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal Fig. 07 Photograph of narrow exit stairs. Methodology: To provide the most effective and least disruptive solution to the listed issues above, we reviewed and cross-referenced each necessary change with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. To continue the design language of the existing heritage building, the proposed work will carry on the same or similar visual elements and structural build of the existing home. The major renovation of the project is the introduction of two shed dormers on the existing roof, which will be carefully executed to inhabit the appropriate style by avoiding new materials and construction during the restoration. For the construction of the dormers, the largest side elevation will be extended from the existing exterior walls to replicate traditional balloon framing (Fig.09). This will provide a seamless extension from the existing. The front and rear fagade of the building envelope will be kept intact to protect its historical value and integrity. The intentions are to clean, repair and protect the existing roof fagade and seamlessly incorporate two dormer additions. To reduce the amount of disruption upon the existing build, the new floor construction for the attic will be anchored above the existing attic floor structure and vertically braced by the balloon framing that is extended from the original exterior wall. The reason for constructing the new attic floor above the existing one is to retain the original attributes of the angled ceiling to the floor below (Fig.10)(Fig.11). Traditional balloon framing is the least disruptive methodology to raise the roof structure for more headroom clearance. The proposed extension of the exterior wall will be reinforced between the existing exterior walls and the existing roof structure. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N21V! 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page of 8 of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal The minor interior renovations will be surface -level restoration with cleaning and repairing of the existing attributes as the main tool of execution. Substitution of materials will be explored only after all other options for repair and replacement have been ruled out. A majority of the existing first and second floors will remain intact, with a focus on repurposing the attic space to allow safe use. The main objective is consistent through the understanding of the build features, assessing the overall condition of built features, protecting, and maintaining the built features using non-destructive methods, retaining sound features, repairing deteriorated building features, and providing thorough documentation. The proposed exterior and interior renovation materials will visually and physically reflect and complement the existing heritage attributes. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pagof of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal Fig. 10 Photograph of the existing bathroom with an angled ceiling. Fig. 11 Photograph of the existing bedroom with an angled ceiling. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pagof � of 156 thinkform written proposal architecture + interiors inc 4—PLY 2RX12" LVL. RIDGE BEAM MIAIOLiUIi F�]piT PROPOSED TOP OF ROOF �r-8-11 �12 2710' RAFTERS TOP OF EAS7ING ROOF 676 POST 2x10 WALL WDDD STUD 30 C 3- SPRAY—FOAM ATTIC INSULATION do EXISTING 5.5" BATT CHIMNEY INSULATION 12" TGI 6F�1 ATTIC FLOOR DOUBLE TOP PLATE a I' rr UBLE P1 OTE n MINNE '-9-3/4' SECOND FLOOR EXISTING WALL TYPE (HATCHED TO REMAIN) Fig. 09 Wall section of proposed balloon framing. 02 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N21M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pa of� of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc Photo Documentation of Existing & Proposed Area of Work: written proposal Existing Front Elevation Partial Existing Rear Elevation Partial Existing Rear Elevation 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Pa ofge 4 of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc Existing West—Side Elevation written proposal Existing East—Side Elevation Existing Detached Car Garage 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal Existing Detached Car Garage — Side Profile Existing Landscaping in Rear -Yard 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca P11 of age �8 of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc written proposal Existing windows & trims. Existing chimney — Interior. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 Existing chimney— Exterior. 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca P12 age of � of 156 thinkform architecture + interiors inc Interior — Relocation & repair of existing stairs to attic Interior — Repair exit stairs. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 written proposal J ,I a Interior - Remove the closet door to the existing stairs to the attic. Interior— Propose new headroom clearance. (Exist= 65) 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page of 156 th i n kfo rm architecture + interiors inc Existing Precedence on Theresa Street: Shed Dormer Addition. Black Accent Colour on Property. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 written proposal Black Accent Colour on Property. Siding on Building Facade. 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page 4of�8 of 156 0 th i n kform architecture + interiors inc written proposal Siding on Dormer. Shed Dormer Addition. 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca P15 age of M of 156 0 th i n kform architecture + interiors inc Proposed Materials: PRODUCT TYPE APPLICATION BRAND SHINGLES Entrance & Exit Doors Proposed Dormer Roof GAF CLADDING n/a Proposed Dormer—Wall GENTEK n/a LUMBER Cladding n/a SHAKE SIDING Front Elevation Fagade n/a FLASHING Fascia, Soffit, Eaves, Troughs KAYCAN TRIM Window & Door Trims n/a EXTERIOR DOOR Entrance & Exit Doors n/a WINDOW Dormer Windows n/a RAILING Porch & Balcony Railing n/a LUMBER Proposed Porch n/a written proposal SPECIFICATION (COLOUR, TYPE, ETC.) Type: Slateline Colour: Antique Slate URL: hftps://www.gaf.com/en-us/products/slateline Type: Align Cladding Colour: Iron Ore URL: hftps://www.gentek.ca/product- catalog/siding/align-composite-exterior-siding/ Type: Cementitious — Rough Sawn Shake Siding Colour: Iron Grey Type: Aluminum Colour: Choc (37) URL: hftps:Hkaycan.com/product/aluminum/aluminum- soffit/ Type: Composite Exterior Trim Colour: Iron Ore Type: n/a Colour: Cedar -Stain Solid Wood Door Type: Double -Pane Awning Glazing: Standard Clear Type: Pressure Treated Lumber Stain: Cedar Type: Pressure Treated Lumber Stain: Cedar 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N21VI 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page of 156 th i n kfo rm '1_ architecture + interiors inc Cost Estimate: ITEM TYPE LABOUR (DEMOLITION & CONSTRUCTION) WINDOWS DOORS SHINGLES ALUMINUM RAILING DRYWALL FLOORING SIDING BATHROOMS KITCHENS HEATING/ AIR CONDITIONING INTERIOR DOORS & TRIMS FRAMING/ STAIRS PLUMBING LANDSCAPING TOTAL COST 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 1 226 476 1428 written proposal COST $17000 $16000 $5000 $7500 $4500 $26000 $8000 $7000 $36000 $30000 $28000 $9000 $40000 $6000 $14000 $245000 www.thinkform.ca P17 age of d� of 156 thinkform architecture + interiors inc 3D Render: written proposal South -East Perspective South-West Perspective 881 Queen's Blvd Kitchener ON N2M 1A8 226 476 1428 1 www.thinkform.ca Page of 156 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: May 2, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: March 28, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-154 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 181 Frederick Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 181 Frederick Street as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to designate 181 Frederick Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • The key finding of this report is the 181 Frederick Street meets the criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (now amended to 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagements included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, consulting and collaborating with the owner regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), and consultation with Heritage Kitchener. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served to the owner and Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The property municipally addressed as 181 Frederick Street is located on the south side of Frederick Street near the intersection of Frederick Street and Lancaster Street East (Fig. 1). The existing house was built circa 1910 in the Craftsman architectural style and is currently *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 54 of 156 listed as a non -designated building of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register. The subject property is also located within the Central Frederick Neighborhood Cultural Heritage Landscape. The existing house is being used as an office by Rome Transportation Inc. and is also known as the `Snider House'. C_C_V.Pm'd 170 f C©MfIERCIA.L CORE1i0_. t 172� 166 1 . 3 't _•._ Y ' r 1RAi FREDERICK 1T1,r, 1,1 .4 1,.i 166 21 �164y Figure 1- Location Map of 181 Frederick Street which is highlighted in the red box. The submission and approval of a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was made a requirement of a proposed Site Plan Application that was submitted to the City in 2019. The HIA, last revised in June 2021, was prepared by Metropolitan Design Ltd. and submitted in support of this application. It was circulated to the Heritage Kitchener committee via email with an information memo dated August 6, 2019. The site plan application included the construction of a 10 -storey apartment building with a mechanical penthouse, as well as retail on the ground level. There would be a total of 97 residential units on level two to level nine, with a total of 123 parking spaces. As part of the proposed development, the applicant was proposing to preserve 181 Frederick in-situ but demolish 197 Frederick Street, and 143 and 153 Lancaster Street East. This site plan application initially received conditional approval on March 12, 2020. A revised site plan was submitted to the City on December 9, 2021, and another conditional approval letter was issued dated December 21, 2021. The HIA received approval on April 8, 2022, by the Director of Planning. A Conservation Plan (CP) was also prepared to ensure the long-term conservation of the existing house and garage. The CP was approved on September 8, 2022. REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The Page 55 of 156 t .'.:ir.Il F-�ll l -rel 134 I- . 3 't _•._ Y ' r 1RAi FREDERICK 1T1,r, 1,1 .4 1,.i 166 21 �164y Figure 1- Location Map of 181 Frederick Street which is highlighted in the red box. The submission and approval of a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was made a requirement of a proposed Site Plan Application that was submitted to the City in 2019. The HIA, last revised in June 2021, was prepared by Metropolitan Design Ltd. and submitted in support of this application. It was circulated to the Heritage Kitchener committee via email with an information memo dated August 6, 2019. The site plan application included the construction of a 10 -storey apartment building with a mechanical penthouse, as well as retail on the ground level. There would be a total of 97 residential units on level two to level nine, with a total of 123 parking spaces. As part of the proposed development, the applicant was proposing to preserve 181 Frederick in-situ but demolish 197 Frederick Street, and 143 and 153 Lancaster Street East. This site plan application initially received conditional approval on March 12, 2020. A revised site plan was submitted to the City on December 9, 2021, and another conditional approval letter was issued dated December 21, 2021. The HIA received approval on April 8, 2022, by the Director of Planning. A Conservation Plan (CP) was also prepared to ensure the long-term conservation of the existing house and garage. The CP was approved on September 8, 2022. REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The Page 55 of 156 City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term protection of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value and interest. The property municipally addressed as 181 Frederick Street is recognized for its design, associative, and contextual values. The house is a one -and -a -half storey unique example of a Craftsman architectural style (Fig 2). Figure 2: Front Fagade of 181 Frederick Street. Design/Physical Value The existing house is one of the remaining Craftsman Cottages that were built on Frederick Street between 1900 and 1910. This would make the existing house on 181 Frederick Street one of the last of its kind within its immediate vicinity. These houses were meant to be simple and a representation of the "everyman house", which reflected the changing social values of the time. The social movement that inspired this was the rejection of elaborate Victorian and Edwardian house models and to replace those with simpler, more modest homes that celebrated `North American values'. Page 56 of 156 Associative Values The associative value of the house is that Elias Weber Bingeman Snider (E.W.B. Snider) lived in this house from 1919 until 1921. His wife, Ellen Snider (nee Shoemaker) continued to live in this address until 1950. E.W.B Snider was a prominent businessman in Kitchener. He was, however, best known for bringing hydroelectricity to the area and originating the present hydropower system in Ontario. Contextual Value The contextual value of the building lies in its original location along Frederick Street as part of the Craftsman Homes that were originally built on Frederick Street between 1900 and 1910. The heritage attributes identified include: • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the house, including: ■ side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; ■ wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation; ■ Rear second storey, formerly screened, sleeping porch; ■ full width porch under main roof supported by tapered brick columns with brick guard; ■ Red brick exterior; ■ chimney; ■ windows and window openings, including: o large picture windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, o brick and wood projecting bay windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, 0 1/1 windows with and without stone headers and sills, o small square windows with stone headers and sills on each side of the chimney; ■ Natural wood main entry door with vertical leaded glass panels. ■ rusticated stone foundation with stone detailing; ■ Tudor-esque board and plaster gable treatment for the main house and the carport gables; ■ The carport's tapered brick carport columns, and the flat arch supporting gable; and ■ carport. • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the detached garage, including: o side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; o wide eave overhang; o red brick; and, o rusticated stone foundation. • All elements related to the contextual value, including: o The original location of the existing house and the detached garage and its contribution to the Frederick Street Landscape; and o The detached garage that mimics the architectural style of the house and completes the site. Page 57 of 156 Figure 3: Front and side elevation of 181 Frederick Street There are no alterations proposed to the existing house and the building will remain preserved in-situ, and the HIA has concluded that the existing house and the garage should be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (Fig. 3). Heritage Planning Staff are generally in agreement with this conclusion. The Statement of Significance for 181 Frederick Street has been revised to include the conclusions and findings of the HIA (Attachment A). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT and COLLABORATE — Heritage Planning staff have consulted and collaborated with the applicant and owner regarding implementation of the recommendations of the HIA, Page 58 of 156 including designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The owner has confirmed their support for designation subject to consideration by Heritage Kitchener and Council. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving notice of its intention to designate a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: - Ontario Heritage Act, 2021 REVIEWED BY: Natalie Goss, Manager, Policy & Research APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Proposed Statement of Significance for 181 Frederick Street Attachment B — HIA for 181 Frederick Street Page 59 of 156 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 181 FREDERICK STREET ❑x Design/Physical Value ❑XSocial Value ❑x Historical/Associative Value ❑Economic Value ❑x Contextual Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 181 Frederick Street Legal Description: Plan 392 Part Lot 4 & 5 Year Built: c. 1910 Architectural Style: Craftsman Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Residence Condition: Good Page 60 of 156 MIN 15a 1 17n / ?� _ PAce Services , t �k tn: - Central Division N 151 $ .r r , "" '� 2133 '• � D C TY COMMERCIAL CORE o ! •r tso. i Summary of Significance 134 %14 - f 1-147 CENTRAL FREDERICK ❑x Design/Physical Value ❑XSocial Value ❑x Historical/Associative Value ❑Economic Value ❑x Contextual Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 181 Frederick Street Legal Description: Plan 392 Part Lot 4 & 5 Year Built: c. 1910 Architectural Style: Craftsman Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Residence Condition: Good Page 60 of 156 MIN 15a 1 Waterloo Rea ronaI _ PAce Services , t �k tn: - Central Division N 151 $ .r r , "" '� 2133 '• � ' ltiy Summary of Significance ❑x Design/Physical Value ❑XSocial Value ❑x Historical/Associative Value ❑Economic Value ❑x Contextual Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 181 Frederick Street Legal Description: Plan 392 Part Lot 4 & 5 Year Built: c. 1910 Architectural Style: Craftsman Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Residence Condition: Good Page 60 of 156 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 181 Frederick Street is a one and a half storey early -201h century brick house built in the Craftsman architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.22 acre parcel of land located on the south east corner of Frederick Street and Lancaster Street East in the Central Frederick Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the house. Heritage Value 181 Frederick Street is recognized for its design, historical, and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example of the Craftsman architectural style. The house is in good condition. The house is one and a half storeys in height and features: • side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; • wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation; • full width porch under main roof supported by tapered brick columns with brick guard; • Exterior red brick and chimney; • windows and window openings, including: o large picture windows with transoms, stone headers and sills; o bay windows with transoms, stone headers and sills; 0 1/1 windows with and without stone headers and sills; o small square windows with stone headers and sills on each side of the chimney; • rusticated stone foundation; and, carport. • The detached garage features: o side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; o wide eave overhang; o Exterior red brick; and o rusticated stone foundation. In addition, the architectural significance of the Snider House at 181 Frederick Street is that it is one of the remaining of a number of Craftsman Cottages that were built along Frederick Street between 1900 and 1910. This would make 181 Frederick Street one of the last of its kind in this immediate area. These simple, detached, storey and a half homes reflected the changing social values of the times and the evolution of the "Five Points" intersection area from a 19th Century mix of commercial and residential uses into a family community served by the Suddaby School. Page 61 of 156 Historical/Associative Value The associative significance of the Snider House is that Elias Weber Bingeman Snider (E.W.B. Snider) lived in the house from 1919 until 1921. His wife, Ellen Snider (nee Shoemaker) continued to live at this address until 1950. E.W.B. Snider was a prominent Berlin (now Kitchener) businessman and entrepreneur in the Kitchener area who is remembered for his many achievements. These included his role in introducing the major technical advances in the milling industry which included the introduction and transformation of the first porcelain rolling press which replaced the stone grinding method. This technology transformed the flour industry in Canada, United States and abroad. He is however best known for bringing hydroelectricity to the area and originating the present hydropower system in Ontario. Contextual Value The contextual value of the building lies in its original location along Frederick Street as part of the Craftsman Homes that were originally built on Frederick Street between 1900 and 1910. Other Values Social Value The storey and a half, brick, American Craftsman Cottage -inspired house, built before World War I is characterized by its modest size, the deep porch, framed and supported by stout brick columns and the shallow pitched roof with deep bracketed overhangs and the inset dormer. The social movement that inspired this rejection of the Victorian and Edwardian house models of the past was inspired by the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. One of the best known and eloquent proponents of these values that were translated into architectural form was Gustave Stickley. In his 1909 book "Craftsmen Homes", Stickley describes the Craftsman Idea that is the foundation on which the design of these homes is built: "But while we take the greatest interest in all efforts towards reform in any direction, we remain firm in the conviction that the root of all reform lies in the individual and that the life of the individual is shaped mainly by home surroundings and influences and by the kind of education that goes to make real men and women instead of grist for the commercial mill." To add to his argument that the design of the home will improve the quality of life he goes on to say, "Therefore we regard it as a step in the direction of bringing about better conditions we try to plan and build houses which will simplify the work of home life and add to its wholesome joy and comfort." The "better conditions" and values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact and influence on the appetite for and the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. These small, storey and a half homes came to be seen as a model housing solution to the crowded and unhealthy cities with their row houses, tenements and slums. This model contributed to the evolution of the post -World War 11, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle most North American cities today. Page 62 of 156 The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". It is detached, sitting on its own lot with room for a garden, with a garage or carport, and a generous front porch that served to mediate between private and public life. Ample windows were provided for fresh air and natural light and simple building materials were featured that celebrated the range of the builder's woodworking, ceramic, masonry craft. All of these attributes together created the healthy home providing "wholesome joy and comfort" all of which is protected and secure under the characteristic, large, gently sloping roof with deep overhangs. 181 Frederick Street is part of the narrative of this old residential neighborhood. Its design is similar to 145 Lancaster, which is slated for demolition. This would make 181 Frederick Street one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this immediate area. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 181 Frederick Street resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the house, including: ■ side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; ■ wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation; ■ Rear second storey, formerly screened, sleeping porch; ■ full width porch under main roof supported by tapered brick columns with brick guard; ■ Red brick exterior; ■ chimney; ■ windows and window openings, including: o large picture windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, o brick and wood projecting bay windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, 0 1/1 windows with and without stone headers and sills, o small square windows with stone headers and sills on each side of the chimney; ■ Natural wood main entry door with vertical leaded glass panels. ■ rusticated stone foundation with stone detailing; ■ Tudor-esque board and plaster gable treatment for the main house and the carport gables; ■ The carport's tapered brick carport columns, and the flat arch supporting gable, and, ■ carport. • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the detached garage, including: o side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; o wide eave overhang; o red brick; and, o rusticated stone foundation. • All elements related to the contextual value, including: Page 63 of 156 o The original location of the existing house and the detached garage and its contribution to the Frederick Street Landscape; and o The detached garage that mimics the architectural style of the house and completes the site. References Loucks, D. ( June 2021)Snider House -181 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario —Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment_ Metropolitan Design Ltd. Photos 181 Frederick Street Page 64 of 156 Ma City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form Address: 181 Frederick Street Period: c. 1910 Field Team Initials: LB/ML/CM Description: Date: April 18, 2013 Page 66 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Style Is this a notable, rare or unique example of a particular ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N architectural style or type? Construction Is this a notable, rare, unique or early example of a particular ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ material or method of ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ construction? Design Is this a particularly attractive or ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ unique structure because of the merits of its design, composition, ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N craftsmanship or details? Does this structure demonstrate a high degree of technical or ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ scientific achievement? Interior Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship and/or detail ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ noteworthy? Notes Field Team: craftsman influenced; carport noteworthy Page 66 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE CONTEXTUAL VALUE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Continuity Does this structure contribute to the community or character of the ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ street, neighbourhood or area? Setting Is the setting or orientation of the structure or landscaping ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ noteworthy? Does it provide a physical, historical, functional or visual link ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ to its surroundings? Page 66 of 156 Landmark Is this a particularly important EVALUATION HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE & SUBCOMMITTEE INTEGRITY visual landmark within the region ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ N/A ❑, city ❑ or neighbourhood ❑? No Yes Site Does the structure occupy its Completeness Does this structure have other associations with and/or contribute to the original site? ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ original outbuildings, notable ❑ N Alterations Does this building retain most of ❑ N ❑ ❑ organization or institution that is significant or unique landscaping or external features ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ that complete the site? ❑ N features? Is the original, previous or existing use significant? ❑ Notes Field Team: garage mimics building style Page 67 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE & SUBCOMMITTEE INTEGRITY SIGNIFICANCE N/A N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Site Does the structure occupy its associations with and/or contribute to the original site? ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N Alterations Does this building retain most of ❑ N ❑ ❑ organization or institution that is significant or unique its original materials and design ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N features? Is the original, previous or existing use significant? ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N Is this a notable structure due to ❑ Does this property meet the definition of a significant sympathetic alterations that have ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ taken place over time? Condition Is this building in good condition? ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N Notes Page 67 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE & SUBCOMMITTEE SIGNIFICANCE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Does this property or structure have strong associations with and/or contribute to the understanding of a belief, person, activity, ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ organization or institution that is significant or unique within the City? Is the original, previous or existing use significant? ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape, as identified in the Provincial Policy Statement under the Ontario Planning Act? ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N A property or structure valued for the important contribution it makes to an understanding of the history of a place, an event or a people? Notes Field Team: directories show ownership by Mrs. E. Snider (widow E.W.B. Snider) from 1924 till 1946 Page 67 of 156 SNIDER HOUSE 1 tq1 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario PREPARED FOR: Erik Olsen Rome Transportation Inc. 100 Campbell Ave #2 Kitchener, ON N2H 4X8 (519) 572-0980 Figure 1: 181 Frederick Street, Kitchener June 2021 PREPARED BY: Donald Loucks Metropolitan Design Ltd. 45 Willow Avenue Toronto, ON M4E 3K1 (416) 579-7026 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 68 of 156 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Site Location 1.2 Description of Site 1.3 Current Context of Site 1.4 Heritage Recognition 1.5 Present Owner 1.6 Contact Person 2. BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS 2.1 Historic Research and Development of Kitchener - Identification and Evaluation of Significant Heritage Attributes. 2.2 Site Context and History 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 3.1 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI) 4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ALTERATION OF THE SITE 5. IMPACTS 6. CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION 7. IMPACT MITIGATION 8. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 9. APPENDICES 9.1 Maps 9.2 Images 9.3 Site Photographs 9.4 Statement of Significance - Evaluation Form, City of Kitchener 9.5 Conservation Principles and Applicable Legislation - Additional Information from the OHA 9.6 Architectural Drawings 9.7 Qualifications of Authors Completing the CHIA CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN 3 3 4 5 7 7 7 7 7 10 15 24 28 28 39 39 40 41 50 54 60 62 64 68 Page 69 of 156 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Site Location i4 Ll W 31 14 114 14 Figure 2: Property Data Map showing 181 Frederick Street, Kitchener. Figure 3: Satellite View of 181 Frederick Street, Kitchener. F Wr A Figure 4: Entire Development site (approximate, in red) and 181 Frederick Street in context (circled in red). CHIA — 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 70 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 1.2 Description of Site The property at 181 Frederick Street is located within a triangular lot, near the intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street East in This property is located within the Central Frederick Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) as identified in the 2014 Cultural Heritage Landscape Study. Historically this was a prominent intersection known as "Five Points", as five streets once intersected here. It evolved into a busy commercial centre of historic Berlin (Kitchener), with businesses such as the Ahrens Five Point Grocery, Five Point Meat Market, the Five Point Drugstore, Izma's Five Point Fruit Store and a series of service stations surrounding the intersection (See Appendix: Images No. 1-5). Figure 5: Satellite view of 181 Frederick Street (circled in black) and the 'Five Points" intersection (circled in red). 181 Frederick Street is adjacent to Suddaby Public School at 171 Frederick, a designated building of heritage significance circa 1857. Currently the owner and developer Rome Transportation Inc. wishes to continue to use 181 Frederick Street (a listed building) as their office and wishes to demolish 197 Frederick Street (Tim Horton's), 143 and 145 Lancaster Street East to construct a condominium building on this triangular piece of land. This proposed building is planned to be ten storeys plus a mechanical penthouse with retail on the ground level with 97 residential units on levels two to nine and with a total of 123 parking spaces, 112 below grade and 11 at grade. Figure 6: Bird's Eye View of triangular property at Frederick and Lancaster Streets, circled properties are to be demolished (181 Frederick Street is in red). CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 71 of 156 1.3 Current Context of Site Figure 7: Looking northeast on Frederick Street toward 181 Frederick, Suddaby Public School is in the foreground. Figure 8: Looking southwest on Frederick Street towards 181 Frederick. Figure 9: Looking southeast on Otto Street towards Suddaby Public School, 181 Frederick is on the left. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 72 of 156 Figure 10: "Five Points" Intersection, present context (arrow pointing to 181 Frederick). The building, left of centre, was where the Five Points Grocery once stood (now demolished). --ffo3L4 I a-1� MW , 7M M, 9 1 W ijQnIINW9 4 Wki-"� Figure 11: Development site context. Suddaby School (171 Frederick) is marked with green arrow on left, 181 Frederick is marked with green arrow on right. Circled properties in red are proposed to be demolished (Tim Horton's and two properties on Lancaster). rnu�tagro��,t ,� G' -•� Figure 12: Development site context. From left, 197 Lancaster Street (red arrow, slated for demolition), 143 and 145 Lancaster Street (red arrows, slated for demolition), 181 Frederick (green arrow) and Suddaby School at 171 Frederick (green arrow). CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 73 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 1.4 Heritage Recognition As of October 24, 2017, the City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register lists the following: • 181 Frederick Street is a listed, non -designated property of heritage value or interest. • 171 Frederick Street (Suddaby Public School) is a Part IV designated property. 1.5 Present Owner Rome Transportation 100 Campbell Avenue, Unit #2 Kitchener, ON N2H 4X8 1.6 Contact Person Mr. Erik Olsen P: (519) 572-0980 eolsen@romesales.com 2. BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS 2.1 Historic Research and Development of Kitchener - Identification and Evaluation of Significant Heritage Attributes. Prior to 1784, the Mississauga claimed a large land area that included the Grand River Valley on which Kitchener is located. In 1784, the British government purchased this land and granted it to the Six Nations as a gift for their allegiance and to compensate them for their losses during the American Revolution.' During the period from 1796-1798, the Six Nations, represented by Joseph Brant, sold a portion of this land to prominent land speculator Colonel Richard Beasley. This remote land was highly desirable to German Mennonite farming families from Pennsylvania who discovered a new-found freedom from persecution in Canada in the wake of the American Revolution.2 In 1800, two Pennsylvanian Mennonites from Lancaster County named Joseph Schoerg and Samuel Betzner Jr. (brothers -in -Law) purchased land from Richard Beasley and established the nucleus of what would become a large German-speaking settlement.' The first buildings were erected by 1802. The German Company Tract4 was created in 1803 by a group of interrelated Mennonite families, represented by two prominent Mennonites, Daniel Erb and Samuel Bricker. The Tract sold blocks of land to Pennsylvanian pioneers arriving in the early 1800s; it would begin the wave of 1 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo z https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/enduring-spirit-the-rejuvenation-of-berlin-ontario/article3l576065/ 3 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo 4 http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ontmennohistoryl5-2.pdf CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 74 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN immigration from Pennsylvanian Mennonites to this region. The early pioneers became leading local landowners — notably the Erbs, the Ebys, the Bechtels, the Brubachers, the Cressmans, the Shoemakers, the Webers and the Schneiders (Snyder/Snider).' Over the next decade several Pennsylvanian families made the difficult trip north. By 1807 many of the founding families had arrived and were becoming established in the area. When the Mennonite migrations ended, flights of European German -Speaking immigrants began between the 1820s and 1850s,6 attracted to Canada in turn to escape post-war upheavals and uncertainties in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars. The new wave of immigrants were skilled tradesmen, artisans, craftsmen, farmers and agricultural labourers, drawn to the good land and markets. Their industrialism complemented the Mennonite founders' skills and an entrepreneurial spirit of the community strengthened its growth and a cohesive community developed.' By 1816, the Government of Upper Canada designated the settlement the Township of Waterloo. In 1833, the developing "town" was christened "Berlin" by its Mennonite pioneers, Bishop Eby and Joseph Schneider. Soon a smithy and a tavern joined the gristmill, meeting hall and schoolhouse. The late 1830s would see the establishment of a village market, where calves, sheep, butter, eggs, and cattle could be bought and sold. In 1840, Canada's first lager brewery was founded.' Over the next 20 years, the area was bustling with activity. Land -clearing and building bees saw each family have a log cabin (See Appendix: Map 1). In surveying the land, Mennonites employed a different method than other settlements in Canada, they made no allotment for roads; roads were built only as needed. Compared to rectangular lots of nearby townships, the large lots were of odd shapes. Farms were settled according to nearness to family compacts, water sources or terrain, not by proximity to roads. The European Germans would in turn emulate street patterns from their homeland, adopting more curves, twists and spiral patterns than the traditional British grid system. The arrival of the Grand Trunk Railway after 1856 would see its political and economic influence grow exponentially. The subsequent establishment of Steam -powered factories and industries such as furniture, felt, machinery, trunks, bicycles, footwear, pianos and organs and food products, established along the route would further create a discordant street pattern in developing Berlin.9 Where other Canadian communities clung to Loyalist -based social hierarchies as large numbers of diverse immigrants arrived, Berlin retained its German identity while being a Canadian community. In 1871, 73 per cent of Berliners were German by ethnic origin. German was the language of ' http://ebybook.region.waterloo.on.ca/ebyintro.php. 6 http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ontmennohistoryl5-2.pdf 7 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ 8 Staebler, Edna. "The Story of Kitchener". Kitchener: Kitchener -Waterloo Record, 1962. 9 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 75 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN education, newspapers and worship, and German fashions and imported goods stocked shop shelves.10 In 1910, Berlin was the first inland city to have access to power from Niagara Falls spear -headed by Elias Weber Bingeman Snider, the great nephew of Joseph Schneider, a founder of Berlin, Ontario, further elevating its industrial prominence in the area.11 E. W. B. Snider had put Berlin on the map through his creation of the roller system which transformed the way flour was processed, the first of its kind in Canada, North America and internationally. The technology became an international success and a revolutionary, sought-after system in the flour industry at large. Berlin achieved city -status in 1912, with the bare minimum of population requirement, and withdrew from the county.12 This new status helped buoyed Berliners confidence, as they continued to distinguish themselves from other centres. This city would soon be known as "one of the busiest and most prosperous manufacturing cities of the east," which paired well with its German character, thrift, and enterprise." On September 1, 1916, the Ontario community of Berlin ceased to be. 14 During the First World War, to help combat any perception of disloyalty due to its sizable German-speaking population, residents voted narrowly to change the name to "Kitchener". The prevalent German language and culture of Kitchener at the turn of the century continued to make the city unique in Ontario. In the aftermath of the Second World War, Kitchener and its citizens led the nation in welcoming new German refugees who fled or were expelled from eastern Europe (Romania, Yugoslavia, Poland and the Soviet Union). It has since retained its place as one of the centres in Canada most likely to receive refugees, aided by its vibrant local economy. During post-war reconstruction and a population explosion in the 1950s, Kitchener faced an acute housing shortage. The building of the 401 in 1960 had a major impact for its industrial growth and industrial parks,15 which expanded heavily into existing farmlands. The original economic development of Kitchener and Waterloo was built around the business and artisanal skills of its German population. The communities became strongly identified with the automotive parts industry with companies supplying components to all of the major automobile manufacturing companies. Furniture and leather companies flourished in the early part of the century, but have since declined significantly, leaving only Krug Furniture with a national presence. 10 http://ryeandginger.ca/berlin-ontario-until-1916/ 11 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ 1z https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ 13 http://ryeandginger.ca/berlin-ontario-until-1916/ 14 https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/enduring-spirit-the-rejuvenation-of-berlin-ontario/article31576065/ 15 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 76 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN In the 1980s, a general recession hit Kitchener hard. Since then, many of the companies that formed the backbone of the local economy have left or ceased operations.16 At the close of the 20th century, many long-standing industries ceased operations, including the Seagram distillery (1857) and Labatt's brewery (1870s). The 21St Century has brought an economic shift to Kitchener. Real estate development is causing a boom in the downtown core as upscale condos and business developments soars. There is a renewed interest in the heritage and conservation in both its architectural heritage and "Berlin" roots with a resurgence in the Berlin namesake for many businesses. And much like its pioneer roots, Kitchener -Waterloo continues to be at the leading edge for world-class technology, innovation and education. 