Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK Agenda - 2024-08-06Heritage Kitchener Committee Agenda Tuesday, August 6, 2024, 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. Conestoga Room City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 407 People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation(a)kitchener.ca. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public record. The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow. *Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.* Chair - J. Haalboom Vice -Chair - P. Ciuciura Pages 1. Commencement 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared, please visit www. kitchener. ca/conflict to submit your written form. 3. Delegations Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. 3.1 Item 4.1 - Steve Burrows, Facet Design Studio 4. Discussion Items 4.1 Notice of Intention to Demolish Smokehouse - 10m 3 1478 Trussler Road, DSD -2024-343 5. 4.2 Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-015, 20 m 39 99 College Street, Construct a Rear -Yard Addition, DSD -2024-324, 4.3 Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-103, 5 m 78 Lome Crescent, Demolish Detached One Car - Garage and Construction of New Shed, DSD - 2024 -345 4.4 Notice of Intention to Designate, 113-151 5 m 103 Charles Street West (Lang Site A), DSD -2024- 335 4.5 Notice of Intention to Designate, 148 Madison 5 m 139 Avenue South, DSD -2024-339 4.6 Notice of Intention to Designate, 171-173 5 m 170 Victoria Street North, DSD -2024-339 4.7 Notice of Intention to Designate, 1738 Trussler 5 m 195 Road, DSD -2024-341 4.8 Notice of Intention to Designate, 709 King 5 m 219 Street West, DSD -2024-336 4.9 Notice of Intention to Designate, 83-85 King 5 m 233 Street West, DSD -2024-336 4.10 Notice of Intention to Designate, 87-91 King 5 m 251 Street West, DSD -2024-337 4.11 Notice of Intention to Designate, 97-99 King 5 m 268 Street West, DSD -2024-338 4.12 Notice of Intention to Designate, 103-109 King 5 m 285 Street West, DSD -2024-331 4.13 Proposed Update to the Heritage Grant 30 m 296 Program 2024, DSD -2024-332 4.14 Bill 23 Municipal Heritage Register Review - 20 m 314 August 2024 Update, DSD 2024-333 Information Items 5.1 Heritage Permit Application Tracking Sheet 454 Adjournment Mariah Blake Committee Coordinator Page 2 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 5 DATE OF REPORT: July 8, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-343 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Demolish Demolition of Smoke House Building Log House & Smoke house 1478 Trussler Road RECOMMENDATION: That, in accordance with Section 27(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Notice of Intention to Demolish received on June 28, 2024, regarding the intent to demolish the smoke house located on the property municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road, be received for information and that the notice period run its course. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to present the proposed demolition of the smoke house municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road (subject property). • The key finding of this report is that smoke house on the subject property is in poor condition. As a result, Heritage Planning staff recommend that the Notice of Intention to Demolish the smoke house on the subject property be received and that the notice period run its course. • There are no financial implications associated with this report. • Community engagement included consultation with Heritage Kitchener. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of a Notice of Intention to Demolish (Attachment A) the smoke house located at the property municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road (Figure 1.0). The Notice was received on June 28, 2024. *** 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 454 (p -.-ERG TRl,l55LFF I� + --,�-� �iva°w Rp. Figure 1.0: Location Map of 1478 Trussler Road The subject property was evaluated as part of the City's Southwest Kitchener Urban Areas Study Community Master Planning process. As part of this process, a heritage consultant was retained to identify, evaluate, and provide recommendations for cultural heritage resources within the study area. "The Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Landscapes" prepared by Nancy Z. Tausky, Heritage Consultant, and dated August 2010 concluded that the subject property is worthy of designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and conservation as it is defined in the Provincial Policy Statement. The study provided a preliminary list of heritage attributes. Council formally "listed" the subject property on the Municipal Heritage Register (MHR), as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest, on August 29, 2011, based on the City's 4 -Step Listing Process and the evaluation conducted by Nancy Tausky. The listing included a Statement of Significance (SOS) describing the preliminary cultural heritage value or interest and a preliminary list of heritage attributes (Attachment B). Heritage Planning staff re-evaluated the subject property as part of the City's MHR Review process in May 2024. A revised draft SOS (Attachment C) was presented to Heritage Kitchener on June 11, 2024 and the committee recommended that designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act be pursued. In accordance with the MHR Review process, a letter along with the revised SOS and Kitchener's "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" was sent to the owner on June 12, 2024. The letter sought feedback from the owner. The owner connected with Heritage Planning staff via phone and email and met with Heritage Planning staff at the subject property on June 25, 2024. The owner expressed objections to the proposed designation, raised concerns with the condition of the smoke house and advised that she would commence the process to obtain permission to demolish the smoke house. Heritage Planning staff agreed to revise the draft SOS (Attachment C) based on discussions with the owner, information obtained onsite, and additional research. Heritage Planning staff committed to sharing a revised DRAFT SOS with the owner in September 2024. Page 4 of 454 Ontario Heritaae Act Part IV, Section 27(3), of the Ontario Heritage Act provides a minimum level of conservation to properties listed as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register: Restriction on demolition, etc. (9) If a property that has not been designated under this Part has been included in the register under subsection (3), the owner of the property shall not demolish or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the owner's intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or to permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure. 2019, c. 9, Sched. 11, s. 6. (11) The notice required by subsection (9) shall be accompanied by such plans and shall set out such information as the council may require. 2019, c. 9, Sched. 11, s. 6. In accordance with the Act, Council has 60 days as of and including June 28, 2024 (date of receipt of the plans and information required for Heritage Planning staff to make a recommendation to Heritage Kitchener and Council), to act, if it so chooses, on the Notice of Intention to Demolish. The 60 days provides Council with the time it requires to issue a Notice of Intention to Designate as a means of preventing demolition. With respect to the proposed demolition of the smoke house at 1478 Trussler Road, the Notice is sufficient for Heritage Planning staff to make a recommendation to Heritage Kitchener and Council. REPORT: The property municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road (Figure 1.0) is located on the east side of Trussler Road between Bleams Road and Huron Road in the Trussler planning community and contains a circa 1861 log house and a smoke house. The subject property is recognized for design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values as identified in the Statement of Significance (SOS) associated with it's listing as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR). The preliminary list of heritage attributes identified in the SOS (Attachment B) include: "All elements related to the construction and Georgian architectural style of the house, including: log construction; roof and roofline; stone foundation, original door and window openings, and, Interior features, including: original fireplace and ovens in the wall; original floorboards, original doors; original baseboards, casings and wainscoting, and, original joists supporting the first floor. All elements related to the construction and style of the smoke house, including: brick construction, roof and roofline; door and door opening,- and, pening,and, interior features, including: interior slats of the ceiling and attached hooks." The focus of this report is the proposed demolition of the smoke house (Figure 2.0). Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) enables municipalities to pass designating by-laws for individual properties that have cultural heritage value or interest. Heritage designation is one tool to conserve cultural heritage resources as it provides a mechanism to manage change, such as alterations and demolitions, to ensure that the cultural Page 5 of 454 heritage value and interest along with the heritage attributes of a property are not negatively impacted by proposed changes. Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act, now amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22, prescribes the criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest. Designation requires a property to meet two (2) or more of nine (9) criteria relating to design/physical, historical/associative, and/or contextual values. Figure 2.0: Front Elevation of Smoke House (South Elevation) Heritage Planning staff met the owner at the subject property on June 25, 2024. During this meeting the owner raised concerns with the condition of the smoke house and advised that she would commence the process to obtain permission to demolish the smoke house. A visual inspection of the exterior and interior of the smoke house revealed building deficiencies with the most concerning being major cracks through the parging and mortar where you can see through the building. Exterior deficiencies include missing bricks, step cracks in the mortar, missing mortar, inappropriate mortar/parging repairs, spalling bricks, deteriorated/missing asphalt shingles, shifted foundation, and deteriorated wood (door, Page 6 of 454 fascia, soffits, etc.). Interior deficiencies include missing parging, cracks in parging, missing mortar, and inappropriate mortar repairs. Figure 3.0 through 7.0 provide examples of the deficiencies. Figure 3.0: Photograph showing major cracks through the parging and mortar where you can see through the smoke house Figure 4.0: Photograph showing step crack and spalling bricks Page 7 of 454 Figure 5.0: Photograph showing missing bricks, step cracks and inappropriate mortar repairs -------- Figure -_ Figure 6.0: Photograph showing deteriorated/missing asphalt shingles Council's Options Under the Ontario Heritage Act, Council does not have the authority to approve or refuse an owner's Notice of Intention to Demolish. Rather, Council's options include - 1 . nclude-1. Receive the Notice of Intention to Demolish, allowing the notice period to run its course, at the end of which the Building Division may issue a demolition permit. And/Or, 2. Council may issue a Notice of Intention to Designate, at which point Council would have the authority to deny demolition-, however, the owner could object to Council's decision. Heritage Planning Staff Comments Following the onsite meeting with the owner, Heritage Planning staff considered the owners concerns, the condition of the smoke house and re-evaluated the contextual value of the property. With respect to the condition of the smoke house, Heritage Planning staff Page 8 of 454 agree with the owners concerns about the poor condition of the building and understand that costs to repair the smoke house would be substantial. With respect to the contextual value, the revised Statement of Significance drafted in June 2024 described the contextual value as follows: "The contextual values relate to physical, functional, visual and historic links between the log house, the smoke house and surrounding farmland. Although the barn and most outbuildings connected with the farming operations are gone, the log house is still situated in its original location. The log house faces south and is setback from Trussler Road on a slight incline. The surrounding lands were traditionally used for mixed farmland and two apple orchards. The original smoke house is located adjacent to the east fagade of the house and was once used to smoke ham and sausages." A review of aerial photography provides insight around the historic layout of the farm buildings and surrounding rural landscape. A barn was present on the property in 1997 but it is unlikely that this barn was original given its location close to Trussler Road and its distance from both the log house and the smoke house. This barn was demolished sometime between 1997 and 2000. The property also used to contain two apple orchards. The two apple orchards along with hedgerows that bordered the log house and apple orchards were removed sometime between 2012 and 2016. There are no other original or historic structures, such as barns, silos, or drivesheds on the property. Trees that once framed the laneway entrance at Trussler Road have been removed likely as part of Regional road improvements. Based on the onsite meeting with the owner, the condition of the smoke house and the alterations to the context, Heritage Planning staff support the demolition of the smoke house subject to photographic documentation (Attachment D). Figure 7.0 Page 9 of 454 2 Photograph showing shifted foundation Page 9 of 454 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting. CONSULT — Heritage Kitchener will be consulted regarding the subject Notice of Intention of Demolish. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act • Ontario Planning Act • CSD -11-080 Listing of Non -Designated Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest on the Municipal Heritage Register • DSD -2024-250 Municipal Heritage Register Review June 2024 Update APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment A — Notice of Intention to Demolish • Attachment B — 1478 Trussler Road Statement of Significance (August 2011) • Attachment C — 1478 Trussler Road Draft Statement of Significance (June 2024) • Attachment D — 1478 Trussler Road — Photographic Documentation of Smoke House (June 2024) Page 10 of 454 June 28, 2024 Michelle Drake, Senior Heritage Planner City of Kitchener, Planning_ Department 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4C -j7 Dear Ms. Drake, Re: Notice of Intention to Demolish the Smokehouse (approximate size 8'-2" x 10') on a Listed Property under Part IV, Section 27(9) of the Ontario Heritage Act —1478 Trussler Road The purpose of this letter is to provide the City of Kitchener with Notice in writing of the intent to demolish / remove the smokehouse on the listed property located at 1478 Trussler Road. Part IV, section 27 (9) of the Ontario Heritage Act provides the following as it relates to the removal of buildings on listed properties: Restriction on demolition, etc. 9) if a property that has been designated under this Part has been included in the register under subsection (3), the owner of the property shall not demolish or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the owner's intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or to permit the demotion or removal of the building or structure. 2019, c. 9, Sched. 11, s. 6. The purpose of removing the smokehouse is because of its current poor condition and wanting to remove it before its condition deteriorates further. The building is of no use to me and I am not interested in any repair or maintenance costs related to it. If there is interest, I am willing to donate it where it can be accessible to the public (i.e. Doan Heritage Village or Schneider Haus). Thank you for your assistance in the wording to use to make this submission. You were on site June 25, 20124 to view and discuss the smoke house. You measured it and took many pictures of it. Please contact me if there is anything further you require. cc: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals Page 11 of 454 Statement of Significance 1478 Trussler Road Municipal Address: 1478 Trussler Road, Kitchener Legal Description: GCT Part Lot 145 Year Built: c. 1861 Architectural Style: Georgian Original Owner: Thomas Trussler Original Use: Farm Condition: Description of Historic Place Ward 5 1478 Trussler Road features a mid 19th century log house originally built in the Georgian architectural style with later additions featuring minor influences from the Gothic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 87.59 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Trussler Road between Bleams Road and Huron Road in the Trussler Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value are the house and smoke house. Heritage Value 1478 Trussler Road is recognized for its design, physical, historical and associative values. The design and physical values relate to the age, material and method of construction. The house is an early and representative example of a log building. The original log building exists under layers of cladding, including brick or wood siding with stucco under front porch, insulbrick and grey aluminum siding. The house features: log construction; stone foundation; side gable roof; original door and window openings; interior fireplace and the ovens in the wall; original floor boards; original interior doors; original baseboards, casings and wainscoting; and, original joists supporting the first floor. The design and physical value also relates to the type of building. The smoke house is rare and well preserved. The smoke house features: brick construction; front gable roof; and, interior slats of ceiling and attached hooks. The historic and associative values relate to the original owners of the farm. Thomas Trussler, son of George Trussler, purchased the property from his father in 1861 and built the log houseM. A family photograph shows thatthe log house had been covered by siding (likely brick or wood) and stuccoed under the front porch by around 1880. Alicia Trussler, daughter of Thomas, purchased the property from her father in 1891. Page 12 of 454 Alicia and her sister Minnie lived on the property until 1899. Between 1899 and 1917 the property was tenanted or owned by a number of different owners. Oscar Trussler purchased the property in 1917 and Robert Trussler, Oscar's son, purchased the property in 1934. The property remained in Trussler family ownership until recently. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 1478 Trussler Road resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Georgian architectural style of the house, including: o Log construction o Roof and roofline; o Stone foundation; o Original door and window openings-, and, o Interior features, including: ■ Original fireplace and ovens in the wall-, ■ Original floorboards-, ■ Original doors-, ■ Original baseboards, casings and wainscoting-, and, ■ Original joists supporting the first floor. ■ All elements related to the construction and style of the smoke house, including: o brick construction-, o roof and roofline; o door and door opening-, and, o interiorfeatures, including: interior slats of the ceiling and attached hooks. Photos 4 +XY MAll��A rCr 1478 Trussler Road Page 13 of 454 Excerpt from "Cultural Heritage Background Study. Built Heritage and Cultural Landscapes.- Southwest andscapes.Southwest Kitchener Urban Areas Study" prepared by Nancy Z. Tausky dated August 2010 6-2.10 1477 -:ii:ler Roac- Legal descrription. Lot 1+-5 is C.T. Y),pes of heritage resources_ Former farmhouse and smoke house Historlcr'aassocia the value: Thomas Trussler. as sore of George Trussler and a brother of George Gilbert (see section 6.2.7), purchased Lot 1*5 G-C.T. from his father in 1361 and replaced the small lag house where he had lived at the corner of Huron and Tm5sler Roads slater moved an inhabited by George G.) vuith a larger log bi ilding m his new, property. A family photograph shows that by circa 188+0 the house had been covered with wood or brick siding (characteristically stuccoed under the front ;.erandtdi; behind the house one can just glimpse a back kitchen wing (figure 66). Thomas -s daughter Alicia bought the farm from her f-.t__er in 1891, and she and her sister N innie lived there and managed the faun u nt:l 18' ' :asking up a toll of notorious nuuours in the process: racing a sulky up and [l : '. rr -:rL lane.. holding dances in the implement shed, and smacking the 1az;: hired n:,.r::.lr:le he was still in bed. Alicia sold the farm iu 1399, and Nancy- Z. Tausk-y Hmitage Cnnsidunt Page 14 of 454 BMTHENT 4GEAND CLT.TVIULLL%VSC4PEB.tCKGRC END STUDY 78 Sourkicest Eirchenrr Urban _creta.: Stud% for the next couple of decades it was tenanted or owned by a number of different perms. In 1917 Oscar Trussler bouelnt the farm. and in 1934. ©scans son Robert and his ;%ife moved into his great-uncles house. It stayed in the Trussler family until recently sold ro the Karen and Gordon Doelnn. Figure 64z: The house at 1475 Trus -ley Road e. 1$34, Aiewed from the -outheresr. On the parch are Hannah and Thomas Trus -ler and rheir daughter; Lizzie and Emmeline. Designplosical value: The exterior appearance of the house has undergone many changes since the 1880 (see figure 66). It was probably in the late nineteenth century that a front gable with a lancet window i% -as added. In 1949 the verandah was removed. the present sun porch added. and the entire house covered with insulbrick. The house has since been covered with grey aluminum siding and the lancet window in the gable replaced by a rectangular sash window. At some point an additional room, was built south of the back kitchen, and a back extension was built to the north. A garage and sitting room were built onto the east side of the house. Inside, however. the house retains almost all of its original features and much of its original character. The fireplace wall of the old kitchen is largely intact, with its original mantelpiece, bake oven. warming oven with cabinet above the wunaiing oven (figure 67). The house retains its simple.. single board door and window surrounds, its chair and picture rails, the wainscot in the present dining room_ its wide floorboards. and its .\ancy Z. TauskN• Hetirage C on:ultant Page 15 of 454 BMT HERIT_4 GE AAD CLI TUBUL LLN DSC PE BACKGROUND S7ZrDY 79 Sous rwart Kitchener Urban Arew Snrds original doors (some of which are panelled and some of which, in less public areas, are formed of vertical planks (see, for example, figure 68)_ Figure 66. The house at 1478 Trussler Road Figure 67: Mantte and ovens. 1178 Trussler Road Figure % Door. door casing, and wainscot in the dining room The other highly sigmfiicant building on the prop"- is the brick smoke house (figure 69). just behind the garage. A small rectangular builduig with a gable roof, the smoke Nana- Z. Tausk-v Herit;ee C on-ultant Page 16 of 454 ar~xtMENTAGE AJNV CMZ rGR 4L LLNDsc PE BA CKGROMD SMDY so South- est Kitchener Urban Area, 5ntdti house retains its original door and hardware and inside. its original wood slat ceiling and even the hooks for holding the meat being smoked (figure 70) 4 Figure 69: Smoke bou:e. 1578 irussler Road Figure 70: Interior t-iesr of smoke house Contexrrral value.- There alue:There is nothing left of the bam or of any outbuildings connected with the historic farming operations of the property, winch were located across the lane, south of the house. The house still has a clearly rural setting. however, surrounded by fields and east of the house. the large apple orchard_ Prelinwaii- tilt gfheriroge attribures: Original log structure of the house and its first cladding Original window and door apertures Interior fireplace and the fittings. including the ovens, in the fireplace wall Original floorboards Original interior doors Original baseboards. casings. and ivalnscottmg Joist's supporting first floor Stone foundation W, and silhouette of the smoke house Slats of sauoke house ceiling and attached hooks Evaluation: This property merits listing in the Municipal Heritage Register, designation under the amario Heritage Act. and conservation as it is defnned in the Provincial Palk, Starenient. Reasons, for evaluation: The property has design and physical value because of the rarity- of its well preserved smokehouse, because of the equally; rare integnry of its once representative interior 1 ancr Z. Tauskv Heritage C on>ultant Page 17 of 454 BLrILTHERTGE.�LWD CULTURAL LINDSCAPE BACKGROV20 STUDY 31 Southwa r itekemsr Urban Area: Smd.i fittings, and because of its log construction. It has historical value because of its connection with the Irussler family grid its potential for Melding information that contributes to .an understaudinLy of the conulauniry and its historical culture. It has contexrLW wlue because ithelps to define and support the character of the area anal because it is physically and Historically limed to its surroundings. Page 18 of 454 1478 Trussler Road Photo Documentation of Smoke House Front Elevation (South Fagade) —Smoke House at 1478 Trussler Road Side Elevation (East Fagade) —Smoke House at 1478 Trussler Road Page 19 of 454 Rear Elevation (North Fagade) —Smoke House at 1478 Trussler Road Side Elevation (West Elevation) —Smoke House at 1478 Trussler Road Page 20 of 454 a 1 1 n - I Detail of Door on Front Elevation (South Fagade) —1478 Trussler Road ,yam Y Detail of Door Hardware on Front Elevation (South Fagade) —1478 Trussler Road Page 21 of 454 i a 1 1 n - I Detail of Door on Front Elevation (South Fagade) —1478 Trussler Road ,yam Y Detail of Door Hardware on Front Elevation (South Fagade) —1478 Trussler Road Page 21 of 454 Interior Photograph of Charred Wood Slats and Metal Hooks inside the Smoke House — 1478 Trussler Road Page 23 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE � r Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 1478 Trussler Road Municipal Address: 1478 Trussler Road Legal Description: GCT Part Lot 145 Year Built: c. 1861 Architectural Style: Georgian Original Owner: Thomas Trussler Original Use: Farm Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value „t� WE in The property municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road is a mid -19th century log house originally built in the Georgian architectural style with later additions featuring minor influences from the Gothic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 87.59 -acre parcel of land located on the east side of Trussler Road between Bleams Road and Huron Road in the Rosenberg planning community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value are the log house, the smoke house, the laneway and surrounding agricultural fields. Page 24 of 454 Heritage Value 1478 Trussler Road is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as a rare and early example of a mid -19t" century log house built in the Georgian architectural style with later additions featuring minor influences from the Gothic Revival architectural style. These values were described in a document entitled "Cultural Heritage Background Study. Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study' written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 and based on this research are further described below. The exterior appearance of the house has undergone many changes since the 1880. It was probably in the late nineteenth century that a front gable with a lancet window was added. In 1949 the verandah was removed, the present sun porch added, and the entire house covered with insulbrick. The house has since been covered with grey aluminum siding and the lancet window in the gable replaced by a rectangular sash window. At some point, an additional room was built south of the back kitchen, and a back extension was built to the north. A garage and sitting room were built onto the east side of the house. The property also demonstrates design/physical value as a rare and well conserved example of a smoke house. The smoke house features: brick construction; front gable roof; and, interior slats of ceiling and attached hooks. Further, the design/physical values were originally described in a document entitled "Architectural Analysis — 1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991, and based on this research are further described below. The house has a new roof with grey asphalt shingles. The Front (South) Facade features the central gable dormer influenced by the Gothic Revival architectural style. The windows are new, but the window openings retain the symmetry of the original windows. The Rear (North) Fagade features two kitchen annexes: one built shortly after the log house, and the other about 1900. The Side (East) Fagade features a contemporary front porch and deck that wraps around the east elevation, and a garage and sitting room have also been built off the east elevation. Don Ryan (1991) goes on to describe changes to the log house. In 1949 the original roofed verandah, which spanned the front elevation, was removed and the present asymmetric porch was built. The return eaves and the pointed Gothic window were lost when the roof was rebuilt in 1938. All the windows and exterior doors are new. Two chimneys have been removed. The garage and sitting room were built in 1988. Interior Value These values were described in a document entitled "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study' written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 and based on this research are further described below. Inside, however, the house retains almost all of its original features and much of its original character. The fireplace wall of the old kitchen is largely intact, with its original mantelpiece, bake oven, warming oven with cabinet above the warming oven. The house retains its simple, single board door and window surrounds, its chair and picture rails, the wainscot in the present dining room, its wide floorboards, and Page 25 of 454 its original doors (some of which are panelled and some of which, in less public areas, are formed of vertical planks). Further, these design/physical values were originally described in a document entitled "Architectural Analysis — 1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991, and based on this research are further described below. Inside one finds the original panelled doors, door hardware, and wainscotting. Upstairs, one room remains in its original condition with exposed plaster walls and ceiling. The enclosed staircase rises from the rear through the centre of the house. There are presently ten rooms inside. In the first (northeast) kitchen stands a large brick fireplace where maple syrup was once boiled. This room retains much of its original character. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 1478 Trussler Road has historical/associative value due to its history and association with early settlement, and the Trussler family. Thomas George Trussler was born on December 10, 1831 in Fernhurst, Sussex, England (Waterloo Region Generations, 2001-2024). His obituary from the Waterloo Chronicle dated February 18, 1897 reads "Mr. Thomas Trussler, a highly esteemed citizen of our town, died at his home on Scott Street on Friday last after a prolonged illness, at the age of 66 years, 2 months and 2 days. Mr. Trussler emigrated with his parents to Canada in 1833, where they took up residence on the town line between Wilmot and Waterloo. In 1860 he was married to Miss Hannah Townsend. They then lived on a farm adjoining his father's until about 6 years ago when they moved to Berlin. His widow and five children, one son and four daughters, remain to mourn his death." (Waterloo Region Generations, 2001-2024). These values were described in a document entitled "Cultural Heritage Background Study. Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study' written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 and based on this research are further described below. Thomas Trussler, a son of George Trussler and a brother of George Gilbert, purchased Lot 145 of the German Company Tract from his father in 1861 and replaced the small log house where he had lived at the corner of Huron and Trussler Roads (later moved and inhabited by George G.) with a larger log building on his new property. A family photograph shows that by circa 1880 the house had been covered with wood or brick siding (characteristically stuccoed under the front verandah, behind the house one can just glimpse a back kitchen wing. Thomas's daughter, Alicia bought the farm from her father in 1891, and she and her sister Minnie lived there and managed the farm until 1899, racking up a toll of notorious rumours in the process: racing a sulky up and down the lane, holding dances in the implement shed, and smacking the lazy hired man while he was still in bed. Alicia sold the farm in 1899, for the next couple of decades it was tenanted or owned by a number of different persons. In 1917, Oscar Trussler bought the farm, and in 1934, Oscar's son Robert and his wife moved into his great-uncle's house. It stayed in the Trussler family until recently sold to the Karen and Gordon Doehn. An indenture (an agreement of purchase and sale) dated March 9, 1841 confirms that George Trussler purchased Lot 145 in 1841 and an indenture dated February 15, 1861 confirms that George Trussler sold some of his lands to his sons. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to physical, functional, visual and historic links between the log house, the smoke house and surrounding farmland. Although the barn and most outbuildings connected with the Page 26 of 454 farming operations are gone, the log house is still situated in its original location. The log house faces south and is setback from Trussler Road on a slight incline. The surrounding lands were traditionally used for mixed farmland and two apple orchards. The original smoke house is located adjacent to the east fagade of the house and was once used to smoke ham and sausages. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 1478 Trussler Road resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the design/physical value of the log house built in the Georgian architectural style with later additions featuring minor influences from the Gothic Revival architectural style, including: o One -and -one-half storey height; o Irregular plan due to the presence of additions; o The original side gable roofline with Gothic dormer; o Log construction; o Door and window openings; and, o The two kitchen annexes. • All elements related to the design/physical value of the smoke house, including: o brick construction; o front gable roof; and, o interior slats of ceiling and attached hooks. • All elements related to the design/physical value of the interior of the log house, including: o The enclosed staircase that rises from the rear through the centre of the house; o The fireplace wall of the old kitchen with its original mantelpiece, bake oven, and warming oven with cabinet above; o Single board door and window surrounds; o Chair and picture rails; o Wainscotting in the present dining room; o Wide floorboards; and, o Original doors (some of which are panelled and some of which, in less public areas, are formed of vertical planks), and door hardware. • All elements related to the contextual value of the property, including: o Original location of the log house; o Orientation of the log house with the front elevation facing south; o Setback of the log house from Trussler Road on a slight incline; o Location of the smoke house; and, o Surrounding farmlands. RPfPrPnr_Pc Google Earth (10.49.0.0 Multi -threaded) (2024). 1478 Trussler Road. [online]. Available from: https://earth.google.com/web/search/1478+Trussler+Road,+Kitchener,+ON/(a)43.3827299,- 80.5175805,368.49006258x,594.1928504d,34.99999875y,Oh,Ot,Or/data=CowBGm ISXAolM Hg4ODJi Page 27 of 454 MGE2YihhOTQVOTJkOOB4NTRmMigOMThINDMwY2Q1ZhnG2RIL bBFQCEHI YJICFUwCohMTQ3 OCBUcnVzc2xlciBSb2FkLCBLaXRiaGVuZXIsIE9OGAIgASImCiQJcmH7DdHcRUARNTEhsAyrRUAZ YaXekYz7U8AhY4o f31 DVMA [Accessed 2024, April 5). Ryan, D. (1991). "Architectural Analysis — 1478 Trussler Road." City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Tausky, N.Z. (2010). "Cultural Heritage Background Study. Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study." City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Waterloo Region Generations (2001-2024). Thomas George Trussler. [online]. Available from: https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personID=1146455&tree=qenerations (Accessed 2024, April 8). Photographs FM oil oil �Al Historic Front Elevation (South Fagade): The house at 1478 Trussler Road c. 1880, viewed from the southwest. On the porch are Hannah and Thomas Trussler and their daughters Lizzie and Emmeline. (Source: Tausky, 2010) Page 28 of 454 i ' � t 4N_ N ■ _I An Front Elevation (South Fagade) — 1478 Trussler Road j' i rr View Looking South East Over the Farm Fields to the Farmhouse — 1478 Trussler Road Page 29 of 454 , 71 M Y �s/rf Interior (Mantle and ovens) — 1478 Trussler Interior (Door, door casing, and wainscot in the Road dining room) — 1478 Trussler Road , 71 M Y �s/rf • . a --. .. Smoke house — 1478 Trussler Road Interior view of smoke house — 1478 Trussler Road Page 30 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 1478 Trussler Road Address: Gothic Revival, rural small house Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Jean Haalboom Recorder: — Date: March 21, 2023 ❑X Front Facade X Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details X 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 X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ 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 X No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 31 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 32 of 454 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 X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ 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 J. Haalboom: main house, blue siding, windows modern, landscape, trees M. Drake: see "Architectural Analysis -1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study" written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 Page 33 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑X occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑X most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 11 of 15 Page 34 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X good Yes ❑X 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Page 12 of 15 Page 35 of 454 1 KrTCHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential X Unknown ❑ Residential X Commercial X What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other X Farm present Office ❑ Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 13 of 15 Page 36 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 J. Haalboom: too far off road to assess, can't see smoke house, in good condition based on what can be seen from the road M. Drake: see "Architectural Analysis -1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study" written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010, log house is covered by sidding 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 Page 14 of 15 Page 37 of 454 1 KrT HENER ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes J. Haalboom: age and material and family (Trussler) should qualify for designation, requires reassessment — arrange with owner/resident for the visit M. Drake: assessments provided in 1991 and 2010, see "Architectural Analysis -1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study" written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 15 of 15 Page 38 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director and Housing and Development Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7602 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: July 22, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-324 SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-015 Construction of a rear -yard addition RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-015 be refused to construct a rear -yard addition on the property municipally addressed as 99 College Street, in accordance with the supporting information submitted with this application. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to present Heritage Planning staff's recommendation for the proposed partial demolition and construction of an addition at the subject property municipally addressed as 99 College Street. • The key finding of this report is that the proposed addition does not meet the policies included within the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District Plan for new additions to existing buildings and would have a negative impact on the integrity of the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District. • 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. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-015 proposes the partial demolition and construction of an addition on the property municipally addressed as 99 College Street. The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighborhood (CCNCHCD) and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The CCNHCD Plan includes various policies for new additions to ensure that any new development or redevelopment within the district is sympathetic to and compatible with the existing buildings within the District. In assessing whether the proposed development satisfies these policies, it is staff's *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 39 of 454 opinion that the proposed addition does not meet these policies and would have a negative impact on the existing building as well as the CCNHCD. BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA- 2024-V-015 (Attachment A) seeking permission for the partial demolition of the laundry room and staircase, and construction of a rear-yard addition on the property municipally addressed as 99 College Street (Fig 1). /- -`226 127 a '103 82 �� 22 MT HOPE HURON PARK/ � 2� 80d 16 2 122 /' �.t-N 125 '4591 �yRF�`S3 76 74 T yvG�OT`P131 115 87 123 115 119 110 111 118 120 83 79 70Hbnar Park 149.. 105 h - .� 10G� -y 116 73 �'� 58 t i� 102 �� 107 71 54 100 103 e94 110 of 6967� 50 11946 ti100 99 -104 136 109 132 1103 .:124 94 88 927 i�51, IN �Sb1�...,\ 84 74 95• X912`^, ��\19j�� '45 4 87� E-t-, Synod777� 65 OfTheE—gd-1 � 066 „78 Lutheran Church InCanada �6258 leexandnan`\ '�' J��/ 74 64 102>.104 ! Ok.9 - 54 66 /\ 107 65 48 / a6 ,� 664CITY COMMERCIAL CORE` R 56 i 57 (4(1n [Sci nvs[ 53 51 ..hnficn S�rence� _ y�4 ,'St Loci: 8 �0 F. r ling Room �� ult L_sr 3� R 52- Rock­Tenn%nrt 7; \ %„5v0 48 44 Chur, 43 h Z n Jnir W rTT. Figure 1. Location Map of subject property REPORT: The subject property is located on the east side of College Street between Weber Street West and Ahrens Street West. The property currently includes a two-and-a-half storey residential dwelling built c. 1910 in the Kitchener Vernacular architectural style (Fig. 2). Page 40 of 454 Figure 2. Front Elevation of subject property The subject property is located within the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The building has been classified as a Group `B' building within the CCNHCD Plan. Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District The CCNHCD is an important historical residential neighborhood that can be linked to several key periods in the development of the City of Kitchener. This neighborhood helps tell the story of Kitchener's phenomenal growth at the turn of the 19th century and of the development of its extensive industrial sector. Almost two-thirds of the existing houses were built between 1880 and 1917 and in most cases were occupied by owners, managers, or workers for some of the key industries that defined the community at the turn of the century. The heritage attributes of the CCNHCD include: • Its association with important business and community leaders during a key era of development in Kitchener; • A wealth of well maintained, finely detailed buildings from the late 1800s and early 1900s that are largely intact; Page 41 of 454 • A number of unique buildings, including churches and commercial buildings, which provide distinctive landmarks within and at the edges of the District-, • A significant range or recognizable architectural styles (Queen Anne, Berlin Vernacular, Italianate, etc.) and features including attic gable roofs, decorative trim, brick construction, porches, and other details, associated with the era in which they were developed-, • The presence of an attractive and consistent streetscape linked by mature trees, grassed boulevards and Ianeways-I and • Hibner Park, Kitchener's second oldest city park, in the centre of the District. Proposed Development at 99 College Street The proposed development at the subject property involves the partial demolition of the rear staircase and laundry room, and the construction of a three-storey addition with basement in order to accommodate eight (8) units on the property (Fig. 3-6). v Q 2N_I R�©R F.F. F_ GROUND FLOOR F D. in ex _ NEW BASEMENT I I RR -9'-2 114• Ex. BASEMENT F.F.- 9'-712' EAST ELEVATION I Vl - EL Figure. 3 — East (side) elevation of the existing dwelling with the proposed addition. Page 42 of 454 D c; e a' aLgp-GE a4'-av4 _ M CEIUNG - t , 19'-4jl4' - v Q 2N_I R�©R F.F. F_ GROUND FLOOR F D. in ex _ NEW BASEMENT I I RR -9'-2 114• Ex. BASEMENT F.F.- 9'-712' EAST ELEVATION I Vl - EL Figure. 3 — East (side) elevation of the existing dwelling with the proposed addition. Page 42 of 454 1 2 3 OP OF EX. ROOF _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TOP OF EX. ROOF n 34' - 01 /4" 34'- 0 114" _ I . II UIS CEILING T1 - UIS CEILING OISTS �8'--5j112" — — — a a — — — — — 28'-5112" � 3RD FLOOR F.F. L — — �_ — — — 3RD FLOOR F.F. AU J 19' 4 314„ __— _— I I 19' - 4 314" 1 1 - 101 1 1 EX.h Q"NDQ"FLOOR F.F. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ 2ND FLOOR F.F. n - 11 3/4" —_ . 9' - 11 314"-V �C - OO r r 1 1 I GROUND FLOOR GROUND FLOOR F.F. 0,-q, - - - - - - F C 0,-0" IN 5 5 GRADE— 3 -- GRADE L� �-' -3'-74 112" -122" 3' - IF, NEW BASEMENT NEW BASEMENT F.F. L J F.F. -9' - 2 114" -9'-21/1 EX. BASEMENT EX. BASEMENT F.F. '-71/2" _ — — — — — — — — — — — — _ — F.F. r1 -9'-71/2" � DSOUTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0, Figure 4. South (rear) elevation of the addition. A T4P O X, ROOF � OP OF EX , ROOF WS CEILINq 115 CEILING A J 1112' _ _ -- V 259 — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ JgI5T5 f� 2%�511Y� Ij 1 � LE �'E 16 � 43+4' IF 4W II 1� I_ m J BRG Fw FF, l\ 1A -{3f4' d +, I IEll - EKi I WL I A RNO-fLti9N F.F. _ _ _ _ — _ � _ �dOfL20H F.F,-� 9'� 11 S!4" 5 5 I 6 5 GRWNO FLOORExe �- I GROIINO FLOON Q�,.C_F_F.__ Aa % IEXl iE% lcx:,,r7 El MEW 9ASEMENf F I I': NEW BASEMENT -B'-211d" EXBASEMENT .� 7 10 r_---- - ---------=r----�.-----�----r�— EX. EASEMENT ANT 6C WEST ELEVATION Figure 5. West (side) elevation of the existing building with the addition. Page 43 of 454 2ND FLOOR F.F. - 11 314" - =W BARRIER -FREE PLATFORM LIFT BY SAVARIA WITH A GLASS ENCLOSURE~- REPLACE GUARD TO MEET MIN. REQUIRED BY O..B,C. MATERIALS TO MATCH EX GRCUNDFLooR _F F. _ 3'-4112" NEW BASEMENT I F.F. -9'- 2 114' EX. BASEMENT _ [1� F.F. L L —E77-1 - TOP OF EX. RODF L� 34'-Oif4" I _ U/S CEILING JOISTS n 28' - 5 112" 3 2 �y TOP OF EX, ROOF F.F. 34 -5 1114" I UIS CEILING I �X) EX.I P JOISTS - - IEX.I - - - - _ 2B'-5112" 3RD FLOOR F.E. qII_ _ I I 19 '-4314„ 2ND FLOOR F.F. - 11 314" - =W BARRIER -FREE PLATFORM LIFT BY SAVARIA WITH A GLASS ENCLOSURE~- REPLACE GUARD TO MEET MIN. REQUIRED BY O..B,C. MATERIALS TO MATCH EX GRCUNDFLooR _F F. _ 3'-4112" NEW BASEMENT I F.F. -9'- 2 114' EX. BASEMENT _ [1� F.F. L L —E77-1 - TOP OF EX. RODF L� 34'-Oif4" I _ U/S CEILING JOISTS n 28' - 5 112" _ 3RD FLOOR F.F• I ' 19'- 4 314" _ 2ND FLOOR F.F. 9'-113f� .NEW PORCH FLOORING TO MATCH EXISTING. :NEW EX.STAIRS. ENSURE RISE'RUN ARE IN ;CORDANCE WITH O.B.C. REQUIREMENTS. GROUND FLOOR F.F. I � 0'-00" GRADE r -3' -4 i!2" J NEW BASEMENT F.F. 9'-2114" I - I �X) l IEX.I I _ 3RD FLOOR F.F• I ' 19'- 4 314" _ 2ND FLOOR F.F. 9'-113f� .NEW PORCH FLOORING TO MATCH EXISTING. :NEW EX.STAIRS. ENSURE RISE'RUN ARE IN ;CORDANCE WITH O.B.C. REQUIREMENTS. GROUND FLOOR F.F. I � 0'-00" NORTH ELEVATION G 0116" = 1'-0" Figure 6. North (front) elevation of the property. According to the heritage permit application and drawings that have been submitted, the addition is proposed to have a gable roof, with dark grey horizontal aluminum siding and white window trims. The application mentions that "the addition is necessary to provide additional housing in accordance with the Provincial Growth Plan". Conformity with the CCHNCHD Policies Repardinp Additions The CCNHCD Plan includes specific goals and policies for the preservation of the existing built heritage stock within the District. One of the Goals of the CCNHCD Plan with respect to buildings include "establishing policies and design guidelines to ensure new development and alterations are sensitive to the heritage attributes and details of the District and are based on appropriate research and examination of archival and/or contextual information." One of the goals regarding Land Use speaks about "ensuring that infill development or redevelopment is compatible with the heritage character and pedestrian scale of the District'. Sections 3.3.2, 6.4 and 6.5 of the Plan include policies that are meant to guide any alterations and additions to existing buildings within the district. These policies include - Page 44 of 454 GRADE r -3' -4 i!2" J NEW BASEMENT F.F. 9'-2114" EX. BASEMENT - F.F. & NORTH ELEVATION G 0116" = 1'-0" Figure 6. North (front) elevation of the property. According to the heritage permit application and drawings that have been submitted, the addition is proposed to have a gable roof, with dark grey horizontal aluminum siding and white window trims. The application mentions that "the addition is necessary to provide additional housing in accordance with the Provincial Growth Plan". Conformity with the CCHNCHD Policies Repardinp Additions The CCNHCD Plan includes specific goals and policies for the preservation of the existing built heritage stock within the District. One of the Goals of the CCNHCD Plan with respect to buildings include "establishing policies and design guidelines to ensure new development and alterations are sensitive to the heritage attributes and details of the District and are based on appropriate research and examination of archival and/or contextual information." One of the goals regarding Land Use speaks about "ensuring that infill development or redevelopment is compatible with the heritage character and pedestrian scale of the District'. Sections 3.3.2, 6.4 and 6.5 of the Plan include policies that are meant to guide any alterations and additions to existing buildings within the district. These policies include - Page 44 of 454 (a) Minor exterior alterations and additions to single detached dwellings shall be permitted provided such alterations are not within any front or side yard. a. The addition is located at the rear of the existing single detached dwelling. However, the addition being proposed would not be considered minor. It is proposed to be 3 -storeys in height and larger in size to the existing dwelling. (b) Structural alterations to the exterior of buildings are not permitted in the event of residential conversion. Any exterior stairs or fire escapes are to be enclosed and kept away from the fagade of the structure. ii. This is not a residential conversion. (c) Major structural alterations to the exterior of buildings are not permitted for conversions in the Office -Residential Conversion designation. iii. This is not a residential conversion. (d) Additions shall be subordinate to the original structure to allow the original structure to allow the heritage features and built form to take visual precedence on the street. iv. The proposed addition is not subordinate to the original heritage due to the following factors: 1. It is bigger in size in than the original structure (11.9 m x 9.04 m) with a liveable area of 95.44 square metres — whereas the existing structure has a liveable area of 83.74 square metres after the proposed demolition of the laundry room and staircase (Fig. 7). Figure 7. Proposed Site Plan for the subject property. 2. The existing building is two -and -a -half storeys in height, and the addition is proposed to be 3 -storeys. This will have an impact on the existing roof and roofline, with the altered roofline being visible from the public realm. It is recommended that the roof of the addition be Page 45 of 454 of a sympathetic design as the existing. The proposed roof has a smaller roof slope and unsympathetically alters the roofline, thereby negatively impacting the roof. 3. Subordination doesn't include just size, but the impact of the addition on the overall appearance and symmetry of the original structure as well. Additions are recommended to be of similar or neutral colours, so they do not negatively detract from the original structure. The proposed addition has dark grey aluminum siding. Due to its size and proposed colour, this addition will be in greater contrast from the existing red brick structure, negatively impacting the existing heritage resource and detracting from the visual prominence that the original structure would have on the streetscape. The proposed roof design, roofline, along with the fenestration pattern has a negative impact on the overall symmetry of the building. Furthermore, there is a paved driveway on the western side of the property along with the driveway of the neighboring property, due to which this addition will be highly visible from the public realm and will have a negative impact on the established streetscape (Fig 8-11). ACROSS THE STREET 3 Figure 8. 3D Views submitted as part of the application Figure 9. View from the street. Approximate location of the addition highlighted by red arrow and will be highly visible from the street. Page 46 of 454 ACROSS THE STRF'-T -a Figure 10. 3D views submitted with the application. Figure 11.View from the street. Approximate location of the addition highlighted by red arrow and will be highly visible from the street. (e) Design guidelines provided in Sections 6.4 and 6.5 of this Plan will be used to review and evaluate application for additions and alterations to ensure that the proposed changes are compatible with the existing dwelling and do not result in irreversible loss of heritage attributes. v. The proposed development has been assessed against these design guidelines in Section 6.5 and have been summarized in the table below. CCNHCD Plan Section and Policy Compliance with the HCD Policy Section 6.5 — Additions to Existing Buildings Policies: • Additions that are The proposed addition is clearly distinguishable from the necessary should original structure, but it is not sympathetic and be sympathetic and complementary in design to the original structure. The complementary in addition does not use traditional materials, finishes and design as possible, colours. The proposed material is aluminum siding in a clearly dark grey colour, which is incompatible with the original distinguishable from structure. Due to these factors, the proposed development the original also does not provide for an appropriate transition between construction by form the addition and the original structure. or detail. The use of traditional materials, finishes, and colours rather than exact duplication of form, can provide appropriate transition between additions and original structures. Page 47 of 454 4 • Additions should be located away from the principal fagade(s) of heritage properties, preferably at the rear of the building, to reduce the visual impact on the street(s). The proposed addition is located at the rear of the property; however, it will have a negative visual impact on the existing home and the street. The paved driveway located on the western portion of the property, along with the driveway of the neighboring property has resulted in the rear portion of the property to be highly visible from the public realm. The proposed addition, with its size, colour, and design, will be highly visible from the public realm and will have a negative visual impact on the street. • Details of the Details of the proposed addition are not complementary to addition should be the original construction with respect to style, scale and complementary to materials. The addition is not compatible in size and scale the original with the existing dwelling. The western elevation of the construction, with proposed facades is almost flush with the existing building, respect to style, with the eastern elevation projecting out (Fig. 12). Good scale, and materials heritage preservation practice recommends that any but distinguishable addition be subordinate in size and massing to the original to reflect the structure, which this addition is not. The proposed roof and historical roofline would result in an undesirable alteration to the construction periods existing roofline. of the building. se v mi 1 �xp rwas o�o, I Figure 12. Western facade of the addition flush with the existing dwelling, with the eastern fagade projecting out. • The height of any The height of the proposed addition is similar to the addition should be existing building; however, the design of the roof is not similar to the compatible with the existing building (Fig 13). Furthermore, existing building due to its size and scale, the addition would most likely and/or adjacent dominate the original building. buildings to ensure that the addition does not dominate the original building, Page 48 of 454 neighboring buildings or the streetscape. - Figure 13. Incompatible roofline of the addition. • Additions should not The addition does not propose to remove any important obscure or remove features of the original building. However, the addition will important impact the roofline of the existing building. architectural features of the existing building. • Additions should not As mentioned above, due to the size, scale and massing of negatively impact the proposed addition, it will have a negative impact on the symmetry and existing dwelling. Furthermore, the existing building is two - proportions of the and -a -half storeys in height, with the proposed addition building or create a being 3 storeys in height, along with the proposed roofline visually unbalanced has resulted in the creation of an unbalanced east and fagade. west fagade and a negative impact on the overall proportions of the building (Fig. 14). oEE 9 QrJ O OO � s pap�pf Figure 14. West elevation of the proposed development. • New doors and New doors and windows are of similar style and windows should be orientation, but not of similar proportion as the existing of similar style, building. The placement and location of the windows on orientation and the proposed addition is not sympathetic to the existing proportion as on the building. Since the roof slope of the existing building and existing building. the addition do not match, the window pattern on the Where possible, addition contribute negatively to the overall proportion of consider the use of the building and contribute to the creation of an appropriate unbalanced east, west, and rear fagade with respect to the reclaimed materials. original construction. Furthermore, the fenestration pattern of the proposed addition is not in alignment with, sympathetic or cohesive to the fenestration pattern of the original dwelling (Fig. 15). Page 49 of 454 There are other sources available to determine whether an addition is complementary and compatible with the existing heritage buildings. The proposed addition does not meet the intent of some of the standards included in the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. These include: • Aim for minimal intervention. o The existing laundry room and staircase located at the rear of the property would have to be demolished and openings on the rear fagade would have to be created to facilitate the construction of the addition. • Make sure the new work is physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place. o As has been demonstrated above, the new addition is not physically and visually compatible with and subordinate to the existing building. It is, however, distinguishable from the historic place. • Design new work so that it could be removed in the future (reversibility). o The new addition could technically be removed in the future through demolition. • Select the location for a new addition so that the heritage value of the original building is maintained. o The addition is located on the rear of the property; however, the scale, massing and style of the addition will have a negative impact on the heritage value of the original building. • Design that new addition in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. o The proposed addition has been designed in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. • Design the addition so that it is compatible in terms of materials and massing with the exterior form of the historic building and its setting. o The proposed addition is not compatible in terms of materials and massing with the exterior form of the historic building and its setting. Due to its proposed size, scale, massing, colour, fenestration pattern, and roof design, Page 50 of 454 dA to c.r P —_—_ — _ __ — _ — ___— L_ LU I I I I w Fig 15. The proposed windows are not in alignment with existing windows, creating an unbalanced fagade. • New construction To facilitate this addition, the existing laundry room and should avoid staircase at the rear of the house will have to be irreversible changes demolished, which is considered an irreversible change to to original original construction. construction. There are other sources available to determine whether an addition is complementary and compatible with the existing heritage buildings. The proposed addition does not meet the intent of some of the standards included in the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. These include: • Aim for minimal intervention. o The existing laundry room and staircase located at the rear of the property would have to be demolished and openings on the rear fagade would have to be created to facilitate the construction of the addition. • Make sure the new work is physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place. o As has been demonstrated above, the new addition is not physically and visually compatible with and subordinate to the existing building. It is, however, distinguishable from the historic place. • Design new work so that it could be removed in the future (reversibility). o The new addition could technically be removed in the future through demolition. • Select the location for a new addition so that the heritage value of the original building is maintained. o The addition is located on the rear of the property; however, the scale, massing and style of the addition will have a negative impact on the heritage value of the original building. • Design that new addition in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. o The proposed addition has been designed in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. • Design the addition so that it is compatible in terms of materials and massing with the exterior form of the historic building and its setting. o The proposed addition is not compatible in terms of materials and massing with the exterior form of the historic building and its setting. Due to its proposed size, scale, massing, colour, fenestration pattern, and roof design, Page 50 of 454 construction of the addition would result in unbalanced facades and its visibility from the public realm would have a negative impact on the historic building and the streetscape. • Find solution to meet accessibility requirements that are compatible with the exterior form of the historic building, i.e., introducing a gently sloped walkway instead of a constructed ramp with handrails in front of an historic building. o n/a • Work with accessibility and conservation specialists and users to determine the most appropriate solution to accessibility issues with the least impact on the character -defining elements and overall heritage value of the historic building. o n/a The policies and guidelines included within the CCNHCD recognizes that development or redevelopment is bound to occur in the HCD. In fact, these policies and guidelines have been put in place based on that assumption. The intent of these policies and guidelines, however, is to guide the compatibility of gentle infill with the existing heritage stock within the HCD, not to restrict it. There have been many properties over the last few years that have been successfully converted to multi -unit residential homes while still meeting the intent of these policies and guidelines. Some of these include, but are not limited to; 53 Margaret Avenue, which included construction a small third -storey addition to the existing triplex, and 58-60 Ellen Street West and 115 Lancaster Street West for which a site plan application has been approved to build a 2 -storey addition to the existing building to increase the number of units. Numerous other additions to existing homes have been supported by staff, only after it has been demonstrated that the proposed additions will not have a negative impact on the existing heritage resource. Staff do not have any concerns with the additional dwelling units proposed within the CCNCHD, however, staff do have concerns regarding the proposed design of the addition and the impact it might have on the existing heritage dwelling and on the streetscape. Staff have communicated a number of design interventions that could be used for the addition to better comply with the policies within the CCNHCD Plan to the applicant's architect, but those interventions have not been integrated into the final design. In reviewing this application, heritage planning staff note that: • The subject property municipally addressed as 99 College Street is located within the Civic Centre Neighborhood Heritage Conservation District and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act; • The proposed development includes the construction of a rear -yard addition to the existing building; • The proposed addition does not meet the policies included within Section 3.3.2 and 6.5 of the CCNCHD Plan related to the additions to existing buildings; • The proposed addition does not meet the intent of most of the standards and guidelines of the Standards and Guidelines of the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada -land • The proposed addition will have a negative impact on the existing dwelling, and because it would be visible from the public realm, the CCNHCD streetscape. Page 51 of 454 As a result, Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed addition to the property municipally addressed as 99 College Street will negatively impact the existing property and the integrity of the CCNHCD. 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 will be consulted on the subject Heritage Permit Application. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2023 APPROVED BY: Garett Stevenson, Acting General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-015 Page 52 of 454 2024 HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS �—� Development & Housing Approvals .L 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor MNER Kitchener ON N2G 4V6 519-741-2426; plan ning@kitchener.ca PART A: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Page 1 of 10 The following requirements are designed to assist applicants in submitting sufficient information in order thal their Heritage Permit Application may be deemed complete and processed as quickly and efficiently as possible. If further assistance or explanation is required please contact heritage planning staff at heritage(a)kitchener.ca. 1. WHAT IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? The Province of Ontario, through the Ontario Heritage Act, has enacted legislation to assist its citizens with the protection and conservation of cultural heritage resources. Once properties are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, the City is enabled to manage physical change to the cultural heritage resources as a means of protection. The principal mechanism of management is the Heritage Permit Application process, which allows the municipality to review site-specific applications and determine if proposed changes will beneficially or detrimentally affect the reasons for designation and heritage attributes. As a general rule, the preferred alterations to heritage properties are those that repair rather than replace original heritage attributes, and those that do not permanently damage cultural heritage resources and their heritage attributes. Where replacement of materials or new construction is necessary, these should be compatible with the original. Reversibility is also preferable as this allows for the future reinstatement of heritage attributes. According to the Ontario Heritage Act, no owner of designated property shall alter the property or permit the alteration of the property if the alteration is likely to affect the property's heritage attributes, unless the owner applies to the council of the municipality and receives written consent. This consent is obtained through the approval of a Heritage Permit Application. Heritage Permit Applications are applicable for all individually designated properties (under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act) and all properties located within the boundaries of Heritage Conservation Districts (designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act). 2. WHEN IS A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIRED? Under the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, any new construction or "alteration" to a property designated under Part IV of the Act (individually designated property) or a property designated under Part V of the Act (within a Heritage Conservation District) requires a Heritage Permit Application. "Alteration" is defined as: "to change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair or disturb." In addition, the approval of a Heritage Permit Application is required for any demolition of a property designated under Part IV or V of the Act. Please contact Heritage Planning staff directly to confirm if your specific project requires the approval of a Heritage Permit Application. Below are some examples of typical Part IV alterations that may require a Heritage Permit Application: • Addition and/or alteration to an existing building or accessory building • Replacement of windows or doors, or a change in window or door openings • Change in siding, soffit, fascia or roofing material • Removal and/or installation of porches, verandahs and canopies • Removal and/or installation of cladding and chimneys • Changes in trim, cladding, or the painting of masonry Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 • Repointing of brick Page 2 of 10 Note: Heritage Permit Application requirements differ between Part V designations depending on the policies and guidelines of the respective Heritage Conservation District Plans. Please refer to the City of Kitchener's website at www.kitchener.ca/heritage to download a copy of the relevant Heritage Conservation District Plan (Civic Centre Neighbourhood, St. Mary's, Upper Doon, and Victoria Park Area). 3. WHAT INFORMATION IS REQUIRED WITH A HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? The information required varies with each application. The intent of the application is to ensure that Heritage Planning staff and, where required, the Heritage Kitchener committee understand the specific details of any proposed changes in order to be sufficiently informed so they may offer advice to the applicant and, where required, to City Council. An incomplete application cannot be processed and the official notice of receipt (as required under the Ontario Heritage Act) will not be issued until all of the documents have been submitted. Failure to provide a complete application may result in deferral by Heritage Planning staff or the Heritage Kitchener committee in order to secure additional information, which will delay final approval. At minimum, the following information is required: Heritage Permit Application Form The applicant must provide a complete original copy, including signature of the owner, of the Heritage Permit Application Form. Written Description The applicant must provide a complete written description of all proposed work. The description should complement drawings, detailed construction plans, photos and any other sketches or supporting information submitted with the application. The written description must include a list and the details of all proposed work including, but not limited to, proposed colours, materials, sizes, etc. Construction and Elevation Drawings Along with construction elevation drawings (drawn to scale) the applicant may also, but not in lieu of, submit a sketch of the proposed work made over a photograph. Drawings must be drawn to scale and include: a) Overall dimensions b) Site plan depicting the location of existing buildings and the location of any proposed new building or addition to a building c) Elevation plan for each elevation of the building d) Specific sizes of building elements of interest (signs, windows, awnings, etc.) e) Detailed information including trim, siding, mouldings, etc., including sizes and profiles f) Building materials to be used (must also be included in the written description) g) Construction methods and means of attachment (must also be included in the written description) Some of the above components may be scoped or waived at the discretion of Heritage Planning staff following discussion with the applicant. Photographs Photographs of the building including general photos of the property, the streetscape in which the property is located, facing streetscape and, if the property is located at an intersection, all four corners. Photos of the specific areas that may be affected by the proposed alteration, new construction, or demolition must be included. Electronic copies of construction and elevation drawings, sketches, and photographs, along with hard copies submitted with the application, are encouraged. Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 Samples Page 3 of 10 It is recommended that applicants bring samples of the materials to be used to the Heritage Kitchener meeting when their application is to be considered. This may include a sample of the windows, brick, siding, roofing material, as well as paint chips to identify proposed paint colours. Other Required Information In some circumstances Heritage Planning staff may require additional information, such as a Heritage Impact Assessment or Conservation Plan, to support the Heritage Permit Application. The requirement for additional information will be identified as early on in the Heritage Permit Application process as possible. Pre - consultation with Heritage Planning staff before formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application is strongly encouraged. 4. WHAT CAN I DO IF MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION IS DENIED? City of Kitchener Heritage Planning staff and the Heritage Kitchener committee endeavour to come to solutions for every Heritage Permit Application submitted. Discussions with the applicant and revisions usually result in successful applications. However, if the municipality refuses your application and you choose not to resolve the issue with a revised application, you have the option of appealing the decision to the Conservation Review Board (for alterations to designated properties under Part IV) or the Ontario Municipal Board (for demolition of property designated under Part IV or for any work to designated property under Part V). 