Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2023-309 - Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Review - August UpdateStaff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 1, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Planning Director, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7041 DATE OF REPORT: July 14, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-309 SUBJECT: Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Review — August Update RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest be recognized, and designation pursued for the following properties: • 40 Chapel Hill Drive • 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North • 67 King Street East 66 Queen Street South BACKGROUND: On January 1St, 2023 amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) came into effect through Bill 23, the More Homes Build Faster Act. One of the primary changes introduced was the imposition of a new timeline which requires "listed" properties on the Municipal Heritage Register to be evaluated to determine if they meet the criteria for heritage designation before January 1St, 2025. Listed properties are properties that have not been designated, but that the municipal Council believes to be of cultural heritage value or interest. The criterion for designation is established by the Provincial Government (Ontario Regulation 9/06, which has now been amended through Ontario Regulation 569/22) and a minimum of two must be met for a property to be eligible for designation. A work plan to address these changes has been developed by Heritage Planning Staff with consultation from the Heritage Kitchener Committee on February 7t", 2023. Implementation of the strategy has now commenced. This report provides a summary of the findings for the first properties fully reviewed, and recommendations for next steps. REPORT: Ontario Regulation 569/22 (Amended from Ontario Regulation 9/06) Among the changes that were implemented through Bill 23, the Ontario Regulation 9/06 - which is a regulation used to determine the cultural heritage value or interest of a property, *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 130 of 182 was amended through Ontario Regulation 569/22 (O. Reg. 569/22). Where the original regulation had three main categories — design/physical, historical/associative and contextual - with three (3) sub -categories for determining cultural heritage value, the amended regulation now lists all nine (9) criteria independently. The new regulation has been amended to the following: 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical value because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. 5. The property has historical or associative value because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. 6. The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. 7. The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. Also, among the changes brought about by Bill 23 are how properties can now be listed or designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. They include: • Properties would warrant being listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register if they met one or more criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22). • Properties could be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act if they meet two or more criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22). Pursuant to O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22), the subject properties meet the following criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest: 40 Chapel Hill Drive The subject property municipally addressed as 40 Chapel Hill Drive meets eight of the nine criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22)(Attachment A): • The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. • The property has design value or physical value because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. • The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. Page 131 of 182 • The property has historical value or associative value because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. • The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. • The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. • The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North The subject property municipally addressed as 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North meets five of the nine criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22)(Attach ment B): • The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. • The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. • The property has historical value or associative value because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. • The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. 67 King Street East The subject property municipally addressed as 67 King Street East meets five of the nine criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22) (Attachment C): • The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. • The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. • The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. • The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. Page 132 of 182 66 Queen Street South The subject property municipally addressed as 66 Queen Street South meets four of the nine criteria of O. Reg 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22)(Attach ment D): • The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. • The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. • The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. Heritage Kitchener Committee Options Option 1 — Pursuing Designation for these properties Should Heritage Kitchener committee vote to start pursuing designation for these properties, staff will then contact the respective property owners to inform them and to start working with them towards designation. Staff will then bring back Notices of Intention to Designate back to the Committee to get the designation process started. Should a property owner object to their property being designated, they can submit an appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) to rule on the decision. If the OLT determines that the property should not be designated but remain listed, it will be removed from the Municipal Heritage Register on January 1, 2025. Option 2 — Deferring the Designation Process Should Heritage Kitchener vote to defer the designation process for these properties, they will still remain listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register under January 1, 2025, after which they will have to be removed. The process of designating these properties can be started at any time until January 1, 2025. Option 3 — Not Pursuing Designation for these properties Should Heritage Kitchener vote not to pursue the designation of these properties, they will remain listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register until January 1, 2025, after which they will be removed. Once removed, these properties will not be able to be re -listed for the next five (5) years i.e. — January 1, 2030. It should be noted that currently staff are undertaking evaluations for high priority properties that are in located in areas of the City undergoing redevelopment. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. Page 133 of 182 CONSULT AND COLLABORATE — The Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) have been consulted at previous meetings regarding the proposed strategy to review the Municipal Heritage Register of Non -designated Properties and participated in the assessment of the properties subject to this report. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: Heritage Kitchener Committee Work Plan 2022-2024 — DSD -2023-053 Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review — DSD -2023-225 Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — 40 Chapel Hill Drive Statement of Significance Attachment B — 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North Statement of Significance Attachment C — 67 King Street East Statement of Significance Attachment D — 66 Queen Street South Statement of Significance Page 134 of 182 33, 3d1 X19 i @RIGAUOpM l - --- 413 _ Jri aid MEARYHH'�Q�3pR ss y Statement of Significance 40 Chapel Hill Drive Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ® Historical Value ® Contextual Value ® Social Value ❑ Economic Value ❑ Environmental Value Municipal Address: 40 Chapel Hill Drive Legal Description: PLAN 1123 PT BLK A Year Built: 1964 Architectural Style: Modern Original Owner: Carmel Church of the New Jerusalem Original Use: Institutional Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 40 Chapel Hill Drive is a 201h century building built in the Modern architectural style. The building is situated on a 6.98 acre irregularily shaped parcel of land located on the east side of Chapel Hill Drive between Caryndale Drive and Evenstone Avenue in the Doon South Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the institutional building, known as the Carmel New Church and School. Page 135 of 182 Heritage Value 40 Chapel Hill Drive is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The design and physical value of this building resides in its Modern architectural style, laid out in an irregular floor plan and utilizing a mix of natural building materials including stone, vertical wood siding and wood shingles. Geometric elements such as octagonal entranceways, a pyramidal steeple, comer clerestory windows, and stained-glass windows are also incorporated throughout the design. The front facade of this building is positioned at an approximately 20 -degree angle to Chapel Hill Drive, with the western portion of the building being closest to the street. The front facade can be divided into three sections; the western -most section, the central section, and the eastern -most section. The western -most section of the building is comprised of a new addition built in 2001 that expanded the capacity of the school. It is one -storey in height and has an irregular floor plan that predominately utilizes rectangular shapes and a flat roof. A canted bay sits off -center within this section and is composed of floor -to - ceiling windows, an entrance, and a pitched roof with asphalt shingles. The cladding of the rest of the western- most section is comprised of a pink stucco or plaster material on the upper two-thirds of the walls and a field- stone veneer on the lower third of the exterior. The central section also utilizes rectangular shapes in its floorplan. It is one storey in height, with a raised secondary level. The cladding is a confection of glass glazing extending over the upper two-thirds of the wall and afield stone veneer on the lower third. The windows are equal in size and intervals and appear to possess metal framing. The eastern -most section of the building is comprised of the 300 -seat chapel. It is the most distinctive section of the overall building in terms of appearance, with the contemporary Scandinavian being evident. Stone, vertical wood siding, and wood shingles provide a rough and natural texture to the building, a contrast to the straight and heavily geometric angels utilized in its massing. The roofline of this section is the most distinguishable feature of the structure as a whole, being comprised of a tall pyramid steeple that shares focus at the sanctuary with the corner clerestory window opposite. Within the 52st Volume of the Waterloo Historical Society (1963), the following commentary is offered on symbolic nature of the architecture of 40 Chapel Hill Drive: "The new Church, like the old is based, architecturally, on certain symbols. Both are four-square as was the holy city of Ierusalem. The building materials are primarily stone and wood materials of construction mentioned so frequently in the Bible. The chancel has three levels as does the roof, with the tower being the highest level. These are based on symbols because of the believe that the Bible itself has a symbolic or internal sense. " Historical Value The historic and associative value of 40 Chapel Hill relates to the original owners and use of the property and building. The building was constructed by the Carmel Church of New Jerusalem, who remain the owners to date. The building has always been used as a church and this remains one of its dual uses, with the secondary use being a school which offers what it deems a Christian education to its students. The Carmel Church of the New Jerusalem is a society of the New Church, which is Christian denomination that follows the theological writings and interpretations of famous 18th century Swedish scientist, philosopher, and theologian Emanual Swedenborg. Such sects can be referred to as Swedenborgians. The Pennsylvania groups of Swedenborgian were one of the principal sources of immigration to Waterloo County, and later enabled the Page 136 of 182 emergency of the Berlin Association in the middle of the nineteenth century. The Swedenborgians in Kitchener had at one point constituted the largest and most significant Swedenborgian community in Canada. Christian Enslin is one notable figure within what was then -Berlin's history and was a prominent figure within the Swedenborgian community. After immigrating from Germany to the Waterloo area in about 1830, Enslin practised his trade as a bookbinder — the first in the area - before eventually expanding his business into a bookstore and later taking an active role in journalism. He was instrumental in the formation of the first Swedenborgian congregation within Waterloo County. Other prominent names of this early group of Swedenborgian include Adam Ruby Sr., Charles A. Ahrens, and William Benton. 40 Chapel Hill Drive was not the first church for Kitchener's Swedenborgians. In 1847 the group occupied a 150 -seat chapel built on the corner of Church and Benton Street. As the congregation grew it moved to a new building on the corner of King and Water Street in 1870, which eventually became the first to adopt the name Church of the New Jerusalem. Divisions within the congregation that occurred in 1891 led to both the creation of a new group known as the Carmel Church Society and the erection of a new church at 820 King Street West. Finally, in 1960, the Carmel Church Society purchased the present-day property and approximately 500 acres of other holdings from congregation member John Evans, with the plan to build an independent and self-sufficient church community where families could be close to both the church and school. This community was named Caryndale. Patterns of growth and urbanization lead to Caryndales eventual annexation into Kitchener in the 1970's. The associative value of the Carmel New Church also relates to the architect of the building, John Lingwood. A prolific local architect in the mid -20th century, Lingwoods architectural firm completed more than 700 projects in its lifetime, with a large portion of the work being within the Waterloo Region. These projects ranged in function, scale, and style and included modest homes, university buildings, civic buildings, and churches. Some of his more significant work beyond the Carmel New Church includes the TD Bank at the intersection of King and Francis Street and the former provincial courthouse at the intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street within the downtown area. Lingwood contributed to the existing appearance of Kitchener and the larger Regions built landscape. Contextual Value 40 Chapel Hills contextual value relates to its importance in maintaining the character of the church -centred community formerly known as Caryndale. Though the areas title has changed from community to neighbourhood and it has grown significantly through the construction of new subdivisions as well as infill development, the predominant residential use of the area remains. The subject property and the surrounding area have been identified as being a Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) by the Cultural Heritage Landscape Study approved by Council in 2015. Key characteristics of this CHL include diversely sized lots that are often well - landscaped and follow the natural topography and drainage patterns of the land. Housing types are modest and not consistent in architectural style, but rather reflect the popular styles of the time -period in which they were built. Further, many members of the congregation reside in the surrounding homes with some even being original residents of the former community. The church is also physical, functional, visual, and historical link to its surroundings. Though the majority of the 503 acres of land on which the church was originally situated has been parcelled and subdivided, the church remains in situ and continues in its original function. In addition, the Church has a strong visual presence, being situated on the largest piece of land within the neighbourhood and possessing a distinct architectural style. The tall pyramidal shaped steeple in particular acts as a marker within the landscape. Page 137 of 182 Other Values Social Value The Carmel New Church and School has social value as a place of worship and education. This building has been providing these services since its construction in 1964, and its operations were central to the development and function of the surrounding community. It remains a prominent place of importance within the Caryndale neighbourhood, with many near -by residents being members of the Carmel New Church congregation. Places of worship often provide intangible community value, serving as places where people gather and socialize in addition to providing comfort or support to those who need it and creating community connections. Schools also contribute social value for a community, acting as a source of socialization and learning for children. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 40 Chapel Hill Drive resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction and Modern architectural style of the building, including: o an irregular floor plan and massing; o natural building materials such as stone, vertical wood siding and wood shingles; o geometric elements such as octagonal entranceways; o pyramidal steeple and irregularly pitched roof, o flat roof with raised secondary level; o corner clerestory windows; and, o stained glass windows. References Bird, Michael. The Swedenborgian Community in Waterloo County: Two Religious Approaches to Culture. Waterloo Historical Society, Volumes 61-65, 1973-1977. N.A. Carmel Church of the New Jerusalem. Waterloo Historical Society, Volumes 51-55, 1963-1967 Mannell Steven. Images of Progress 1964-1966: Modern Architecture in Waterloo Region. CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Address: _ 40 Chapel Hill Drive Recorder: _ Jessica Vieira Description: Carmel New Church (church and school) Date: _ (date of construe,.,,,, al�111L �LLUI . �Lyl�, e�) Photographs Attached: Page 138 of 182 ©Front Facade © Left Facade © Right Facade ❑ Rear Facade © Details ❑ Setting Designation Criteria Heritage Kitchener Committee Recorder - Heritage Planning Staff 1. This property has design value or physical value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No ZYes E:1 because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. * E.g. - constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or associative value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. * Additional archival work may be required. 5. The property has historical or associative value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - A commercial building may provide an understanding of how the economic development of the Citv occured. Additional Page 139 of 182 archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or associative value N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value because it N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. * E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a neighbourhood or helps establish the (historic) rural character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value because it N/A E:1 Unknown El No E:1 Yes El N/A El Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z is a landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Page 140 of 182 Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? No ❑ Yes ❑ Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external No ❑ features that complete the site? Yes ❑ Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ * If relocated, is it relocated on its Yes ❑ original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this building retain most of its original materials N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes and design features? Please refer to No ❑ the list of heritage attributes within Yes ❑ the Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there additional elements or features that should be N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X added to the heritage attribute list? No ❑ Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for Yes ❑ adaptive re -use ifpossible and contribute towards equity -building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could this site be of importance to Indigenous N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ heritage and history? No ❑ Yes ❑ ❑X Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research *E.g. - Site within 300m of water Required sources, near distinct topographical land, or near cemeteries might have archaeological potential and indigenous heritage potential. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? ❑X Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ * Additional archival work may be NO ❑ Yes ❑ required. ❑ Additional Research Required Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ function of the subject property? Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑X - Institutional * Other may include vacant, social, Office 71 institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building Other ❑ - perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Page 141 of 182 subject property contribute to the No ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required cultural heritage of a community of ❑ Additional Research people? Required Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X intangible value to a specific ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim NO ❑ Yes ❑ Society of Waterloo & Wellington ❑ Additional Research Counties) was the first established Required Islamic Center and Masjid in the Region and contributes to the history of the Muslim community in the area. Notes Notes about Additional Criteria Examined Recommendation Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, and should it be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act? (Does it meet two or more of the designation criteria?) N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up ❑ Keep on the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Remove from the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 142 of 182 Page 143 of 182 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 4-30 KING STREET EAST/1 QUEEN STREET NORTH "4- 54 If T"P.d".g A"f CATY C (MA ERI -IAL- Cf RE Jr 22 -4 -4 Z".. 34 Summary of Significance • Design/Physical Value • Historical/Associative Value N Contextual Value []Social Value ®Economic Value DEnvironmental Value Municipal Address- 4-30 King Street East/ 1 Queen Street North Legal Description- Plan 364 Pt Lots 13 & 14 Architectural Style- Italianate Year Built: 1862/1863 Original Owner- Louis Breithaupt Original Use- Hotel Condition- Good Page 144 of 182 20 ate! ri Summary of Significance • Design/Physical Value • Historical/Associative Value N Contextual Value []Social Value ®Economic Value DEnvironmental Value Municipal Address- 4-30 King Street East/ 1 Queen Street North Legal Description- Plan 364 Pt Lots 13 & 14 Architectural Style- Italianate Year Built: 1862/1863 Original Owner- Louis Breithaupt Original Use- Hotel Condition- Good Page 144 of 182 Descriation of Cultural Heritaae Resource 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North is a 19th century commercial building built in the Italianate architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.46 acre parcel of land located on the north east corner of King Street East and Queen Street North in the City Commercial Core Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the commercial building. Heritage Value 4-30 King Street East/ 1 Queen Street North is recognized for its design/physical, significant historical/associative and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design and physical values relate to the Italianate architectural style that is in good condition with many intact original elements. The building features: yellow brick construction; individual facades, including some original main street storefronts; simple cornice with single wood brackets; and semi -circular window openings with brick voussoirs. South (Front) Facade The existing building is 3 storeys in height in brick construction and has a flat roof. There are a number of commercial businesses on the ground floor and the front fagade of the building can be divided into 6 sections: - 4 King Street East/1 Queen Street North is of brick construction which has been painted white; - 8-10 King Street East has yellow/beige brick construction; - 16 King Street East is of white brick construction; - 20 King Street East is of brick construction, but has since been covered with stucco; - 24 King Street East is of red veneer brick construction; and - 26-30 King Street East