2.2 Site Context and History Prior to 1784, this site was in the possession of the Mississauga. Following the American Revolution, the British government granted this land to the Six Nations for their allegiance and losses during the American Revolution .17 From 1796-1798, Mohawk and political leader Joseph Brant, representing the Six Nations, sold this land to prominent land speculators. One such land speculator was Colonel Richard Beasley. In 1800, two Pennsylvanian -German Mennonite brothers-in-law named Joseph Scherg and Samuel Betzner Jr. took interest in Beasley's land. The remoteness and quality of this land was appealing to fellow Mennonite farming families who saw freedom and opportunity in Canada. The much - persecuted Christian group saw Canada as a safe -haven which offered religious tolerance in the wake of the American Revolution.18 By 1802, the first buildings were constructed in the area which would become Berlin (eventually Kitchener). In 1803, The German Company Tract19 was created by Pennsylvania Mennonites David Erb and Samuel Bricker and a pioneer wave of interrelated Mennonite families would begin. Lancaster County families were the first to purchase blocks of land from the Tract and would become leading local landowners and founding members of a large German-speaking settlement .20 By 1807, these established family compounds included the Bechtels, the Brucachers, the Erbs, the Ebys, the Webers, the Cressmans, the Shoemakers and the Schneiders (Snyders/Sniders).21 Their block purchase and role as founding pioneers ensured the survival of a substantial enclave of German- speaking settlers in a distinctive society and culture.22 16 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ 17 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo 18 https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/enduring-spirit-the-rejuvenation-of-berlin-ontario/article3l576065/ 19 http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ontmennohistoryl5-2.pdf 20 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo 21 http://ebybook.region.waterloo.on.ca/ebyintro.php 22 http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/OntmennohistorVl5-2.pdf / Waterloo Township Through Two Centuries pp. 58-68. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER i0 Page 77 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN By the late 1810s the Mennonite migrations had slowed and ended. Between the 1820s -1850s, in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, flights of European German -Speaking immigrants began,23 attracted in turn to Canada for its good land and markets and o escape post-war upheavals and uncertainties in the aftermath of war. The new wave of immigrants were skilled tradesmen, artisans, craftsmen, farmers and agricultural labourers; their industrialism complemented their Mennonite founders' skills. An entrepreneurial spirit of the community strengthened its growth and a cohesive community developed.24 By 1816, the Government of Upper Canada designated the settlement the Township of Waterloo. In 1833, the growing settlement within the township was christened "Berlin" by its Mennonite pioneers, Bishop Eby and Joseph Schneider. Soon a smithy and a tavern joined the gristmill, meeting hall and schoolhouse. The late 1830s would see the establishment of a village market, where calves, sheep, butter, eggs, and cattle could be bought and sold and by 1840, Canada's first lager brewery was founded.25 Over the next 20 years, the area was bustling with activity by a medley of pioneers. Land -clearing and building bees saw each family have a log cabin (See Appendix: Map 1). Although school was voluntary prior to 1842, education was important to the first settlers of the Township of Waterloo, as schools were established very soon after the area was colonized.26 Schools were formed in private houses, Meeting Houses (churches), abandoned buildings, unused shops or under any available shelter. The first five recorded schools established by the region's settlers in Waterloo Township were: Built 1802 - Carlisle School — Near Blair (now Cambridge) - the first teacher was a Pennsylvanian German named Rittenhaus. It was the first school in the county.21 Built 1808 — Likely established by David Strohm, one and a half miles northeast of Preston (now Cambridge). Built 1808 - A school established in Berlin (now Kitchener) at the corner of Mill Street and Shoemaker Avenue. 4. Built circa 1810 -A log house school in Doon (now Kitchener), established by Tobias Wanner. 5. Built circa 1811 - O'Lone's School — In Centreville (now Kitchener) Schools were kept open only during the winter months as the warmer seasons were devoted to tending the land. The teachers were mostly itinerants — ex -soldiers or tradesmen who engaged in other occupations for the rest of the year. Their scholarship was unknown, examinations and certificates were unheard of.21 23 http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ontmennohistoryl5-2.pdf 24 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kitchener-waterloo/ 25 Staebler, Edna. The Story of Kitchener. Kitchener: Kitchener -Waterloo Record, 1962. 26 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 27 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 28 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 78 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN In 1842 the Common School Act passed which authorized the election of trustees, the formation of school districts, the building of schoolhouses, and the examination and licensing of teachers. The first four teachers were granted licenses to teach in the Township of Waterloo. Soon after the length of time that schools stayed open gradually increased to six then nine months of the year.29 In 1853 the County Council purchased 3 % acres of land between Frederick and Lancaster Streets for the joint use of a Grammar School and Common School, they paid f160 ($640).30 In 1856-1857 the Berlin Central School was opened at 171 Frederick Street. It appears to be the first building on the site, occupying the entire block (See Appendix: Map 7). It was designed with Neo -Classical influences by architect Philip Roth, who had designed other Berlin buildings such as the Franklin Hotel in 1856. By 1871 the population had grown steadily; the Village of Berlin became the Town of Berlin. A burgeoning population, as well as school attendance now deemed mandatory in Ontario, led to an addition in 1874 to create four new classrooms at a cost of $5,000.31 Grammar Schools became High Schools and Common Schools became Public Schools.32 In 1877 the Berlin Central School was selected by the Minister of Education to become the "Model School" for the training of third grade teachers. At that time the school's first principal, Alex Young, stepped down and Jeremiah Suddaby received the appointment to Berlin Central School, thus becoming the first principal of the Model School. In 1882, the first Kindergarten in Canada opened at the school, with Miss Janet Metcalfe as the first kindergarten teacher in the country. By 1886 the swelling population made the school once again inadequate. The Board found another site on Agnes Street to accommodate the overflow of students. The school would continue to expand in 1922, 1954, 1957, 1959 and 1967, while retaining the original structure within. The concept of Model Schools came to an end in 1908. Upon Jeremiah Suddaby's death in 1910, after being the principal of the school for 34 years, the school board renamed the school in his honour. Suddaby was considered a great teacher and advocate for education not only in the province but also throughout Waterloo County at the time. The school's most famous alumnus is William Lyon Mackenzie King, Canada's 10th and longest serving Prime Minister who was born in Berlin, Ontario. In addition, William Daum Euler, a former member of Parliament, taught at Suddaby Public School and later became a Canadian Senator.33 29 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 30 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 31 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 32 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 33 Kitchener Civic Centre — Central Frederick Walking Tour CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 79 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN The building is a local landmark due to its dominating architecture and landscape design that contribute to the streetscape of Frederick Street. The school celebrated its 100th anniversary in 1957. At that time, the school's original bell was donated to Doon Heritage Crossroads. On November 17, 1980, the school building was designated as a heritage property by Kitchener's city council under the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. The designation noted the facade, the archway between the main foyer, the archway between the main foyer and the original kindergarten, and the oil painting of Jeremiah Suddaby that was painted in 1912 by A. Y. Jackson, one of the original members of the Group of Seven. Around 1907, the lot surrounding Suddaby Public School was subdivided, and ten houses were built on the triangular lot surrounded by Frederick and Lancaster Streets. These new houses that were built were 181, 185, 189, 193 Frederick Street and 143, 147, 151, 155, 159 and 163 Lancaster Street East (See Appendix: Map 6-8). They were a mix of Victorian, Edwardian and Craftsman style. 181 Frederick Street, built circa 1907, was built adjacent to Suddaby Public School. Its first occupant was a man named Isaac Rathwell who worked at the local Planing Mill, followed by Louis A. Zeigler who was a clerk at Dunke Brothers. In 1919 Elias Weber Bingeman Snider (E. W. B. Snider) moved into 181 Frederick Street with his second wife Ellen Snider (n6e Shoemaker) (See Appendix: Image 12). The Snider family has deep roots in Berlin's history and development, and E.W. B. Snider holds a particularly prominent place. The son of Reverend Elias Snider, an ordained member of the Mennonite church and Hannah Bingeman, E. W. B. was born June 19, 1842. From the age of 12 he left public school to work on the family farm near Waterloo. He shared a keen interest in milling with his father, and at 17 began a two-year apprenticeship with his father's flour operation at German Mills. He would be manager by the age of 20. The Snider family expanded their operations to include a small mill in Berlin, but by 1871 E.W.B. Snider had decided to set out on his own and bought a flour mill in St. Jacobs. That same year he married Nancy Weber, with whom he would have 11 children. It was at this mill that he installed the first roller process milling machine in Canada, dramatically improving the quality of traditionally milled flour. It would be ground- breaking to the industry in Canada, United States and abroad.34 This flour proved of such good quality and so superior to the old stone process that an extraordinary demand was created, not only in Ontario and the Maritime Provinces, but also in the New England States, and abroad.31 In 1884 E.W.B. Snider purchased Jacob Bricker's foundry in Waterloo which he incorporated into the Waterloo Manufacturing Company, an organization which would become famous for agricultural implements; he held the position of president. He was also president of the Anthes 34 http://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personID=119540&tree=generations 35 http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/snider elias weber bingeman_15E.html CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 80 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Foundry Company in Toronto, president of the Snider Lumber Company in Gravenhurst, Vice - President of the Ontario Sugar Company in Kitchener and a director of the Niagara Peninsula Power and Gas Company of St. Catharines. Perhaps Snider's greatest achievement however was his role in originating our present hydropower system. He is considered by many as the "The Father of Hydro" and was instrumental in bringing power generated at Niagara Falls to businesses and homes in the province. On May 14, 1956, Hydro's 50th anniversary, a monument to him was unveiled in St. Jacobs (See Appendix: Image 10). Snider was instrumental in obtaining a railway through St. Jacobs and was made its provisional president. From 1881-94 he was the provincial liberal member for Waterloo North. He concentrated on expanding municipal powers through his work on municipal assessment and a municipal fire insurance act. Three years after the death of his first wife he married Ellen Shoemaker of Kitchener and moved into 181 Frederick Street until his death in 1921, Ellen continued to live there after her husband's death. A member of the Evangelical Association, he was laid to rest in the St Jacobs cemetery. He had enjoyed great success in his life by embracing new technology, a new method of milling flour, new machinery for agriculture, and a new system for delivering electricity. While he embraced technology and innovation, he also embraced history; E. W. B. Snider was a founding member of the Waterloo Historical Society.36 Snider's widow Ellen Snider continued to live at 181 Frederick Street until she died in 1950. The intersection near the Snider's home at 181 Frederick Street was well-known in Berlin, then Kitchener. Situated at a crossroads where five roads met, it was coined "Five Points". In 1905, there was a grocery store known as Ahrens Five Point Grocery. A small addition housed a meat market. The Ahrens store had a melange of cereal, cigars, stuffed olives, candy apples, soaps, breads and much more. In the late 1920s there was a Five Point Drugstore. In 1933, the store was rented by John Izma, a fruit merchant. The Izmas eventually purchased the site and became so associated with the corner that the corner became known as "lzma's Five Points". It was a commercial hub of the neighbouring community. It closed in 1969. Beside 181 Frederick, on the corner lot where Tim Hortons now sits at 197 Frederick, a series of service stations occupied the busy intersection. The first service station was constructed in 1933, operated by "Herb & Gamey". It changed hands in 1938 to George Sarre. In 1942 it became the Neighbourhood Service Station, and by 1945 the Supertest Petroleum Service Station. It continued to change hands every few years until 1965 when it became the Five Points Supertest Service Station. It became a Petro Canada in 1985 and finally a Tim Hortons in 2004.37 36 http://www.whs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1914.pdf 37 As per email correspondence with Karen Ball-Pyatt, Librarian - Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 81 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE - 181 Frederick Street, Kitchener Prepared by the City of Kitchener, October 28, 2013 Figure 13: 181 Frederick Street Municipal Address: 181 Frederick Street, Kitchener. Legal Description: Plan 392 Part Lot 4 & 5 Year Built: c. 1910 Architectural Style: Craftsman Original Use: Residential Original Owner: Unknown Historic Owner: Elias Weber Bingeman Snider, Ellen Snider (nee Shoemaker) Description of Historic Place 181 Frederick Street is a one and a half storey early -20"' century brick house built in the Craftsman architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.22 -acre parcel of land located on the south east corner of Frederick Street and Lancaster Street East in the Central Frederick Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the house. Heritage Value 181 Frederick Street is recognized for its design and contextual values. The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example of the Craftsman architectural style. The house is in good condition. The house is one and a half storeys in height and contains the following design features: side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation; full width porch under main roof supported by tapered brick columns with brick guard, red brick, chimney, windows and window openings. The window openings include: large picture windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, bay windows with transoms, stone headers and sills, 1/1 windows with and without stone headers and sills, small square windows with stone headers and sills on each side of the chimney. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 82 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN In addition, the house features a rusticated stone foundation and carport. The detached garage features: side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation; wide eave overhang, red brick, and rusticated stone foundation. The contextual values relate to the detached garage that mimics the architectural style of the house and completes the site.38 Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 181 Frederick Street resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the house, including: o Side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation o Wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation o Full width porch under main roof supported by tapered brick columns with brick guard o Red brick o Chimney o Windows and window openings, including: ■ Large picture windows with transoms, stone headers and sills ■ Bay windows with transoms, stone headers and sills ■ 1/1 windows with and without stone headers and sills ■ Small square windows with stone headers and sills on each side of the chimney o Rusticated stone foundation o Carport • All elements related to the Craftsman architectural style of the detached garage, including: o Side gable roof with centre hip roof dormer on front elevation o Wide eave overhang with roof rafters on the front elevation o Full width porch under main roof supported by taper brick columns with brick guard o Red brick o Rusticated stone foundation. o Carport • All elements related to the contextual value, including: o The detached garage that mimics the architectural style of the house and completes the site. (Please See Appendix 10.4 for Statement of Significance, Evaluation Form, City of Kitchener) 38 City of Kitchener, Statement of Significance, 181 Frederick Street. CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 83 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN MDL Assessment of Heritage Value Social/Cultural Contextual Value The storey and a half, brick, American Craftsman Cottage -inspired house, built before WWI is characterized by its modest size, the deep porch, framed and supported by stout brick columns and the shallow pitched roof with deep bracketed overhangs and the inset dormer. The social movement that inspired this rejection of the Victorian and Edwardian house models of the past was inspired by the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. One of the best known and eloquent proponents of these values that were translated into architectural form was Gustave Stickley. In his 1909 book "Craftsmen Homes", Stickley describes the Craftsman Idea that is the foundation on which the design of these homes is built: "But while we take the greatest interest in all efforts towards reform in any direction, we remain firm in the conviction that the root of all reform lies in the individual and that the life of the individual is shaped mainly by home surroundings and influences and by the kind of education that goes to make real men and women instead of grist for the commercial mill." To add to his argument that the design of the home will improve the quality of life he goes on to say, "Therefore we regard it as a step in the direction of bringing about better conditions we try to plan and build houses which will simplify the work of home life and add to its wholesome joy and comfort." The "better conditions" and values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact and influence on the appetite for and the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. These small, storey and a half homes came to be seen as a model housing solution to the crowded and unhealthy cities with their row houses, tenements and slums. This model contributed to the evolution of the post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle most North American cities today. The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". It is detached, sitting on its own lot with room for a garden, with a garage or carport, and a generous front porch that served to mediate between private and public life. Ample windows were provided for fresh air and natural light and simple building materials were featured that celebrated the range of the builder's woodworking, ceramic, masonry craft. All of these attributes together created the healthy home providing "wholesome joy and comfort" all of which is protected and secure under the characteristic, large, gently sloping roof with deep overhangs. 181 Frederick Street is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood. Its design is similar to 145 Lancaster, which is slated for demolition. This would make 181 Frederick Street one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this immediate area. Architectural Value The architectural and contextual significance of the Snider House at 181 Frederick Street is that it is one of the remaining of a number of Craftsman Cottages that were built along Frederick Street between 1900 and 1910. This would make 181 Frederick Street one of the last of its kind in this immediate area. These simple, detached, storey and a half homes reflected the changing social values of the times and the evolution of "Five Points" from a 19th Century mix of commercial and CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER 17 Page 84 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN residential uses into a family community served by the Suddaby School. Associative Value The associative significance of the Snider house is that Elias Weber Bingeman Snider (E.W.B. Snider) lived in the house from 1919 until 1921. His wife, Ellen Snider (nee Shoemaker) continued to live at this address until 1950. E.W.B. Snider was a prominent Berlin businessman and entrepreneur in the Kitchener area who is remembered for his many achievements. These included his role in introducing the major technical advances in the milling industry which included the introduction and transformation of the first porcelain rolling press which replaced the stone grinding method. This technology transformed the flour industry in Canada, United States and abroad. He is however best known for bringing hydroelectricity to the area and originating our present hydropower system in Ontario. Character -Defining Craftsman Architectural and Associative Elements/Attributes The following Craftsman elements or attributes contribute to the heritage value of 181 Frederick: Character -Defining Elements 1: Low sloped main hip roof with bell -cast, deep, bracketed eaves with roof dormer centered on front elevation. Character -Defining Elements 2: Deep, full -width front porch, supported by tapered brick columns. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 85 of 156 Character -Defining Elements 3: Rear second storey, formerly screened, sleeping porch. Character -Defining Elements 4: Brick exterior with rusticated stone foundation and stone detailing, door and window headers and sills, stone chimney stepped shoulders, porch railing cap. Character -Defining Elements 5: Tudor-esque board and plaster gable treatment, main house and carport gables. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 86 of 156 Character -Defining Elements 6: The carport's tapered brick carport columns, flat arch supporting gable. Character -Defining Elements 7: Brick and wood projecting bay windows, other large windows with stained glass transoms. Character -Defining Elements 8: Natural wood main entry door with vertical leaded glass panels. s9 Photographs in this section by David Galbraith CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 87 of 156 Exterior Details Exterior Details 1: Stone and Brick Detailing Exterior Details 4: Front Door with Leaded Glass Panels Exterior Details 2: Bay Window METROPOLITAN DESIGN r - } Exterior Details 3: Stone and Brick Detailing Exterior Details 5: Front Porch Stone Weeping Spout CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 88 of 156 Interior Details Interior Details 1: Brick Fireplace Interior Details 3: Stained —M Interior Details 2: Terracotta 'ovum' molding Interior Details 4: Leaded glass hardwood trim and cupboard doors leaded glass window CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 89 of 156 Interior Details 5: Stained hardwood, lead glass doors, built in dining room wall cupboard,. Interior Details 6: One of a pair of square columns and cupboards with glass doors that separated the dining room from the living room. A wall currently fills the former opening. Interior Details 7: Sunroom above the rear porch. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 90 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 3.1 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI) ONTARIO REGULATION 9/06 RESPONSE RATIONALE CRITERION (YES/NO) 1. The property has design or physical value because: i. it is a rare, unique, representative or YES -181 Frederick Street is connected to the early example of a style, type, expression, social movement that inspired the material or construction method. rejection of Victorian and Edwardian house models and reflected the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. -architect Gustave Stickley was associated with this architectural expression. -The values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact on the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. -This style of home came to be seen as a model housing solution, contributed to evolution of post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle North American cities today. -The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -181 Frederick is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood, it is one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this area. ii. it displays a high degree of YES - The Snider House is a Kitchener example craftsmanship or artistic merit. of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -its generous front porch served to mediate between private and public life. -Characteristic, large, gently sloping roof with deep overhangs. -Ample windows were provided for fresh air and natural light -Simple building materials that celebrated the range of the builder's woodworking, ceramic, masonry craft. -All of these attributes together created the healthy home providing "wholesome joy and comfort" CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 91 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN iii. it demonstrates a high degree of NO technical or scientific achievement. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because: i. it has direct associations with a theme, YES -181 Frederick Street is associated with event, belief, person, activity, organization Elias Weber Bingeman Snider (E.W.B. or institution that is significant to a Snider) who lived in the house from 1919 - community. 1921; his wife, Ellen Snider (nee Shoemaker) continued to live here until 1950. -E.W.B. Snider was a prominent Berlin/Kitchener businessman and entrepreneur in the Kitchener area who is remembered for his many achievements such as introducing major technical advances in the milling industry which transformed the flour industry in Canada, United States and abroad. -Snider is best known for bringing hydroelectricity to the area and originating Ontario's present hydropower system. ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, YES -181 Frederick Street is connected to the information that contributes to an social movement that inspired the understanding of a community or culture. rejection of Victorian and Edwardian house models and reflected the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. -architect Gustave Stickley was associated with this architectural expression. -The values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact on the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. -This style of home came to be seen as a model housing solution, contributed to evolution of post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle North American cities today. -The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -181 Frederick is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood, it is one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this area. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 92 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or YES -architect Gustave Stickley was associated ideas of an architect, artist, builder, with this architectural expression. designer or theorist who is significant to a -The values that were attributed to the community. Craftsman home design had a significant impact on the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. -This style of home came to be seen as a model housing solution, contributed to evolution of post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle North American cities today. -The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -181 Frederick is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood, it is one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this area. 3. The property has contextual value because: i. is important in defining, maintaining or YES -181 Frederick Street is connected to the supporting the character of an area. social movement that inspired the rejection of Victorian and Edwardian house models and reflected the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. -architect Gustave Stickley was associated with this architectural expression. -The values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact on the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. -This style of home came to be seen as a model housing solution, contributed to evolution of post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle North American cities today. -The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -181 Frederick is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood, it is one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this area. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 93 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN ii. is physically, functionally, visually or YES -181 Frederick Street is connected to the historically linked to its surroundings. social movement that inspired the rejection of Victorian and Edwardian house models and reflected the desire for a simpler, healthier lifestyle that celebrated North American values. -architect Gustave Stickley was associated with this architectural expression. -The values that were attributed to the Craftsman home design had a significant impact on the growth of 20th century North American suburbia. -This style of home came to be seen as a model housing solution, contributed to evolution of post -WW2, car -dependent suburbs of detached housing that encircle North American cities today. -The Snider House is a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". -181 Frederick is part of the narrative of this old residential neighbourhood, it is one of the last of its kind in its Craftsman architectural design in this area. iii. is a landmark. NO 181 Frederick Street is adjacent to Suddaby Public School at 171 Frederick Street, which is arguably a landmark in the community along Frederick Street. Based on the Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria; 1. Description of Property, 2. Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 3. Description of Heritage Attributes, as set out in the Cultural Heritage or Value Interest Matrix 3.1, above, we recommend that this property at 181 Frederick Street be designated based on the OHA criteria. CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 94 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ALTERATION OF THE SITE The property at 181 Frederick Street is located within a triangular lot, near the intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street East in downtown Kitchener. Currently the developer, Rome Transportation wishes to demolish 197 Frederick Street East (Tim Horton's), 143 and 145 Lancaster Street (See Appendix: Site Photographs) to construct a condominium building on this triangular piece of land which is proposed to be ten storeys with retail on the ground level and two levels of parking below ground (See Appendix: Architectural Drawings). Rome Transportation wishes to continue to use 181 Frederick Street as their office and it will therefore not be demolished. In constructing the condominium on this corner lot, consideration must be made to the adjacent properties at 181 Frederick Street (a listed heritage property) and Suddaby Public School at 171 Frederick Street (a designated heritage property). The mitigation of impacts to these two adjacent properties are considered and proposed in the following, section, 5. Impacts. 5. IMPACTS Identification and Evaluation of the Potential Impacts on the Identified Heritage Resources. In the section above, Social/Cultural Contextual Value, we discussed how the Craftsman Style of housing reflected new values at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. This movement rejected not only the superficially decorated Victorian and Edwardian housing of the wealthy, it provided design solutions to rid the cities of the squalid, over -crowded tenements and slums. The Craftsman houses provided a model for a healthy home environment for the middle- and working-class families. 181 Frederick Street is an important part of the story of the evolving community of Kitchener. The architectural form and detailing of the house are both a narrative of the changing social values at the turn of the last century as well as being the last home of an important Kitchener Region entrepreneur and public leader. Suddaby Public School at 171 Frederick Street is also an important part of the story of the evolving community of Kitchener. Its original design in 1856 (by architect Philip Roth) followed by subsequent additions in 1874, 1922, 1954, 1957, 1959 and 1967 represent a growing population and evolving demographic of this neighbourhood and Kitchener at large. It holds a prominent space on Frederick Street and is an important landmark in the community and continues to be fully occupied. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 95 of 156 �M METROPOLITAN DESIGN The Scale Difference: The scale difference between The Snider House which is a one and one half storey 1910 bungalow and the adjacent proposed ten storey plus mechanical penthouse, contemporary residential building, will have a significant impact on The Snider House especially when viewed from Frederick Street. The proximity of the much taller and larger building to The Snider House will tend to visually overpower and possibly diminish the smaller building. Any opportunity to mediate the difference in height between the new 30m high residential building and the adjacent 8m high bungalow can occur in the + - 11.6m (38') space between the two structures. Mitigation measures such as the installation of a line of columnar trees (Quercus Fastigiata) and a decorative, vine -covered fence or wall could be installed along the east side of the house from the Frederick Street property line south to the surface parking. This would tend to buffer and separate the two buildings and reduce the visual impact of the higher proposed building and the car and truck traffic. Vehicular Traffic Noise Impact: The concentration of all vehicular traffic onto the site; residents' cars, visitors, deliveries, moving vans and garbage trucks, along the drive adjacent to 181 Frederick Street, between the two buildings, will have a significant noise impact on the uses proposed for the re -purposed Snider House. The measures proposed to mitigate the visual impact of the new building on the Snider House, a line of columnar trees (Quercus Fastigiata) and a vine -covered fence or wall would act as a buffer between the driveway and the bungalow would also contribute to the noise and headlight mitigation. Construction Impact: The absence of bedrock and the sandy soil composition is such that the excavation adjacent to 181 Frederick will likely not result in vibration being transmitted below grade to the heritage house. Suddaby School: The impact of the scale difference between the proposed 10 -storey building and the adjacent existing Suddaby Public School will be minimal. The school building is located to the west and south of the proposed building and there may be some shadow impact in the morning during the winter months. With the access to the underground parking and service areas located on the west side of the new building, there may be some intermittent vehicular and truck noise impact. The Snider House and the generously treed schoolyard will assist in the mitigation of noise impact on the school. Shadowing Impact: The orientation of the ten storey residential building to the east of 181 Frederick Street will mean that most shadowing will occur during the first half of the day both summer and winter. Detailed shadow mapping should be undertaken to determine the exact extent and pattern of this shadowing. The impact significance of the shadowing should be taken into consideration for 181 Frederick Street. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER 29 Page 96 of 156 Shadow Study: CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 97 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 98 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 99 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 100 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 101 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 102 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 103 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 104 of 156 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 105 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 6. CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION 6.1 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada 1. Conserve the heritage value of a historic place. The 1910 Craftsman bungalow will continue to be preserved, unaltered in its current, good condition which will conserve the heritage value. 2. Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention. The owner will continue to intervene minimally. 3. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place and use. The continued preservation, maintenance and minimal intervention of the exterior and interior of the 1910 Craftsman bungalow will continue to recognize the physical record of this historic place. 6.2 Ontario Heritage Act, Part IV 1. "heritage attributes" means, in relation to real property, and to the buildings and structures on the real property, the attributes of the property, buildings and structures that contribute to their cultural heritage value or interest; ("attributs patrimoniaux") 2. (1.2) In addition to the property listed in the register under subsection (1.1), the register may include property that has not been designated under this Part but that the council of the municipality believes to be of cultural heritage value or interest and shall contain, with respect to such property, a description of the property that is sufficient to readily ascertain the property. 2005, c. 6, s. 15. 6.3 It is apparent that when the Statement of Significance was prepared by the City of Kitchener, it was listed based on its architectural heritage attributes. In the preparation of this CHIA, our research established that 181 Frederick Street also possesses associative heritage value as well as contextual/cultural heritage value. Based on this, our conclusion is that this heritage resource should be Designated under the Ontario Heritage Act Part IV. Please see Appendix 10.5: Conservation Principles and Applicable Legislation — OHA Excerpts - for additional information. 7. IMPACT MITIGATION The most effective impact mitigation and the MDL preferred approach, which the owners agree with, is to retain the 181 Frederick Street house in place, stabilize and restore the architectural attributes and continue to have the building occupied by the owner Rome Transportation. An interpretive plaque could provide the public with details of the building's history and heritage significance. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 106 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 8. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 181 Frederick Street is a significant and valuable Kitchener heritage resource for the following reasons; 1. The associative heritage value of 181 Frederick Street is based on E. W. B. Snider having lived there for the last three years of his life and his widow, Emma Snider (nee Shoemaker) having lived there for 29 years following his death. Mr. Snider bridges the worlds of Berlin and Kitchener and is a recognized entrepreneur who made substantial contributions to the community and region and helped put both Berlin, and Kitchener, on the map. Of note is that E. W. B. Snider was also a founding member of the Waterloo Historical Society. 2. The architectural heritage value is embodied in both the tangible quality of the Craftsman design and construction of the house as well as possessing an intangible value that represents an important aspect of the evolving social/cultural values of the community at the turn of the 20th century. The contextual heritage value of the Snider House is based on it being a Kitchener example of the beginning of this evolution of the "everyman house". It reflects the changing social values of the times as well as the evolution of the "Five Points" neighbouring context from a 19th Century mix of commercial and residential uses into a family community. 181 Frederick Street sits adjacent to Suddaby School, another prominent piece of Berlin and Kitchener's history. When its population grew, it grew with it, ever expanding and evolving as a model school with Ontario's first Kindergarten class. Kitchener -Waterloo has continued to this day as an epicenter for education in the province. It is understood, that urban centres are very complex entities characterized, among other things, by competing objectives among landowners, developers and city requirements (City Planning and Heritage and Transportation and Traffic requirements). But given the architectural, contextual and associative heritage value of the Snider House Metropolitan Design supports the owner's commitment to the preservation, restoration, maintenance and continued adaptive reuse of the resource. The commercial use of 181 Frederick St. will compliment the commercial uses in the new building that are proposed for the ground floor facing Frederick Street. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 107 of 156 9. APPENDICES 9.1 Maps METROPOLITAN DESIGN ad Assessed in 1831 bw ■ Low MWOW 40 Map 1: By 1833, pioneer families from Pennsylvania accounted for 70 percent of Waterloo Townships population and owned 87 percent of the assessed land area. 41 Compiled from PIONEER database, http://www.mhso.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ontmennohistoryl5-2.pdf CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER 't1 Page 108 of 156 KITCHENER -- �,m. 41 Map 2: Map of part of the town of Berlin, 1853-1854 . s ■ i Map 2a:Map of part of the town of Berlin, 1853-54. -Aw 42 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 41 Surveyed for George John Grange, Esq, by M.C. Schofield, PLS. 1853-54, Association of Canadian Map Libraries, University of Waterloo. 42 Surveyed for George John Grange, Esq, by M.C. Schofield, PLS. 1853-54, Association of Canadian Map Libraries, University of Waterloo. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 109 of 156 JEJ 41. C t] COUNTY OF PROVINCE OF ONTARIO I�u w a«ca Map 3: Map of Waterloo County 1883 q cou i'iry OF r1n a --T https:Hen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_County,_Ontario mmr CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER 43 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 110 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN A;' t J i Map 4: New Topographical Atlas of the Province of Ontario, Canada, 1879, Berlin & Town of Galt, 1879. aEGI•� �3 Map 4a: In 1879, Central Public School (the former Suddaby Public School) was the only building on the triangular block. 