HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2024-217 - Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-009, 36 lancaster Street East Demolition and reconstruction (rear yard additionStaff Report
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: May 7, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-741-2200 ext. 7070
PREPARED BY: Michelle Drake, Senior Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7839
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: May 1, 2024
REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-217
SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-009
36 Lancaster Street East
Demolition and reconstruction (rear yard addition)
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2024-V-009 be approved to permit the demolition of the fire damaged rear
addition and reconstruction of the rear addition on the property municipally
addressed as 36 Lancaster Street East, in accordance with the supplementary
information submitted with the application, subject to the following condition:
1. That the final building permit drawings be reviewed and heritage clearance
provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of the required
building permit.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to present Heritage Planning staff's recommendation for
the proposed demolition and reconstruction of the addition at the subject property
municipally addressed as 36 Lancaster Street East.
The key finding of this report is that the demolition of the fire damaged rear addition
and the reconstruction to match the original rear addition will not negatively impact the
heritage attributes of the subject property, the Lancaster Street East streetscape, or
the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage District. Note that according to
Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the demolition of any building or structure, or
part thereof, on the property requires Council approval.
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Community engagement included consultation with the City's Heritage Kitchener
committee.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
*** 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 294
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA-
2024-V-009 seeking permission to demolish and reconstruct the rear addition at the
subject property municipally addressed as 36 Lancaster Street East.
r
x
n
q
LP
T4
M
Figure 1. Location Map of the subject property municipally addressed as 36 Lancaster
Street East (see property highlighted in red box).
The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District (CCNHCD), which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act. The CCNHCD Plan indicates that the demolition of a building or a portion of a building
that is visible from the street or other public space requires a Heritage Permit Application.
The rear yard addition is visible from Lancaster Street East and Mansion Street.
Furthermore, Section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act requires a property owner to obtain
approval from Council to demolish or remove any building or structure, or part thereof.
REPORT:
The subject property is located on the east side of Lancaster Street East between Mansion
Street and Luella Street, within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District (CCNHCD). The building was constructed circa 1910 in the Berlin Vernacular
architectural style. The building is identified as Group C in the CCNHCD Plan due to its
heritage attributes that contribute to the heritage value of the district. The 1924 Fire
Insurance Map shows a 1 storey rear addition. In 1924, this addition was 1 storey in height
and flush with the right side of the dwelling but projected out from the left side of the
dwelling. The current addition is 1 storey in height and projects out from both the right and
left side (with the left projection being like the additions footprint in 1924). Brown & Beattie
Ltd., the engineer for the building permit, estimated that the rear yard addition may be 40+
years old.
Page 4 of 294
Proposed Demolition
Section 3.3.4 of the CCNHCD Plan contains five (5) policies pertaining to proposed
demolitions. These policies indicate that: demolition is strongly discouraged; demolition of
a building, or part thereof, requires a Heritage Permit Application; the applicant must
provide documentation justifying the reasons for demolition; where demolition is approved,
written and/or photographic documentation of heritage attributes and construction
techniques may be required; and, where demolition is approved, building material
reclamation for reuse on site or elsewhere in the district is strongly encouraged. The
CCNHCD Plan also recognizes there are situations where demolition may be necessary
such as partial destruction due to fire.
The applicant is proposing to demolish the rear yard addition that sustained extensive fire
damage in 2023. As required by the policies of the CCNHCD Plan, the applicant has
provided documentation justifying the reasons for demolition. This documentation
includes: (1) A building permit to repair structural damage sustained during a fire; and, (2)
A document entitled "Report Regarding Structural Assessment of Fire Damaged Building
at 36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener, Ontario" prepared by Brown & Beattie Building
Science Engineering and dated March 21, 2024.
Figure 2: Rear Elevation (After Fire)
The report indicates that:
'Significant `structural' fire damage to the building appeared to include primarily the
rear exterior wall and roof the single -storey rear addition."
"The fire resulted in significant charring to almost all of the roof rafters forming the
roof above the rear addition."
Page 5 of 294
• "Fire damage to the roof extended up and damaged the top of the interior
loadbearing wall where the roof of the rear addition meets the original building
above..."
• "The fire also damaged the majority of the rear exterior wall of the first -floor... within
the addition."
• "Externally, fire related damages included widespread damage to the exterior wall
cladding and roofing of the rear addition."
The report concludes that:
• "...it is our opinion that the recent fire resulted in significant structural damage to the
majority of the rear addition roof and rear exterior wall to the extent that the
complete replacement of this roof section and rear exterior wall is warranted. The
fire also damaged the rear exterior deck to the extent that its complete replacement
is warranted. Localized fire damage was noted to the rear end of the first -floor joists
for the rear addition to the extent that the augmentation or replacement of at least
some of these joists is warranted, the full extent of which is subject to further
review. Localized fire damage was also noted to the interior stud wall supporting the
roof of the addition along the rear wall of the original building to the extent that the
partial replacement of this wall is also warranted, again the extent of which is
subject to further review."