was heavily damaged in a fire in 2011, and has since been demolished. Each section has a commercial store on the ground floor level, with two or three semi- circular windows with brick voussoirs on each storey. The window configurations vary with: - 4 King Street East/1 Queen Street North has two full six -over -six semi -circular hung windows with brick voussoirs and one partial six -over -six semi -circular window that it shares with 8 King Street East on each storey; Page 145 of 182 - 8 -10 King Street East has 4 full semi -circular windows with brick voussoirs and one partial semi -circular window with brick voussoirs it shares with 4 King Street East on each storey. These windows all have sills but they do not appear to be original; - 16 King Street East has three semi -circular windows with brick voussoirs and sills on each storey, however, the windows are not original; and - 20-24 King Street East both have two semi -circular windows with brick voussoirs and sills on each storey. These windows also do not appear to be original. At the top of this fagade, there is a cornice with decorative brackets and decorative brick work that extends throughout the fagade. The cornice and the brackets used to be red, but have since been painted black. West (Side) Facade This fagade extends along Queen Street North and has a similar fenestration pattern as the front fagade. The facade contains commercial stores at the ground level, with 15 windows on each storey. These windows are six -over -six semi -circular hung windows with brick voussoirs and sills. At the top of this fagade is the cornice with decorative brackets and decorative brickwork. North (Rear) Facade The facade has been altered. The facade did not have any window openings or door openings and was a blank fagade. Since then, the window has been altered with window openings on each storey. East (Side) Facade The east fagade is of 24 King Street East. Since 26-30 King Street East was damaged in a fire in 2011, this fagade and front facade needed to be repaired. This fagade can be divided into 5 bays. There seems to be an addition on the back which is of the same cladding as the main fagade, but was not part of the original building. Each bay of this fagade has two long openings on the ground floor each, two small windows on the first storey, and two small windows on the second storey. However, all the windows openings of the ground floor seem to be boarded up, and some windows on each storey have also been boarded up. Although there have been several alterations to the building over the years, including the alterations that had to be made because of the fire, the building still maintains some of its original elements and is still representative of its Italianate architectural style and retains its heritage integrity. Furthermore, the building has significant historical, associative and contextual value. Page 146 of 182 Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative values relate to the original owner and use of the property and buildings and the contribution they made to the history of Berlin (now Kitchener). The historic and associative values relate to the original owner and use of the building. The original owner of the building was Louis Breithaupt while the original use of the building was a hotel — the American Hotel. The American Hotel was built by Louis Breithaupt in 1862-1863 for $9000.00. It is estimated that the building has served as a hotel for approximately 100 years. The building is the oldest commercial building in the City. Louis Breithaupt was a prominent business in Berlin as well as a former mayor, and his contributions to the development of Berlin form an integral chapter in Berlin's commercial and industrial development. Louis Breithauat Louis Jacob Breithaupt was born in Buffalo, New York, on March 3, 1855. His parents were Louis and Catherine (Hailer) Breithaupt. Louis' father was a native of Hessen, Germany, who brought his family from the United States to Canada, which led to Louis being educated in Berlin and Toronto, after which he joined his family in business in Berlin, learning the trade of a tanner. He served many roles, from being a salesman, bookkeeper, and commercial traveler for the house, and upon the death of his father in 1880, he became a member and acting manager of the form of Louis Breithaupt & Company. In 1890, with Louis Breithaupt now the President of the Company, the business was re -organized as a joint stock company, also becoming known as The Breithaupt Leather Company Ltd, have extensive tanneries at Berlin, Penetanguishene and Listowel, with the head office in Berlin. This company became one of the biggest leather companies to operate in Canada. This contributed greatly to the economic and industrial development of Berlin at the time, with Louis Breithaupt becoming one of the most prominent members of the society. Along with his business, he has also served as the President for the Ontario Bank Company, President of the Berlin Gas, Electric Light & Power Company, a Director for the Economical Fire Insurance Co. of Berlin, and was also the President of the North Waterloo Agricultural Society. Additionally, he was the first Vice -President of The Berlin Rubber Company. He was also the President of the Berlin Board of Trade. For many years he was on the Waterloo County council as a member, serving was a Warden of the County in 1898. For seven years, he was also served as a member of the Berlin Town Council, and served as a mayor of the city in 1889. Contextual Value Page 147 of 182 This building has contextual value as being built in the downtown commercial core of Berlin, before it became Kitchener, and is a part of a group of buildings that were built at a time when industrial and commercial development in Berlin (now Kitchener) was happening. Today, these buildings are located in the downtown commercial core of Kitchener, and greatly contribute to the character of the area. The building is in its original location, and maintains historical and visual links to its surroundings. Furthermore, this building is the oldest commercial building in the City and located a prominent intersection in the downtown city core, contributing to its contextual value. Economic Value The existing building has economic value as being representative of a building with a history that contributes to the economic development that was taking initially in Berlin, and then in Kitchener in the late 19th and early 20th century. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 4-30 King Street East / 1 Queen Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Italianate architectural style of the building, including: o yellow brick construction; o individual front, rear, and west facades on the second and third storey, except for 24 King Street East front Facade and east facade; o roof and roofline; o Decorative brickwork around the single wood brackets; o simple cornice with single wood brackets; and, o semi -circular window openings with brick voussoirs and sills on the front and west (Queen Street) facade; ■ All contextual elements related to the building including: o Its original location on Queen Street South streetscape and its contribution to the Kitchener downtown commercial area. Page 148 of 182 PHOTOS Page 149 of 182 ;r r INI i 4-30 King Street East/ 1 Queen Street North — Front Fa ade taken in June 2009. Page 150 of 182 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Address: 1 Queen Street North / 4-30 King Street East Former Hotel Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc.) Photographs Attached: Natalie Recorder: — Date: March 30, 2023 ❑X Front Facade X Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade X Rear Facade X Details X Setting Designation Recorder — Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff Criteria Committee 1. This property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ physical value Yes ❑X Yes ❑X because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑X Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it Page 151 of 182 demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. * E.g. - constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑X Yes ❑X because it has direct associations with a theme, Louis Breithaupt — Owner, former event, belief, mayor, oldest commercial building in person, activity, the city organization or institution that is significant to a community. *Additional archival work may be required. 