44 New Topographical Atlas of the Province of Ontario, Canada, 1879, Berlin & Town of Galt, 1879. http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/datapub/digital/G_1145 M54 1879/Map_28.JPG CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 111 of 156 UST If "Mom 111DISTAN METROPOLITAN DESIGN w4T BUSY BERLIN M. K 1v`N11\1 & CO.. TA'U. K,?ULI7,N-H I'.\l;l:.l, I\ HI:) I(P" IJAF I'. I'rn,.r. A11;1.A11,1. :1-2V; T W A R i 45 Map 5: Map circa 1913 showing construction of houses on triangular lot at intersection of Lancaster and Frederick Street. 41 "Map of Busy Berlin", issued by M.S. Boehm & Company, Limited, 1913. From the Joseph Schneider Haus Museum collection. http://ebybook.region.waterloo.on.ca/getArtifact. php?AID=10701 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 112 of 156 r • �F `r�� 4 F i go F 40 40 10 N"'I a oil some t, m now f ,# ' me !'1 moi .tAN, A. METROPOLITAN DESIGN r r j r. � art N M 0-0 tv OiWin Nei to �* ' �0� +� �r a �■ a! 00 so Map 5a: Map circa 1913 showing construction of houses on triangular lot at intersection of Lancaster and Frederick Street. 181 Frederick is indicated with a green arrow. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 113 of 156 �M METROPOLITAN DESIGN 34_,6 VEST Na. 34 .�lt�lw 4k 182 zyj.-. 4kA11) 4 s oT401 RV 49 �C 40 aC e u 2oa 46 A9193, 4 - Map 6: Kitchener Insurance Map, created by 1908, Revised March 1925. 46 Kitchener Insurance Map, created by 1908, Revised March 1925, showing houses built on Lancaster Street around 1908. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 114 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN ................... C]. 6 182 Y' i 9Ilk- r 181 r /F(1 SC R� 46L ZY Map 6a: Kitchener Insurance Map, created 1908, Revised March 1925, 181 Frederick is circled in black, 143 and 145 (formerly 147) Lancaster Street East are circled in red. 143 and 145 Lancaster East are slated for demolition. CHIA— 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 115 of 156 �M METROPOLITAN DESIGN U LQ � 4 - - 28 W 181 - / Scnw. 50 Fr-1 Ixc 11. W T � 180 � SEE SHEET No. 34 r 47 Map 7: Kitchener Insurance Map, created 1908, Revised March 1925, showing the former density of houses built on Frederick Street around 1908. 181 Frederick Street is marked with a red arrow. 47 Kitchener Insurance Map, created 1908, Revised March 1925, showing houses built on Frederick Street around 1908. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 116 of 156 9.2 Images Image 1: Ahrens Five Point Grocery Store, under construction in 1903. 48 Image 2: Ahrens Five Point Grocery Store, circa 1905, located at Frederick and Lancaster Streets. It was owned by Henry Jacob Ahrens, second eldest son of Charles A. Ahrens, the noted Berlin shoe manufacturer. He opened the Five Point Grocery in late 1903 or early 1904. An addition was later added for the Five Point Meat Market. Ahrens owned the site until 1933, at which time it was taken over by John Izma and operated as Izma's Five Point Fruit Store. The Izma family operated the business until the late 1960's. The building has since been demolished. 48 http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/1638389/data 49 http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/1638388/data CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 117 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 50 Image 3: Ahrens Five Point Grocery Store, circa 1905, located at the corner of Frederick and Lancaster streets in Berlin, Ontario. I , 1 r _ 51 Image 4: The traffic enigma that was the "Five Points". A late 1940s -view of the intersection, Five Points Fruit Market (former Ahrens Five Point Grocery Store) and service station, which became the Tim Hortons. -Fi.a rwm�^. eam�, anm�w. Image 5: Undated Postcard of "Five Points" Berlin so http://vitacollections.ca/kpl-gsr/1638968/data 51 https:Hbooks.google.ca/books?id=hFJ kzRgJylgC&pg=PA55&I pg=PA55&dq=izma%27s+five+points&source=bl&ots=i MQTOVDV Wo&s ig=ueBrH uUCoF_sl3rg8tgLD_VyOUo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2a hUKEwjWxY2ytgndAhUsloMKHYQ3CAsQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage &q=izma's%20five%20points&f=false CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 118 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Image 6: City of Berlin, Ontario, from Victoria Park, 300 Yards from Queen's Park. Image 7: In 1855, a lot was bought at Frederick and Lancaster, in 1857 the Berlin Central School was opened. Two main floor rooms served as both a grammar school and library. In 1876 four classrooms were added to the original structure. Jeremiah Suddaby became principal in 1877, and in the some year Berlin Central School became a Model School, offering training to future teachers. The first Kindergarten in Canada opened at the school in 1882. Upon Jeremiah Suddaby's death in 1910, the school board renamed the school in his honour. 54 Image 8: Elias W. B. Snider's home, adjacent to the mill in downtown St. Jacobs, Ontario. 52 52 From'Map of Busy Berlin'; issued by M.S. Boehm & Company, Limited, 1913. From the Joseph Schneider Haus Museum collection. 53 http://images.ourontario.ca/waterloo/30599/data 54 https://archives.mhsc.ca/32-44 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 119 of 156 I) THE MPMORY OF ELIAS \WEBER B]NCEMAN SNIPER 1`�l i�tEC;O�,I�ITIL�I`�' ��E• FI15 I EAL�GItSHIf' l PROS101 1,\"G ONTARIO'` PUBLIC: Y OWNED "HYDRO ENTERPRISE TO SERVE I HE COMMON C'00L) IMjLj* NT t E 111 fnn,lL+ -.11 MAT. UE, i'nn A 111.1Al'11 .AND INE11V 010 [E MTA IK:111- A t HIftSSA'W {'ni[TII TAN rd 7i1[ IIr I I[Itl AN. Il'[B SA Y fTf nitroTt1113aC1N. IIINV NW IY.VI'In,{r{5 nY tNL'10.IINTnlf 11 SII\4�ihli[IIAUI`Y. I.L.45_ 'Il if[N Atli 4l'p N41H N Ow 111l[' �n i 55 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Image 9: Commemorative plaque to E. W. B Snider, a prominent miller, Member of Provincial Parliament and a founder of Ontario Hydro who lived in St. Jacobs, Ontario. This plaque and monument celebrate Snider, located in downtown St. Jacobs. Image 10: The 11 children of Rev. Elias Snider and Hannah (Bingeman) Snider. Top row, left, is E.W.B. (Elias) Snider. Middle row (left to right): Hannah (Snider) Shantz, Bishop Jonas B. Snider, Mary (Snider) Kraft. The other siblings: Israel, Isaac, William, John, Tilman, Jacob, and Amos. Image 11: E. W. B. Snider 5s 55 https://archives.mhsc.ca/34-3 56 https://archives.mhsc.ca/33-45 57 https://archives.mhsc.ca/children-of-elias-and-hannah-snider 58 https://archives.mhsc.ca/copy-of-e-w-b-sniders-portrait-st-jacobs CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 120 of 156 �'b Image 12: Pioneer Roller Flouring Mills where EWB Snider made groundbreaking advances in flour production. 9.3 Site Photographs Site Photograph 1: 181 Frederick Street. Site Photograph 2: 181 Frederick Street. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 121 of 156 Site Photograph 3: 181 Frederick Street, north eievorion. Site Photograph 4: 181 Frederick Street. Site Photograph 5: 181 Frederick Street, west elevation. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 122 of 156 Site Photograph 6: 181 Frederick Street, porch. Site Photograph 7: 181 Frederick Street, portico. Site Photograph 8: 181 Frederick Street, East elevation. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 123 of 156 Site Photograph 9: Rear of 181 Frederick Street South elevation and Sleeping Porch". Site Photograph 10: Garage belonging to 181 Frederick Street. Site Photograph 11: 145 Lancaster Street in similar Craftsman design, slated for demolition. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 124 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Site Photograph 12: 143 Lancaster Street, slated for demolition. Site Photograph 13: 143 and 145 Lancaster Street and 197 Frederick Street (Tim Hortons), slated for demolition. 59 Photographs in this section by: David Galbraith CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 125 of 156 Site Photograph 14: 197 Lancaster Street, slated for demolition. Site Photograph 15: 197 Lancaster Street, slated for demolition. Site Photograph 16: 171 Frederick Street, Suddaby Public School. 60 Photo courtesy of Google Earth 2016 61 Photo courtesy of Google Earth 2009 62 Photo courtesy of Wikipedia CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER METROPOLITAN DESIGN Page 126 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 9.4 Statement of Significance - Evaluation Form, City of Kitchener ST^TEt.iEFI'S Of 51QNIFIC ANIE City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form Address: '91 F- cerck 3trt-e: Period: c. 1910 Field Team Initials: LB%4UCM Description: Date: April 18. 2013 CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 127 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE WA UnkAOWM NO Yes WA Unkno%n No Yes Sryie Is tr116 3 notate. rare 7 I<-lique Continuity Does this structure va^it1bV.e w euampe of 3 oarticular I 3rchreabrai s-yie v type' s'reet neighoourhood br area 7 Consutiction is this a notatlae, rare, unque or Setting is tine serng or Dnenlabon of tre easy example or a particular sxuc:we or iandscap ig material or method or noseworM) .. constructiarr 7 Does It provide a prysical, Dwyn Is MIS a 'particularly at"CTr:e or hlstclrtcai, furcboral or risua Ink 1 ur que structure Decause V trpe tD ris surrounisr90 meni5 Of 11s deskr, compositor, Landmark ] cdf1sman6nip DrdeWis7 vi6" landmark w Min the region Does tris structure demtlls,ate a 1, city : I or nergribourhDod _ '' 13 1 high degree V terAma or compirtwMe Ooes this structure nave otter 131 scientlfrc amleverreht- +nay ouMu4ifl , ncMie Inirow Is ne lnteror ar=3r.gernC,1', tnlsh, C*a rnaris+fi� and -or (?tall ] 1 na'e+w�rth} Moms F el., Tears: Cra'MT3n lrl%penCed; Carport w7ewom) CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 127 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION SUBCOMMI'ME CONTEMAL VALUE NIA Unknowr No Yes NA U+•kr=:. N^ Yes Continuity Does this structure va^it1bV.e w Me con fmurr t), or cha-racter of *Ye s'reet neighoourhood br area 7 Setting is tine serng or Dnenlabon of tre sxuc:we or iandscap ig noseworM) Does It provide a prysical, hlstclrtcai, furcboral or risua Ink 1 tD ris surrounisr90 Landmark IS tris a pafbcutany Important vi6" landmark w Min the region 1, city : I or nergribourhDod _ '' 13 1 compirtwMe Ooes this structure nave otter 131 +nay ouMu4ifl , ncMie CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 127 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 128 of 156 landscapemg o' external featLires t^at comoiete the site? EVALUATION MSTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE S — SUBCOMMITTEE INTEGRITY Notes F eld Tearr: garage rn mics bu dcing style CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 128 of 156 FIELD TEAM EVALUATION MSTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE S — SUBCOMMITTEE INTEGRITY SIGNIFICANCE NIA NIA Unknown No Yes NPA Unknown No Yes site Does the structure occupy Its associations with an&or contribute lo tine ong*ial site? 77 7 C r 7 — r7 — - Alterations Does this building retain most of C ❑ organization or institution that is significant or unique its original materWs and designs within the City? — — fe3hres, .7— s tt,e or -.a] previous or exrAng use sigwf.cant — 0 ❑ C 1= 0 Is th s a notabk struch" due to ❑ Goes tw+:s Property meet dw definition o` a s!gniFicant sympathetic alterations that have b,, ilt heritage resource or cultural hersage — _ - take!1 place overbrie? Condition Is th s bu la ng n poo c:_�no,tjonl _ — ❑ — — — Notes CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 128 of 156 FIELD TEAM P.'ALLIAT1C'N MSTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE S S l I a :_ I=1d h1 FTTEE SIGNIFICANCE NIA U,skr%own No C . .41 � Unkn•z�id,rt JL -es Does this property or structure have strung associations with an&or contribute lo tine understanding of a belie', Person. activity, r7 — - — C C ❑ organization or institution that is significant or unique within the City? s tt,e or -.a] previous or exrAng use sigwf.cant — 0 ❑ C 1= 0 ® ❑ Goes tw+:s Property meet dw definition o` a s!gniFicant b,, ilt heritage resource or cultural hersage 63rdsc-we as denti--ed n the Provnc+a. PN,cy -Statement .nde'the Ontano Pla-ing Act? — _ C ❑ ❑ �I A property or strucrure valued for the important contribution it makes to an understanding of the history of a place. an even or a people? Metes Feld -earn d rectones show ow—ership by Ars. E Sn ae• �,wodow E.W.B. Snider) frorn 1924 till 1Na^ CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 128 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN 9.5 Conservation Principles and Applicable Legislation — Additional Information from the OHA. Designated Properties The accepted definition of a Designated Heritage Property is, under the Ontario Heritage Act, that municipalities can pass by-laws to designate properties of cultural heritage value or interest. Designation of heritage properties is a way of publicly acknowledging a property's value to a community. At the same time, designation helps to ensure the conservation of these important places for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations." Cultural Heritage Value Identifying properties of cultural heritage value is an essential part of municipal heritage conservation. What is the Municipal Register of Cultural Heritage Properties? Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act requires the clerk of every local municipality to keep a current, publicly accessible register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest situated in the municipality. The municipal register is the official list or record of cultural heritage properties that have been identified as being important to the community. The register must include all properties in the municipality that are designated under Part IV (individual designation) and Part V (district designation) of the Ontario Heritage Act. For properties designated under Part IV, the register must include: a. legal description of the property; b. the name and address of the owner; and c. a statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the property and a description of its heritage attributes. For districts designated under Part V. the register must include a map or description of the area of each district. Listed Heritage Property The accepted definition of a Listed Heritage Property: Listing is a means to formally identify properties that may have cultural heritage value or interest to the community. It is an important tool in planning for their conservation and now provides a measure of interim protection. This allows time for the municipality to decide whether to begin the designation process to give long term protection to the property. As of 2005, the Ontario Heritage Act also allows municipalities to include on the municipal register properties of cultural heritage value that have not been designated. This is commonly known as "listing." See subsection 27 (1.