Proposed Addition (Reconstruction)
Section 3.3.2 of the CCNHCD Plan contains five (5) policies pertaining to additions and
alterations to existing buildings. Two (2) of these policies are relevant to the proposed
addition (reconstruction): (1) the addition shall be subordinate to the original structure to
allow the original heritage features and built form to take visual precedence on the street;
and, (2) the design guidelines provided in Section 6.4 and 6.5 of the CCNHCD Plan will be
used to review and evaluate applications for additions to ensure that the proposed
changes are compatible with the existing dwelling and no not result in irreversible loss of
heritage attributes.
The applicant is proposing to reconstruct the rear addition to match the size and
appearance of the rear addition (before the fire). The addition will match the existing
footprint, location, and design of the rear addition, including materials and colours.
Page 6 of 294
Figure 3: Rear Elevation (East Fagade)
Heritage Planning Staff Comments
The proposed alterations meet the relevant principles of the Ministry of Heritage, Sport,
Tourism and Culture Industries' document entitled the "Eight Guiding Principles in the
Conservation of Built Heritage Properties."
• Respect for documentary evidence - Although the rear addition is not original, the
reconstruction will be based on photographs (before the fire) and physical evidence.
• Respect for original fabric - Although the rear addition is not original, the
reconstruction will use the same materials of the rear addition (before the fire).
Legibility - The reconstructed rear addition will be recognized as a new addition that
is distinct from the original buff (yellow) brick Berlin Vernacular building.
The proposed alterations meet the relevant standards of the Parks Canada document
entitled "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, 2nd
Edition. "
Conserve the heritage value and character -defining elements when creating any
new additions to an historic place or any related new construction. Make the new
work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable
from the historic place. — The reconstructed rear addition will be recognized as a
new addition that is distinct from the original buff (yellow) brick Berlin Vernacular
building.
In reviewing the merits of this application, Heritage Planning Staff note the following:
• The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District and therefore designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act;
• The proposal to demolish the rear addition has been justified in the document
entitled "Report Regarding Structural Assessment of Fire Damaged Building at 36
Page 7 of 294
III®■�■�I
it
II!I!II
1�1�1111111 I I
iil��
�ii�li�
=ME
�i�l
Ell
�������
ffis
■1®1
E1
iiia
minim
MIME
MI
EE NEEM
Figure 3: Rear Elevation (East Fagade)
Heritage Planning Staff Comments
The proposed alterations meet the relevant principles of the Ministry of Heritage, Sport,
Tourism and Culture Industries' document entitled the "Eight Guiding Principles in the
Conservation of Built Heritage Properties."
• Respect for documentary evidence - Although the rear addition is not original, the
reconstruction will be based on photographs (before the fire) and physical evidence.
• Respect for original fabric - Although the rear addition is not original, the
reconstruction will use the same materials of the rear addition (before the fire).
Legibility - The reconstructed rear addition will be recognized as a new addition that
is distinct from the original buff (yellow) brick Berlin Vernacular building.
The proposed alterations meet the relevant standards of the Parks Canada document
entitled "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, 2nd
Edition. "
Conserve the heritage value and character -defining elements when creating any
new additions to an historic place or any related new construction. Make the new
work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable
from the historic place. — The reconstructed rear addition will be recognized as a
new addition that is distinct from the original buff (yellow) brick Berlin Vernacular
building.
In reviewing the merits of this application, Heritage Planning Staff note the following:
• The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District and therefore designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act;
• The proposal to demolish the rear addition has been justified in the document
entitled "Report Regarding Structural Assessment of Fire Damaged Building at 36
Page 7 of 294
Lancaster Street East, Kitchener, Ontario" prepared by Brown & Beattie Building
Science Engineering and dated March 21, 2024;
The proposal to reconstruct the rear addition will match the size and appearance of
the addition (before the fire);
The proposal is in keeping with the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District Plan policies for demolitions and additions, including
recommended practices and design guidelines for additions; and,
The proposal will not detract from the character of the property, the integrity of the
Lancaster Street East streetscape, nor the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District.
In accordance with the Heritage Permit Application form, the approval of any 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
Ontario Building Code and Zoning By-law. In this regard, staff confirm that a Building
Permit is required to demolish and reconstruct the rear addition.
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 — The Heritage Kitchener committee has been consulted regarding the
Heritage Permit Application.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Ontario Heritage Act, 2022
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-009
Attachment B — Brown & Beattie Building Science Engineering, Report Regarding
Structural Assessment of Fire Damaged Building at 36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener,
Ontario, March 21, 2024
Page 8 of 294
2024
HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION &
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Development & Housing Approvals
I�ITCHENER 200 King Street West, 61" Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4V6
519-741-2426; plan ning@kitchener.ca
STAFF USE ONLY
Page 7 of 10
Date Received:
Accepted By:
Application Number:
Aril 22 2024
Michelle Drake
HPA-
2024-V-009
PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
1. NATURE OF APPLICATION
❑ Exterior ❑ Interior ❑ Signage
@ Demolition @ New Construction ❑ Alteration
2. SUBJECT PROPERTY
Municipal Address: 36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener, ON N2H 1 M4
Legal Description (if know):
❑ Relocation
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. PRO
Name
Addri
City/[
Phone:
Email:
4. AGENT (if applicable)
Name: Stephen MacDougall
Company: Brown & Beattie Ltd.