5. The property has historical o r N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑X Yes ❑X because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - A commercial building may provide an understanding of how the economic development of the City occurred. Additional archival work may be required. Page 152 of 182 6. The property has historical values N/A El Unknown El No XN/A El Unknown El No X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. *Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑X Yes ❑X important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. * E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a neighborhood or helps establish the (historic) rural character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑X Yes ❑X physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. *Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Page 153 of 182 because it is a landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Rear alterations, vive development building "coming soon" House back of build, chimney possible heritage attributes Original door (16 on top) may be original Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ craftsmanship and/or Yes ❑ detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this structure have other N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ original outbuildings, Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X original site? Yes ❑X * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this building retain most of its N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X original materials and Yes ❑X design features? Please Partially original brick colour refer to the list of heritage roof/roofline, cornice with attributes within the Statement of Significance wood brackets, windows with and indicate which brick voussoirs, individual elements are still existing facades and which ones have been removed. Page 154 of 182 Alterations: Are there additional elements or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ features that should be Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Yes ❑X *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for adaptive re -use if possible and contribute towards equity -building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could this site be of importance N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ to Indigenous heritage ❑ ❑X Additional Research Required and history? ❑ Additional Research Required *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct topographical land, or near cemeteries might have archaeological potential and indigenous heritage potential. N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Could there be any urban N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Additional Research Required Indigenous history ❑ associated with the ❑ Additional Research Required property? * Additional archival work may be required. Function: What is the Unknown ❑ Residential ❑X Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commer present function of the Commercial ❑X cial ❑X subject property? Office ❑ Other ❑ - Office ❑ Other ❑ - * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Does the subject property ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required contribute to the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X Page 155 of 182 Does the subject property N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required have intangible value to a ❑ specific community of ❑ Additional Research Required people? * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the first established Islamic Center and Masjid in the Region and contributes to the history of the Muslim community in the area. Notes about Additional Criteria Examined Recommendation Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, and should it be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act? (Does it meet two or more of the designation criteria?) N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up ❑ Keep on the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Remove from the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes Page 156 of 182 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 157 of 182 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 67 King Street East 1 �r Thamusaum �'. Conrid'C�sntrr 35/ 1ji y��lrA'ri sre ,; 5 Fa Tha Parlarming r "rr� rr cif f 1 ? Dusan 5t � Stan a IAarkar,. 1 q x > Th. Valm V 010ne... Th.Po w Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value Municipal Address: 67 King Street East Legal Description: Year Built: c. 1976 Architectural Style: International Original Owner: Canada Permanent Original Use: Bank Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource []Social Value ❑ Economic Value ❑ Environmental Value 67 King Street East is a two-storey late 201h century commercial building, constructed in the International architectural style. The commercial building is situated on a 0.22 acre parcel of land located near the south west corner of Benton Street and King Street in the City Commercial Core Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the commercial building. Page 158 of 182 Heritage Value 67 King Street East is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual value. Design/Physical Value The design and physical value of the subject property resides in the architecture and physical construction of the building. It is a unique and representative example of the International architectural style in a commercial building. The building was constructed in a two-storey rectangular form and is in good condition as the original appearance of the structure has been largely maintained. Front Fagade (East Elevation) The building is located on a corner lot, with the front principal facade positioned along Benton Street. The roof is flat, thick and cantilevered over the front wall, supported at equal intervals by eight thin rectangular steel pillars. The thinness of the supporting pillars creates an interesting juxtaposition against the thick and heavy appearance of the roof overhang. The front fagade makes extensive use of glazing, with 21 evenly spaces glass panels dividing the elevation vertically. Black textured steel panels span the width of the fagade and provide a horizontal division between the first and second storey, with a thinner textured steel band wrapping above the second -storey windows. Two double doors are set centrally within the front fagade with a steel canopy positioned above. Both the windows and the door frames make use of anodized aluminum framing. An artistic installation was added in front of the building in 2015. Though technically located on the adjacent property, this installation frames the entrance to the building and significantly alters the visual appearance of the front facade. The structure is a refurbished 23 -bell Glockenspiel situated on a four -metre high, free-standing frame built by Melloul Blarney Construction. The Glockenspiel has an enclosure facade decorated with a banner and two inscriptions in gothic font on either side; the inscription on the left is written in German while the English translation is on the right. It reads "Glockenspiel and Chorgesang mag der Mencsch sein Leben lang" which means "Glockenspiel and choir song make man happy all lifelong". The installation is capable of playing an animated show of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves to a variety of different tunes. Right -Side Fagade (North Elevation) The right -side facade is positioned along King Street East. The cantilevered roof design continues from the front facade to the side facades, supported by three thin rectangular steel pillars. Approximately one-third of the cladding of the side facade is a neutral limestone. On the other two-thirds of the side fagade the glazing of glass with textured steel bands continues. There is an additional double -door entrance with steel canopy on this side facade. Left -Side Fagade (South Elevation) The left -side fagade mimics the right -side fagade. The only differentiation is the presence of a service door set into the limestone cladding. Rear Fagade (West Elevation) The rear facade of the building is directly against the adjacent building and is not visible. Historical Value The building possesses historical and associative value due its original use and ownership. The building was originally owned and operated by the Canada Permanent Trust Company, whose origins as a trust company date back to 1855. After World War II the company were significant contributors towards continued growth and development in cities, as they focused on mortgage lending within urban areas