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act. CHIA- 181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 129 of 156 METROPOLITAN DESIGN Why List Property on the Register? While the legislation does not require municipalities to list properties on the register, listing is strongly recommended. A comprehensive register of cultural heritage properties, including both designated and listed properties, has the following benefits: 1. The register recognizes properties of cultural heritage value in the community. 2. The register promotes knowledge and enhances an understanding of the community's cultural heritage. 3. The register is a planning document that should be consulted by municipal decision makers when reviewing development proposals or permit applications. The register provides easily accessible information about cultural heritage properties for land -use planners, property owners, developers, the tourism industry, educators and the general public. 4. The register provides interim protection for listed property (see below). Interim Protection for Listed Properties Changes to Ontario's Building Code Act, which took effect January 1, 2006, brought new, accelerated building permit review timeframes. These include, for example, 10 days for a house and 20 days for a large building. Building permit review timeframes allow municipalities and municipal heritage committees little time to assess properties facing demolition or alteration that are potentially of cultural heritage value to the community. Amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act made in June 2006 address this issue. These changes now provide interim protection for listed properties (see subsections 27 (3)-(5) of the Ontario Heritage Act). Owners of listed properties must give the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice of their intention to demolish or remove a building or structure on the property. This allows time for the municipality to decide whether to begin the designation process to give long term protection to the property. CHIA-181 FREDERICK STREET - KITCHENER Page 130 of 156 Q w Z O Z O w .-_ 1:.LL.L.,LL z'.01A'AF■&A& Mk 1 111111 milli ME 111111111 111 :1 Moll P 11111.1 sil Lsm I'mi III, NO oil 13 IN i6ij r 1. a '� •J I kmsg7 & v v ~! i( $e f I�a LU Z W U w V) U LU 0 LU U- Ee :. MW 0 N 0 Cu it 4z a o V� �W 2© 11111 I'M W Z LU U LU V) U LU 0 LU LL Re M LO 4- 0 (Y) (Y) 0 0) Cu 0- ,i W Z W U ruW V) U W 0 W U- Ee LO 0 c� 0 c6 IIE r S � a s Qj �I ..w 1 _ 11 w • ,, l ■' r I ------------------ ___-_.- j J 1 - ------------ ----- i 8 ll1 1 �� to ------------- , ,i W Z W U ruW V) U W 0 W U- Ee LO 0 c� 0 c6 M co 110 W Z W U W V) U LU 0 LU LL Re LO 4- 0 LO (Y) 0 c6 t r" I j 1 ♦ \'o I �r I 1 \ \ \_ 1 fl 1 r i I ! ! I L i i I1 ..1._._._.-._.---.-._._._._._._._.-._._._._._._._._._..s..,._._._._.�.�.�.�._._._._._.�.�.�� i i 1 e ! 8 M co 110 W Z W U W V) U LU 0 LU LL Re LO 4- 0 LO (Y) 0 c6 el Si M W Z W U w V) U LU n LU LL Re M LO 4- 0 m (Y) 0 c6 a fI 4t�wa _ ¢ I 1hill t �1 I 1 I I \ I tx•\ j I f •` ta. I ` I I �\ I I i � � •y I . i I i i • i I i I f 9 9 I I I i I j r i r r i ! i fi I i I I I I I f I I 1 I I i I I f I i 7 ..................... --------------- ----------....... ._._._._._._. _._.—._.J rc �p �I -8 -c W Z LU U W V) U LU 0 LU LL Re LO 4- 0 ti (Y) 0 c6 el st L Q W Z W U w V) U LU n LU LL Re M LO 4- 0 co (Y) 0 c6 4r r� t IP] i i i •• I E _ I I I n•` I I � I •� I � I • I • •� P i j ® ! I � P i @ f i P i � i P I i r j i 1 I I P j i P I• r + i P j I I .—.._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.-._._._._.-._._._._._._._._._._._._._.a.-._.-._...,..-._.-.--- I In C 3 O W Z W U LU V) U LU n W LL Re M i� LO 4- 0 rn (Y) 0 c6 i X901 IlgldE i {FFgg[E q �E6iF��]j LU Z LU U w V) U Lu 0 Lu U - Re M .. MW 0 LO 0 0 0 c6 0 Z R W W 1) 0 t U N -c W z LU U w V) U LU 0 LU U— Re M u '� Ips a Na/fJ Z$ � I � 4yfsNDJy foy 0 fBB�B B OBB Ln r" W z LU U LU V) U LU 0 LU U - Re LO 0 N 0 0) m 0- 1 . nab a B BOB ik B BBB mum �E E1IEEE § •�,ygg i —T— I ED ELD =—a f -l' �jpE�SSEt EIEEEE- E EEE u �a -3 LU Z LU U W V) U LU 0 LU LL Re LO 4- 0 (Y) 0 c6 LU Z LU U w V) U Lu 0 Lu w Re LO 0 0 c6 !2 ) &m mLu ■d Pel • A, N � . \lE \ƒ //. 11 ! \ Re ■ � S LO 0 LO � ¢ 2 n � 3 rn LU Z LU U w V) U LU n LU LL Re M LO 4- 0 m 0 c6 9.7 QUALIFICATIONS OF AUTHORS COMPLETING THE CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Don Loucks - Architect, Writer, OAA, RAIC, CAHP, LEED AP As the Managing Principal of Metropolitan Design Ltd. since 2014 and as Architect, Urban Designer and Heritage Planner, Don brings over 45 years of consulting experience to his public and private sector clients. Don is committed to social/cultural, environmental, and economic sustainability, aging -in-place planning, and an innovative and creative approach to design challenges, characterized by a collaboration and inclusion. Don recently completed a Graduate Certificate in Cultural Heritage Management from the University of Victoria and continues to be an adjunct instructor at Ryerson's Chang School lecturing on Heritage Conservation practice. As a Heritage Planner and past board member of Heritage Toronto and VP of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals, Don is committed to validating our past by embedding it in our future. He is currently working on the relocation and restoration of an 1890s farmhouse in Brampton, an 1820s stone commercial building in Kingston, a CHIA for a complex of 191h century streetcar barns in Windsor. Don and Leslie Valpy are co-authors of a book about Toronto's worker's houses titled "Modest Hopes" to be published by Dundurn Press. Leslie Valpy - Research Project Manager, Writer, Hons. BA, CRM Leslie is a conservation practitioner with a passion for built heritage, history, architecture, and conservation. Working with both intangible and tangible heritage, she has participated in a range of projects in Toronto, Kingston, Ottawa, St. Catharines, Richmond Hill and throughout Ontario. A graduate of the University of Victoria's Cultural Heritage Management Program, her portfolio of projects includes both residential and commercial and is experienced at the intersection of development and protection. Her recent work with Metropolitan Design Ltd. includes farmhouse preservation amidst housing developments, heritage LCBO outlets across Ontario, Toronto's John Street Roundhouse, Windsor Streetcar Barns, St. Catharines' Memorial Public School, and in Kingston the Carnovsky Bakery and the Capitol Theatre Development. Working with Metropolitan Design Ltd. and Taylor Hazell Architects, Leslie has explored the heritage properties within Toronto's Railway Corridor for Metrolinx and the City of Toronto, focusing on bridges, subways and underpasses associated with Toronto's historic Grade Separation Project. Leslie also holds an Honours B.A in English and Film, and a diploma from the Vancouver Film School in Film Production and has worked throughout Canada and overseas in the media field. Her interests include heritage architecture, social history, places of worship, industrial development, railway history and local history. Leslie and Don Loucks are co-authors of a book about Toronto's worker's houses titled "Modest Hopes" to be published by Dundurn Press. Page 147 of 156 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: May 2, 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: April 11, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-170 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 73 Shanley Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: The pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 73 Shanley Street as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 73 Shanley Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • The key finding of this report is that 73 Shanley Street possesses design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual value and meets over the required number of criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06. The subject property has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting. Consultation and collaboration with the property owner has also been conducted. In addition, should Council choose to give notice • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The property municipally addressed as 73 Shanley Street is located on the east corner of the Shanley Street and Moore Avenue intersection (Figure 1). It is located within the Mount Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape. The surrounding area is characterized predominately by single -detached residential dwellings or other low-density residential uses as well as some institutional uses, namely the Sacred Heart Church located to the north-west of the subject property. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 148 of 156 m 3 90 BD 2 107 ,99� MT. HOPE HURON 67 \ 5 � 91111`1 < 69 } 67 �N SA 50 0 fifi� 57 Figure 1: Location Map of Subject Property L� Figure 2: View of the Subject Property Page 149 of 156 Situated on 0.10 acres of land and built c. 1905 in the Queen Anne Revival architectural style, the building originally operated as a single-family residence with an attached grocery store. Currently the home is being used as a single detached dwelling, while the grocer portion having been converted to an attached dwelling unit that is operating as a short-term rental accommodation. The property is neither listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register or included on the Inventory of Historic Buildings in Kitchener. The subject property is not part of any active planning applications. This is a property -owner - initiated undertaking, as the property owner of 73 Shanley Street contacted City Heritage Staff on March 10, 2023 via email to inquiry about the possibility of designation. REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future and is necessary in helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that gives the City its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool used to provide long- term protection of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Amongst other benefits, designation: • Recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; • Protects the property's cultural heritage value; • Encourages good stewardship and conservation; and • Promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognized the promotes awareness, it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value and interest The property municipally addressed as 73 Shanley Street is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Design The subject property demonstrates design/physical value as a representative example of an early 20th century single -detached dwelling constructed with influences from the Queen Anne Revival architectural style. Built c. 1905, the home is two -storeys in height with a one - storey extension on the east facade. This is a distinguishing and unique feature of the property and was built during the original construction period. The home also features steeply pitched and irregular rooflines, cornices, gables, tall rectangular windows with soldier course, two balconies, a wraparound veranda with decorative posts, railings, and brackets, and rusticated stone foundation. These detailed elements indicate a high degree of craftmanship. Many of the features of the building are original, including the posts and railing system of the porch, a few windows and window openings on the front, side, and rear facades, the two front porch doors and door openings, and the decorative brackets and sun -detailing on the north-fagade balcony. Page 150 of 156 4 16 Historical The historic and associative value relates to the historical ownership of the property as well as its potential to yield an understanding of the changing scale of neighbourhoods that the City has experienced. The property was owned by David Mather, a carpenter before he began operating as a grocer out of the one -storey east extension on his home sometime between the period of 1905 and 1918. Local grocers were a necessity to communities prior to the introduction of motor vehicles and associated urbanization, as they allowed communities such as the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood to be almost fully self- contained. It was not until the first half of the twenty century that big box stores and supermarkets began to supersede these local stores. David Mather also acted as the first Chairman of the Organization Committee for the Twin City Trades and Labor Council, which was established Dec 1, 1909. The intention of the Trades and Labour Council was to focus the otherwise disparate interests of skilled workers divided into separate craft unions. During the initial period after its establishment the Labor Council met the 2nd and 4t" Monday of every month in what was T&I Hall, located at 28 King Street West. Contextual The contextual value of the subject property relates to its location within the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood and Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape. This is an early and significant residential neighbourhood established in the late 1800's, with many buildings original to the area remaining. These buildings are of recognizable architectural styles and possess specific features typical of the era in which they were constructed. This original -period architecture in conjunction with the mature landscaping lend to a strong visual coherence and create a distinct character for the area. 73 Shanley Street is located in-situ and supports the continuous residential uses as well as the character of the neighbourhood. In considering the above, it is recommended that the City Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 73 Shanley Street. 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. Page 154 of 156 CONSULT and COLLABORATE— Heritage Planning Staff have consulted and collaborated with the property owner regarding designation of this property under the Ontario Heritage Act. The property owner initiated this undertaking and has confirmed their support for designation subject to consideration by Heritage Kitchener and City Council. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving notice of its intention to designate a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Page 155 of 156 S LO 0 S LO ¢ 2 n � { (a} q §00 E e o /\){\{ } _ 2_ n —Do 2 -0§�\7 a / /)J(/\ -)]3[) )\}3 0 E J J 3 /k� \ƒ/ _2§\ A �) A\ou/ k \ k)\) \ � ) m co k 0 10 / ) ) m f f \ \ _ P4( § q } k § A \ 2 j q) � j ) ) � \ ; 4 g � \ ) \ : \ o \ \ a R co \_\ ƒ� ( ( ƒ ƒ n ..QmmR� S LO 0 S LO ¢ 2 n �