Address: 588 Edward Avenue, Unit 49
City/Province/Postal Code: Richmond Hill, ON L4C 9Y6
Phone: 905-464-3650
Email: macdougall@brownbeattie.com
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2024 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.
Demolish and rebuild the fire damaged single -storey rear addition above the first floor level to match existing size/appearance.
Original two-storey brick masonry section of building is to remain. Fire damaged windows and doors are to be replaced with aluminum clad frames to match existing size/style
All interior finishes are to be removed and replaced throughout building due to fire/smoke/water damage
6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work:
Structural fire damage
Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage
Conservation District Plan:
All fire damaged exterior elements of the building which are removed are to be replaced to match
existing conditions.
Describe how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation
of Historic Places in Canada (www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx):
All fire damaged exterior elements of the building which are removed are to be replaced to match
exibiiny cunUitiun5.
7. PROPOSED WORKS
a) Expected start date: As soon as permit approved Expected completion date: within 1 year of approval
b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? 8 Yes ❑ No
- If yes, who did you speak to? Michelle Drake
c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? 8 Yes ❑ No
- If yes, who did you speak to? Dwayne Hordyk & Tara Zhang
d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? 8 Yes ❑ No
e) Other related Building or Planning applications
Application number 2024107488
Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage
2024
11.4 L,161111114:4 11CIA"T L:4 LIVI
Page 9 of 10
The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this
application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this
application by the City of Kitchener - Planning Division does not guarantee it to be a `complete' application.
The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the
information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will be undertaken and
the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or
issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application
will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and
Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter
upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are
necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has
been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and
this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The
undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and
understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any
of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the
requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event
this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener
or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could
result in a fine being imposed or imprisonment as provided for under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Stephen MacDougall
2024.04.17 13 50:13 April 1 2024
Signature of Owner/Agent: 0400 Date:
Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: Ami I LIZ y
9. AUTHORIZATION
If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must
be completed:
I/We,
Jason Gosling
owner of the land that is subject of this application,
Brown & Beattie Ltd. (Stephen MacDougall, P.Eng.)
hereby authorize _ to act on my i our behalf in this regard.
Signature of Owner/Agent Date: A�?- k ZOZL�
Signature of Owner/Agent Date:
The personal information on this form is collected under the legal authority of Section 33(2), Section 42(2),
and Section 42(2.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The information will be used for the purposes of
administering the Heritage Permit Application and ensuring appropriate service of notice of receipt under