as well as lending to corporations investing in plans and equipment. In 1959 Canada Permanent became the first trust company to sponsor a mutual fund. These actions earned the company a reputation as a leader in developing and providing a wide range of personal and business services, including deposit -taking, lending, mutual funds, financial planning, and Page 159 of 182 investment management. At the time that 67 King Street East was built, Canada Permanent was the oldest trust company in Canada. In the late 1990's Canada Permanent — now named Canada Trust — grew to be the largest trust and loan financial institution in the country with almost 400 branches. In 2000, Canada Trust was acquired by the TD Bank Financial Group. The architecture firm which designed the building also contribute to 67 King Street East's historical and associative value. The building was designed by the prominent architecture firm that was at the time known as Rieder and Hymmen, previously called Barnett Rieder Architects and later Rieder, Hymmen and Lobban Inc. Architects. This was the firm of prolific local architect Carl Rieder, who in the 47 years of his career made significant contribution to the development of the Modernist architectural style in Southwest Ontario and in the Waterloo County region specifically. Notable examples of his work within Kitchener includes Eastwood Collegiate Institute (1955-56), Highland Baptist Church (1958), the Kitchener Public Library (1959-61), and Centre in the Square (1979). His completed design for Eastwood Collegiate gained internationally recognition, being one of the few Canadian buildings to be featured in the issue of leading British Architectural Journal The Architectural Review, and in Nikolas Pevsner's book, New Buildings in the Commonwealth. He had a significant impact on the built landscape of the region. Contextual Value The contextual value of the building relates to its importance in maintaining the commercial character of the surrounding area, as well as its physical, functional, visual, and historical link to its surroundings. The subject property is located within the Downtown Cultural Heritage Landscape, which is within the City Centre District. This area is recognized as the heart of the downtown and historically was the focal point of early development in what was then Berlin. Hotels and inns, banks, offices, and other commercial enterprises anchored this core area. Many of these late -19th and early -20th century remain today, and the mix of uses continues. The building currently operates as the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) Waterloo Wellington office — this is a continuation of the original office use of the building and supports the function and character of the surrounding area. Further it is located in-situ within a notable setting, as the building provides a frame for the adjacent Speakers Corner Park space. Other historical buildings are located adjacent to or in proximity to the property, including properties within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 67 King Street East resides in the following: • All elements related to the construction and International architectural style of the building, including: o two storey rectangular form; o flat roof with large overhang o rectangular steel support pillars placed at regular intervals; o smooth neutral limestone cladding on 1/3 of the side fagades; o extensive use of glazing from ground floor to roofline; o Repetitive and even patterning of windows; o steel framed doors and windows; o horizontal textured steel panels that wrap in a band around the building above both the first and second storey windows; and o steel canopy above entrances. All elements related to the contextual value, including: o Location of the building and the contribution that it makes to the continuity and character of the King Street streetscape; o Setting that is provided to the adjacent Speakers Corner Park space. Page 160 of 182 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION Address: _ 67 King Street East Description: Office Building date of conStrW L1U11, alp ,uiLU Mlai �,Ly IV, cu.) Photographs Attached: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Facade FORM Recorder: _ Ilona and Natalie Date: _ ❑ Right Facade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑ Setting Designation Criteria Recorder — Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff Committee 1. This property has design value or physical value N/A El Unknown El No El Yes ZN'A El Unknown El No El Yes Z because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value N/A El Unknown El No ZYes El N/A El Unknown El No ZYes El because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical value N/A El Unknown El No ZYes El N/A El Unknown El No ZYes El because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. * E.g. - constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or associative value N/A El Unknown El No El Yes ZN/A El Unknown El No El Yes Z because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. * Additional archival work may be required. Page 161 of 182 5. The property has historical or associative value N/A El Unknown E:1 No XYes E:1 N/A E:1 Unknown E:1 No XYes E:1 because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - A commercial building may provide an understanding of how the economic development of the City occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or associative value N/A El Unknown E:1 No El Yes ZN/A E:1 Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value because N/A El Unknown E:1 No El Yes ZN/A E:1 Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. * E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a neighbourhood or helps establish the (historic) rural character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because N/A El Unknown E:1 No El Yes ZN/A E:1 Unknown E:1 No E:1 Yes Z it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value because N/A El Unknown E:1 No El Yes ZN/A E:1 Unknown E:1 No ZYes E:1 it is a landmark. Page 162 of 182 *within the region, city or neighborhood. Page 163 of 182 Additional Criteria Recorder — Heritage Heritage Planning Staff Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A X Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? Yes ❑ Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external Yes ❑ features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Yes ❑ * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this building retain most of its original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X materials and design features? Yes ❑ Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there additional elements or features that should be N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Yes ❑ *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for adaptive re-use ifpossible and contribute towards equity-building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could this site be of importance to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and history? Yes ❑ © Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research *E.g. - Site within 300m of water Required sources, near distinct topographical land, or near cemeteries might have archaeological potential and indigenous heritage potential. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? ❑X Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ * Additional archival work may be Yes ❑ required. ❑ Additional Research Required Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commer function of the subject property? Commercial ❑ cial Office ❑ Other ❑ - Office ❑ Other ❑ - * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the communityfrom an equity building perspective. Page 164 of 182 Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the subject property contribute to Yes ❑ © Additional Research Required the cultural heritage of a ❑ Additional Research community of people? Required Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ intangible value to a specific ZAdditional Research Required community of people? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Yes ❑ Society of Waterloo & Wellington ❑ Additional Research Counties) was the first established Required Islamic Center and Masiid in the Region and contributes to the history o the Muslim community in the area. Notes Notes about Additional Criteria Examined Recommendation Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, and should it be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act? (Does it meet two or more of the designation criteria?) N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up ❑ Keep on the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Remove from the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 165 of 182 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 66 QUEEN STREET SOUTH n. 7 44'- 41 ZITY COTANAERIAALCORE rh A 84 98 10 0 * '� 112 Summary of Significance • Design/Physical Value • Historical/Associative Value N Contextual Value []Social Value ®Economic Value El Environmental Value Municipal Address- 66 Queen Street South Legal Description- Plan 391 Part Lot 6 RP 58R-9667 Part 1 & 2 Architectural Style- Renaissance Revival Year Built: 1898 Original Owner- Randall & Roos Original Use- Commercial Condition- Good Page 166 of 182 Descriation of Cultural Heritaae Resource 66 Queen Street South is a late 19th century building built in the Renaissance Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.12 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Queen Street South between Charles Street East and King Street in the City Commercial Core Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the commercial building. Heritage Value 66 Queen Street South is recognized for its design/physical, significant historical/associative and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design and physical values relate to the Renaissance Revival architectural style that is in good condition with many intact original elements. The building features: a rectangular plan; brick construction; decorative brick work; central entrance flanked by windows; three upper storey semi -circular window openings with brick voussoirs; and stone sills. East (Front) Facade The existing building is 2 storeys in height in red and yellow brick construction and has a flat roof. The building is currently occupied by The Working Centre, and the ground floor includes a large one-on-one windows on both ends with a central entry. Between the windows and doors are two red brick columns and the ends of the fagade includes yellow brick columns. Above the ground floor is a decorative green and beige cornice with decorative brackets on either end of the fagade. The second storey include three semi -circular windows each with yellow decorative brick headers and yellow stone sills or stone band that extends through the length of the fagade. Above the windows there is decorative yellow brick work. North (Side) Facade This fagade partially abuts the neighboring building at 58 Queen Street South. The rear north fagade is of red brick construction and includes two doors and a small single hung window with yellow brick voussoirs on the ground level. The doors might have been altered from windows. There is an additional single -hung window on the ground floor, but that has been filled in. The upper floor also includes three single -hung windows with yellow voussoirs. These windows do not seem to be original. West (Rear) Facade This fagade has been extensively altered since it was first constructed. The ground floor includes three single -hung windows with yellow brick voussoirs, out of which two have Page 167 of 182 been filled in. There is one window, which has been altered and now includes a smaller window opening with yellow voussoirs. The upper floor also has three windows with yellow brick voussoirs and stone sills. The windows do not seem to be original. This facade also includes pipes and other building systems. South (Side) Facade The south fagade is long and includes an irregular fenestration pattern. On the ground floor, towards the rear, there is a door and an artistic installation with three small single - hung windows with yellow brick voussoirs. There is also a pair of single hung window next to the art installation that does not appear to be original. Some original window openings have been filled in or altered. Between the ground level and the upper level, there are four (4) pairs of single hung windows that don't look original to the building. The upper storey includes four single hung windows with yellow brick voussoirs. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative values relate to the previous and existing owners and uses of the building. The building was once owned by Randall & Roos and used as a Wholesale Grocers. An advertisement in the "Berlin, Canada. A Self -Portrait of Kitchener, Ontario Before World War One" indicates that Randall & Roos is the "largest distributing firm in wholesale groceries, cigars, tobaccos, etc. between Toronto and Winnipeg." Randall & Roos was established in 1884 by George Randall and William Roos of Waterloo in the Ahrens block on King Street in Berlin. The 2 storey red brick building at 66 Queen Street South was built in 1898 for $6000.00 by Aaron Bricker for Randall & Roos. George Randall was involved with the Grand Trunk Railway and he was a member of the School Trustee and one of the first members of the Hospital Trust. William Roos was a Park Commissioner and President of the Musical Society. The ownership and history of this building is similar to the abutting property, 58 Queen Street South. Ownership of the building transferred to John Fennell for his hardware company, and then Carl Nicholas Weber for his company. George Randall George Randall was born on April 16, 1832, in born in Chesterfield, Chesire, New Hampshire, United State of America. He immigrated to Canada to Ontario in 1854, with his uncle, Marshall H. Farr, who had contracts for station buildings from Guelph westward on the Grand Trunk Railway and also some for the Great Western Railway. On Mr. Farr's death, George Randall and his brother took over the contracts. He also had other businesses, such as manufacturing, a woolen mills in Waterloo and also for some time in a distillery. Joseph Seagram joined the mills business in 1870 and within 13 years became Page 168 of 182 the sole owner of the historic mill, changing its name to the Joseph Seagram Flour Mill and Distillery Company. In 1884, he opened the Randall & Roos Wholesale Grocers with William Roos. In addition to this, he was a director in the Waterloo Mutual Fire Insurance Company for 33 years, and was the director of this company from 1890 until his death in 1908. In 1870, for the next three years, George Randall served as the village magistrate, and when Waterloo officially became a town in 1876, Randall eventually became the mayor in 1878. George Randall was also on the committee that was charged with the responsibility of building the region's first "poor house" — which eventually came to be known as the County House of Industry and Refuge. When it opened on June 15, 1869, it became the first of its kind in Ontario. William Roos William Roos was born in Preston (present day Cambridge), Waterloo Region, on April 18, 1842. He was a businessman in Berlin and operated the Randall and Roos Wholesale Grocers for many years. He was the brother-in-law of George Randall. John Fennell The building was once used as a hardware company. The hardware company was founded on June 1, 1863, by John Fennell and carried his name for 60 years. John Fennell was born on August 8, 1837, in Cobourg, Ontario. John Fennell arrived in Kitchener, known as Berlin at the time, on June 1 st, 1863, and was a young hardware merchant at the time. He was a prominent and one of the most successful businessman in the community at the time, and his hardware company sold plated ware, paint, glass, oils, etc. In addition to being a successful businessman, he was also an important member of the society at the time. He was the founding present of the Board of Trade and the founding organizer of the Economical Mutual Fire Insurance Company. In addition to all these achievements, he also served as a Councillor on Berlin's Council from 1881-1882. In 1886, the Berlin Board of Trade was established, with John Fenell serving as its first President. He was instrumental in preparing the by-law, some of which stand today as they were prepared. He also served as a Justice of the Peace. In addition to these activities, John Fenell also served as a Church Warden of St. John's Church for many years. John Fenell died in 1922, the property and firm was purchased by Carl Nicholas Weber from John's widow, Alicia Jackson. Carl Nicholas Weber After Carl N. Weber purchased the property and firm, he renamed it to Weber Hardware Co, Ltd in 1923. Carl N. Weber was born on January 19, 1899, in Elmira. For many years, he operated Weber Hardware Co. Ltd. In addition to his business interests, he was also a long-time member and President of the Kitchener Board of