Section 33(3) and Section 42(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act. If you have any questions about this collection
of personal information, please contact the Manager of Corporate Records, Legislated Services Division,
City of Kitchener (519-741-2769).
Working together + Growing thoughtfully . Building community Page 11 of 294
�,�tiGER nOl�
C7 � a N 20
C J=
O
da��SNdJ11 Q@,
>>o00
o
o
ow9�'OOOLL9000�°a
as am � . 05 _
- ° 3m
.1 10000° wwwwE_ _K e�-zaaaao�harc� ,y�=aaa
o -a
o
a �o o LLF
as 2 a
o F
z
o
° o o
o tom 0 �OH-
° o -o= °moo
z0oz oaa10
10
°mom �zo
�2 o -o
aoaaO or
O 1BOaa
y
o
Mho g ro �o
-S°Eo"'
om>F
Nor aG�s nom=
m� Xa O
°gym"' >z�"oo,;°'�
amo N-s�zz°o
rod,2-E--
Mozz�x��zwo�z��
zoos°= a
m =z
a °� os
0 -o a °�o
no" o
�aoLL
=w3° aF
r° o �o'a
0�ao„�ao'ays �a
} o o
2° s
om�o° =r�
_ro lw,-Folin � z
°=o
z° z z °
�� Na Fo 0 _ aooos=
o° °
o=o ° w F LLa
�¢00oo ..0" a m,
.0 �o
sa=
o°gy�_moEe
0
o�
°°" mw m -10
0 oo
? wa�3�ag>o�o° '
a°'��� a
'oo °o00�0
o -o=,
"1 °° ywM
°o° °
°a
_ °°
o oy = P _ o
aso OL o o� 3
z° o 0 o=T �r
S s= a _
k w ¢°� ° a� a� °"�'
moi z3 - 'd3 °o ��oR2og° xo � poo
op,
rc° o ° °z N�°o�o�3a 'H a'd
sz° H,
° x y _ ° _�-;°oLL-a o
10
�3 0
a=jo om v '_' °
°aw2,19
o o° wo°a� 'no opo
-a��'�'_9�x soy°��'��5°000°u°
�-°
=ooaoaoaoFoaz=a°�zaoO°��,=a
>oz>000a.� H a�a��°��o°10-o�ozoo,��=z20
�
q
w
o o a
•�
S
a s
O z zz o w
Q
c2
o
pp3�a
mm
qR
w
„ _
�,�tiGER nOl�
C7 � a N 20
C J=
O
da��SNdJ11 Q@,
>>o00
o
o
ow9�'OOOLL9000�°a
as am � . 05 _
- ° 3m
.1 10000° wwwwE_ _K e�-zaaaao�harc� ,y�=aaa
o -a
o
a �o o LLF
as 2 a
o F
z
o
° o o
o tom 0 �OH-
° o -o= °moo
z0oz oaa10
10
°mom �zo
�2 o -o
aoaaO or
O 1BOaa
y
o
Mho g ro �o
-S°Eo"'
om>F
Nor aG�s nom=
m� Xa O
°gym"' >z�"oo,;°'�
amo N-s�zz°o
rod,2-E--
Mozz�x��zwo�z��
zoos°= a
m =z
a °� os
0 -o a °�o
no" o
�aoLL
=w3° aF
r° o �o'a
0�ao„�ao'ays �a
} o o
2° s
om�o° =r�
_ro lw,-Folin � z
°=o
z° z z °
�� Na Fo 0 _ aooos=
o° °
o=o ° w F LLa
�¢00oo ..0" a m,
.0 �o
sa=
o°gy�_moEe
0
o�
°°" mw m -10
0 oo
? wa�3�ag>o�o° '
a°'��� a
'oo °o00�0
o -o=,
"1 °° ywM
°o° °
°a
_ °°
o oy = P _ o
aso OL o o� 3
z° o 0 o=T �r
S s= a _
k w ¢°� ° a� a� °"�'
moi z3 - 'd3 °o ��oR2og° xo � poo
op,
rc° o ° °z N�°o�o�3a 'H a'd
sz° H,
° x y _ ° _�-;°oLL-a o
10
�3 0
a=jo om v '_' °
°aw2,19
o o° wo°a� 'no opo
-a��'�'_9�x soy°��'��5°000°u°
�-°
=ooaoaoaoFoaz=a°�zaoO°��,=a
>oz>000a.� H a�a��°��o°10-o�ozoo,��=z20
_ Ig
w a
LLI -9
w �
31g��N�1
o o o ° °
o
��o
o3°3a'��a�F�-moa a=o�;F
opo m
°zo�'o,
o
�3=
s
�oam�ao�,z° oa�o
R,
o°m °��
oho zoo�o°a�sa,=woaa ='oho
10 IHE2�
mo
° =o w- O°
2.
'o�ao a0' -
8.-o 0 am omEo
°FO� Sao o o F,., oGm zas°o 0°my 0z 20m.EzO�
°-
El 00 _
El
o°a„Fa°yEd.o° a o �S
s
_
'°
E!2w.,'° = o
o o
_o
m
°a
_ a_
I—oeI�z �zP _}a- ,o
o,o
o�°
°o�� o- -°o-VNoo m �oP8'�ao a'oa=o °'oot
a���°°3ao, E=z"y ° °z mm'o°ora°Y °oo.o�N°�ao-a� oo oooo
z
NGSa°=a°��
R?°a„z¢�Oaz�zoz
'�oo0�0, -,o=9'ooz-E�_Gog°s�oN oFoo°�o _ =y?
z -o msoo
oo
r�o
z¢
���-- 0°o_�yPo aoa
,
°OOFoF°�F
�o -0 °» N 1
0 0am0 s ? 0 s,mo 3a , R0
o o a
•�
S
ow
Q
c2
o
pp3�a
mm
qR
o
_ Ig
w a
LLI -9
w �
31g��N�1
o o o ° °
o
��o
o3°3a'��a�F�-moa a=o�;F
opo m
°zo�'o,
o
�3=
s
�oam�ao�,z° oa�o
R,
o°m °��
oho zoo�o°a�sa,=woaa ='oho
10 IHE2�
mo
° =o w- O°
2.
'o�ao a0' -
8.-o 0 am omEo
°FO� Sao o o F,., oGm zas°o 0°my 0z 20m.EzO�
°-
El 00 _
El
o°a„Fa°yEd.o° a o �S
s
_
'°
E!2w.,'° = o
o o
_o
m
°a
_ a_
I—oeI�z �zP _}a- ,o
o,o
o�°
°o�� o- -°o-VNoo m �oP8'�ao a'oa=o °'oot
a���°°3ao, E=z"y ° °z mm'o°ora°Y °oo.o�N°�ao-a� oo oooo
z
NGSa°=a°��
R?°a„z¢�Oaz�zoz
'�oo0�0, -,o=9'ooz-E�_Gog°s�oN oFoo°�o _ =y?
z -o msoo
oo
r�o
z¢
���-- 0°o_�yPo aoa
,
°OOFoF°�F
�o -0 °» N 1
0 0am0 s ? 0 s,mo 3a , R0
do _
w _ a
W U
X/11 I
o
17J
\
_
w
ow�'z
oQ
¢ 4
O
3
w
N
L off = to
I°
I" r
I
I
I
0----
I�
I
I
F 71 ----0
® OZ
do _
w _ a
W U
X/11 I
z
a
z
w
2 _
w9
m
o
17J
\
_
m
\/
L 7
L off = to
I°
I" r
I
I
I
0----
I�
I
I
F 71 ----0
z
a
z
w
2 _
w9
m
'-
<
wo Qv Y cSd
= ao w 20 G � o 51 d m
��`� �a Hw '? w ¢Q V
'o'
w q
=w„ 6 i Iwm
----
09,
10 10
og
om
---- a
-
3
- 3 LLLL
J
3
3
3 �p�
_ a Z
� Q
/\ J
3 a
-
Q
A.
1=774 m M
A m
m
s = LL = -
-
goac�soLL S� S� '"'" c�5o� <`a a� SoLL 'K` p�soLL �LL=LL � z��oa � z��spa ,ka poi
�3 - w3 3 ��?'� a c�Uz>a oarya �3�zogm �3�zo amm a c�U�
9em�o ry r�m6� _oo>axor � o�>aym6o oho _e5w�<5 M ffl , oo>ay
_`~'.33333 _�.�� - - `".333 ':33333¢333 ':_3333^333 ?3a.3 _u6i33333 _u6i333333 ':_3333^3
zzzz z3 wwwzzz 3zzzz zozzz zzwzzz z zzz zzzz zzwz
O O O
—
— — —
— —
— — —
—
— —
— — —
wm ===
w
a'
z
a
YJr
a
ol
I
I
I z
3=
I
o
a
x
w
It;
=
w
w
D O
s
m
o<
I
I
I
I
m
I
�
I
Alm
o
—h
o
A3a
°o
/m -
m I
I
di
�o¢
wm ===
w
a'
z
a
YJr
a
ol
I
I
I z
3=
o
M
o
a
x
w
D O
°o
/m -
m I
I
wm ===
w
a'
z
YJr
I
I
I z
3
,
ol
w o w
2
a
�
3=
M
o
a
-
.N,
�
J m
=
06
D O
96
�3a
3
cl
LLI
C
m
O
3
,
ol
o
2
x
�
3=
M
o
a
w
�
J m
=
06
D O
96
3
,
2
�
�
�
J m
=
�3a
3
cl
LLI
3
O
o, o
aM
cl
3
a
LL
Z
0
m
m
(r
))_\
L--�
�O
cl
I
-
-
---
�
\~
a
±
2§
/
±
}
®
�
« :
�
>
)((
;
2\
(( _
§)
:§\\
>
\
M
^
■!
2\
§)
:§\\
>
\
M
^
}/
/ / \\//
cc
( \ \
§
141
7§
��
CG
�_
-
?
lm
2
\
>
2
-
w
I.
R y
± ;
z \
;r!
_!
�! l:
Cn
■`
§
\
/
mW
& Cd
\
68
92(E
-01
9
-
2
�
L
_
R =
\_
\
/
:
.
LLJ
Cb
>
)((
; ;
t\
>
\
M
f
,\)
(!f\
/\)\( !\
_!
t\
>
\
M
N
_!
of
0
w0
00
( �
\
! § &
§
Brown&Beaftie
BUILDING SCIENCE ENGINEERING
588 Edward Avenue, Unit 49, Richmond Hill, ON L4C 9Y6
P 905-737-0111 F 905-7374046 (Guelph Region) P 519-827-1757
REPORT REGARDING STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT OF
FIRE DAMAGED BUILDING
AT
36 LANCASTER STREET EAST
KITCHENER, ONTARIO
PREPARED FOR:
Levente Toth
of
Gore Mutual Insurance Company
DATE:
March 21, 2024
REFERENCE:
Lancaster36.adj/r
Page 27 of 294
Brown&Beaftie
BUILDING SCIENCE ENGINEERING
March 21, 2024
Gore Mutual Insurance Company
252 Dundas Street North,
P.O. Box 70
Cambridge, ON N1 R 5T3
Attention: Levente Toth
588 Edward Avenue, Unit 49, Richmond Hill, ON L4C 9Y6
P 905-737-0111 F 905-737-4046 (Guelph Region) P 519-827-1757
Ref. Lancaster36.adj/r
Re: Structural Assessment of Fire Damaged Building
36 Lancaster Street East Kitchener Ontario
Insured:
Client Claim Ref.:
Date of Claim: August 4, 2023
Itoth(agorem utual.ca
As requested, we visited the building at 36 Lancaster Street East in Kitchener to review
engineering aspects of the recent structural fire damage. Specifically, we were requested
to provide our opinion regarding the appropriate `structural' Scope of Work to return fire -
damaged sections of the building to conditions commensurate with that prior to the fire.
Please see the attached structural repair drawings for initial budgeting and subsequent
Permit Application.
We have the following summary comments.
1. INVESTIGATION
Mr. Stephen MacDougall P.Eng., from Brown & Beattie visited the subject building
on October 20, 2023 to review relevant structural conditions related to the fire
damage to the building structure.
The photographs included with this report were taken during our site visit unless
otherwise noted. Additional photographs can be provided as considered necessary.