Trade, and he was also elected as a chairman of the Kitchener Urban Renewal Committee in 1971. He Page 169 of 182 has also served as a Director for Canada Trust, the Equitable Life Insurance Company, and the Economical Mutual Insurance Company. Beyond his business interests, he also served Kitchener's community as a member of the K -W Hospital Commission for twenty-two (22) years and was chairman for twenty (20) of those years. He was a member of the Board of Governors of the University of Waterloo from the time it was founded in 1957, till his death in 1978. Carl Weber was also an active member of the Lutheran Church. He served as a Canadian delegate to the World Council of Churches in India in 1961, representing Kitchener and Canada on a global platform. He was also a member of the executive council of the Lutheran Church in America, a member and chairman of its board of publications, and a member of its pension board. Carl's company, the Weber Hardware Co. Ltd., operated out of the building at 58 Queen Street South from c. 1918 until 1927 when it moved to the building at 66 Queen Street South. The company moved to the building at 675 Queen Street South in 1987 and the company is currently known as C.N. Weber Ltd and still continues to operate today, becoming of the rare businesses surviving from the time when Kitchener was still Berlin. The Working Centre The existing use of the building is for The Working Centre. The Working Centre has been operating out of this building since the mid-1980s. According to The Working Centre's website: "The Working Centre was established in the spring of 1982 as a response to unemployment and poverty in downtown Kitchener. The Centre grew roots in the Kitchener downtown through the dedication of Joe and Stephanie Mancini, a young married couple who had just graduated from St. Jerome's College at the University of Waterloo. They saw the potential for building a community of interest around responding to unemployment and poverty, developing social analysis and engaging in creative action." Contextual Value This building has contextual value as being built in the downtown commercial core of Berlin, before it became Kitchener, and is a part of a group of buildings that were built at a time when industrial and commercial development in Berlin (now Kitchener) was happening. Today, these buildings are located in the downtown commercial core of Kitchener, and greatly contribute to the character of the area. The building is in its original location, and maintains historical and visual links to its surroundings. Economic Value Page 170 of 182 The existing building has economic value as being representative of a building with a history that contributes to the economic development that was taking initially in Berlin, and then in Kitchener in the late 19th and early 20th century. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 66 Queen Street South resides in the following heritage attributes of the Renaissance Revival style: ■ All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o a rectangular plan; o brick construction, including: ■ decorative brick work; o Original remaining yellow brick voussoirs above window openings; o three upper storey semi -circular window openings with brick voussoirs; and, o stone sills. ■ All contextual elements related to the building including: o Its original location on Queen Street South streetscape and its contribution to the Kitchener downtown commercial area. Page 171 of 182 PHOTOS r 62 56 fes. Pi m. 66 Queen Street South — Front East Fa ade Page 172 of 182 1 58 Queen Street South — West (rear) facade 158 Queen Street South — South Fagade Page 173 of 182 158 Queen Street South — North Fagade .,r s _ i `a Orli-,moi i� f s� _ 9! r�i�Yi•riy� i IFTl iQueen StreetSouthVoussoirs Page 174 of 182 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 66 Queen Street South Address: 1898 Renaissance Revival Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Donny & Andrew Recorder: — Date: March 10, 2023 ❑X Front Facade X Left Fagade X Right Fagade X Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑ Setting Designation Criteria Recorder— Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff Committee 1. This property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ physical value Yes ❑X Yes ❑X because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑X Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 10 of 16 Page 175 of 182 1 KrT HES ER scientific achievement. * E.g. - constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑X Yes ❑X because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community. *Additional archival work may be required. 5. The property has historical o r N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑X Yes ❑ because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - A commercial building may provide an understanding of how the economic development of the City occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical vaIue or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 11 of 16 Page 176 of 182 1 KrT HES ER reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑X Yes ❑X important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. * E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a neighbourhood or helps establish the (historic) rural character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑X Yes ❑X physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. *Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Cornice overhanging front fagade. Page 12 of 16 Page 177 of 182 1 KrTcHEN�R Additional Criteria Recorder — Heritage Heritage Planning Staff Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ craftsmanship and/or Yes ❑ Yes ❑ detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this structure have other N/A El Unknown El No XN/A El Unknown El No X original outbuildings, Yes ❑ Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ original site? Yes ❑X Yes ❑X * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this building retain most of its N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ original materials and Yes ❑X Yes ❑X design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there additional elements or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X features that should be Yes ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Page 13 of 16 Page 178 of 182 Condition: Is the building in good condition? *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for adaptive re -use if possible and contribute towards equity -building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could this site be of importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct topographical land, or near cemeteries might have archaeological potential and indigenous heritage potential. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with the property? * Additional archival work may be required. Function: What is the present function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does the subject property contribute to the cultural heritage of a community of people? Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of people? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X Additional Research Required N/A X Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial X Office ❑ Other ❑X social services N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 1 KrTCHEN�R N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes El ❑X Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes El ❑X Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Co mmercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑X - social N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes El ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Page 14 of 16 Page 179 of 182 1 KrT HEN�R * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the first established Islamic Center and Masjid in the Region and contributes to the history of the Muslim community in the area. Notes about Additional Criteria Examined Refer to S.O.S. Recommendation Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, and should it be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act? (Does it meet two or more of the designation criteria?) N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up ❑ Keep on the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Remove from the Municipal Heritage Register ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes Page 15 of 16 Page 180 of 182 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 16 of 16 Page 181 of 182