The interior finishes were in place at the time of our inspection, concealing
underlying conditions from ready assessment. Our review was limited to visible
building components and we have not completed destructive testing unless
otherwise noted. We have not reviewed construction drawings or calculations,
environmental or concealed conditions. This is not a full Code, By -Law or Zoning
Compliance or Structural Assessment of the entire building nor is it a Cause and
Origin type assessment of the fire.
This investigation is designed to provide sufficient information for its purpose, while
trying to balance the cost of obtaining this information. It is likely that conditions
not uncovered by this investigation exist, which may affect the costs or
effectiveness of the recommended repairs.
Page 28 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener Page 3
2. INTRODUCTION
This is a two and a half -storey (+basement) three -unit apartment building. We
assume the original front portion of the building is in the order of 100 years old with
the rear single -storey addition in the order of 40+ years old. We understand the
building is a heritage designated property within the City of Kitchener Civic Centre
neighbourhood heritage conservation district.
Side Elevation
Rear Elevation
For the purposes of this report, Lancaster Street runs north -south and the building
is on the east side of the street (front facing west).
We understand that the fire originated along the rear exterior of the building;
however this is not a cause and origin assessment.
3. OBSERVATIONS AND ASSESSMENT
This building includes three dwelling units with separate units in the basement,
first floor and second floor respectively. Access to the basement unit is provided
via the rear exterior stairwell, with access to the first and second floor units
provided by separate entrances along the front of the building. We understand
that this building was registered as a duplex with the City and that the basement
apartment was added without a Permit.
2. Relevant 'structural' building components of the original front portion of the
building include stone masonry foundation walls around the perimeter of the
excavated basement with a concrete slab -on -grade basement floor. It appears
that the foundations within the front half of the original building have been
previously underpinned in order to lower the basement floor elevation, the
details of which are subject to confirmation.
Page 29 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 4
Where checked, the exterior wall framing includes 2x4 "balloon framed" studs
which are continuous from the top of the foundation wall to the roof level. The
first floor includes 2x10 joists spaced at 16" o/c spanning front to back where
checked. The second -floor framing was concealed at the time of our review;
however, is assumed to be similar to the first. It is unknown if the second floor
joists include bearing support (typically with the use of a ribbon joist notched
into the studs) or if the joists are simply nailed to the side of the balloon framed
studs.
The roof framing was mostly concealed at the time of our review; however,
appears to include 2x4 rafters supporting plank sheathing. The second floor
includes a combination of sloped and horizontal ceilings which are assumed to
include concealed collar joists.
3. Relevant 'structural' building components of the rear addition include concrete
block masonry foundation walls with assumed concealed footings extending to
an unknown depth around the perimeter of an unexcavated crawl space. Where
checked, the floor framing includes 2x8 joists spaced at 16" o/c spanning front
to back.
The exterior walls of the addition include 2x4 studs with OSB sheathing
supporting 2x8 rafters spaced at 16" o/c with 1x2 strapping and plywood
sheathing. The rear addition includes sloped ceilings (no ceiling joists) except
for the hallway which includes 2x4 ceiling joists.
4. Relevant building 'envelope' components of the original building include an
asphalt shingled rain barrier roof above a combination of sloped ceilings and a
shallow attic space with assumed insulation and plaster or drywall ceiling
finishes. It should be noted that based on the limited depth of the roof rafters,
the roof likely does not include adequate thermal insulation or ventilation
between the insulation and roof sheathing as required by the current Code.
The exterior walls of the original building include brick masonry veneer on the
exterior and lathe and plaster interior finishes. It is unknown to us if the exterior
walls include significant amounts of thermal insulation.
The basement of the original building is finished and includes drywall finishes
with assumed concealed vapour barrier, strapping, and insulation on the
interior side of the foundation walls.
5. Relevant building 'envelope' components of the rear addition include an asphalt
shingled rain barrier roof above a sloped ceiling with batt insulation between
the rafters, polyethylene vapour barrier and drywall ceiling finishes. The roof
includes cross strapping along the top of the rafters intended to facilitate
ventilation; however, the functionality of this ventilated space is suspect due to
Page 30 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 5
the lack of roof top ventilation where the roof of the addition meets the rear wall
of the original building.
The exterior walls of the rear addition include board and batten wood siding
with batt insulation between the studs, polyethylene vapour barrier and drywall
interior finishes.
6. Significant "structural' fire damage to the building appeared to include primarily
the rear exterior wall and roof of the single -storey rear addition.
The fire resulted in significant charring to almost all of the roof rafters forming
the roof above the rear addition. This includes the roof extension above the
rear deck and supporting beam which was mostly consumed by the fire.
The roof framing above the garage addition was concealed at the time of our
review; however, it appears that this roof framing was likely also at least locally
damaged by the fire.
Page 31 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 6
Fire damage to the roof extended up and damaged the top of the interior
loadbearing wall where the roof of the rear addition meets the original building
above the laundry room. This wall appears to have been constructed on the
exterior side of the original brick masonry and is assumed to provide
loadbearing support for the roof of the addition. It is subject to confirmation
following the removal of interior finishes if the adjacent wall of the original
building was also damaged.
The fire also damaged the majority of the rear exterior wall of the first -floor
bedroom and bathroom within the addition. The full extent of damage to the
wall is subject to confirmation; however, it appears that the exterior edge at the
top of the wall studs were damaged along the majority of the rear wall.
Page 32 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 7
The fire damaged the rear exterior deck as well as the rear ends of the first -
floor joists of the addition. Where checked, the floor does not appear to have
included a rim joist along the rear exterior wall, allowing the fire to enter the
crawl space. The full extent of damage to the currently concealed floor joists is
subject to confirmation and will likely require the removal of the floor sheathing.
7. The following photographs depict the general conditions of the interior finishes
of the building noted during our inspection; the full extent of which is beyond
our mandate and therefore was not assessed at the time of our inspections
(related clean-ups had yet to be completed). It should be noted that the Code
required unit fire separations provided by the drywall or plaster ceiling and wall
finishes between the units included widespread fire, water, and/or smoke
damages.
Page 33 of 294
M.
Brown & Beattie Ltd. www.brownbeattie.com
Mk q
ivo
Brown & Beattie Ltd. www.brownbeattie.com
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Third Floor
8. The following photographs depict the
building noted during our inspection.
widespread damage to the exterio
r
Page 10
general conditions of the exterior of the
Externally, fire related damages included
wall cladding and roofing of the rear
addition. The fire also resulted in at least localized smoke staining of the
exterior brick masonry on the original house, the full extent of which is beyond
the scope of this report and subject to confirmation.
Page 36 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 11
9. Unrelated to the recent fire damage, several issues relating to the building's
compliance with the current Building Code were noted during our assessment
of the fire -related damages (not meant to be a complete inventory of such
issues as many areas remain concealed and may reveal additional issues.)
➢ As previously discussed, the building is registered with the City as a
duplex and it appears that the basement unit (making it a triplex) was
added without a Permit. The basement ceiling height ranges between
5-11" and 6'-2" where checked within the rear half. The current Code
requires a minimum height of 6-11" throughout 75% of the basement
with a minimum height of 6'-5" below beams and ducts. Only the front
half of the basement which appears to have been previously
underpinned to provide a ceiling height of 7'-1" would meet this height
requirement. In our opinion, the existing basement window also would
not meet current Code requirements for egress and natural lighting.
➢ Unrelated to the recent fire, it should be noted that the original building
appears to include stone masonry foundation walls. These walls were
mostly concealed at the time of our review; however, in our experience,
it is not uncommon for stone masonry foundations of this age to develop
voids over the long term, as the grout and mortar between the stones (in
the element, not just at the surface) disintegrates and washes out,
leaving the element less and less stable as this condition progresses.
Due to the age of the stone masonry walls, the deterioration of the
mortar within the wall may be significantly greater than what is visible on
the above grade exterior portions and as a result may have significantly
weakened the wall.
➢ As previously discussed, the original building includes balloon framing
where the studs are continuous from the top of the foundation wall tot
the roof level. Where checked, the studs do not include Code required
fire blocking at the second floor level and it is unknow if they include
adequate bearing support for the floor joists.
➢ The third floor joists appear to be secured to sides of roof rafters as the
original house includes partially closed ceilings on the second floor level.
This framing was concealed at the time of our review; however, in our
experience it is unlikely that the third floor joists include adequate
bearing support as required by Code. It should also be noted that the
third floor may have originally been intended for use as an unconditioned
attic space, and as a result the third floor joists may not have been
intended to support occupancy loading.
Page 37 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 12
➢ Access to the third floor is provided via very steep, narrow stairs which
do not include a handrail. These stairs would evidently not meet current
Code requirements and in our opinion are a falling/safety hazard. As
previously discussed, it is unclear if the third floor was originally intended
as occupied space or if it was converted from an attic sometime since
original construction.
➢ As previously discussed, the rear addition does not appear to include a
rim joist along the rear exterior end. In our opinion, a rim joist is required
at this location in order to adequately transfer the loading from the wall
and roof above to the foundation.
➢ The roof of the rear addition appears to be supported in some areas by
a ledge board bolted to the rear exterior wall of the original house. The
ledger board appears to be located near mid -height of the wall and it is
unclear if the ledger board bolts are adequately fastened to the building
Page 38 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 13
structure. It should be noted that the ledger board should not be secured
to the brick veneer which is not intended to support roof loads.
➢ Where visible, the rear wall of the original building appears to include
openings in the brick masonry, while maintaining sections of brick
above. It is unclear if the remaining brick above these openings is
adequately supported.
➢ As previously discussed, the roofs of the original building and rear
addition include sloped ceilings which provide limited space for thermal
insulation and Code required ventilation between the insulation and roof
sheathing. In our opinion, the existing roof assemblies do not include
adequate insulation and ventilation with respect to current Standards
and as a result may be susceptible to long-term performance issues
such as excessive condensation build-ups during the winter months.
➢ The basement stairs does not include a handrail as required by the
current Code.
Page 39 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
4. DISCUSSION
Page 14
Part 11 of the Ontario Building Code applies to renovations of existing building
systems, assuming related Permits were obtained for their original
construction. Renovation of existing buildings can fall within the scope of a "basic
renovation" or an "extensive renovation" depending on the extent of the repair work
at issue to be carried out (in this case the fire damages). Basic renovations allow
the existing systems to be repaired to meet existing conditions and to the same
performance levels, while extensive renovations require Upgrades in compliance
with Part 11 and the other parts of the Ontario Building Code, again assuming
Permits were obtained for the original construction. The Building Code indicates
that extensive renovations involve significant changes or substantial removal to
the interior walls, layouts, floor assemblies, roof assemblies, or building systems,
while basic renovations involve material alterations or repairs to the existing
systems. In our opinion, Part 11 does not require sections of a building not
undergoing renovation to retroactively meet current Codes.
The fire resulted in significant damage to the majority of the rear addition roof and
rear exterior wall as discussed in this report. Based on this, it is our opinion that
the renovations required due to the fire damage would be considered an "extensive
renovation" of the fire -damaged framing systems, requiring the replaced building
systems to meet the structural requirements of the current Code.
An extensive renovation under Part 11 of the Code requires that the renovated fire -
damaged building system which is being substantially replaced meet the
requirements of the current Code. Part 11 of the current Code provides compliance
alternatives to allow for components that do not meet the current Code to remain
in an existing building if they are affected by the construction work and not
replaced. It also allows for areas and structures not affected by the construction
work to remain in an existing building.
Page 40 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 15
In our opinion, all significantly damaged structural and fire rated assemblies that
require replacement as discussed in this report should be replaced with new
assemblies that meet current Code requirements within the limitations of existing
construction.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the information available, it is our opinion that the recent fire resulted in
significant structural damage to the majority of the rear addition roof and rear
exterior wall to the extent that the complete replacement of this roof section and
rear exterior wall is warranted. The fire also damaged the rear exterior deck to the
extent that its complete replacement is warranted. Localized fire damage was
noted to the rear end of the first -floor joists for the rear addition to the extent that
the augmentation or replacement of at least some of these joists is warranted, the
full extent of which is subject to further review. Localized fire damage was also
noted to the interior stud wall supporting the roof of the addition along the rear wall
of the original building to the extent that the partial replacement of this wall is also
warranted, again the extent of which is subject to further review.
Unrelated to the recent fire damage, several issues related to the building's
compliance with current Code requirements were identified during our review of
the fire damages. As previously discussed, Part 11 of the Code allows for existing
building components not affected by the construction work to remain in an existing
building; however, several of these items should be addressed as part of the
repairs due to potential safety concerns, recognizing these are not a result of the
fire. We recommend reviewing issues further following the removal of interior
finishes.
As we understand the basement dwelling unit was added without a Permit, Part 11
of the Code does not apply to the replacement of that unit. As discussed, the
existing basement ceiling height and egress does not meet current Code
requirements. Based on our discussions, we have included for the removal of the
basement dwelling unit for the purposes of the fire damage repairs. If the Insured
wishes, a separate permit application may be submitted to the City to convert the
building from a duplex to a triplex.
Additional repairs may be necessary around the discussed areas in this report, the
full extent of which is subject to confirmation upon interior finish removals and as
the Work progresses to expose presently concealed conditions. We recommend
we return to site following the removal of the interior finishes to review conditions
further.
Please see the attached structural repair drawings for budgeting, and Permit
Application. As discussed, the full scope of work is subject to confirmation following
the removal of interior finishes.
Page 41 of 294
36 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener
Page 16
Please note this report is based primarily on technical considerations. We recommend
final decisions also take into account other considerations such as costs, timings,
coverage, desired alterations, Permit implications, etc.
We can prepare a further report with additional photographs and comment or drawings as
considered necessary. Should you wish to review matters further in the interim, or review
additional information that becomes available, please contact us at 905-737-0111.
Yours truly,
BROWN & BEATTIE LTD.
6'�
f
Stephen MacDougall, P.Eng.
-mak' 01,�'3'�'�
Tim Beattie, P.Eng.
c. Ben O'Malley, Gore Mutual (bomallevQGoreMutual.ca)
Please note this report was based on a visual assessment of the accessible areas only. Unless noted
specifically, intrusive or destructive testing was completed during this assessment. Technical specifications
should be prepared for any work decided upon as a result of this report. The material in this report reflects best
judgement in light of the information available and does not imply fitness for a particular purpose and should
not be considered a verification of past or present regulations. Brown & Beattie Ltd. cannot be held responsible
for any deficiencies that may be found within inaccessible areas by others, which have not been documented
in this report. Copies of this report are subject to authentication from the writer. Brown & Beattie Ltd. accepts
no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based
on this report. Use of this report or any other aspect of our service is not authorized until and unless our account
is paid in full and on time.
Page 42 of 294