5. IMPORTANT NOTES Professional Assistance Although it is not a requirement to obtain professional assistance in the preparation of this information, the applicant may wish to seek such assistance from an architect, architectural technologist, draftsperson or others familiar with the assessment of buildings and the gathering together of building documents. Building Codes and Other By-laws It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure compliance with all other applicable legislation, regulations and by-laws. These items include the Ontario Building and Fire Codes, and the City's zoning and property standards by-laws. 2024 Heritage Permit Application Submission Deadlines 2024 Heritage Kitchener Meeting Dates November 24, 2023 January 9, 2024 December 29, 2023 February 6, 2024 January 26, 2024 March 5, 2024 February 23, 2024 April 2, 2024 March 29, 2024 May 7, 2024 April 26, 2024 June 4, 2024 - No July Meeting June 28, 2024 August 61 2024 July 26, 2024 September 3, 2024 August 23, 2024 October 1, 2024 September 27, 2024 November 5, 2024 - No December Meeting Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 Page 4 of 10 6. HOW DO I PROCEED WITH SUBMITTING MY HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION? a) Heritage Planning Staff are available to meet with applicants and review all documentation prior to formal submission. Often Heritage Planning staff can assist you with historical and architectural information that might help with your proposed changes. b) Formal submission of a Heritage Permit Application with all supporting documentation (written description, construction drawings, sketch plans, scale drawing, photographs) to Heritage Planning staff are due approximately five (5) weeks prior to a Heritage Kitchener meeting (see schedule for submission deadlines and committee meeting dates). c) Upon confirmation of the submission of a complete application, including the owner's signature and all supporting documentation, Heritage Planning staff will issue a Notice of Receipt, as required by the Ontario Heritage Act, to the Applicant. d) Heritage Planning staff determine whether the Heritage Permit Application may be processed under delegated authority approval without the need to go to Heritage Kitchener and/or Council. Where Heritage Permit Applications can be processed under delegated authority approval without the need to go to Heritage Kitchener and Council, Heritage Planning staff will endeavour to process the application within 10 business days. e) Where Heritage Permit Applications are required to go to Heritage Kitchener, Heritage Planning staff prepare a staff Report based on good conservation practice and the designating by-law, or the guidelines and policies in the Heritage Conservation District Plan. Preparation of the staff Report may require a site inspection. f) Heritage Kitchener Meeting Agenda, including staff Report, circulated to Committee members prior to Heritage Kitchener meeting. Staff Report circulated to applicant prior to meeting. g) Heritage Permit Application is considered at Heritage Kitchener meeting. Heritage Planning staff present staff Report and Recommendations to Heritage Kitchener. Applicants are encouraged to attend the Heritage Kitchener meeting in order to provide clarification and answer questions as required. Failure to attend the Heritage Kitchener meeting may result in a deferral in order to secure additional information, which would delay consideration of the Heritage Permit Application. Where the applicant, Heritage Planning staff, and Heritage Kitchener support the Heritage Permit Application, the application may be processed under delegated authority and approved by the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning. Where the applicant, Heritage Planning staff and/or Heritage Kitchener do not support the Heritage Permit Application, the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation will be forwarded to Council for final decision. h) Where the staff report with recommendation and Heritage Kitchener recommendation are forward to Council for final decision, Council may: 1. Approve the Heritage Permit Application; 2. Approve the Heritage Permit Application on Terms and Conditions; or, 3. Refuse the Heritage Permit Application. i) Within 30 days of receiving Notice of Council's Decision, the applicant may appeal the decision and/or terms and conditions to the Conservation Review Board or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). 7. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO DESIGNATED PROPERTY Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should indicate an understanding of the reasons for designation and heritage attributes of the designated property and, if applicable, the surrounding area, including the following: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 Page 5 of 10 Setting 1. Positioning of the heritage building or structure on the property 2. Lot size related to building size 3. Streetscape (relationship to other properties and structures on the street) Building Details 1. Proportion and massing 2. Roof type and shape 3. Materials and detailing 4. Windows and doors: • Style • Proportions • Frequency or placement 5. Relationship of the heritage building to other buildings on the lot and to the streetscape Heritage Attributes The following applies where a Heritage Permit Application includes work on heritage attributes: Windows and Doors The applicant should consider in order of priority: 1. Repairing or retrofitting the existing units (information on how to make older windows more energy efficient is available from Heritage Planning staff) 2. Replacing the units with new units matching the originals in material, design, proportion and colour 3. Replacing the units with new units that are generally in keeping with the original units If historic window units are proposed to be replaced the application should include the following: • Description of the condition of the existing units • Reasons for replacing the units • Description of the proposed new units If approval to replace historic window units is given, the following action should be considered: • A sample of a window removed should be stored on site in case a future owner wishes to construct a replica of the original • The masonry opening and/or door framing should not be disturbed • Exterior trim should match the original Roofing The application should include: • Description of proposed roofing material to be applied • If there is a request to install a different roofing material, the applicant may wish to investigate what the original material might have been Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 Page 6 of 10 Masonry Work The application should include: A description of the proposed work, materials (type/style of brick, type of mortar mix, etc.) and methods of repair and application • Outline the reasons for the work Signage The application should include: • A general written description of the proposed signage to be installed A scale drawing of the signage with dimensions, materials, methods of construction, colours and means of attachment (the means of attachment should be arranged to anchor into joints between historic masonry units or into wood building elements) • Type of illumination, if applicable Awnings The application should include: • A sketch view of the proposed awning — perhaps over a photo A scale drawing of the awning on the building with dimensions, materials, operating mechanism, method of construction, colours and means of attachment (the means of attachment should be arranged to anchor into joints between masonry units or into wooden building elements) • Type of illumination, if applicable. 8. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION Information presented in the Heritage Permit Application should describe the existing conditions, including the existing setting and existing heritage attributes, of the designated property and the surrounding area, specifically as they relate to the building proposed for demolition. The Heritage Permit Application should provide a detailed rationale for the demolition, including an assessment of the current condition of the building, and a cost comparison identifying the difference in cost to repair and restore the building versus cost to demolish and construct a new building. 9. HERITAGE CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES The Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work (e.g., alteration, new construction or demolition) is consistent with the designating by-law for individual properties (Part IV) or the Heritage Conservation District Plan for properties within a Heritage Conservation District (Part V designation). In addition, the Heritage Permit Application must demonstrate how the proposed work is consistent with the Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (available at www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx). For more information on Heritage Planning in the City of Kitchener please contact our heritage planning staff at heritage(o-)-kitchener.ca. Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Planning Division — 200 King Street West, fit" Floor T P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 K-('HF:'`F.R 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca STAFF USE ONLY Page 7 of 10 Date Received: Accepted By: Application Number: H PA - PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 1. NATURE OF APPLICATION ❑ Exterior ❑ Interior ❑ Signage ❑ Demolition ❑ New Construction ❑ Alteration ❑ Relocation 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY Municipal Address:99 COLLEGE ST, KITCHENER, ON. Legal Description (if know):PLAN 401 PT LOT 7 RP 58R-1450 PART 1 Building/Structure Type: ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ Institutional Heritage Designation: ❑ Part IV (Individual) ❑ Part V (Heritage Conservation District) Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 3. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Address: City/Province/Postal Code: Phone Email: 4. AGENT (if applicable) Name: Company: Address: City/Province/Postal Code: Phone: Email: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2024 5. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION Page 8 of 10 Provide a written description of the project including any conservation methods proposed. Provide such detail as materials to be used, measurements, paint colours, decorative details, whether any original building fabric is to be removed or replaced, etc. Use additional pages as required. Please refer to the City of Kitchener Heritage Permit Application Submission Guidelines for further direction. This prosect consists of a 3 storey addition (11.9m x 9.04m) with basement to the existing 3 storeys with basement. The addition will be located at the back of the ex. building and will connect to the rear wall of the ex. building. The exterior of the ex. building is to remain untouched aside from the rear wall. The addition is to have a dark grey horizontal aluminum siding as a finish with white window trims. 6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work: The addition is necessary to provide additional housinq in accordance to the Provincial Growth Plan. Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage Conservation District Plan: Describe how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx): Existing heritage building is to remain as is without any alterations to the building exterior aside of the rear wall where the addition will join with the existing building. Minimal intervention will be required with the existing building. 7. PROPOSED WORKS a) Expected start date: Expected completion date: b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? ❑ Yes No - If yes, who did you speak to? c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? ■ Yes ❑ No - If yes, who did you speak to? Garett Stevenson b) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? ■ Yes ❑ No c) Other related Building or Planning applications: Application number. Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage 2023 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Page 9 of 10 The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this application by the City of Kitchener - Planning Division does not guarantee it to be a `complete' application. The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will be undertaken and the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could result in a fine being imii ^r—ided for under the Ontario Heritage Act. Signature of Owner/Agent Date: Signature of Owner/Age 9. AUTHORIZATION Date: If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must be completed: I I We, , owner of the land that is subject of this application, hereby authorize Signature of Owner/Agent Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: Date: to act can my I our behalf in this regard. The personal information on this farm 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 (519-747-2769). Working together a Growing thoughtfully • Building community 2024 Application Number: Application Received: Application Complete: Notice of Receipt: Notice of Decision: 90 -Day Expiry Date: PROCESS: ❑ Heritage Planning Staff: ❑ Heritage Kitchener: ❑ Council: Page 10 of 10 STAFF USE ONLY Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community rage eW 'esign studio ltd. 01 November 2023 Planning Department City of Kitchener 200 King Street, West Kitchener, ON N2G 4V6 RE: Written Description for Heritage Permit Good afternoon, The proposed addition will be located to the rear of the property, with the walls entirely concealed by the existing building. The materials selected for the new addition are intended to resemble the appearance of other rear additions that have been done in the neighborhood, using a colour to differentiate it from the original building. The construction and materials for the addition are going to be typical/standard for this type and size of building. The construction will be wood frame with some ICF around the stairs to address the requirement for a 1 -hour Fire Resistance Rating along the Norther property line. The cladding will be vinyl siding with a 5" aluminum frame around the windows with standard asphalt shingle roof. Best Regards, ralet Design Studio Steve Burrows https://facetdesign.sharepoint.com/sites/2207_0399Collegestair/Shared Documents/3—Authorities/1—SPA/23.10.31 Zoning By -Law Amendment, Minor Variance & Heritage Permit Applications/Written Description - Heritage.docx Page 11 of 1 Facet design studio 0 490 Dutton Drive 0 Suite B1 0 Waterloo, ON 0 N2L 61-17 0 519.746.1003 0 facetds.ca 0 dR@gef,6acoiA54 �t ��M�tr6 . I 1� t mor sm- oni n too- mor sm- oni NP4. Aw" 1440, J - ti RM PAN 6oT-Q. w � Wo �4r 'd i ift all FP;*. W/1 97 All p, 4N. rk cr Ap [I ■tea■ �aw� usm� =ss■ _ f 1w*. .. ! .Ire ♦.-' - �1 { _ ,.1,-".'iA '' i.. I � pki Ott •{�. �`v ,n�t'�wp�e�: ' C C? i��t�±�l��:. 4- -' y" fl ,�. 111 'IY CIA . r m ...ray , �" �,� R•.� � � ____. __may dd. P ..•T�+�i' .P r. � 'r e Imo" r� r r. -IT f. �� Fl:rt kv jr !r ,�,,� a 'r`'�► ✓,ate `. Mal— PyAr ,./.•�i� 1 •p tit " k Gm's LL, LU LLJ A R CY) 0- ui D000 � FIN LLlc w old "I> J LLlc_ "I_ olf- o LLIo olN z ,z o to �I> w " Nw LLI m 3 - - - of w w �,vice-s� aso-s�s-,e�.ueu s r ILII c,e O I I I �w Ili s III II x LL F o_ LLI o_ �LL o LLI z LLI wLL III, (x) III II � IIII III I IIII U) I I y Z o O V')LU m i I o LL z z wLL z wig m � N .sees �e LL _ll. ole w oio °Im o w, 0 o LL o, °Im ---W -_----- _ Q w LU CD 03o O S -o v8 - V pp 5om _ 0, 9m3" 0 J — D000 o� Flo n, � FIN LLlc w old "I> J LLlc_ "I_ olf- o LLIo olN z ,z o to �I> w " Nw LLI m 3 - - - of w w �,vice-s� aso-s�s-,e�.ueu s r ILII c,e O I I I �w Ili s III II x LL F o_ LLI o_ �LL o LLI z LLI wLL III, (x) III II � IIII III I IIII x I I i I o LL z z wLL z wig m � N .sees �e LL _ll. ole w oio °Im o w, 0 o LL o, °Im o� Flo n, � FIN LLlc w old "I> J LLlc_ "I_ olf- o LLIo olN z ,z o to �I> w " Nw LLI m 3 - - - n r ILII O O O I I aTTT s x LL F o_ LLI o_ �LL o LLI z LLI wLL z O a W J W b 0 m 0 0 0 0 o - 0 0 SII>w�`Nw-17 �,vc .eso a s a .ueu a w -- - - - - -------�I I� � ill � I i ,III N III II O - - I O - � II ILEI I I I , I of ml NI 0 �x a) awl LZI I III II II I I I I IIII I I o ' O W - W W J �i a w W LLII LLII °LLII LLII SII LLII LLII oLLl LL oe wLL wLL w, � o, o. - wLL wLL O o_ o_ 3 a 83 ° zz Q g CV CY) m ---------- -w a w z 9 w - I J CD 030 O S -o v8 Z — V pp 5om _ 0, 9m3" 0 J — 0 0 0 0 o - 0 0 SII>w�`Nw-17 �,vc .eso a s a .ueu a w -- - - - - -------�I I� � ill � I i ,III N III II O - - I O - � II ILEI I I I , I of ml NI 0 �x a) awl LZI I III II II I I I I IIII I I o ' O W - W W J �i a w W LLII LLII °LLII LLII SII LLII LLII oLLl LL oe wLL wLL w, � o, o. - wLL wLL O o_ o_ 3 a ---W-z----- 9 _ LU Q LU -- - - —- _ 5 ° cn O v8 V w 0) cm3 Q e3� 0) mr i� r MITI F,* _ f 6 • -_ 1^Ilp • I�I� r'ry�aV�� �I�''�l4'illlllll��l!I!I o JJ i �����Nu I'�'IJJ 1l'11�55�15 1ih4�JJi411Y yyy,y 444444J444i SCJ yyyyy��,yy�yyy 5155555541, i5 . D — uru11 L1 JueS��ueueue �e J JuSu' S IIFEW [.................' W '— ............. I-- z W T z W W Li z L z ®u o J v N � C� N U Z m € x I a6 SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT PART 1 PLAN OF SURVEY OF PART OF LOT 7 NORTH OF WEBER ST. AND EAST OF COLLEGE ST. D. WEBER'S SURVEY REGISTERED PLAN 401 CITY OF KITCHENER REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO SCALE 1:250 MTE OLS LTD. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS f_.P- IM T. SOUIII OF NIRENS SIRFLT - S, SOUM OF W1REN5 SfRFET - _ IM 7. NORM OF WE9IX STREET -- _ LOf & NORTH OF WE9aR SIREEi I I � ;'.{;?T :, nl.•il`% .,...."I•f::D P.I.N. 11J15-009] (Lr) P.LN. i 1131a-0948 (L'h RWCK OIY6IMS I 10 j I^wrP,. P3 aET)` MOOR Ir. FENT£ I L5D.1z,.rP,. P7 -- 47.97 y 157 P.I.N. 113fa-004] (LT) Jdli1-• •� O DENOTES PLANTED MONUMENT ■DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT SIB DENOTES STANDARD IRON BAR SSIB DENOTES SHORT STANDARD IRON BAR IB DENOTES IRON BAR IP DENOTES IRON PIPE OU DENOTES ORIGIN UNKNOWN WIT DENOTES WITNESS MEAS DENOTES MEASURED P.I.N. DENOTES PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (LT) DENOTES LAND TITLES MTE DENOTES MTE OLS LTD. 1191 DENOTES GUENTHER RUEB SURVEYING LTD. RP DENOTES REGISTERED PWJ BE DENOTES BOARD FENCE CLF DENOTES CHAIN LINK FENCE ME DENOTES METAL FENCE RW DENOTES REFAINING WALL P1 DENOTES PLAN 58R-1450 P2 DENOTES PLAN SOR-8073 P3 DENOTES PLAN OF SURVEY BY MTE OLS., FILE NO. 43512-108-SR1 MEMIC. DISTANCES AND COORDINATES SHOWN ON THIS PUN ARE IN METRES AND CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048. NOTES: BEARINGS ARE UTM GRID, DERIVED FROM GPS OBSERVATIONS USING THE CAN -NET NETWORK AND ARE REFERRED TO UTM ZONE 17, NAD83 (CSRS V7j EPOCH 2O1D.00. DISTANCES ON THIS PUN ARE GROUND DISTANCES AND CAN SE CONVERTED TO GRID DISTANCES BY MULTIPLYING BY THE COMBINED SCALE FACTOR OF 0.999573. FOR BEARING COMPARISON, ROTATIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED TO THE FOLLOWING PUNS TO CONVERT THEM TO GRID BEARINGS PLAN ID ROTATION AMOUNT DIRECTION 5BR-1450 (P1 1'115- COUNIER-CLOCKWISE 43512-108-SR1 (P3) 011'15' CLOCKWISE SURVEYOR'S CE7mRC47E: I CERRFY THAT: 1. THIS SURVEY AND PLN ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS ACT, THE SURVEYORS ACT AND THE LAND TITLES ACT AND THE REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THEM. 2. THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON THE 25th DAY OF JANUARY .2023 FES& 27, 9023 TREVOR DA WNEIL ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR THIS PIAN OF SURVEY RELATES 70 AOLS PLAN SUBMISSION FORM NUMBER' V-39850 Page 77 of 454 L_ii I P.LN. 1zJfa-D144 (Lr) I 1137a P..n. _ .. P.4ii7 i.PLAA- ----------- Jdli1-• •� O DENOTES PLANTED MONUMENT ■DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT SIB DENOTES STANDARD IRON BAR SSIB DENOTES SHORT STANDARD IRON BAR IB DENOTES IRON BAR IP DENOTES IRON PIPE OU DENOTES ORIGIN UNKNOWN WIT DENOTES WITNESS MEAS DENOTES MEASURED P.I.N. DENOTES PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (LT) DENOTES LAND TITLES MTE DENOTES MTE OLS LTD. 1191 DENOTES GUENTHER RUEB SURVEYING LTD. RP DENOTES REGISTERED PWJ BE DENOTES BOARD FENCE CLF DENOTES CHAIN LINK FENCE ME DENOTES METAL FENCE RW DENOTES REFAINING WALL P1 DENOTES PLAN 58R-1450 P2 DENOTES PLAN SOR-8073 P3 DENOTES PLAN OF SURVEY BY MTE OLS., FILE NO. 43512-108-SR1 MEMIC. DISTANCES AND COORDINATES SHOWN ON THIS PUN ARE IN METRES AND CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048. NOTES: BEARINGS ARE UTM GRID, DERIVED FROM GPS OBSERVATIONS USING THE CAN -NET NETWORK AND ARE REFERRED TO UTM ZONE 17, NAD83 (CSRS V7j EPOCH 2O1D.00. DISTANCES ON THIS PUN ARE GROUND DISTANCES AND CAN SE CONVERTED TO GRID DISTANCES BY MULTIPLYING BY THE COMBINED SCALE FACTOR OF 0.999573. FOR BEARING COMPARISON, ROTATIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED TO THE FOLLOWING PUNS TO CONVERT THEM TO GRID BEARINGS PLAN ID ROTATION AMOUNT DIRECTION 5BR-1450 (P1 1'115- COUNIER-CLOCKWISE 43512-108-SR1 (P3) 011'15' CLOCKWISE SURVEYOR'S CE7mRC47E: I CERRFY THAT: 1. THIS SURVEY AND PLN ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYS ACT, THE SURVEYORS ACT AND THE LAND TITLES ACT AND THE REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THEM. 2. THE SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON THE 25th DAY OF JANUARY .2023 FES& 27, 9023 TREVOR DA WNEIL ONTARIO LAND SURVEYOR THIS PIAN OF SURVEY RELATES 70 AOLS PLAN SUBMISSION FORM NUMBER' V-39850 Page 77 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Kirsten Hoekstra, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7078 Michelle Drake, Senior Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7839 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 15, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-345 SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-014 - 103 Lorne Crescent - Demolition and new construction RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-V-014 be approved to permit the demolition of a detached one car -garage and construction of a new shed on the property municipally addressed as 103 Lorne Crescent, in accordance with the supplementary information submitted with the application. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to present Heritage Planning staff's recommendation for the proposed demolition of a detached one -car garage and construction of a new shed at the same location, at the subject property municipally addressed as 103 Lorne Crescent. • The key finding of this report is that the demolition of the detached one -car garage and the construction of a new shed at the same location will not negatively impact the heritage attributes of the subject property, the Lorne Crescent streetscape, or the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation 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 78 of 454 BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA- 2024-V-014 seeking permission to demolish a detached one -car garage and construct a new shed, at the subject property municipally addressed as 103 Lorne Crescent. Veterans Park U 5!� Figure 1. Location of the subject property municipally addressed as 103 Lorne Crescent The subject property is located within the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District (SMHCD), which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The SMHCD Plan indicates that the construction of any storage sheds and the demolition of a building or structure within the designated district requires a Heritage Permit Application. Furthermore, Section 42 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 Lorne Crescent between Delaware Avenue and Seneca Drive, within the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District (SMHCD). The building was constructed circa 1946 in the Victory Housing architectural style. The detached one -car garage was built circa 1948. The garage is one storey in height and is set back from the house at the rear of the property. Proposed Demolition Section 1.4 of the SMHCD Plan has four (4) policies that indicate the core heritage conservation principals of the district. One of these policies speaks to the demolition of heritage structures in the district: The existing residential building stock of Veteran housing Page 79 of 454 is considered to be of heritage interest. These policies do not address the demolition of non-residential buildings. Figure 2: Front elevation of detached one -car garage The applicant is proposing to demolish the detached one -car garage in the rear of the property due to structural damage from the growth of a large maple tree located behind the garage. The tree has grown into a corner of the garage causing it to shift and lean to the left. Extensive repairs, possibly rebuilding the garage, would be required to return the garage to its original state. A repaired or new garage would continue to be impacted by the growth of the maple tree. The applicant has indicated that following demolition, gravel will be laid at the location where the garage was removed, and that the maple tree will be retained. Figure I Right side elevation of garage demonstrating extensive tree growth and damage Page 80 of 454 Figure 4: Right side elevation of garage illustrating the distance between the maple tree and the garage Figure 5: Branches protruding from the corner of the garage Proposed Exterior Addition (New Shed) Section 4.4.1 of the SMHCD Plan speaks to the traditional materials that are encouraged to be used for new construction: Wall materials for use in new construction are encouraged to be wood cladding (either as clapboard or shingles). Limited use or small Page 81 of 454 areas of synthetic cladding may be permitted on secondary facades or when used with traditional materials on principal facades. Use of concrete or synthetic masonry units or brick while unlikely, could be used. Additionally, Section 2.4.1 of the SMHCD Plan speaks to the design considerations for garages and ancillary structures: Garages and ancillary structures are best located behind the main fagade and should be located in traditional areas for these functions, usually towards the rear of the lot. The applicant is proposing to construct a new shed generally in same location as the detached garage, but away from the maple tree. The shed will be located behind the main fagade in the traditional location used for these structures as seen throughout Lorne Crescent and the broader SMHCD. The dimensions of the proposed shed will be 8'x10' or 10'x10'. As the size of the shed will be less than 108 square feet, a building permit to construct/place the new shed will not be required. The applicant has advised staff that the shed will not be permanent but a movable pre -constructed shed that they will be placing at the original location of the garage. The applicant has also indicated that the proposed shed will have wood siding and be painted either white or grey. Heritage Planning Staff Comments In reviewing the merits of this application, Heritage Planning Staff note the following: - The subject property is located within the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District and therefore designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act; - The garage is in poor condition. No changes or alternations to the historic residential building will occur through the demolition of the garage; - The proposed new shed will not be greater in mass or scale than the historic residential building; - The proposal is in keeping with the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District Plan policies for demolition, garages and the construction of storage sheds; and, - The proposal will not detract from the character of the property, the integrity of the Lorne Crescent streetscape, nor the St. Mary's 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 the detached garage. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 82 of 454 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-014 Page 83 of 454 2024 Page 7 of 10 HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Development & Housing Approvals * 200 King Street West, 6'h Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4V6 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca STAFF USE ONLY Date Received: Accepted By: PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 1. NATURE OF APPLICATION ❑ Exterior ❑ Interior ❑ Signage Demolition ❑ New Construction ❑ Alteration Application Number: j H PA - ❑ Relocation 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY Municipal Address: A -b r-ne-. Legal Description (if know): tiaM aY�C Building/Structure Type: ' Residential El Commercial El Industrial El Institutional ,rx e Heritage Designation: ❑ Part IV (Individual) 2 Part V (Heritage Conservation District) Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement? e'Yes ❑ No 3. PROP Name Addre City/P Phone Email: 4. AGENT (if applicable) Name: Company:. _ Address: City/Province/Postal Code: Phone: Email: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community 2024 5. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION Page 8 of 10 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. n i �i tri CO- 0-n e. — Ca, r' ad ra 9G ?. u _ L. s r 6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work:: a. a,ca Describe how the proposal is consistent wit¢f the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage Conservation District Plan: Describe how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (www.historicglaces. ca/en/paces/st��andar/ds-normes..asp x): h S lIli��, �� I.U1 11 h c, /?/I�i �aAr_� 4L A %-,4-Y-;C _ / t& -Ix_- ;• 7. PROPOSED WORKS } a) Expected start date: r c ��Ir Expected completio date: ` b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? Zes ❑ No - If yes, who did you speak to? c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? ❑ Yes No - If yes, who did you speak to?_ d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? ❑ Yes No e) Other related Building or Planning applications: Application number il { Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community 2024 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Page 9 of 10 The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this application by the City of Kitchener - Planning Division does not guarantee it to be a 'complete' application. The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will be undertaken and the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could result in a fine being imposed or imprisonment as provided for under the Ontario Heritage Act. Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: L" �, r, Signature of Owner/Agent: Date:_ 9. AUTHORIZATION If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must be completed: / We, hereby authorize Signature of Owner/Agent: owner of the land that is subject of this application, Date: Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: to act on my/ our behalf in this regard. 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 2024 STAFF USE ONLY Application Number: Application Received: Application Complete: Notice of Receipt: _ Notice of Decision: - 90 -Day Expiry Date: PROCESS: Page 10 of 10 ❑ Heritage Planning Staff:, ❑ Heritage Kitchener: ❑ Council: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building community FW: Garage Pictures From: 16: [)oie€ Wednesday, June 26, 2024 at 01:33 p.m. EDT I don't have a printer at home. Would you mind printing these pictures for me to send in to the historical committee to get a demolition permit. Thanks Sent from my Galaxy ----- Ori final messa a From: Date: 2024-06-26 1:26 p.m. (GMT -05:00) To: Subject: arage ictures Page 88 of 454 ' i M .�' 1 . .4,. �A I ''�I i 'ea � i' �F 'I 15(�' L k J Irr fly ;° + �J 4 , •+ 7 , old 1 5� � 3• e��,K+_�� � °.�r' - � �I� L � 71 +�� '•'f- �t� �' �ifl �' °' % ? dl, r � ±a �}�' P }' �Jj°' � ' 41� '�F. }r' *li _s yhr 'f 'YR�°�° •� 'e�� 11 � 4,t• „ 71 10, 17,JR i ~►. . .I OrF, �3.= f *� wf 44 �L •ry>iT r .8'k�', fir. .. # '`7*' ;#` • '� I F i� 1p .6p.. 'or y r+ L. s i '�. y, °� 4°f ''4 5,'�' I•i4 �' ,�'y' r �.s+ �,a �/ tg S 4 4F . r �r • s4 =i list* ig n ilk M to Y Mei '4s ev s IA Page 91 of 454 Page 92 of 454 4 A � 1w a r v ii ble wall/floor deformity s ti r 6N 4v M au in cl FU fY R 14. ru fv V ly 14 IV co W4 e4 4.4 Page 93 of 454 tree rove i n into garagecausing cement to crack and •° building to r,4_ w t a "'lean left Page 94 of 454 2024 STAFF USE ONLY i7at� Received; HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION & SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Development & Housing Approvals 200 King Street West, 6th Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4V6 519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca H PA - PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM tuber; Page 7 of 10 'I. NAT,I:fRia OF APPLICATION Q Exterior ❑ Interior ❑ Signage ❑ Demolition ❑ New Construction ❑ Alteration ❑ Relocation 2. SUBJECT PROPERTY / Municipal Address: s Legal Description (if know),: ,, Building/Structure Type: L�'] Residential ❑ Commercial El Industrial El Institutional Heritage Designation: ElU Part IV (Individual) Part V (Heritage Conservation District) Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 3. PROP Name: Ad Cit Ph Err 4. AGENT (if applicable) Name: Company: Address: City/Province/Postal Code:_ Phone: Email: Working together . Growing thoughtfully • Building community 2024 5. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION Page 8 of 10 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 - (a -4-e_ r J 2 mo 1 4 1 11 d -r aa,r-o-.9 e� AUl1tq a stela as rd ey, S hey n `f I~e SQ '/0cj rL h tu �- 1 e 6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work: S k eJ cL) %(1 -be u -S Lf, GX , Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage Conservation District Plan:1w-v- Describe how the proposal is consistent with Parks Canada's Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (www.historicl)laces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx): 7. PROPOSED WORKS a) Expected start date: c►ti'_ -� Expected conipletin date: b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff? ❑ Yes ❑ No - If yes, who did you speak to? c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? ❑ Yes No - If yes, who did you speak to? d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? ❑ Yes 01N o tee I` � e) Other related Building or Planning applications: Application number/ je-mo <<71: 4 LP- J 0- Fa�94_ Working together + Growing thoughtfully a Building community 2024 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Page 9 of 10 The undersigned acknowledges that all of the statements contained in documents filed in support of this application shall be deemed part of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that receipt of this application by the City of Kitchener - Planning Division does not guarantee it to be a `complete' application. The undersigned acknowledges that the Council of the City of Kitchener shall determine whether the information submitted forms a complete application. Further review of the application will be undertaken and the owner or agent may be contacted to provide additional information and/or resolve any discrepancies or issues with the application as submitted. Once the application is deemed to be fully complete, the application will be processed and, if necessary, scheduled for the next available Heritage Kitchener committee and Council meeting. Submission of this application constitutes consent for authorized municipal staff to enter upon the subject property for the purpose of conducting site visits, including taking photographs, which are necessary for the evaluation of this application. The undersigned acknowledges that where an agent has been identified, the municipality is authorized but not required to contact this person in lieu of the owner and this person is authorized to act on behalf of the owner for all matters respecting the application. The undersigned agrees that the proposed work shall be done in accordance with this application and understands that the approval of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act shall not be a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation including but not limited to the requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning By-law. The undersigned acknowledges that in the event this application is approved, any departure from the conditions imposed by the Council of the City of Kitchener or from the plans or specifications approved by the Council of the City of Kitchener is prohibited and could result in a fine being imposed or imprisonment as provided for under the Ontario Heritage Act. Signature of Owner/Agen Date: Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: 9. AUTHORIZATION If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must be completed: I / We, . owner of the land that is subject of this application, hereby authorize Signature of Owner/Age Date: Signature of Owner/Agent: Date: to act on my/ our behalf in this regard. 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 2024 STAFF USE ONLY Application Number: Application Received:,_ Application Complete: Notice of Receipt: Notice of Decision: 90 -Day Expiry Date:__ PROCESS: ❑ Heritage Planning Staff: ❑ Heritage Kitchener: _ ❑ Council: Working together • Crowing thoughtfully • Building community Page 10 of 10 . I - I. -k�- - FW: From: To: Date: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 at 01:40 p.m. EDT Also need to print these pictures please. Sent from my Galaxy ---- Original message --- From: Date: 2024-06-26 1:35 p.m. (GMT -05:00) To: Subject: Page 100 of 454 T R�` 4, • '+�} i� ply � �tM1r � 1 S �r n 4. o ` 4`. 1y Page 102 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 4, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-335 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 113-151 Charles Street West/ 170- 180 Joseph Street/ 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The key finding of this report is that 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) meets (7) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical and historical/associative values. There are no financial implications. Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener. Should *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 103 of 454 Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North (Lang Site A) is a complex of approximately 15 interconnected industrial buildings ranging in height from one to five storeys built between 1896 and 2012 primarily in the Industrial Vernacular architectural style. The buildings are situated on a 3.95 -acre parcel of land bounded by Charles, Francis, Joseph and Victoria Streets in the City Commercial Core Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value are the industrial buildings. 3' } �P RIO R11 R12 � 3 f 38 J 5th 0222 f88 206 0223 27 0303 G ti 0317 12 � H 69 � C 33 $ / Lsn9 Green _ C414 / L / 1 1 44 F SEpy$j.. Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (Lang Site A) A full assessment of 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North (Lang Site A) has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets seven (7) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 113-151 Charles Street West / 170- 188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North (Lang Site A) should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023 in response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowners Protection Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 113-151 Charles Street West / 170- 188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North (Lang Site A) was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 17, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" Page 104 of 454 prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Aerial View of Lang Site A in the Foreground REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North (Lang Site A) is recognized for its design/physical and historical/associative, values. It satisfies seven (7) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Page 105 of 454 Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North demonstrates design or physical value as a good example of an early (20th century) complex of buildings designed primarily in the Industrial Vernacular architectural style that reflect the evolution of the tanning industry (ERA Architects Inc., 2008). Simple brick detailing and durable finishes demonstrate the functional and industrial history of the building use. The buildings have many intact heritage attributes in good condition. The oldest portions of the site were built between 1896 and 1904 and include: the former two- to three-storey beam and currying house at Victoria Street and the two-storey leach house at the centre of the site. The remaining buildings were constructed between 1904 and 1917, with significant alterations and additions occurring between 1917 and 1925 and again between 2010 and 2012. The buildings that best exemplify the Industrial Vernacular architectural style between 1904 and 1925 include: the former administration and production buildings at the corner of Charles and Francis Streets; the former beam and storage house along Charles Street; and, the former leach house along Joseph Street. Front (North) FaQade The main entrance to the complex of buildings faces Charles Street West. Page 106 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it Unknown demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Yes 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 No 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. Yes Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North demonstrates design or physical value as a good example of an early (20th century) complex of buildings designed primarily in the Industrial Vernacular architectural style that reflect the evolution of the tanning industry (ERA Architects Inc., 2008). Simple brick detailing and durable finishes demonstrate the functional and industrial history of the building use. The buildings have many intact heritage attributes in good condition. The oldest portions of the site were built between 1896 and 1904 and include: the former two- to three-storey beam and currying house at Victoria Street and the two-storey leach house at the centre of the site. The remaining buildings were constructed between 1904 and 1917, with significant alterations and additions occurring between 1917 and 1925 and again between 2010 and 2012. The buildings that best exemplify the Industrial Vernacular architectural style between 1904 and 1925 include: the former administration and production buildings at the corner of Charles and Francis Streets; the former beam and storage house along Charles Street; and, the former leach house along Joseph Street. Front (North) FaQade The main entrance to the complex of buildings faces Charles Street West. Page 106 of 454 The five -storey building at the north east corner of the site is the former administration building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of doors and windows; changes to the size of original openings; introduction of canopy signage; and, introduction of a barrier -free access. The second - storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone stills; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; lionhead tie rods located on the brick pilasters at the second-, third- and fourth -storey; and, decorative brickwork. The fifth - storey features: buff brick; 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; decorative brickwork; and, painted signage that reads "LANG'. Figure 3: Front Elevation (North Facade) — Former Buildings of the Lang Tanning Co. Administration and Tan Yard The four -storey building west of the former administration building is the former tan yard building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; addition of a new double doors; and, introduction of canopy and fascia signage with gooseneck lighting. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; new 12 - pane flathead windows with stone sills; and decorative brickwork. Page 107 of 454 The one -storey building west of the former tan yard building is a recent (c. 2010-12) addition to the complex. It features contemporary design that is compatible with the complex of historic buildings on the site. It features a shallow side -gable roof, beige and brown horizontal cladding, and lots of glazing. Behind the one -storey building is a four - storey building that once functioned as the leach house for the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and two buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. For the most part, only the third- and fourth -storey are visible from the pedestrian level on Charles Street West. The east bay of the third- and fourth -storey features a new single 6/6 flat head hung window beside a perhaps former circular window opening with a brick surround on each storey. The west bay of the third- and fourth -storey features two new side by side 6/6 flat head hung windows with a stone header and a stone sill. West of the one -storey addition is another one -storey vestibule addition and a central tower (c. 2010-12) that connects the former leech house to the former beam and storage house. The vestibule and central tower are of contemporary design that is compatible with the complex of historic buildings on the site. It features a unique roof line that is like the shallow side gable roof of the one -storey building addition but instead the side gable is inverted. The walls are clad with glazing. The last building that fronts onto Charles Street is the three-storey former beam and storage house of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 15 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows and doors; addition of windows and doors; and, introduction of canopy signage. The second -storey and third -storey feature: buff brick and new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills. The second -storey features painted signage that reads "The Lang Tannery Company Limited". The third -storey features: the new municipal address number "151"; two sets of clerestory windows with internal muntins reflecting a 6 -pane design; and, backlit channel letter fascia signs of current tenants. Side (East) Facade; The east side fagade faces Francis Street South. The five -storey building at the north east corner of the site is the former administration building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of doors and windows; changes to the size of original openings; and, introduction of a new exterior fire escape. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone stills; 4/4 wood windows with segmentally arched brick voussiors and stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 8 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 4/4 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, decorative brick work between the third- and fourth - storey. The fifth storey features: buff brick; new 4/4 flathead hung windows with stone sills; decorative brick work; and, painted signage that reads "LANG'. The four -storey building west of the former administration building is the former production building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 16 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; alterations to window and door openings; and, introduction of canopy signage. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and Page 108 of 454 stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; 1/1 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; 1 -pane flathead window with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; decorative brickwork; and, painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED. HARNESS & SOLE LEATHER." Side (West) Facade The west side fagade faces Victoria Street South. A one- and three-storey building directly abut the sidewalk. The three-storey building is the former beam and storage house of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 5 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; alterations to the size of window openings; and, replacement of the windows. The second -storey and third -storey feature: buff brick and new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills. The second- and third -storey features an exterior fire escape. There are metal tie -rods on the brick pilasters between the first- and second -storey as well as the second- and third - storey. The side elevation of the former tan yard building is setback approximately 90 metres from Victoria Street South. This building has a flat roof and two wide buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: using salvaged brick to enclose the building wall; adding contemporary windows; adding a contemporary door; and, installing a channel letter fascia sign with gooseneck lights. The second -storey features three new 6/6 flathead hung windows with stone sills. The fourth -storey features painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED HARNESS AND SOLE LEATHERS". Rear (South) FaQade The rear fagade faces Joseph Street and features a one -storey building at the corner of Joseph Street and Victoria Street South, the four -storey former leach house, new exterior courtyard, and the four -storey former production building. The one -storey building has a flat roof and 17 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The building has been altered, including: painting the brick; changes to the size of door and window openings; new windows; new entrances; new exterior stairs; and, new canopy signs. The four -storey former leach house has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the building; installation of new windows in place of former shipping bay doors; and, installation of new 12/12 flathead hung windows with stone sills. The second- through fourth -storey features new flathead 6/6 hung windows with stone lintels and sills. The former production building has a flat roof and three buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; and, alterations to window and door openings. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; and, decorative brickwork. West of the former production building is a four -storey concrete addition. The first -storey has been altered, including: painted of the concrete; replacement of the windows; and, replacement of a door. The second -storey features new 6/6 flathead hung windows with segmentally arched concrete header and concrete sill. The third -storey features four different window designs (1/1; single lite; and, 6/6) all with segmentally arched concrete header and concrete sill. The fourth -storey features six new 6/6 hung windows with flatheads and stone sills. Page 109 of 454 Interior The interior of the original buildings feature: generous floor to ceiling heights; wood beams and flooring; wood staircases; exposed structural columns and mechanical systems; freight elevators with wood gates; and, metal fire separation doors with original weights and pulleys. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N has historic/associative value due to its history and association with early settlement, the Six Nations, Joseph Brant, Colonel Richard Beasley, Pennsylvanian German Mennonites, the first permanent non-native settlement (now Kitchener), the German Company Tract, the Township of Waterloo, German speaking immigrants, Berlin as the County seat for the County of Waterloo, the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) extension, the leather tanning industry, and Reinhold Lang. These values were extensively documented in a Heritage Impact Assessment written by ERA Architects Inc. in 2008 and based on this research are further described below. The land now known as the City of Kitchener was located far inland and isolated from centres of commerce. As a result, the land attracted the settlement of Pennsylvania German Mennonite farmers who were attracted to the promise of inexpensive land and the guarantee of religious freedoms. By the end of 1800, the first permanent non-native settlement was established in what is now the City of Kitchener. Shortly after a group of Mennonites purchased all the unsold land from Beasley and formed the German Company Tract (GCT). The GCT divided it's 60,000 acres into 130 farmsteads thus establishing a Pennsylvania Mennonite colony in Upper Canada. In 1816 the GCT became the Township of Waterloo. This marked the beginning of steady migration of German speaking Europeans to the area between the 1820s and 1870s. Population growth and infrastructure improvements (e.g., road upgrades) helped establish the urban centre that became Berlin (now Kitchener) in 1833. Twenty years later, in 1853, Berlin became the County seat for the County of Waterloo and three years later the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) was extended to Berlin. This opened the area to future industrialization. The skilled trades and industrial knowledge of the German immigrants contributed to Berlin's industrialization. Leather tanning became Berlin's first major industry. In 1848, Reinhold Lang came to Berlin from Baden, Germany. The Lang Tanning Company was founded in 1849. The business was originally located at the northeast corner of King and Ontario Streets. This tannery made all classes of leather required for saddlers and shoemakers. Unfortunately, this building was destroyed by fire in 1853. Reinhold Lang rebuilt his business by purchasing a large piece of land at the corner of Francis and King Streets. The property once featured several natural springs and a small creek that would provide a good water supply for the tannery. His new single frame building was built on the corner of Charles and Francis Streets and eventually grew into an industrial complex occupying nearly three city blocks. This site reflects the organizational, technological, and market changes of the tanning industry. Page 110 of 454 Reinhold emerged as a prominent local resident as the industrial centre of Berlin continued to grow. In 1859, he was elected to Berlin Council where he was one of two businessmen proposing a motion for a "factory" policy that would provide exemptions and bonuses to new and expanding business. Many of Berlin's most prominent and prosperous firms were aided by this policy. Industry and politics were linked with Berlin's Council relying heavily on it's Board of Trade for advice. Many of Berlin's industrial families sat on local ward committees set up by the Board to assist with the passage of legislation. These families lived in the ward they represented, which contributed to an enhanced sense of community. The Board not only supported industrial expansion, but it also sponsored German cultural events throughout the late 1800s. Reinhhold's sons (George, William, John and August) and grandsons (Louis L, Reinhold, Jerome and George W.) were also prominent figures in the community. In 1887, his son, John A. Lang built his home at the northwest corner of Charles and Francis Streets to be close to the business in order to oversee daily activities. His home was sold to the company in 1897 to serve as offices until operations stopped in 1954. The home was demolished in the 1990s. Over the years, in addition to the tanning industry, the Lang family was also involved in the insurance, banking, hydro and land use planning. By the late 19th century, Berlin was a major industrial centre in Canada and it's economic success has been attributed to the industry and pride of the community. By 1904, the original Lang buildings started to be replaced, expanded, or converted from frame to more permanent brick or iron construction. Berlin became a city in 1912 and was considered Canada's German capital. It appears that some of the changes to the complex of buildings were a result of the company's involvement in the production of wartime supplies. World War One (WW1) caused anti -German sentiment, which resulted in the name change to Kitchener, after a British General. During WW1, the Lang Tanning Co. became the largest sole leather producer in the British Empire by producing huge amounts of saddle material. The Lang Tanning Co. supplied sole leather and leather linings for aircraft gasoline tanks in World War Two (WW2). Post WW2, modest changes to the complex were in the form of connections between buildings to accommodate future uses. Operations declined after WW2 due to changes in the industry and in 1954 the company ceased operations as a tannery due to competition from synthetic materials. The 5 -acre site and, at the time, complex of 35 buildings continued to be owned by the Lang family until 1974. When the company operations ceased, the Lang Tanning Co. represented one of Kitchener's longest operating businesses (1849-1954). Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the complex of buildings make to the continuity and character of the adjacent streetscapes and the overall Warehouse District in the City of Kitchener. The buildings are historically and visually linked to their surroundings, including: Lang Site B with the last fully intact smokestack in Kitchener (designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act), other industrial buildings, former homes of industrial workers (including homes in the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District, which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act), the railway line, and the Warehouse District. The complex of buildings is recognized as a significant landmark reflecting Kitchener's Industrial Vernacular architecture, the Page 111 of 454 development and growth of Berlin's (now Kitchener) leather tanning industry, the relationship to and political leadership of the Lang family, the hardworking German community in establishing Berlin (now Kitchener). as an industrial centre, and the overall industrial development of the City of Kitchener (ERA Architects Inc., 2008). Other Values Economic Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North has both historic- and present-day economic value. The historic/associative value section above extensively details how the Lang Tannery Co., Reinhold Lang, and the Lang family supported the local economy. At present, "The Tannery" (151 Charles Stret West) is located within the warehouse district of Kitchener's downtown. It is one of the largest remaining industrial complexes in the area that reflects the evolution of the tanning industry. The site was rehabilitated and redeveloped in 2008 to support adaptive new uses. The uses support the City's economic development strategy focused on the creation of an innovation district with high-tech companies. The Tannery boasts 306,564 square feet of office space and 25, 810 square feet of retail uses. It is home to many innovated business and complimentary uses such as restaurants and event space. In 2011, The Tannery was awarded the City of Kitchener's Mike Wagner Heritage Award in the category of rehabilitation and adaptive reuse. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the design and physical value of the complex of Industrial Vernacular buildings. All elements related to the design and physical value of the former administration building, including: o five -storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; 0 4/4 wood windows with segmentally arched brick voussiors and stone sills; o new 4/4 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 4/4 flathead hung windows with stone sills 0 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 8 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; Page 112 of 454 o new 12 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o lionhead tie rods; o decorative brickwork; o painted signage that reads "LANG'. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former tan yard building, including: o four storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; o decorative brickwork; and, o painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED HARNESS AND SOLE LEATHERS". • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former leach house building, including: o four storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows; o window openings; o former circular window openings with a brick surrounds; and, o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone lintels and stone sills. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former beam and storage house building, including: o three storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o painted signage that reads "The Lang Tannery Company Limited" o two sets of clerestory windows with internal muntins reflecting a 6 -lite design; o exterior fire escape; and, o metal tie rods. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former production building, including: o four storey height; o flat roof; Page 113 of 454 o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 12 -lite flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; 0 1/1 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; 0 1 -lite flathead window with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o decorative brickwork; o painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED. HARNESS & SOLE LEATHER"; o four -storey concrete addition, including: ■ concrete construction; ■ window openings with segmentally arched concrete headers and concrete sills; ■ new 6/6 flathead hung windows with segmentally arched concrete headers and concrete sills; and, ■ new 6/6 flathead hung windows with concrete headers and concrete sills. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 17, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after Page 114 of 454 which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 23 and Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 113-151 Charles Street West / 170-180 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis Street South (Lang Site A) Page 115 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 113-151 Charles Street West/170-188 Joseph Street/3-44 Francis Street South VC223 C304 121 F' C317 42 � C]30 0414 pQ C400B 0729 44 -�I I 163 , Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ®Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N Legal Description: Plan 375 Lot 110-116 Lot 131-138 Part Charles St 58R-6449 Part 1 Year Built: c. 1896 to c. 2012 Architectural Style: Industrial Vernacular Original Owner: Reinhold Lang / Lang Tanning Company Original Use: Industrial Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N is a complex of approximately 15 interconnected industrial buildings ranging in height from one to five storeys built between 1896 and 2012 primarily in the Industrial Vernacular architectural style. The buildings are situated on a 3.95 -acre parcel of land bounded by Charles, Francis, Joseph and Victoria Streets in the City Commercial Core Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value are the industrial buildings. Page 116 of 454 Heritage Value 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, contextual, and economic values. Desipn/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N demonstrates design or physical value as a good example of an early (20th century) complex of buildings designed primarily in the Industrial Vernacular architectural style that reflect the evolution of the tanning industry (ERA Architects Inc., 2008). Simple brick detailing and durable finishes demonstrate the functional and industrial history of the building use. The buildings have many intact heritage attributes in good condition. The oldest portions of the site were built between 1896 and 1904 and include: the former two- to three- storey beam and currying house at Victoria Street and the two-storey leach house at the centre of the site. The remaining buildings were constructed between 1904 and 1917, with significant alterations and additions occurring between 1917 and 1925 and again between 2010 and 2012. The buildings that best exemplify the Industrial Vernacular architectural style between 1904 and 1925 include: the former administration and production buildings at the corner of Charles and Francis Streets; the former beam and storage house along Charles Street; and, the former leach house along Joseph Street. Front (North) FaQade The main entrance to the complex of buildings faces Charles Street West. The five -storey building at the north east corner of the site is the former administration building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of doors and windows; changes to the size of original openings; introduction of canopy signage; and, introduction of a barrier - free access. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone stills; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; lionhead tie rods located on the brick pilasters at the second-, third- and fourth -storey; and, decorative brickwork. The fifth -storey features: buff brick; 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; decorative brickwork; and, painted signage that reads "LANG'. The four -storey building west of the former administration building is the former tan yard building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; addition of a new double doors; and, introduction of canopy and fascia signage with gooseneck lighting. The second - storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; and decorative brickwork. The one -storey building west of the former tan yard building is a recent (c. 2010-12) addition to the complex. It features contemporary design that is compatible with the complex of historic buildings on the site. It features a shallow side -gable roof, beige and brown horizontal cladding, and lots of glazing. Behind the one -storey building is a four -storey building that once functioned as the leach house for the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and two buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. For the most part, only the third- and fourth -storey are visible from the pedestrian level on Charles Street West. The east bay of the third- and fourth -storey features a new single 6/6 flat head hung window beside a perhaps former circular window opening with a brick surround on each storey. The west bay of the third- and fourth -storey features two new side by side 6/6 flat head hung windows with a stone header and a stone sill. Page 117 of 454 West of the one -storey addition is another one -storey vestibule addition and a central tower (c. 2010- 12) that connects the former leech house to the former beam and storage house. The vestibule and central tower are of contemporary design that is compatible with the complex of historic buildings on the site. It features a unique roof line that is like the shallow side gable roof of the one -storey building addition but instead the side gable is inverted. The walls are clad with glazing. The last building that fronts onto Charles Street is the three-storey former beam and storage house of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 15 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows and doors; addition of windows and doors; and, introduction of canopy signage. The second -storey and third -storey feature: buff brick and new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills. The second -storey features painted signage that reads "The Lang Tannery Company Limited". The third -storey features: the new municipal address number "151"; two sets of clerestory windows with internal muntins reflecting a 6 - pane design; and, backlit channel letter fascia signs of current tenants. Side (East) FaQade; The east side fagade faces Francis Street South. The five -storey building at the north east corner of the site is the former administration building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of doors and windows; changes to the size of original openings; and, introduction of a new exterior fire escape. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone stills; 4/4 wood windows with segmentally arched brick voussiors and stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 8 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 4/4 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, decorative brick work between the third- and fourth -storey. The fifth storey features: buff brick; new 4/4 flathead hung windows with stone sills; decorative brick work; and, painted signage that reads "LANG". The four -storey building west of the former administration building is the former production building of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 16 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; alterations to window and door openings; and, introduction of canopy signage. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; 1/1 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; 1 -pane flathead window with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; decorative brickwork; and, painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED. HARNESS & SOLE LEATHER." Side (West) Facade The west side fagade faces Victoria Street South. A one- and three-storey building directly abut the sidewalk. The three-storey building is the former beam and storage house of the Lang Tanning Co.. This building has a flat roof and 5 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; alterations to the size of window openings; and, replacement of the windows. The second -storey and third -storey feature: buff brick and new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills. The second- and third -storey features an exterior fire escape. There are metal tie -rods on the brick pilasters between the first- and second -storey as well as the second- and third -storey. Page 118 of 454 The side elevation of the former tan yard building is setback approximately 90 metres from Victoria Street South. This building has a flat roof and two wide buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: using salvaged brick to enclose the building wall; adding contemporary windows; adding a contemporary door; and, installing a channel letter fascia sign with gooseneck lights. The second -storey features three new 6/6 flathead hung windows with stone sills. The fourth -storey features painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED HARNESS AND SOLE LEATHERS". Rear (South) FaQade The rear fagade faces Joseph Street and features a one -storey building at the corner of Joseph Street and Victoria Street South, the four -storey former leach house, new exterior courtyard, and the four - storey former production building. The one -storey building has a flat roof and 17 buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The building has been altered, including: painting the brick; changes to the size of door and window openings; new windows; new entrances; new exterior stairs; and, new canopy signs. The four -storey former leach house has a flat roof and five buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the building; installation of new windows in place of former shipping bay doors; and, installation of new 12/12 flathead hung windows with stone sills. The second- through fourth -storey features new flathead 6/6 hung windows with stone lintels and sills. The former production building has a flat roof and three buff brick bays separated by brick pilasters. The first -storey has been altered, including: painting of the brick; replacement of the windows; and, alterations to window and door openings. The second -storey through to the fourth -storey feature: buff brick; new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; new 12 -pane flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; and, decorative brickwork. West of the former production building is a four -storey concrete addition. The first -storey has been altered, including: painted of the concrete; replacement of the windows; and, replacement of a door. The second -storey features new 6/6 flathead hung windows with segmentally arched concrete header and concrete sill. The third -storey features four different window designs (1/1; single lite; and, 6/6) all with segmentally arched concrete header and concrete sill. The fourth -storey features six new 6/6 hung windows with flatheads and stone sills. Interior The interior of the original buildings feature: generous floor to ceiling heights; wood beams and flooring; wood staircases; exposed structural columns and mechanical systems; freight elevators with wood gates; and, metal fire separation doors with original weights and pulleys. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N has historic/associative value due to its history and association with early settlement, the Six Nations, Joseph Brant, Colonel Richard Beasley, Pennsylvanian German Mennonites, the first permanent non- native settlement (now Kitchener), the German Company Tract, the Township of Waterloo, German speaking immigrants, Berlin as the County seat for the County of Waterloo, the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) extension, the leather tanning industry, and Reinhold Lang. These values were extensively documented in a Heritage Impact Assessment written by ERA Architects Inc. in 2008 and based on this research are further described below. The City of Kitchener was originally part of a large tract of more than 240,000 hectares of land granted to the Six Nations by the British Crown in 1784. Between 1796 and 1798, the Six Nations led by Joseph Brant sold off 38,000 hectares of land to Colonel Richard Beasley, a United Empire Loyalist. The land now known as the City of Kitchener was located far inland and isolated from centres of commerce. As Page 119 of 454 a result, the land attracted the settlement of Pennsylvania German Mennonite farmers who were attracted to the promise of inexpensive land and the guarantee of religious freedoms. By the end of 1800, the first permanent non-native settlement was established in what is now the City of Kitchener. Shortly after a group of Mennonites purchased all the unsold land from Beasley and formed the German Company Tract (GCT). The GCT divided it's 60,000 acres into 130 farmsteads thus establishing a Pennsylvania Mennonite colony in Upper Canada. In 1816 the GCT became the Township of Waterloo. This marked the beginning of steady migration of German speaking Europeans to the area between the 1820s and 1870s. Population growth and infrastructure improvements (e.g., road upgrades) helped establish the urban centre that became Berlin (now Kitchener) in 1833. Twenty years later, in 1853, Berlin became the County seat for the County of Waterloo and three years later the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) was extended to Berlin. This opened the area to future industrialization. The skilled trades and industrial knowledge of the German immigrants contributed to Berlin's industrialization. Leather tanning became Berlin's first major industry. In 1848, Reinhold Lang came to Berlin from Baden, Germany. The Lang Tanning Company was founded in 1849. The business was originally located at the northeast corner of King and Ontario Streets. This tannery made all classes of leather required for saddlers and shoemakers. Unfortunately, this building was destroyed by fire in 1853. Reinhold Lang rebuilt his business by purchasing a large piece of land at the corner of Francis and King Streets. The property once featured several natural springs and a small creek that would provide a good water supply for the tannery. His new single frame building was built on the corner of Charles and Francis Streets and eventually grew into an industrial complex occupying nearly three city blocks. This site reflects the organizational, technological, and market changes of the tanning industry. Reinhold emerged as a prominent local resident as the industrial centre of Berlin continued to grow. In 1859, he was elected to Berlin Council where he was one of two businessmen proposing a motion for a "factory" policy that would provide exemptions and bonuses to new and expanding business. Many of Berlin's most prominent and prosperous firms were aided by this policy. Industry and politics were linked with Berlin's Council relying heavily on it's Board of Trade for advice. Many of Berlin's industrial families sat on local ward committees set up by the Board to assist with the passage of legislation. These families lived in the ward they represented, which contributed to an enhanced sense of community. The Board not only supported industrial expansion, but it also sponsored German cultural events throughout the late 1800s. Reinhhold's sons (George, William, John and August) and grandsons (Louis L, Reinhold, Jerome and George W.) were also prominent figures in the community. In 1887, his son, John A. Lang built his home at the northwest corner of Charles and Francis Streets to be close to the business in order to oversee daily activities. His home was sold to company in 1897 to serve as offices until operations stopped in 1954. The home was demolished in the 1990s. Over the years, in addition to the tanning industry, the Lang family was also involved in the insurance, banking, hydro and land use planning. By the late 19th century, Berlin was a major industrial centre in Canada and it's economic success has been attributed to the industry and pride of the community. By 1904, the original Lang buildings started to be replaced, expanded, or converted from frame to more permanent brick or iron construction. Berlin became a city in 1912 and was considered Canada's German capital. It appears that some of the changes to the complex of buildings were a result of the company's involvement in the production of Page 120 of 454 wartime supplies. World War One (WW1) caused anti -German sentiment, which resulted in the name change to Kitchener, after a British General. During WW1, the Lang Tanning Co. became the largest sole leather producer in the British Empire by producing huge amounts of saddle material. The Lang Tanning Co. supplied sole leather and leather linings for aircraft gasoline tanks in World War Two (WW2). Post WW2, modest changes to the complex were in the form of connections between buildings to accommodate future uses. Operations declined after WW2 due to changes in the industry and in 1954 the company ceased operations as a tannery due to competition from synthetic materials. The 5 - acre site and, at the time, complex of 35 buildings continued to be owned by the Lang family until 1974. When the company operations ceased, the Lang Tanning Co. represented one of Kitchener's longest operating businesses (1849-1954). Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the complex of buildings make to the continuity and character of the adjacent streetscapes and the overall Warehouse District in the City of Kitchener. The buildings are historically and visually linked to their surroundings, including: Lang Site B with the last fully intact smokestack in Kitchener (designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act), other industrial buildings, former homes of industrial workers (including homes in the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District, which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act), the railway line, and the Warehouse District. The complex of buildings is recognized as a significant landmark reflecting Kitchener's Industrial Vernacular architecture, the development and growth of Berlin's (now Kitchener) leather tanning industry, the relationship to and political leadership of the Lang family, the hardworking German community in establishing Berlin (now Kitchener). as an industrial centre, and the overall industrial development of the City of Kitchener (ERA Architects Inc., 2008). Other Values Economic Value The property municipally addressed as 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N has both historic- and present-day economic value. The historic/associative value section above extensively details how the Lang Tannery Co., Reinhold Lang, and the Lang family supported the local economy. At present, "The Tannery" (151 Charles Stret West) is located within the warehouse district of Kitchener's downtown. It is one of the largest remaining industrial complexes in the area that reflects the evolution of the tanning industry. The site was rehabilitated and redeveloped in 2008 to support adaptive new uses. The uses support the City's economic development strategy focused on the creation of an innovation district with high-tech companies. The Tannery boasts 306,564 square feet of office space and 25, 810 square feet of retail uses. It is home to many innovated business and complimentary uses such as restaurants and event space. In 2011, The Tannery was awarded the City of Kitchener's Mike Wagner Heritage Award in the category of rehabilitation and adaptive reuse. Page 121 of 454 Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis St N resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the design and physical value of the complex of Industrial Vernacular buildings. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former administration building, including: o five -storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; 0 4/4 wood windows with segmentally arched brick voussiors and stone sills; o new 4/4 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 4/4 flathead hung windows with stone sills 0 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 8 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; o new 12 -pane flathead windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o lionhead tie rods; o decorative brickwork; o painted signage that reads "LANG'. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former tan yard building, including: o four storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o new 12 -pane flathead windows with stone sills; o decorative brickwork; and, o painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED HARNESS AND SOLE LEATHERS". • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former leach house building, including: o four storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows; o window openings; Page 122 of 454 o former circular window openings with a brick surrounds; and, o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with stone lintels and stone sills. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former beam and storage house building, including: o three storey building height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 9/6 flat head hung windows with stone sills; o painted signage that reads "The Lang Tannery Company Limited" o two sets of clerestory windows with internal muntins reflecting a 6 -lite design; o exterior fire escape; and, o metal tie rods. • All elements related to the design and physical value of the former production building, including: o four storey height; o flat roof; o buff brick; o bays separated by brick pilasters; o window openings; o new 6/6 flat head hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o new 12 -lite flathead windows segmentally arched brickwork and stone sills; 0 1/1 hung windows with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; 0 1 -lite flathead window with segmentally arched brick voussoirs and stone sills; o decorative brickwork; o painted signage that reads "THE LANG TANNING CO. LIMITED. HARNESS & SOLE LEATHER"; o four -storey concrete addition, including: ■ concrete construction; ■ window openings with segmentally arched concrete headers and concrete sills; ■ new 6/6 flathead hung windows with segmentally arched concrete headers and concrete sills; and, ■ new 6/6 flathead hung windows with concrete headers and concrete sills. RPfPYPn! PC ERA Architects Inc. (2008). 36-50 Francis Street South Heritage Impact Assessment Lang Tanning Co. A. ERA Architects Inc.: Toronto, Ontario. Page 123 of 454 Photographs wool Front Elevation (North Fagade) — Former Administration and Tan Yard Buildings of the Lang Tanning Co. Page 124 of 454 i +�9ti4q�^a apo ( • � i�Sti tit- I � ti oil t IF r - - I< �•i - �' -1 1'" - 1r i+E LANG TANNING CCIMPA.%VAKm e PP Page 126 of 454 -L- Rear Elevation (South Fagade) — Former Leach House of the Lang Tanning Co. Page 128 of 454 Rear Elevation South Fa ade — Former Production Building of the Lang Tanning Co. Page 129 of 454 Rear Elevation (South Fagade) — New Courtyard Page 130 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 113-151 Charles St W/170-188 Joseph St/3-44 Francis Address: Recorder: Lang Tannery Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Date: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details P. Ciuciura March 11, 2023 ❑ 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 X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 16 of 23 Page 131 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 132 of 454 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 X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is Yes ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑X Yes ❑X landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes The subject property (commonly referred to as Lang Site A) is visually and historically connected to the adjacent property (commonly referred to as Lang Site B) as well as the adjacent neighbourhoods (e.g., Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District) where many tannery works lived. Page 18 of 23 Page 133 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure have Yes ❑X other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑X occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑X most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 19 of 23 Page 134 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X good Yes ❑X 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Page 20 of 23 Page 135 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑X What is the Commercial X Office X Other ❑ present Office ❑X Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 21 of 23 Page 136 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 Page 22 of 23 Page 137 of 454 ❑ 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 23 of 23 Page 138 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 4, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-340 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 148 Madison Avenue South under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 148 Madison Avenue South as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 148 Madison Avenue South Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 148 Madison Avenue South has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 148 Madison Avenue South meets eight (8) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: 148 Madison Avenue South is a mid -20th century brick church built in the Romanesque architectural style. The church is situated on a 0.68 acre parcel of land located on the north *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 139 of 454 west corner of Courtland Avenue East and Madison Avenue South in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the church. Ma, , hPl6 i 160 �n QLZ�l F w _ _ I 148 St Joeseplt'S Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (148 Madison Avenue South) A full assessment of 148 Madison Avenue South has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets eight (8) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on May 7, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 148 Madison Avenue South should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 148 Madison Avenue South was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 17, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Page 140 of 454 Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front Elevation (South Fa(;ade) REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. Page 141 of 454 148 Madison Avenue South is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies eight (8) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as a rare and unique example of a mid - 20t" century church built in the Romanesque architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (South) FaQade The front facade of the building faces Madison Avenue South and is comprised of three irregular bays. The centre bay projects forward and features: a front -facing ridged gable roofline; rose window; ribbon of three window openings with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; the windows are surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; the upper half of the fagade is stone while the lower half is semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; there are two one -storey buttresses at each end of the centre bay primarily constructed Page 142 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it Unknown demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Yes 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 Yes 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. Yes Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as a rare and unique example of a mid - 20t" century church built in the Romanesque architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (South) FaQade The front facade of the building faces Madison Avenue South and is comprised of three irregular bays. The centre bay projects forward and features: a front -facing ridged gable roofline; rose window; ribbon of three window openings with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; the windows are surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; the upper half of the fagade is stone while the lower half is semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; there are two one -storey buttresses at each end of the centre bay primarily constructed Page 142 of 454 with buff (yellow) brick with stone at top; decorative stone crosses are inset within the semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; the main entrance features primarily plain archivolts with one decorative floral arch resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; a pair of stained glass windows with semi -circular arches flank each side of the main entrance and are surrounded stone; and, a wide concrete/stone staircase with metal railings leads to the main entrance. The left (west) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: an octagon plan with only six visible sides; a flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; one flat head stained glass window with a stone lintel, quoins and sill; a pair of windows with semi- circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. The right (east) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: square plan; flat roof; prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; semi -circular stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; flathead stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; a pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Side (West) Facade The side facade faces the former St. Joseph's Catholic School. Only a partial view of the side fagade is visible from the public realm. The most prominent feature is the protruding octagon with only six visible sides, which features a flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained glass windows with a stone lintels, quoins and sills; pairs of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Other visible heritage attributes include: the flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained glass windows with a stone lintels, quoins and sills; large semi -circular stained glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Side (East) Facades The side fagade faces Madison Avenue South and is comprised of several irregular bays. The left (south) bay features: square plan; flat roof with copper trim; prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi- circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flathead stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; semi -circular stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; side entrance with plain archivolts resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Page 143 of 454 The central bay is inset and features: gable roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surround; flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, rusticated stone foundation. The right (north) bay features: prominent gable with copper trim; a plain vertical stone rectangle with stone surround (perhaps once a cast stone gable vent); a pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, rusticated stone foundation. To the right of the gable is a one -storey section that features: flat roof with copper trim; flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surround; entrance door with rectangular stone surround; and, rusticated stone foundation. The Parish House also faces Madison Avenue South and features: hip roof with a cross on the front; brick construction; symmetrical fagade with a central main entrance door and window above flanked by a single window and a pair of windows on both the first and second storey; front door and door opening with side lites; flat head 1/1 windows and window openings with stone sills; and, concrete foundation. Rear (South) Fagade The rear (north) fagade faces the Parish House and only a portion of this fagade is visible from the public realm. The prominent feature on this fagade is the semi -circular plan with round copper dome. Other heritage attributes include: semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone sills; flat head basement windows with stone lintels; and, rusticated stone foundation. Historical/Associative Value The historical and associative values relate to the original owner, congregation, original pastor, architect and builder. The St. Joseph website (https:Hstmosephkitchener.org/history) contains a detailed Parish Timeline, history of Priests of St Joseph, 50th Anniversary Booklet (1980), 60 Years Working Together (1990), 75 Year Directory — Our History (2005), and 85 Year Directory — Our History (2015). Most of the following information was obtained from the St. Joseph website. The lands were secured from the school board in 1930 for $3000. The congregation was formed in 1930 when Monsignor Reuben M. Haller was assigned the task of building a church due to the growing congregation at St. Mary's and Sacred Heart. The first mass was held on October 26, 1930 in the St. Joseph's School hall. Monsignor R.M. Haller was the first diocesan priest to serve Kitchener; the first priest of the City to be made a Monsignor while serving the community; and, the first living person to have a new separate school named in his honour. Construction of the basement began in the fall of 1930 with church services being held in the basement by Christmas. Due to a steel shortage during the depression the remainder of the church was not built until 1952. The church was dedicated on April 12, 1953 by Bishop J.F. Ryan of Hamilton and the cornerstone was laid on July 20, 1952 by Monsignor A. J. O'Brien of Hamilton assisted by Rev. R.M. Haller and Rev. H.B. Smith. According to an article in the KW Record (April 11, 1953) the church was "built to match the design of the Pope's private chapel in Rome." Page 144 of 454 The rectory was built on Madison Avenue South in 1958, a plaque in memory of Monsignor Haller was unveiled in 1980, the sanctuary was renovated in 1986, some brickwork was redone in 1988 and some of the brick on the tower was replaced with stone in 1996. The church was designed by Bernal A. Jones. B.A. Jones attended the Toronto Technical School and worked as a draftsman for Frank Darling, in the office of Darling and Pearson, between 1908 and 1922. B.A. Jones moved to Kitchener in 1922 and worked with W.H.E. Schmalz until opening his own office in 1926. During that time B.A. Jones assisted W.H.E. Schmalz design the 1922-23 Kitchener City Hall. B.A. Jones is also responsible for the design of several other important buildings in Kitchener such as the 1932 Public Utilities Building and the 1936-37 Church of the Good Shepherd. The church was constructed by Ball Brothers Ltd. Ball Brothers Ltd. were general contractors formed by the partnership of Harold and Frank Ball in 1923. Ball Brothers Ltd. was a local based company but known across the province. Local examples of their work include: large portions of St. Mary's Hospital and Grand River Hospital; Centre in the Square; various buildings at Conestoga College, Wilfrid Laurier University, the University of Waterloo and the University of Guelph; the former Budd automative plant (demolished); and, the Kitchener railway barns (demolished). The company is now known as Ball Construction. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 148 Madison Avenue South resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the design/physical value of the church built in the Romanesque architectural style, including: o All elements of the front (south) facade, including: ■ three irregular bays; the centre bay that projects forward and features: • a front -facing ridged gable roofline; • rose window; • ribbon of three window openings with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; • windows surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • two one -storey buttresses at each end of the centre bay primarily constructed with buff (yellow) brick with stone at top; • decorative stone crosses are inset within the semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • main entrance features primarily plain archivolts with one decorative floral arch resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; Page 145 of 454 • pair of stained glass windows with semi -circular arches flanking each side of the main entrance and stone surround; and, • wide concrete/stone staircase with metal railings. ■ the left (west) bay that is setback from the centre bay and features: • octagon plan with only six visible sides; • flat roof with copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • one flat head stained glass window with stone lintel, quoins and sill; • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ the right (east) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: • square plan; • flat roof; • prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • semi -circular stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • flathead stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. o All elements of the side (West) fagade, including: ■ protruding octagon with only six visible sides, including: • copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flat head stained-glass windows with stone lintels, quoins and sills; • pairs of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained- glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ other visible heritage attributes include: • the flat roof with copper trim; Page 146 of 454 • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flat head stained glass -windows with stone lintels, quoins and sills; • large semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; and, • rusticated stone foundation. o All elements of the side (East) facade, including: ■ several irregular bays; ■ the left (south) bay features: • square plan; • flat roof with copper trim; • prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flathead stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • semi -circular stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • side entrance with plain archivolts resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ The central bay is inset and features: • gable roof with copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surround; • flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ The right (north) bay features: • prominent gable with copper trim; • plain vertical stone rectangle with stone surround (perhaps once a cast stone gable vent); • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained- glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; • flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, • rusticated stone foundation; ■ to the right of the gable is a one -storey section that features: • flat roof with copper trim; Page 147 of 454 • flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; • entrance door with rectangular stone surround; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ the Parish House features: • hip roof with a cross on the front; • brick construction; • symmetrical fagade with a central main entrance door and window above flanked by a single window and a pair of windows on both the first and second storey; • front door and door opening with side lites; • flat head 1/1 windows and window openings with stone sills; and, • concrete foundation. o All elements of the rear (South) fagade including: ■ semi -circular plan with round copper dome; ■ semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; ■ flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone sills; ■ flat head basement windows with stone lintels; and, ■ rusticated stone foundation. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 17, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be Page 148 of 454 removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 148 Madison Avenue South Page 149 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 148 Madison Avenue South Summary of Significance Mac KWlz Grose School ®Design/Physical Value ❑Social Value ®Historic/Associative Value ❑Economic Value ®Contextual Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 148 Madison Avenue South Legal Description: Plan 395 Part Lot 1, 2 & 7 Year Built: 1930 & 1952 Architectural Style: Romanesque Original Owner: St. Joseph's Catholic Church Original Use: Religious Condition: Good 138 Page 150 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The property municipally addressed as 148 Madison Avenue South is a mid -20th century brick church built in the Romanesque architectural style. The church is situated on a 0.68 acre parcel of land located on the north west corner of Courtland Avenue East and Madison Avenue South in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the church. Heritage Value The property municipally addressed as 148 Madison Avenue South is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values. Desi_gn/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as a rare and unique example of a mid -2011 century church built in the Romanesque architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (South) Facade The front fagade of the building faces Madison Avenue South and is comprised of three irregular bays. The centre bay projects forward and features: a front -facing ridged gable roofline; rose window; ribbon of three window openings with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; the windows are surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; the upper half of the fagade is stone while the lower half is semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; there are two one -storey buttresses at each end of the centre bay primarily constructed with buff (yellow) brick with stone at top, decorative stone crosses are inset within the semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; the main entrance features primarily plain archivolts with one decorative floral arch resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; a pair of stained glass windows with semi -circular arches flank each side of the main entrance and are surrounded stone; and, a wide concrete/stone staircase with metal railings leads to the main entrance. The left (west) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: an octagon plan with only six visible sides; a flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; one flat head stained glass window with a stone lintel, quoins and sill; a pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. The right (east) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: square plan; flat roof; prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi- circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); stone and semi - rugged buff (yellow) brick; semi -circular stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; flathead stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; a pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Page 151 of 454 Side (West) FaQade The side facade faces the former St. Joseph's Catholic School. Only a partial view of the side fagade is visible from the public realm. The most prominent feature is the protruding octagon with only six visible sides, which features a flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained glass windows with a stone lintels, quoins and sills; pairs of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Other visible heritage attributes include: the flat roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained glass windows with a stone lintels, quoins and sills; large semi -circular stained glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Side (East) Facades The side fagade faces Madison Avenue South and is comprised of several irregular bays. The left (south) bay features: square plan; flat roof with copper trim; prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flathead stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; semi -circular stained glass window and window opening with stone surround; side entrance with plain archivolts resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; and, a rusticated stone foundation. The central bay is inset and features: gable roof with copper trim; semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surround; flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, rusticated stone foundation. The right (north) bay features: prominent gable with copper trim; a plain vertical stone rectangle with stone surround (perhaps once a cast stone gable vent); a pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, rusticated stone foundation. To the right of the gable is a one -storey section that features: flat roof with copper trim; flat head stained- glass windows and window openings with stone surround; entrance door with rectangular stone surround; and, rusticated stone foundation. The Parish House also faces Madison Avenue South and features: hip roof with a cross on the front; brick construction; symmetrical fagade with a central main entrance door and window above flanked by a single window and a pair of windows on both the first and second storey; front door and door opening with side lites; flat head 1/1 windows and window openings with stone sills; and, concrete foundation. Rear (South) Facade The rear (north) fagade faces the Parish House and only a portion of this fagade is visible from the public realm. The prominent feature on this fagade is the semi -circular plan with round copper dome. Other heritage attributes include: semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone sills; flat head basement windows with stone lintels; and, rusticated stone foundation. Page 152 of 454 Historical/Associative Value The historical and associative values relate to the original owner, congregation, original pastor, architect and builder. The St. Joseph website (https://staosephkitchener.org/history) contains a detailed Parish Timeline, history of Priests of St Joseph, 50th Anniversary Booklet (1980), 60 Years Working Together (1990), 75 Year Directory — Our History (2005), and 85 Year Directory — Our History (2015). Most of the following information was obtained from the St. Joseph website. The lands were secured from the school board in 1930 for $3000. The congregation was formed in 1930 when Monsignor Reuben M. Haller was assigned the task of building a church due to the growing congregation at St. Mary's and Sacred Heart. The first mass was held on October 26, 1930 in the St. Joseph's School hall. Monsignor R.M. Haller was the first diocesan priest to serve Kitchener; the first priest of the City to be made a Monsignor while serving the community; and, the first living person to have a new separate school named in his honour. Construction of the basement began in the fall of 1930 with church services being held in the basement by Christmas. Due to a steel shortage during the depression the remainder of the church was not built until 1952. The church was dedicated on April 12, 1953 by Bishop J.F. Ryan of Hamilton and the cornerstone was laid on July 20, 1952 by Monsignor A. J. O'Brien of Hamilton assisted by Rev. R. M. Haller and Rev. H. B. Smith. According to an article in the KW Record (April 11, 1953) the church was "built to match the design of the Pope's private chapel in Rome." The rectory was built on Madison Avenue South in 1958, a plaque in memory of Monsignor Haller was unveiled in 1980, the sanctuary was renovated in 1986, some brickwork was redone in 1988 and some of the brick on the tower was replaced with stone in 1996. The church was designed by Bernal A. Jones. B.A. Jones attended the Toronto Technical School and worked as a draftsman for Frank Darling, in the office of Darling and Pearson, between 1908 and 1922. B.A. Jones moved to Kitchener in 1922 and worked with W.H.E. Schmalz until opening his own office in 1926. During that time B.A. Jones assisted W.H.E. Schmalz design the 1922-23 Kitchener City Hall. B.A. Jones is also responsible for the design of several other important buildings in Kitchener such as the 1932 Public Utilities Building and the 1936-37 Church of the Good Shepherd. The church was constructed by Ball Brothers Ltd. Ball Brothers Ltd. were general contractors formed by the partnership of Harold and Frank Ball in 1923. Ball Brothers Ltd. was a local based company but known across the province. Local examples of their work include: large portions of St. Mary's Hospital and Grand River Hospital; Centre in the Square; various buildings at Conestoga College, Wilfrid Laurier University, the University of Waterloo and the University of Guelph; the former Budd automative plant (demolished); and, the Kitchener railway barns (demolished). The company is now known as Ball Construction. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the building makes to the continuity and character of the Courtland Avenue East and Madison Avenue South streetscapes. The church and parish house are physically, functionally, visually and historically linked to each other. The church is physically, visually and historically linked to the former St. Joseph's Catholic School. The prominence of the church on a corner lot with a grand square bell tower make the building a recognizable neighbourhood landmark. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 148 Madison Avenue South resides in the following heritage attributes: Page 153 of 454 • All elements related to the design/physical value of the church built in the Romanesque architectural style, including: o All elements of the front (south) facade, including: ■ three irregular bays; ■ the centre bay that projects forward and features: • a front -facing ridged gable roofline; • rose window; • ribbon of three window openings with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; • windows surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • two one -storey buttresses at each end of the centre bay primarily constructed with buff (yellow) brick with stone at top; • decorative stone crosses are inset within the semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • main entrance features primarily plain archivolts with one decorative floral arch resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; • pair of stained glass windows with semi -circular arches flanking each side of the main entrance and stone surround; and, • wide concrete/stone staircase with metal railings. ■ the left (west) bay that is setback from the centre bay and features: • octagon plan with only six visible sides; • flat roof with copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • one flat head stained glass window with stone lintel, quoins and sill; • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ the right (east) bay is setback from the centre bay and features: • square plan; • flat roof; • prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • semi -circular stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • flathead stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; Page 154 of 454 • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. o All elements of the side (West) fagade, including: ■ protruding octagon with only six visible sides, including: • copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flat head stained-glass windows with stone lintels, quoins and sills; • pairs of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained-glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ other visible heritage attributes include: • the flat roof with copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flat head stained glass -windows with stone lintels, quoins and sills; • large semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; and, • rusticated stone foundation. o All elements of the side (East) fagade, including: ■ several irregular bays; ■ the left (south) bay features: • square plan; • flat roof with copper trim; • prominent square bell tower (decorative floral stone motifs; cornice with small stone dentils; a pair of semi -circular arches that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone; heavy cornice beneath the bell with larger stone dentils); • stone and semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • flathead stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • semi -circular stained-glass window and window opening with stone surround; • side entrance with plain archivolts resting on round embedded stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ The central bay is inset and features: • gable roof with copper trim; • semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; • semi -circular stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surround; Page 155 of 454 • flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ The right (north) bay features: • prominent gable with copper trim; • plain vertical stone rectangle with stone surround (perhaps once a cast stone gable vent); • pair of windows with semi -circular arches containing stained-glass windows that are separated by round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base and surrounded by stone arches, quoining and a single sill; • flat head 1/1 basement windows and window openings with stone lintels and sills; and, • rusticated stone foundation; ■ to the right of the gable is a one -storey section that features: • flat roof with copper trim; • flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone surrounds; • entrance door with rectangular stone surround; and, • rusticated stone foundation. ■ the Parish House features: • hip roof with a cross on the front; • brick construction; • symmetrical fagade with a central main entrance door and window above flanked by a single window and a pair of windows on both the first and second storey; • front door and door opening with side lites; • flat head 1/1 windows and window openings with stone sills; and, • concrete foundation. o All elements of the rear (South) fagade including: ■ semi -circular plan with round copper dome; ■ semi -rugged buff (yellow) brick; ■ flat head stained-glass windows and window openings with stone sills; ■ flat head basement windows with stone lintels; and, ■ rusticated stone foundation. References Ball Brothers. (1957). Building Permit #20928, St. Joseph's Parish House. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Ball Construction. (2013). History. Retrieved from http://www.balIcon.com/index.php/about-us/history/ on October 21, 2013. Hill, R. (2009). Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Canada 1800-1950. Retrieved from http://www.dictionaryofarchitectsincanada.org/architects/view/l7" on October 4, 2013. Page 156 of 454 St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Church. (1990). St. Joseph's Parish Community Kitchener, Ontario 1930-1990: Celebrating Our 60th Anniversary. St. Joseph Parish Roman Catholic Church. (2010). The History of St. Joseph's Parish. Retrieved from http://stmosephkitchener.org/parishlife/history.htm on October 21, 2013. St. Joseph Parish Roman Catholic Church. (date unknown). "History of St Joseph." Retrieved from https://stmoseghkitchener.org/history on April 12, 2024. Photographs e rj � 1 , f t` v 0:0 4 Front Elevation South Fa ade & Side Elevation East Fa ade — 148 Madison Avenue South Page 157 of 454 Page 158 of 454 t � Front •(South• 1M• Page 158 of 454 Side Elevation) (East Fagade) — 148 Madison Avenue South Page 159 of 454 ri Will Side Elevation East Fagade) — 148 Madison Avenue South Page 160 of 454 wagon NMI 1W 'I. E me NJ mill���1�f'I:i��� Elm too, .,,;�,�:►s+iii 11 t Side Elevation Entrance (East Fagade) — 148 Side Elevation Window Detail (East Fagade) — Madison Avenue South 148 Madison Avenue South Page 160 of 454 A -A Rear Elevation (North Fagade) — 148 Madison Avenue South r VA 6 , 1 I ,5 ! 1� iPDis7 .i South'Side Elevation (East Fa�acle) — 148 Madison Avenue Page 161 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 148 Madison Avenue South Address: St. Joseph's, 1930 &1952, Romanesque Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: March 26, 2024 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 13 of 20 Page 162 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it demonstrates or Page 14 of 20 Page 163 of 454 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 ❑ 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 X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑X landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Page 15 of 20 Page 164 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑ occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑ most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 16 of 20 Page 165 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X good Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ Page 166 of 454 1 KrTCHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑X - Religious present Office ❑ Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 18 of 20 Page 167 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 St. Joseph Facebook Page has excellent photos of the interior of the church 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 Page 19 of 20 Page 168 of 454 ❑ 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 20 of 20 Page 169 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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: July 4, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-339 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 171-173 Victoria Street North under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 171- 173 Victoria Street North as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 171-173 Victoria Street North Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 171-173 Victoria Street North has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 171-173 Victoria Street North West meets three (3) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: 171-173 Victoria Street North is a two-storey late 19th century brick building built circa 1887 in the Italianate architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.23 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of Victoria Street North between Ahrens Street West and *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 170 of 454 Margaret Avenue in the Civic Centre planning community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The subject property is also located adjacent to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District, which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. r �- Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (171-173 Victoria Street North) A full assessment of 171-173 Victoria Street North has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets three (3) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on May 7, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 171-173 Victoria Street North should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 171-173 Victoria Street North was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 17, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is Page 171 of 454 posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front Elevation (North Fa(;ade) REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. 171-173 Victoria Street North is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies three (3) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Design/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as rare example of a late 19th century prestigious semi-detached dwelling built in the Italianate architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Page 172 of 454 Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Front (North) FaQade The front fagade of the building faces Victoria Street North and is comprised of four bays (two bays for each half of the semi-detached dwelling). Each half of the semi-detached dwelling features: a projecting bay with a front gable; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a semi -circular window opening in the front gable end with a red brick voussoirs and stone sill; a pair of segmentally arched window openings on both the first- and second -storey with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; the design of the double hung 1 /1 wood windows on the first- and second -storey; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Between the projecting bays are the entrances to the building. Each half of the semi- detached dwelling features: a hip roof; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs on the second -storey; a verandah on both the first- and second -storey; the verandah on the second -storey displays a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; the verandah on the first -storey displays a half turned post on each end with highly decorative brackets and scroll work along with a full central turned post in the middle with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; and, the first -storey has two entrances and both display a front door opening with a segmentally arched transom with red brick voussoirs and simple side lites. Page 173 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 No 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 No 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 No defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, No functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Front (North) FaQade The front fagade of the building faces Victoria Street North and is comprised of four bays (two bays for each half of the semi-detached dwelling). Each half of the semi-detached dwelling features: a projecting bay with a front gable; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a semi -circular window opening in the front gable end with a red brick voussoirs and stone sill; a pair of segmentally arched window openings on both the first- and second -storey with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; the design of the double hung 1 /1 wood windows on the first- and second -storey; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Between the projecting bays are the entrances to the building. Each half of the semi- detached dwelling features: a hip roof; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs on the second -storey; a verandah on both the first- and second -storey; the verandah on the second -storey displays a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; the verandah on the first -storey displays a half turned post on each end with highly decorative brackets and scroll work along with a full central turned post in the middle with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; and, the first -storey has two entrances and both display a front door opening with a segmentally arched transom with red brick voussoirs and simple side lites. Page 173 of 454 Side (West & East) Facades The side fagades of the building are virtually identical. They face the side lot lines and adjacent buildings. The side facades are comprised of the side of the projecting bays, two bays divided by a chimney and a rear addition. In general, the second -storey side fagades feature: a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills at both the first- and second -storey; double hung 1/1 window design; chimneys that project above the roofline and divide the fagade into two bays; two basement windows with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, a field stone foundation. The rear addition is one -and -one -half -storeys with a gable roofline; covered verandah; segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs: a segmentally arched window opening with red brick voussoirs; and, a circular window with a red brick border located above the verandah. The first -storey covered verandah features: a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; and, vertical skirting. Rear (South) Facade The rear fagade faces a laneway in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. This fagade features portions of the two-storey building and the one - and -one -half -storey addition. The portions of the two-storey building feature: a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills at both the first- and second -storey; and, double hung 1/1 window design. The one -and -a -half -storey addition features: gable roofline; two bays separated by a chimney; buff (yellow) and red brick; plain fascia, soffits and frieze; segmentally arched window openings of varying sizes on both the first- and second -storey with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; double hung 1/1 window design; and, rusticated stone foundation. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 171-173 Victoria Street North has historical/associative value due to its history and association the late Ian MacNaughton and his planning firm MHBC — MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited. Ian Mac Naughton graduated from the University of Waterloo's Urban and Regional Planning program in 1968 and went on to pursue his MA in Regional Planning and Resource Development in 1971. He founded MHBC in 1973 with a vision to create a planning firm built on innovation, integrity, strategic thinking, problem solving and excellent service (MHBC Planning Urban Design & Landscape Architecture, 2024). He was honoured as a "Fellow" by the Canadian Institute of Planners, which is the highest recognition a land use planner can achieve. Sadly, Ian passed away on Saturday, October 7, 2023. MHBC's website (2024) contains an "In Memory" page that further describes Ian and his contributions to the planning field and community: "Ian was passionate about the betterment of Ontario through his vision, leadership and big picture thinking. Throughout his life, Ian demonstrated qualities that set him apart as a leader, mentor and innovator and he had a unique ability to inspire and motivate those around him. Based on his knowledge and expertise he was appointed as a member of numerous Provincial, Regional and Local task forces including the Provincial Smart Growth Central Ontario Strategy Sub -Panel, the Greenbelt Task Force and the Province of Page 174 of 454 Ontario Advisory Group on Energy and Economic Development. Ian was also selected as a special advisor to the Ontario Stone, Sand and Gravel Association and assisted numerous municipalities with restructuring, governance, waste management and housing strategies. Beyond Ian's professional achievements, Ian championed causes close to his heart, giving back to the community and making a positive impact on countless lives. This included the University of Waterloo, Canadian Technology Triangle, Rotary, Homewood, Breslau Park and Recreation Association and the Grand River Conservation Foundation." The subject property was MHBCs Kitchener office from 1986 to 2009. Over the past 50 years, what began as a local planning firm, MHBC has grown to be a large company with over 100 staff located at five regional offices (Barrie, Kitchener, London, Woodbridge and Burlington) providing planning services across Ontario. Today, the firm provides a full range of services, including: urban and rural planning; urban design; landscape architecture; cultural heritage; and, resource management. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 171-173 Victoria Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the design and physical value of the semi-detached dwelling built in the Italianate architectural style, including: o two-storey height; o square plan with rear addition; o hipped roofline; o the front facade: ■ four bays (two for each half of the dwelling); ■ projecting bays with front gables (one for each half of the dwelling); ■ roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; ■ buff (yellow) and red brick; ■ semi -circular window opening in the front gable ends with a red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ the design of the double hung 1/1 wood windows; ■ segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs on the second -storey; ■ second -storey verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; ■ first -storey verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters and turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; ■ segmentally arched transom with red brick voussoirs and simple side lites on the first -storey; ■ front door openings; and, ■ rusticated stone foundation. Page 175 of 454 o the side facades: ■ hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; ■ buff (yellow) and red brick; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ double hung 1/1 window design; ■ chimneys that project above the roofline and divide the facade into two bays; ■ two basement windows with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, ■ field stone foundation. o the rear addition features: ■ one -and -one -half -storey height; ■ gable roofline; ■ covered verandah; ■ segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs; ■ circular window with a red brick border located above the verandah; and, ■ covered verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters, turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work, and vertical skirting. o the rear facade: ■ this fagade features portions of the two-storey building and the one - and -one -half -storey addition; ■ the portions of the two-storey building feature: • a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; • buff (yellow) and red brick; • segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, • double hung 1/1 window design. ■ the one -and -a -half -storey addition features: • gable roofline; • two bays separated by a chimney; • buff (yellow) and red brick; • plain fascia, soffits and frieze; • segmentally arched window openings of varying sizes with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; • double hung 1/1 window design; and, • rusticated stone foundation. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 176 of 454 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 17, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 171-173 Victoria Street North Page 177 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 171-173 Victoria Street North Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ❑Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 171-173 Victoria Street North Legal Description: Plan 374 Lot 78 Year Built: c. 1887 Architectural Style: Italianate Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Residential Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The property municipally addressed as 171-173 Victoria Street North is a two-storey late 19th century brick building built circa 1887 in the Italianate architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.23 - acre parcel of land located on the south side of Victoria Street North between Ahrens Street West and Margaret Avenue in the Civic Centre planning community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The subject property is also located adjacent to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District, which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Page 178 of 454 Heritage Value 171-173 Victoria Street North is recognized for its design/physical and historical/associative values. The building was part of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (CCNHCD) Study. As part of the study, the boundaries were refined to exclude certain properties primarily fronting onto regional roads; however, the CCNHCD Plan identified 171-173 Victoria Street North as a Group A building worthy of designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Specifically, the CCNHCD Plan notes the following: a pair of prestigious semi-detached residences; the building is in very good condition; the masonry is in good repair and exhibits the contrasting colours of red and buff (yellow) brick; presence of decorative wood details in the roof eaves and brackets; porches have been replicated using good skill and judgment; the windows appear to be original double hung; and, the front doors have maintained the transom window design. Desipn/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as rare example of a late 19th century prestigious semi-detached dwelling built in the Italianate architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (North) FaQade The front fagade of the building faces Victoria Street North and is comprised of four bays (two bays for each half of the semi-detached dwelling). Each half of the semi-detached dwelling features: a projecting bay with a front gable; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a semi -circular window opening in the front gable end with a red brick voussoirs and stone sill; a pair of segmentally arched window openings on both the the first- and second -storey with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; the design of the double hung 1/1 wood windows on the first- and second -storey; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Between the projecting bays are the entrances to the building. Each half of the semi- detached dwelling features: a hip roof; roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; a segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs on the second -storey; a verandah on both the first- and second - storey; the verandah on the second -storey displays a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; the verandah on the first -storey displays a half turned post on each end with highly decorative brackets and scroll work along with a full central turned post in the middle with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; and, the first -storey has two entrances and both display a front door opening with a segmentally arched transom with red brick voussoirs and simple side lites. Side (West & East) Facades The side fagades of the building are virtually identical. They face the side lot lines and adjacent buildings. The side facades are comprised of the side of the projecting bays, two bays divided by a chimney and a rear addition. In general, the second -storey side fagades feature: a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills at both the first- and second -storey; double hung 1/1 window design; chimneys that project above the roofline and divide the fagade into two bays; two basement windows with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, a field stone foundation. The rear addition is one -and -one -half -storeys with a gable roofline; covered verandah; segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs: a segmentally arched window opening with red brick voussoirs; and, a circular window with a red brick border located above the verandah. The first -storey covered verandah features: a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; and, vertical skirting. Page 179 of 454 Rear (South) Facade The rear fagade faces a laneway in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. This fagade features portions of the two-storey building and the one -and -one -half -storey addition. The portions of the two-storey building feature: a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; buff (yellow) and red brick; segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills at both the first- and second -storey; and, double hung 1/1 window design. The one -and -a -half -storey addition features: gable roofline; two bays separated by a chimney; buff (yellow) and red brick; plain fascia, soffits and frieze; segmentally arched window openings of varying sizes on both the first- and second -storey with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; double hung 1/1 window design; and, rusticated stone foundation. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 171-173 Victoria Street North has historical/associative value due to its history and association the late Ian MacNaughton and his planning firm MHBC — MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited. Ian Mac Naughton graduated from the University of Waterloo's Urban and Regional Planning program in 1968 and went on to pursue his MA in Regional Planning and Resource Development in 1971. He founded MHBC in 1973 with a vision to create a planning firm built on innovation, integrity, strategic thinking, problem solving and excellent service (MHBC Planning Urban Design & Landscape Architecture, 2024). He was honoured as a "Fellow" by the Canadian Institute of Planners, which is the highest recognition a land use planner can achieve. Sadly, Ian passed away on Saturday, October 7, 2023. MHBC's website (2024) contains an "In Memory" page that further describes Ian and his contributions to the planning field and community: "Ian was passionate about the betterment of Ontario through his vision, leadership and big picture thinking. Throughout his life, Ian demonstrated qualities that set him apart as a leader, mentor and innovator and he had a unique ability to inspire and motivate those around him. Based on his knowledge and expertise he was appointed as a member of numerous Provincial, Regional and Local task forces including the Provincial Smart Growth Central Ontario Strategy Sub -Panel, the Greenbelt Task Force and the Province of Ontario Advisory Group on Energy and Economic Development. Ian was also selected as a special advisor to the Ontario Stone, Sand and Gravel Association and assisted numerous municipalities with restructuring, governance, waste management and housing strategies. Beyond Ian's professional achievements, Ian championed causes close to his heart, giving back to the community and making a positive impact on countless lives. This included the University of Waterloo, Canadian Technology Triangle, Rotary, Homewood, Breslau Park and Recreation Association and the Grand River Conservation Foundation." The subject property was MHBCs Kitchener office from 1986 to 2009. Over the past 50 years, what began as a local planning firm, MHBC has grown to be a large company with over 100 staff located at five regional offices (Barrie, Kitchener, London, Woodbridge and Burlington) providing planning services across Ontario. Today, the firm provides a full range of services, including: urban and rural planning; urban design; landscape architecture; cultural heritage; and, resource management. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 171-173 Victoria Street North resides in the following heritage attributes: Page 180 of 454 • All elements related to the design and physical value of the semi-detached dwelling built in the Italianate architectural style, including: o two-storey height; o square plan with rear addition; o hipped roofline; o the front fagade: ■ four bays (two for each half of the dwelling); ■ projecting bays with front gables (one for each half of the dwelling); ■ roofline displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; ■ buff (yellow) and red brick; ■ semi -circular window opening in the front gable ends with a red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ the design of the double hung 1/1 wood windows; ■ segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs on the second -storey; ■ second -storey verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters; ■ first -storey verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters and turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work; ■ segmentally arched transom with red brick voussoirs and simple side Iites on the first -storey; ■ front door openings; and, ■ rusticated stone foundation. o the side facades: ■ hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; ■ buff (yellow) and red brick; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; ■ double hung 1/1 window design; ■ chimneys that project above the roofline and divide the fagade into two bays; ■ two basement windows with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, ■ field stone foundation. o the rear addition features: ■ one -and -one -half -storey height; ■ gable roofline; ■ covered verandah; ■ segmentally arched door opening with red brick voussoirs; ■ segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs; ■ circular window with a red brick border located above the verandah; and, ■ covered verandah displaying a top and bottom rail with turned balusters, turned posts with highly decorative brackets and scroll work, and vertical skirting. o the rear fagade: ■ this fagade features portions of the two-storey building and the one -and -one -half - storey addition; ■ the portions of the two-storey building feature: Page 181 of 454 • a hip roof displaying plain fascia, soffits and decorative frieze board along with highly decorative paired brackets; • buff (yellow) and red brick; • segmentally arched window openings with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; and, • double hung 1/1 window design. ■ the one -and -a -half -storey addition features: • gable roofline; • two bays separated by a chimney; • buff (yellow) and red brick; • plain fascia, soffits and frieze; • segmentally arched window openings of varying sizes with red brick voussoirs and stone sills; • double hung 1/1 window design; and, • rusticated stone foundation. Rafaranrac City of Kitchener. (2007). Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan. Stantec in association with Nexus Architects, ecoplans limited, and Michael Baker, Historian: Kitchener, Ontario. Berlin Fire Insurance Map. (1894 revised 1904). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Kitchener Fire Insurance Map. (1908 revised 1925). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. MHBC Planning Urban Design & Landscape Architecture. (2024). "About Us." Retrieved from https://www.mhbcplan.com/about/ [Accessed April 15, 2024]. MHBC Planning Urban Design & Landscape Architecture. (2024). "In Memory." Retrieved from https://www.mhbcplan.com/team/in-memory/ [Accessed April 15, 2024]. Twin -City Directory and Official Guide of the Towns of Berlin and Waterloo. (1907). Watts & Bowden: n. p., ON. Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo Directory. (1897-1899). Vernon's Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo. (1901-1903). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1907-1908). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1908-1909). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1910-1911). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Page 182 of 454 Photographs _ a , Front Elevation (North Fagade) — 171-173 Victoria Street South (former semi-detached dwelling converted to offices Page 183 of 454 a l it rid I I W . h• �-- iSide Elevation (West Fagade) — 171-173 Victoria Street North Side Elevation (East Fagade) — 171-173 Victoria Street North Page 184 of 454 Page 185 of 454 rIII MWWOJ V, 14 EPA ON 11 KVIO 0 01 V, Detailing of door openings with transom and side lites, and detailing of verandah with turned posts, turned balusters and decorative brackets and scrollwork Page 186 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 171-173 Victoria Street North Address: Former semi-detached dwelling, Italianate style Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: March 25, 2024 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 187 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 11 of 17 Page 188 of 454 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 X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Page 12 of 17 Page 189 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑ occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑ most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 13 of 17 Page 190 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X good Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Page 14 of 17 Page 191 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑X What is the Commercial X Office X Other ❑ present Office ❑X Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 15 of 17 Page 192 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 Page 16 of 17 Page 193 of 454 ❑ 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 of Y Page 194 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 5 DATE OF REPORT: July 10, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-341 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 1738 Trussler Road under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 1738 Trussler Road as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 1738 Trussler Road under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 1738 Trussler Road has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 1738 Trussler Road meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: 1738 Trussler Road is a one -and -one-half storey late 19th century brick farmhouse built in the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style. The adjacent property with frontage on both *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 195 of 454 Huron Road and Trussler Road contains an agricultural landscape with outbuildings, which were historically associated with 1738 Trussler Road (the subject property). The subject property, which contains the farmhouse is situated on a 0.92 -acre parcel of land located on while the adjacent property is situated on a 62.39 -acre parcel of land. Both properties are located at the southeast corner of Trussler Road and Huron Road in the South Plains Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the farmhouse, and adjacent outbuildings, specifically the barn and driveshed. Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property and adjacent property 1738 Trussler Road, GCT Pt Lt 149 RP 58R8498 Part 1 Huron Road, Plan 585 Lots 18, 19, and 20 Part Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 21 SS Huron Road German Company Tract Part Lot 149 A full assessment of 1738 Trussler Road has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings conclude that the subject property meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 1738 Trussler Road should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their MHRs Page 196 of 454 until December 31, 2026. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 1738 Trussler Road was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated June 12, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front Elevation (West Fa(;ade) REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of Page 197 of 454 property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. 1738 Trussler Road is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it No displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it Unknown demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Yes 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 No 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Table 1.0: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property demonstrates design/physical value as a representative example of a late - 19t" century brick farmhouse built in the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style. The 1851 Manuscript Census suggests that a one -storey log structure was covered or replaced by the existing building. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Page 198 of 454 Front (West) Facade The front fagade faces Trussler Road and contains three bays. The building features: side - gable roof with a central Gothic dormer; buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; second floor pointed arch (lancet) door and door opening with brick hoodmould with corbel stops; central verandah on the first and second floor; second floor verandah features square newel posts with ball caps, and simple top and bottom rails with square balusters; first floor verandah features highly decorative posts and pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; front door with segmentally arched transom; two segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, fieldstone foundation. Side (South) Facade The side fagade faces south and contains two bays plus a kitchen annex, which may have been original to the house. The first two bays feature: side -gable roof divided by a concrete block chimney; buff (yellow) brick construction; two 1/1 double hung flat head windows with segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on the second storey; two 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, a stone foundation. The kitchen annex features: cross -gable roof with a central Gothic dormer; buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; second floor pointed arch (lancet) window and window opening; first storey verandah with a hip roof and highly decorative posts pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; segmentally arched door and door opening with brick voussoirs; one 2/2 double hung segmentally arched window, window opening and storm window with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, stone foundation. Another addition is in the rear but has limited visibility from the public realm. Side (North) Facade The side fagade faces north and features: side -gable roof; two 1/1 double hung flat head windows with segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on the second storey; two 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, a stone foundation. The kitchen annex to the rear has limited visibility from the public realm. Other Buildings The original barn with gable roof, vertical board siding, original hardware and stone foundation is located south of the house on the adjacent property. A new garage was constructed in 1999 on the subject property that does not detract from the character of the farmhouse, barn or immediate surroundings. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 1738 Trussler Road has historical/associative value due to its history and association with early settlement, Daniel and Jacob Erb, Joseph Bamburger, John Chapman, Reuben Eby, Simon Hallman, Ida Hallman, and the Trussler family. Daniel and Jacob Erb sold the land to Joseph Bamburger in 1805 who then sold to John Chapman in 1848 (Shantz, 1980). John Chapman Sr., born in 1811, came to Canada from England in the mid -1840's with his wife Lydia and his two children. A third child, John Jr., Page 199 of 454 was born in Upper Canada in 1846. The 1851 manuscript census indicates that the Chapman family resided in a one -storey log structure. It is assumed that the brick structure either replaced or covered the log structure. John Chapman sold the land to Reuben Eby in 1907 who then sold the land to Simon Hallman (b. August 28, 1886, d. May 21, 1976) in 1930 (Shantz, 1980). Simon married his wife, Ida Hallman (b. October 24, 1902, d. May 25, 1991), on December 18, 1929 (G. & J. Burmaster, personal communication, July 9, 2024). The lands passed to Ida in 1977(G. & J. Burmaster, personal communication, July 9, 2024) and shortly thereafter Ida sold to Trussler Farms in 1977 (Shantz, 1980). Contextual Value The contextual values relate to how the property helps to maintain and support the rural character of the area. The farmhouse remains on its original location. A board and batten front gable garage contributes to the character of the property along with the cedar hedges delineating three sides of the property. The farmhouse is visually and historically linked to its surroundings, especially the adjacent property where the original barn and driveshed still stand. The adjacent property is addressed off Huron Road (outlined in green on page 1) and legally described as Plan 585 Lots 18, 19, and 20 Part Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 21 SS Huron Road German Company Tract Part Lot 149. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 1738 Trussler Road resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the design/physical value of the brick house built in the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style, including: 0 one -and -one-half storey height; o rectangular plan with rear kitchen annex; o front fagade with three bays; o side fagade with two bays and rear kitchen annex; o side -gable roof and kitchen annex both with a central Gothic dormer; o buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; o half storey pointed arch (lancet) door and door opening with brick hoodmould with corbel stops; o half story pointed arch (lancet) window and window opening with hoodmould with corbel stops; o central verandah on the first and half storey; o half storey verandah features square newel posts with ball caps, and simple top and bottom rails with square balusters; o first storey verandah features highly decorative posts and pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; o first storey verandah on the kitchen annex with a hip roof and highly decorative posts pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; o front door with segmentally arched transom; 0 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; o 1/1 double hung flat head windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, o fieldstone foundation. Page 200 of 454 All elements related to the contextual value of the subject property, including: o the setback from Trussler Road to the front facade of the brick house; o the orientation of the front fagade of the brick house facing Trussler Road; and, o the original location of the brick house. References Burmaster, G. (2008). Municipal Heritage Register— Written Response Form. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Google Earth (10.49.0.0 Multi -threaded) (2024). 1738 Trussler Road. [online]. Available from: https://earth.google.com/web/search/1738+Trussler+Road,+Kitchener,+ON/(a)43.375 47624,-80.51422149,338.67885546a,51.50655924d,35v,- 86.22925247h,52.68870417t,360r/data=CowBGm ISXAolMHg4ODJiMGEOMiRiMm UzYW M5OOB4ZmMwMzQ5ZWZmMGI0MOU2YxnpMYCmFLBFQCFfoFoz6CBUwCohMTczOCBU cnVzc2xlciBSb2FkLCBLaXRiaGVuZXIsIE9OGAIgASImCiQJzSfvEzgxRUAR1ArBVcuwRU AZxz6yPdEgVMAh4TOPa3AhVMA [Accessed 2024, April 5). Hallman, J. (1991). Hallman Family History in Canada. Mrs. Joan Hallman: Kitchener, ON Shantz, C. (1980). 1738 Trussler Road. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Simpson, S. (1981). 1738 Trussler Road. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and June 12, 2024. Heritage Planning staff corresponded by email and met in-person at the subject property with the property owners on July 9, 2024. The property owners expressed support for the proposed designation. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via Page 201 of 454 circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 1738 Trussler Road Page 202 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 1738 Trussler Road 0- 1738 Trussler Road, GCT Pt Lt 149 RP 58R8498 Part 1 Huron Road, Plan 585 Lots 18, 19, and 20 Part Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 21 SS Hu ron Road German Company Tract Part Lot 149 Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ® Historical Value ® Contextual Value ® Social Value ❑ Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address:1738 Trussler Road (Red) Legal Description: GCT Pt Lt 149 RP 58R8498 Part 1 Year Built: 1879 Architectural Style: Ontario Gothic Revival Original Owner: John Chapman Jr. Original Use: Farm Condition: Good Page 203 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The property municipally addressed as 1738 Trussler Road is a one -and -one-half storey late 1911 century brick farmhouse builtin the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style. The property on Huron Road is a late 19th centuryfarm with outbuildings. The farmhouse is situated on a 0.92 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Trussler Road between Huron Road and Plains Road while the outbuildings are situated on a 62.39 acre parcel of land located at the south east corner of Trussler Road and Huron Road in the South Plains Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritagevalue isthefarmhouse, and adjacent outbuildings, specificallythe barn, located on Huron Road, and legally described as LT 17 S/S HURON RD, 18 S/S HURON RD, 19 S/S HURON RD, 20 S/S HURON RD PL 585 TWP OF WATERLOO; PT LT 3 S/S HURON RD, 4 S/S HURON RD, 5 S/S HURON RD, 6 S/S HURON RD, 7 S/S HURON RD, 8 S/S HURON RD, 15 S/S HURON RD, 16 S/S HURON RD, 21 S/S HURON RD PL 585 TWP OF WATERLOO; PT LT 149 GERMAN COMPANY TRACT KITCHENERAS IN 1200696 & 1200697, SAVE & EXCEPT PT 12 ON 58R-16920; KITCHENER. Heritage Value 1738 Trussler Road is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 1738 Trussler Road demonstrates design/physical value as a representative example of a late -19th century brick farmhouse built in the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style. The 1851 Manuscript Census suggests that a one -storey log structure was covered or replaced by the existing building. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (West) Facade The front fagade faces Trussler Road and contains three bays. The building features: side -gable roof with a central Gothic dormer; buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; second floor pointed arch (lancet) door and door opening with brick hoodmould with corbel stops; central verandah on the first and second floor; second floorverandah features square newel posts with ball caps, and simple top and bottom rails with square balusters; first floor verandah features highly decorative posts and pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; front door with segmentally arched transom; two segmentallyarchedwindows, window open ingsandstorm windowswith brickvoussoirs andwood sills; and, fieldstone foundation. Side (South) FaQade The side fagadefaces south and containstwo bays plusa kitchen annex,which mayhavebeen original to the house. The first two bays feature: side -gable roof divided by a concrete block chimney; buff (yellow) brick construction; two 1/1 double hung flat head windowswith segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on the second storey; two 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window open ingsand storm windowswith brick voussoirsand wood sills; and, astone foundation. The kitchen annex features: cross -gable roof with a central Gothic dormer; buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; second floor pointed arch (lancet) window and window opening; first storey verandah with a hip roof and highly decorative posts pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; segmentally arched door and door opening with brick voussoirs; one 2/2 double hung segmentally arched window, window opening and storm window with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, stone foundation. Anoth er addition is in the rear but has limited visibility from the public realm. Page 204 of 454 Side (North) Fagade The side fagade faces north and features: side -gable roof; two 1/1 double hung flat head windows with segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on the second storey; two 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windowswithbrickvoussoirs and wood sills; and, a stone foundation. The kitchen annex to the rear has limited visibilityfrom the public realm. Other Buildings The original barn with gable roof, vertical board siding,original hardware and stonefoundation is located south of the house on a separate parcel of land. A new garage was constructed in 1999 that does not detract from the character of the farmhouse, barn or immediate surroundings. Historical/Associative Value The property mu n icipally addressed as 1738 Trussler Road has historical/associative value due to its history and association with early settlement, Daniel and Jacob Erb, Joseph Bamburger, John Chapman, Reuben Eby, Simon Hallman, Ida Hallman, and the Trussler family. Daniel and Jacob Erb sold the land to Joseph Bamburger in 1805 whothen sold to John Chapman in 1848 (Shantz, 1980). John Chapman Sr., born in 1811, came to Canadafrom England in the mid -1 840's with his wife Lydia and his two children (Simpson, 1981). A third child, John Jr., was born in Upper Canada in 1846 (Simpson, 1981). The 1851 manuscript census indicates that the Chapman family resided in a one -storey log stru ctu re an d itis assumed th at th e brick stru ctu re either replaced or covered the log structure (Simpson, 1981). John Chapman sold the land to Reuben Eby in 1907 whothen sold the land to Simon Hallman (b. August 28, 1886, d. May 21, 1976) in 1930 (Bonk, 2024; Shantz, 1980). Simon married his wife, Ida Hallman (b. October 24, 1902, d. May 25, 1991), on December 18, 1929 (Bonk, 2024; Bu rmaster, "personal communication", July 9, 2024). The Ian ds passed to Ida in 1977 and shortly thereafter were sold to Trussler Farms in 1977 (Shantz, 1980). A descendant of the Hallman family purchased the house in 1994. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to how the property helps to maintain and support the rural character of the area. The farmhouse remains on its original location. A board and batten front gable garage contributes to the character of the property along with the cedar hedges delineating th ree sides of the property. The farmhouse is visually and historically linked to its surroundings, especially the rural farm property on the corner of Huron Road and Trussler Road where the original barn and driveshed still stand. This property is addressed off Huron Road (outlined in green on page 1) and legally described as Plan 585 Lots 18, 19, and 20 Part Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 21 SS Huron Road German Company Tract Part Lot 149. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 1738 Trussler Road resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the design/physical value of the brick house built in the Ontario Gothic Revival architectural style, including: o the location, massing and scale of the brick house; Page 205 of 454 0 one -and -one-half storey height; o rectangular plan with rear kitchen annex; o front fagade with three bays; o side fagade with two bays and rear kitchen annex; o side -gable roof and kitchen annex both with a central Gothic dormer; o buff (yellow) brick laid in the stretcher bond style; o half storey pointed arch (lancet) door and door opening with brick hoodmould with corbel stops; o central verandah on the first and half storey; o half storey verandah features square newel posts with ball caps, and simple top and bottom rails with square balusters; o first storey verandah features highly decorative posts and pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; o first storey verandah on the kitchen annex with a hip roof and highly decorative posts pilasters with scroll brackets and moulded frieze; o front door with segmentally arched transom; 0 2/2 double hung segmentally arched windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; 0 1/1 double hung flat head windows, window openings and storm windows with brick voussoirs and wood sills; and, o fieldstone foundation. References Burmaster, G. (2008). Municipal Heritage Register— Written Response Form. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Google Earth (10.49.0.0 Multi -threaded) (2024). 1738 Trussler Road. [online]. Available from: https://earth .google.com/web/search/1738+Trussler+Road,+Kitchener,+ON/(a)43.37547624,- 80.51422149,338.67885546a,51.50655924d,35V,- 86.22925247h ,52.68870417t,360r/data=CowBGmISXAolMHg40DJ0MGE0MMRMMmUzYWM50IB4Zm MwMzQ5ZWZmMGI0MOU2Yxn pMYCmFLB FQCFfoFoz6CBUwCohMTczOCBUcnVzc2xlciBSb2FkLC BLaXRiaGVuZXIsIE9OGAIgAS ImCiQJzSfvEzgxRUAR1 ArBVcuwRUAZxz6VPdEgVMAh4TOPa3AhVM A [Accessed 2024, April 5). Hallman, J. (1991). Hallman Family History in Canada. Mrs. Joan Hallman: Kitchener, ON. Shantz, C. (1980). 1738 Trussler Road. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Simpson, S. (1981). 1738 Trussler Road. City of Kitchener: Kitchener, ON. Page 206 of 454 Photographs Front Elevation (West Fagade)— 1738 Trussler Road Side Elevation (South Elevation) — 1738 Trussler Road Page 207 of 454 ZIP `R }� , 71 yI `�! fes.'° i!q( �;�,� „� .� _ ,� t � � �--• 1 Jx 'f..r. Side Elevation (North Fagade)— 1738 Trussler Road Wide Angle View of the Frontage of the Property, including the Front Elevation (West Facade) of the Farmhouse — 1738 Trussler Road View of Farmhouse (1738 Trussler Road) & Barn and Driveshed (Huron Road) Page 210 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 1478 Trussler Road Address: Gothic Revival, rural small house Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Jean Haalboom Recorder: March 21, 2023 Date: ❑X Front Facade ❑X Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑X 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 ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X physical value Yes ❑ 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 ❑X No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 211 of 454 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 or 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 10of16 Page 212 of 454 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 maybe required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ 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 J. Haalboom: main house, blue siding, windows modern, landscape, trees M. Drake: see "Arch itecturalAnalysis-1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study"written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 Page 213 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑X occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑X most of its original materials and design features? Please referto the list of heritage attributes within the Page 214 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X good Yes ❑X 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Page 13of16 Page 215 of 454 1 KrTCHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑X Unknown ❑ Residential ❑X Commercial ❑X What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑X Farm present Office ❑ Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Doesthe subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 14 of lE Page 216 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Doesthe subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 J. Haalboom: too far off road to assess, can't see smoke house, in good condition based on what can be seen from the road M. Drake: see "Architectural Analysis -1478 TrusslerRoad" written by Don Ryan on June 5, 1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study" written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010, log house is covered by lidding 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 Page 217 of 454 1 KrT HENER ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes J. Haalboom: age and material and family (Trussler) should qualify for designation, requires reassessment — arrange with owner/resident forthe visit M. Drake: assessments provided in 1991 and 2010, see "Architectural Analysis -1478 Trussler Road" written by Don Ryan on June 5,1991; see "Cultural Heritage Background Study: Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Southwest Kitchener Urban Area Study" written by Nancy Z. Tausky in August 2010 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 218 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 19, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-330 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 709 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 709 King Street West as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 709 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance on the property's cultural heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. On this meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 709 King Street West be recognized and designation pursued. • The key finding of this report is that the property municipally addressed as 709 King Street West meets the criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource. The property is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual value. • There are no financial implications with this recommendation. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served to the Owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. • 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 219 of 454 BACKGROUND: 709 King Street West is a two storey early 20th century brick school building built in the Neo Classical architectural style. The school building is situated on a 1.81 acre parcel of land located on the block bounded by King Street West, Agnes Street and Walter 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 school building. I ' 742 ; /730 Figure 1: Location Map of Subject Property 12 23 A full assessment of 709 King Street West has been completed and included a field evaluation and detailed archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets the criteria for designation. An updated Statement of Significance on the property's cultural heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. On this meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 709 King Street West be recognized and designation pursued. This work was undertaken as part of the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation in June 2024 were contacted via a second letter dated June 18, 2024, and invited to contact the City's Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Page 220 of 454 Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate, Owners will be contacted a third time through a Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) Letter. An ad for the NOID will also be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served and the ad posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which Owners may object to the designation. REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term protection of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value and interest. 709 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies four of the nine criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is met or not met is provided in the table below. Design/Physical Value Page 221 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it No displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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, No 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 No 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Design/Physical Value Page 221 of 454 The building is located on a corner bounded by King Street West, Agnes Street and Walter Street. The existing portion of the school which fronts onto King Street West is a representative example of the Neo Classical architectural style. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements. The original school build c. 1887 fronted onto Agnes Street and was later modified by the Neo -Classical frontage in 1921, changing the orientation towards King Street West. The 1921 fagade is constructed of red brick with white mortar and features: Front (King Street West) Elevation.- The levation: The front fagade can be visually divided into three sections, with projecting end bays and a tiered central massing. The end bays have 2/5 casement windows with a 4 -pane transom, flanked with flat pilasters with an upper section of vertical grooves to represent capitals and topped with a triangular pediment; the existing casement windows replaced 18/18 single - hung windows c. 2018. Each end bay also has a venetian window with 6/6 section flanked by 3 -paned sidelights on the top floor and 6/6 windows to the basement level. The central section of the school contains the primary entrance, which is comprised of 12 - paned doors surrounded by an architrave, and topped by a projecting cornice visually supported by a bracket at each end. There are two 8/8 windows flanked by 2/5 sidelights on either side of the door. Above are a row of 2/5 casement windows topped with a two - pane transome and moulded panels. This storey also features moulded columns and the King Edward Public School sign. The top floor is recessed with one large 15/15 window in the center flanked by two triple 9/9 windows. The roofline features a projecting cornice with dentil row and plain frieze. Side (Agnes Street) Elevation: The side elevation of the 1921 portion of the building that fronts onto Agnes Street features two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; moulded panels; 6/6 window separated from 4 - paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; 8/8/8 double hung windows and venetian window. Side (Interior) Elevation: The interior side elevation features two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; moulded panels; 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; 8/8/8 double hung windows, and venetian window. Page 222 of 454 Figure 2: Front Facade of Subject Property Historical/Associative Value The school building was built in 1886 for a total cost of $4000 and was originally known as the Agnes Street Public School. It is the second -longest operating grade school within Kitchener. The construction of the school was essential, as the City (then known as Berlin) was experiencing rapid population growth which was resulting in overcrowding at the sole elementary school Central (now Suddaby Public School). Agnes Street Public School was opened under head teacher Maggie Hyndman in 1887, prior to Jennie Thomson being appointed principal in 1889. Over the next 10 years the City's population continued to grow rapidly, so four additional rooms were added to the school in 1897 for a cost of $5000. Janet Metcalfe was named principal this same year; 15 years earlier she had established Canada's first kindergarten class at Central School. By the turn of the century the school was full again, with approximately 750 pupils between kindergarten to grade 8 attending. In 1905 the school board adopted the name King Edward Public School, to honor the monarch King Edward VII. In 1921 a neo classical frontage was built onto the school, turning the eight classrooms to be oriented towards King Street and providing the building with its current appearance. In 1962 the school underwent further major construction, with portions of the original 1886 and 1897 building being demolished and replaced by a new wing which is comprised of a mostly - glass fagade and set at a right angle to the King Street fagade, oriented along Agnes Street. Page 223 of 454 Contextual Value 709 King Street West has contextual value as it is physically, functionally, and historically linked to its surroundings. The building exists in its original location, occupying a large corner lot on the prominent King Street. It maintains its original use as an elementary school. The building also maintains and supports the character of the area, being surrounded by residential family homes which have occupants who may utilize the school, and further being in proximity to other institutional uses including the Kitchener Waterloo Collegiate and Vocational School located to the west at 787 King Street West. Further, the schools distinctive and attractive fagade make is easily recognizable within the local area. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 709 King Street West resides in the following attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Neo -Classical architectural style of the building, including: o Roof and roofline; o Window and door openings and fenestration; o Red brick with white mortar; Front (King Street) Elevation o projecting end bays with multi -pane windows, flanked with flat pilasters with an upper section of vertical grooves to represent capitals and topped with a pediment; o large multi -pane windows o two venetian windows with 6/6 section flanked by 3 -paned sidelights; o projecting cornice with dentil row; o plain frieze; o entrance with 12 -paned doors surrounded by an architrave, and topped by a projecting cornice visually supported by a bracket at each end; Side (Agnes Street) Elevation o Two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; o moulded panels; 0 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; o venetian window; Side (Interior) Elevation: o Two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; o moulded panels; 0 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; and o venetian window. Page 224 of 454 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and June 11, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving notice of its intention to designate a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. It should be noted that should Council decide not to proceed with a Notice of Intention to Designate, that the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed according to the changes enacted by Bill 23 and Bill 200. Once removed, it cannot re -listed on the Register again for five (5) years, i.e. January 1, 2032. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 709 King Street West Page 225 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 709 KING STREET WEST 74.2 �12•�L .I 'I'17.... Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 103 �7 S Itf �r 723' CZ, ss• �f -�—YCing E.I ..a• F`+d'•li� �•I�• •I 7•'JiJ, � r ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 709 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 377 Lot 39 & 40, Lot 82-85, Part Lot 86 Year Built: c. 1887 (addition 1921 and 1962/63) Architectural Style: Neo Classical Original Owner: NA Original Use: Institutional Condition: Good 54 Page 226 of 454 �12•�L .I 'I'17.... Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 103 �7 S Itf �r 723' CZ, ss• �f -�—YCing E.I ..a• F`+d'•li� �•I�• •I 7•'JiJ, � r ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 709 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 377 Lot 39 & 40, Lot 82-85, Part Lot 86 Year Built: c. 1887 (addition 1921 and 1962/63) Architectural Style: Neo Classical Original Owner: NA Original Use: Institutional Condition: Good 54 Page 226 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 709 King Street West is a two storey early 20th century brick school building built in the Neo Classical architectural style. The school building is situated on a 1.81 acre parcel of land located on the block bounded by King Street West, Agnes Street and Walter 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 school building. Heritage Value 709 King Street West is recognized for design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The building is located on a corner bounded by King Street West, Agnes Street and Walter Street. The existing portion of the school which fronts onto King Street West is a representative example of the Neo Classical architectural style. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements. The original school build c. 1887 fronted onto Agnes Street and was later modified by the Neo -Classical frontage in 1921, changing the orientation towards King Street West. The 1921 fagade is constructed of red brick with white mortar and features: Front (King Street West) Elevation.- The levation: The front fagade can be visually divided into three sections, with projecting end bays and a tiered central massing. The end bays have 2/5 casement windows with a 4 -pane transom, flanked with flat pilasters with an upper section of vertical grooves to represent capitals and topped with a triangular pediment; the existing casement windows replaced 18/18 single -hung windows c. 2018. Each end bay also has a venetian window with 6/6 section flanked by 3 -paned sidelights on the top floor and 6/6 windows to the basement level. The central section of the school contains the primary entrance, which is comprised of 12 -paned doors surrounded by an architrave, and topped by a projecting cornice visually supported by a bracket at each end. There are two 8/8 windows flanked by 2/5 sidelights on either side of the door. Above are a row of 2/5 casement windows topped with a two -pane transome and moulded panels. This storey also features moulded columns and the King Edward Public School sign. The top floor is recessed with one large 15/15 window in the center flanked by two triple 9/9 windows. The roofline features a projecting cornice with dentil row and plain frieze. Side (Agnes Street) Elevation: The side elevation of the 1921 portion of the building that fronts onto Agnes Street features two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; moulded panels; 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; 8/8/8 double hung windows and venetian window. Page 227 of 454 Side (Interior) Elevation: The interior side elevation features two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; moulded panels; 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; 8/8/8 double hung windows, and venetian window. Historical/Associative Value The school building was built in 1886 for a total cost of $4000 and was originally known as the Agnes Street Public School. It is the second -longest operating grade school within Kitchener. The construction of the school was essential, as the City (then known as Berlin) was experiencing rapid population growth which was resulting in overcrowding at the sole elementary school Central (now Suddaby Public School). Agnes Street Public School was opened under head teacher Maggie Hyndman in 1887, prior to Jennie Thomson being appointed principal in 1889. Over the next 10 years the City's population continued to grow rapidly, so four additional rooms were added to the school in 1897 for a cost of $5000. Janet Metcalfe was named principal this same year; 15 years earlier she had established Canada's first kindergarten class at Central School. By the turn of the century the school was full again, with approximately 750 pupils between kindergarten to grade 8 attending. In 1905 the school board adopted the name King Edward Public School, to honor the monarch King Edward VII. In 1921 a neo classical frontage was built onto the school, turning the eight classrooms to be oriented towards King Street and providing the building with its current appearance. In 1962 the school underwent further major construction, with portions of the original 1886 and 1897 building being demolished and replaced by a new wing which is comprised of a mostly -glass fagade and set at a right angle to the King Street fagade, oriented along Agnes Street. Contextual Value 709 King Street West has contextual value as it is physically, functionally, and historically linked to its surroundings. The building exists in its original location, occupying a large corner lot on the prominent King Street. It maintains its original use as an elementary school. The building also maintains and supports the character of the area, being surrounded by residential family homes which have occupants who may utilize the school, and further being in proximity to other institutional uses including the Kitchener Waterloo Collegiate and Vocational School located to the west at 787 King Street West. Further, the schools distinctive and attractive fagade make is easily recognizable within the local area. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 709 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Neo Classical architectural style of the building, including: o Roof and roofline; o Windows and window openings; o Doors and door openings; Page 228 of 454 o Red brick with white mortar; Front (King Street) Elevation o projecting end bays with multi -pane windows, flanked with flat pilasters with an upper section of vertical grooves to represent capitals and topped with a pediment; o large multi -pane windows o two venetian windows with 6/6 section flanked by 3 -paned sidelights; o projecting cornice with dentil row; o plain frieze; o entrance with 12 -paned doors surrounded by an architrave, and topped by a projecting cornice visually supported by a bracket at each end; Side (Agnes Street) Elevation o Two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; o moulded panels; 0 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; o venetian window; Side (Interior) Elevation: o Two doors surrounded by an architrave, flanked by pilasters, with a cornice above carrying a wrought iron railing to simulate a balcony; o moulded panels; 0 6/6 window separated from 4 -paned sidelights by half -round pilasters with vertical grooves forming capitals and topped with a wooden fan; and o venetian window. Photographs Page 229 of 454 UI Front Elevation Page 230 of 454 ■ Ju Side Elevation (Interior) Page 231 of 454 -�LIU --mv Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 2, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-336 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 83-85 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 83- 85 King Street West as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 83-85 King Street West Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 83-85 King Street West has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 83-85 King Street West meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 233 of 454 83-85 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.02 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the fagade of the building. na Us 93 "Ove Sr W Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (83-85 King Street West) 4 A full assessment of 83-85 King Street West has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on May 7, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 83-85 King Street West should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 83-85 King Street West was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 24, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Page 234 of 454 Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front (North Fa(;ade) Elevation REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes Page 235 of 454 and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. 83-85 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes on the second and third floor and is in fair condition. Features which represent the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; symmetrical fagade; single bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design and openings with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; flat head window design and openings; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Page 236 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Unknown 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 Unknown 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes on the second and third floor and is in fair condition. Features which represent the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; symmetrical fagade; single bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design and openings with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; flat head window design and openings; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Page 236 of 454 Page 237 of 454 Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 Fire Insurance Plan, the subject property originally contained a barn/shed associated with a livery. The December 20, 1900 edition of the Berliner Journal indicates that improvements were made to the livery stable for a cost of $400. The December 24, 1903 edition of the Berliner Journal suggests that the subject property, as it exists today, may have been built by Frank Heiman. The description indicates that Frank Heiman built a 3 -storey block with livery, stable and store for $8,000. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time, and designed by the same person, and constructed by the same person. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to the character of the City's Downtown and the King Street West streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 83-85 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building (excluding the first storey), including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o symmetrical fagade; o single bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; 0 ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; o semi -circular transom design; 0 1/1 hung window design and openings with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o flat head window design and openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 238 of 454 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 24, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 83-85 King Street West Page 239 of 454 39 97 95 E13 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 83-85 King Street West Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 83-85 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 380 Pt Lot 1 RP 58R3841 Part 3 Year Built: c. 1903 Architectural Style: Vernacular Classic Revival Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Commercial Condition: Good Descriotion of Cultural Heritaae Resource 83-85 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.02 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the Page 240 of 454 City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Heritage Value 83-85 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes on the second and third floor and is in fair condition. Features which represent the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; symmetrical fagade; single bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; flat head window openings; and, rectangular transoms; 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 Fire Insurance Plan, the subject property originally contained a barn/shed associated with a livery. The December 20, 1900 edition of the Berliner Journal indicates that improvements were made to the livery stable for a cost of $400. The December 24, 1903 edition of the Berliner Journal suggests that the subject property, as it exists today, may have been built by Frank Heiman. The description indicates that Frank Heiman built a 3 -storey block with livery, stable and store for $8,000. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time, and designed by the same person, and constructed by the same person. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to the character of the City's Downtown and the King Street West streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 83-85 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction and Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o symmetrical fagade; o single bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, o brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; o ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; Page 241 of 454 o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; o semi -circular transom design; 0 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o flat head window openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Rnfnrnnrnc Berlin Fire Insurance Map. (1894 revised 1904). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Berliner Journal. (1900). New Buildings and Improvements. Berliner Journal: Berlin (now Kitchener), ON. Berliner Journal. (1903). Berlin's Best Year. Berliner Journal: Berlin (now Kitchener), ON. Kitchener Fire Insurance Map. (1908 revised 1925). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Tiessen, P. (1979). Berlin, Canada: A Self -Portrait of Kitchener, Ontario Before World War One. Sand Hills Books, Inc.: St. Jacob's, ON. Twin -City Directory and Official Guide of the Towns of Berlin and Waterloo. (1907). Watts & Bowden: n. p., ON. Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo. (1901-1903). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1907-1908). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1908-1909). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1910-1911). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Page 242 of 454 Photographs r Front Elevation North Elevation — 83-85 King Street West Page 243 of 454 Second -storey details showing flat head window openings; rectangular transom design-, and, 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills Page 244 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Address: Description: 83-85 King Street West Commercial fagade; Brick construction; Classic (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade Recorder: Date: Michelle Drake March 19, 2024 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 245 of 454 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 ❑ 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 ❑X No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 246 of 454 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Page 247 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A ❑x Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ craftsmanship and/or Yes ❑ Yes ❑ detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this structure have other N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X features that should be Yes ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for adaptive re -use if Page 248 of 454 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? * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the first established Islamic Center N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ - N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 1 KrTMh,!R N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Com mercial X Office ❑ Other ❑ - N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Page 249 of 454 1 KrT HENER and Mosjid 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 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 250 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 2, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-337 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 87-91 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 87- 91 King Street West as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 87-91 King Street West Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 87-91 King Street West has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 87-91 King Street West meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 251 of 454 87-91 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.08 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the fagade of the building. Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (87-91 King Street West) A full assessment of 87-91 King Street West has been completed, including: field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on May 7, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 87-91 King Street West should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 87-91 King Street West was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 17, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Page 252 of 454 Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front (North Facade) Elevation REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a Page 253 of 454 property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. 87-91 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 87-91 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes and is in good condition. Features which represent the Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; two -bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; ribbon of three flat headed window design and opening; flat head window design and openings; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Page 254 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Unknown 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 Unknown 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 87-91 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes and is in good condition. Features which represent the Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; two -bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; ribbon of three flat headed window design and opening; flat head window design and openings; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Page 254 of 454 Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 87-91 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 (revised 1904) Fire Insurance Plan, the subject property was to be a 3 -storey brick building for Pearl Steam Laundry. However, by 1901 Pearl Steam Laundry advertised their business as being located at 9 Queen Street South, and later at 90 Queen Street South (Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo, 1901-1903). The 1908 (revised 1925) Fire Insurance Plan identifies the subject property as a 3 -storey brick building housing the Express Office. The Express Office is associated with early (1865) railway companies (Express Company Operations, date unknown). Various Vernon's directories reference either the Canadian Express Company or the Canadian National Express Company between 1908 and c. 1932. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time by the same builder. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to character of the Downtown and the King Street streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 87-91 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building (excluding the first storey), including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o two -bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, o brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; 0 ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; o semi -circular transom design; 0 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o ribbon of three flat headed window design and opening; o flat head window design and openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 255 of 454 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 17, 2024. Heritage Planning staff corresponded by email with the owner of the property and met virtually on June 21, 2024 to discuss the proposed designation. During this meeting, the owner advised that they do not object to the proposed designation of 87-91 King Street West. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 87-91 King Street West Page 256 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 87-91 King Street West k�N 22 Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 87-91 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 380 Pt Lot 1 RP 58R6628 Parts 1 to 4 TOG WITH ROW Year Built: c. 1898 Architectural Style: Vernacular Classic Revival Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Commercial Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 87-91 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.08 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the City Commercial Core planning area ofthe City of Kitchenerwithin the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Page 257 of 454 71 Jr' ! 'J Q' r./ Of ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 87-91 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 380 Pt Lot 1 RP 58R6628 Parts 1 to 4 TOG WITH ROW Year Built: c. 1898 Architectural Style: Vernacular Classic Revival Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Commercial Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 87-91 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.08 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the City Commercial Core planning area ofthe City of Kitchenerwithin the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Page 257 of 454 Heritage Value 87-91 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative and contextual values. Desi_gn/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 87-91 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes and is in fair condition. Features which represent the Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; two -bay red brick facade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; ribbon of three flat head window opening; flat head window openings; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 87-91 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 (revised 1904) Fire Insurance Plan, the subject property was to be a 3 -storey brick building for Pearl Steam Laundry. However, by 1901 Pearl Steam Laundry advertised their business as being located at 9 Queen Street South, and later at 90 Queen Street South (Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo, 1901-1903). The 1908 (revised 1925) Fire Insurance Plan identifies the subject property as a 3 -storey brick building housing the Express Office. The Express Office is associated with early (1865) railway companies (Express Company Operations, date unknown). Various Vernon's directories reference either the Canadian Express Company or the Canadian National Express Company between 1908 and c. 1932. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time by the same builder. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to character of the Downtown and the King Street streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 7-91 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o two -bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, o brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; 0 ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; Page 258 of 454 o semi -circular transom design; 0 1/1 hung window design featuring decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o ribbon of three flat head windows in one large window opening; o flat head window openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. References Berlin Fire Insurance Map. (1894 revised 1904). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Express Company Operations. (date unknown). Retrieved from: https://www66.statcan.gc.ca/eng/1922-23/192207150643 p.%20643.pdf [Accessed on: 2024, April 10). Kitchener Fire Insurance Map. (1908 revised 1925). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Tiessen, P. (1979). Berlin, Canada: A Self -Portrait of Kitchener, Ontario Before World War One. Sand Hills Books, Inc.: St. Jacob's, ON. Twin -City Directory and Official Guide of the Towns of Berlin and Waterloo. (1907). Watts & Bowden: n. p., ON. Vernon's Berlin and Waterloo. (1901-1903). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1907-1908). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1908-1909). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's Berlin, Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1910-1911). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Page 259 of 454 Photographs Front Elevation (North Fagade) — 87-91 King Street West W Detailing of brick frieze, stone and brick architrave and ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling Page 260 of 454 Detailing of second -storey with a ribbon of three windows in the first bay; two flat head window openings in the second bay; rectangular transoms; and, 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills Page 261 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Address: Description: 87-91 King Street West Commercial fagade; red brick; Classic Revival (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade Recorder: Date: Michelle Drake March 19, 2024 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 262 of 454 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 ❑ 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 ❑X No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or Page 263 of 454 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Page 264 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ craftsmanship and/or Yes ❑ Yes ❑ detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this structure have other N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X features that should be Yes ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *E.g. - Could be a good candidate for adaptive re -use if Page 265 of 454 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? * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the first established Islamic Center N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ - N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 1 KrTMh,!R N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Com mercial X Office ❑ Other ❑ - N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required Page 266 of 454 1 KrT HENv R and Mosjid 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 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 267 of 454 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 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 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 2, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-338 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 97-99 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 97- 99 King Street West as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council publish a Notice of Intention to Designate 97-99 King Street West Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance describing the cultural heritage value or interest of 97-99 King Street West has been drafted by Heritage Planning staff. • The key finding of this report is that 97-99 King Street West meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener at their August 6, 2024 committee meeting. Should Council choose to give Notice of Intention to Designate, such notice shall be served to the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. 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 268 of 454 BACKGROUND: 97-99 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.08 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the fagade of the building. kING s�-tv Figure 1.0: Location Map of Subject Property (97-99 King Street West) A full assessment of 97-99 King Street West has been completed, including- field evaluation and archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). An updated Statement of Significance describing the property's cultural heritage value or interest was presented to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on May 7, 2024. The Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 87-91 King Street West should be confirmed by pursuing designation of the subject property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. This work was undertaken as part of the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowner Protect Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation were contacted via a second letter. The property owner for 97-99 King Street West was contacted via second letter sent by mail dated May 17, 2024. This letter was accompanied by the updated Statement of Significance and a "Guide to Heritage Designation for Page 269 of 454 Property Owners" prepared in June 2023. The letter invited property owners to contact the City's Senior Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID), the property owner will be contacted a third time through a letter advising of the City's NOID. An ad for the NOID will be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the newspaper ad is posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which the property owner may object to the designation. Figure 2.0: Front (North Fa(;ade) Elevation REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within our City is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term conservation of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value or interest; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and, promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value or interest. Page 270 of 454 97-99 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies five (5) of nine (9) criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is or is not met is provided in the table below. Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it Yes displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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 Unknown 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 Unknown 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Table 1: Criteria for Designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) Design/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 97-99 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes and is in good condition. Features which represent the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; symmetrical facade on the second- and third -storey; two bay red brick facade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design and openings with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; flat head window design and openings; and, rectangular transoms; 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Page 271 of 454 Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 97-99 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 Fire Insurance Plan, the foundation for a 3 -storey building was built c. 1904. By 1908, the Fire Insurance Plan shows a three-storey building with a tailor on the second floor. It is not clear who built the building or who the original tenants were. J. D. Miller & C. H. Hohmeier founded their dry goods business in 1912. The business operated at 97-99 King Street West (formerly 63 King Street West) from c. 1912 to c. 1936. And later moved to 58 King Street East until 1961 when J. D. Mill retired. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time by the same builder. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to character of the Downtown and the King Street streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 97-99 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building (excluding the first storey), including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o symmetrical fagade on the second- and third -storey; o two bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; 0 ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; o semi -circular transom design; 0 1/1 hung window design and openings with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o flat head window design and openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design and openings with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 272 of 454 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and May 17, 2024. Heritage Planning staff corresponded by email with the owner of the property and met virtually on June 21, 2024 to discuss the proposed designation. During this meeting, the owner advised that they do not object to the proposed designation of 87-91 King Street West. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. Should Council choose to proceed with a NOID, such notice will be served on the property owner, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the property owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should Council decide not to proceed with a NOID then the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed in accordance with the legislative changes enacted by Bill 200. Once removed from the MHR, it cannot be re -listed on the MHR for five (5) years (i.e., January 1, 2032). PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) • Bill 23 — Municipal Heritage Register Review (DSD -2023-225) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — August 2023 Update (DSD -2023-309) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update (DSD -2024-022) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — February 2024 Update (DSD -2024-056) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update (DSD -2024-093) • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update (DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update (DSD -2024-194) • Bill 200, Homeowners Protection Act, 2024 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 97-99 King Street West Page 273 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 97-99 King Street West Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 13 ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address- 97-99 King Street West Legal Description- PT LT 1, 9 PL 380 KITCHENER PT 1, 58R6305; T/W 969401 Year Built- c. 1904 Architectural Style- Vernacular Classic Revival Original Owner- Unknown Original Use- Commercial Condition- Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource Co Cl 4:P0 AV' 97-99 King Street West is a three-storey early 20th-cenutry brick building. The building is constructed in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.08 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South in the Page 274 of 454 City Commercial Core planning area of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the building. Heritage Value 97-99 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 97-99 King Street West demonstrates design or physical value as an early and rare example of 20th -century, commercial brick building built in the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style. The building has many intact heritage attributes and is in fair condition. Features which represent the Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style include: nearly flat, low sloping roof; symmetrical facade on the second- and third -storey; two bay red brick fagade; highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; brick pilasters; semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom design; 1/1 hung window design with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; flat head window openings; and, rectangular transoms; 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 97-99 King Street West has historical/associative value given its direct association with early development of King Street West in what is now referred to as Downtown Kitchener. According to the 1898 Fire Insurance Plan, the foundation for a 3 -storey building was built c. 1904. By 1908, the Fire Insurance Plan shows a three-storey building with a tailor on the second floor. It is not clear who built the building or who the original tenants were. J. D. Miller & C. H. Hohmeier founded their dry goods business in 1912. The business operated at 97-99 King Street West (formerly 63 King Street West) from c. 1912 to c. 1936. And later moved to 58 King Street East until 1961 when J. D. Mill retired. Contextual Value The contextual value of the property relates to its location and proximity to adjacent commercial buildings that share the same Vernacular Classic Revival architectural style and almost identical heritage attributes. It is likely that these buildings were constructed around the same time by the same builder. Collectively, the properties municipally addressed as 83-85 King Street West, 87-91 King Street West and 97-99 King Street West contribute to character of the Downtown and the King Street streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 97-99 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o nearly flat, low sloping roof; o symmetrical fagade on the second- and third -storey; o two bay red brick fagade; o highly decorative brick cornice, brick frieze, and stone and brick architrave; o ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling; Page 275 of 454 o brick pilasters; o semi -circular window openings; o semi -circular transom; 0 1/1 hung window design with decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills; o flat head window openings; o rectangular transoms; and, 0 1/1 hung window design with brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills. Rnfnrnnrnc Berlin Fire Insurance Map. (1894 revised 1904). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Kitchener Fire Insurance Map. (1908 revised 1925). Kitchener Public Library: Kitchener, ON. Tiessen, P. (1979). Berlin, Canada: A Self -Portrait of Kitchener, Ontario Before World War One. Sand Hills Books, Inc.: St. Jacob's, ON. Vernon's City of Berlin and Town of Waterloo and Bridgeport Directory. (1913). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Vernon's City of Kitchener and Town of Waterloo (Ontario) Directory. (1935). Vernon Directories Limited: Hamilton, ON. Waterloo Historical Society. (1961). "Kitchener's oldest merchant retires." Waterloo Historical Society: 49(63). Page 276 of 454 Photographs Detailing of brick frieze, stone and brick architrave and ornamental brick moulding along with red brick corbelling — 97-99 King Street West Page 277 of 454 Detailing of second -storey showing semi -circular window openings; semi -circular transom; 1/1 hung windows; and, decorative brick hood moulds with keystones and continuous stone sills - w Detailing of second -storey showing flat head window openings; rectangular transoms; 1/1 windows; and, brick voussoirs and continuous stone sills Page 278 of 454 1 6 "1'1*11 61 10k CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Address: Description: 97-99 King Street West Commercial fagade; brick construction; Classic Revival (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: March 19, 2024 ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ 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 ❑ Yes 0 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes 0 because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. Page 279 of 454 * 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 ❑ 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 ❑ 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 value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist Page 280 of 454 who is significant to a Recorder Heritage Kitchener community. Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, *Additional archival work N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ craftsmanship and/or detail Yes ❑ Yes ❑ may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A ❑x Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ craftsmanship and/or detail Yes ❑ Yes ❑ noteworthy? Page 281 of 454 Completeness: Does this structure have other original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X outbuildings, notable Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ site? Yes ❑ Yes ❑X * 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 ❑ materials and design features? Yes ❑ Yes ❑X 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 ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X features that should be added Yes ❑ Yes ❑ to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ 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 to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes Indigenous heritage and Yes ❑ ❑ history? ❑ Additional Research ❑ Additional Research Required Required *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct topographical land, or near cemeteries might have archaeological potential and indigenous heritage potential. Page 282 of 454 Could there be any urban N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes Indigenous history associated Yes ❑ ❑ with the property? ❑ Additional Research ❑ Additional Research Required * Additional archival work may be Required required. Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Coin function of the subject Commercial ❑ mercial ❑X 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: 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? * 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. N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No Yes ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No Yes ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required Notes about Additional Criteria Examined Recommendation ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required 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 Page 283 of 454 ❑ 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 284 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: July 19, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-331 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 103-109 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act RECOMMENDATION: That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 103-109 King Street West as being of cultural heritage value or interest. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 103-109 King Street West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. • An updated Statement of Significance on the property's cultural heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. On this meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 103-109 King Street West be recognized and designation pursued. • The key finding of this report is that the property municipally addressed as 103-109 King Street West meets the criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22) and has been confirmed to be a significant cultural heritage resource. The property is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual value. • There are no financial implications with this recommendation. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting, providing written correspondence to the property owner, and consulting with Heritage Kitchener. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served to the Owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust. • 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 285 of 454 BACKGROUND: 103-109 King Street West is a three storey early 20th century brick building built in the Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.19 acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South 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. 48 90 42 El -t -h- M. 36 34 32 ROOF 22 22 18 7876 74 8666626058 / 5654 Figure 1: Location Map of 103-109 King Street West A full assessment of 103-109 King Street West has been completed and included a field evaluation and detailed archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets the criteria for designation. An updated Statement of Significance on the property's cultural heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on June 11, 2024. On this meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 103-109 King Street West be recognized and designation pursued. This work was undertaken as part of the City of Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) Review, initiated in February of 2023. The MHR Review is the City's response to amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of 2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. Bill 200, the Homeowners Protection Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. The City contacted owners of listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this undertaking. Owners of properties recommended for designation in June 2024 were contacted via a second letter dated June 18, 2024, and invited to contact the City's Heritage Planner with any comments, questions, or concerns. Page 286 of 454 Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate, Owners will be contacted a third time through a Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) Letter. An ad for the NOID will also be published in a newspaper. Once the letter is served and the ad posted, there will be a 30 -day appeal period in which Owners may object to the designation. REPORT: Identifying and protecting cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future, and helping to guide change while conserving the buildings, structures, and landscapes that give the City of Kitchener its unique identity. The City plays a critical role in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. The designation of property under the Ontario Heritage Act is the main tool to provide long-term protection of cultural heritage resources for future generations. Designation recognizes the importance of a property to the local community; protects the property's cultural heritage value; encourages good stewardship and conservation; and promotes knowledge and understanding about the property. Designation not only publicly recognizes and promotes awareness, but it also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property's cultural heritage value and interest. 103-109 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies four of the nine criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of the criteria that is met or not met is provided in the table below. Page 287 of 454 Criteria Criteria Met (Yes/No) 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a Yes rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, material, or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical value because it No displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design or physical value because it No demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it Yes 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, No 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 No 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 Yes defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, Yes functionally, visually, or historically linked to its surroundings. 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. No Page 287 of 454 Design / Physical Value The building is a representative example of the Classic Revival architectural style. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements. The building features brick construction of a colour unique to the area, a brick parapet wall with intricate brick details, brick pilasters, continuous stone lintels and sills, and original window openings. Front Fagade 103-109 King Street West fronts onto King Street West. It's facade is divided vertically into two sections by three piers, three storeys in height which create two bays. The first floor of the building contains storefronts and its appearance has been modernized. The second storey contains a row of six windows, three in each bay. The windows do not appear to be original and the window openings on the eastern -most bay have been reduced in size. Below the windows are stone sills, and above and dividing the second storey from the third is a continuous stone lintel. The third storey contains a row of eight windows, four in each bay and all of a size. The windows do not appear to be original. These windows are also framed by stone lintels and sills. The roofline possesses a brick parapet with decorative brickwork. Figure 2: Front Facade of Subject Property Page 288 of 454 Historical / Associative Value The building was built c. 1908 as part of the Huehn Block built by Christian Huehn, an accountant for the Breithaupt Leather Company. He was also the founder of the Fischman Spring Company and he presented Kitchener with the site for St. Mary's General Hospital. The building is also associated with the Freemasons community presence in the City of Kitchener. The Freemasons are the oldest and largest fraternal organization in the world, with bodies present in numerous countries. Within Ontario alone there are over 550 lodges, with 103-109 King Street West being the former home to Grand River Lodge 151. The first Masonic lodge within what was then the County of Waterloo was established in June 1861 and was instituted as Alma Lodge No. 72 in the Town of Galt. Grand River Lodge 151 was formed just one month later in July 1861. W. D. Perine was the first Master of the lodge and a known industrialist in the area. He and his brothers M.B Perine and J.S. Perine established the Doon Twine and Cordage Company in 1853, and the mill was the first of its kind in Canada to produce twine, rope, and curtain cordage. A number of other prominent male citizens have been members of the Freemasons, including but not limited to Alexander Millar (Berlin Business Lawyer), William Hendry (Manager of Ontario Mutual Life Assurance Company, now part of Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada), Joseph E. Seagram (founder of Seagram Distillery), David Forsyth (leading educationist), and more. The construction of the Huehn Block, including 107 King Street West, provided an opportunity for the Grand River Masonic Lodge to acquire a space more suitable for their organization. The upper floors of the building were designed to include a lodge room, a dinner room, and other rooms. The building served as the centre for Masonic activity for 47 years (c. 1908 — c.1956). Contextual Value The contextual value of 103-109 King Street West relates to its contribution in maintaining the commercial character of the surrounding area, as well as its physical, 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 and is an area that has historically been recognized as the heart of the downtown and a focal point of the Region for development. The area is occupied by a mix of uses, with hotels, banks, and other commercial enterprises being the original anchors of the commercial core. Several of these historical anchors are still present and have been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, including the commercial building 115-117 King Street West directly adjacent to 103-109 King Street West to the west and 1-11 King Street West/18-20 Queen Street North (the Walper Hotel), 37 King Street West, and 41-45 King Street West in proximity to the east. Many other late -19th century and early -20th century commercial structures also remain and contribute further to the character of the streetscape and surrounding area. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 103-109 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: Page 289 of 454 All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o Brick parapet wall; o Brick construction, including brick colour; o Brick pilasters; o Continuous stone lintels and sills; and, o Window openings. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT— Heritage Planning staff have consulted with the Heritage Kitchener committee regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Property owners were invited to consult via two separate letters dated May 23, 2023 and June 11, 2024. Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving notice of its intention to designate a property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. In addition, should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the owner has the right of appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal. It should be noted that should Council decide not to proceed with a Notice of Intention to Designate, that the building will remain on the City's Municipal Heritage Register until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed according to the changes enacted by Bill 23 and Bill 200. Once removed, it cannot re -listed on the Register again for five (5) years, i.e. January 1, 2032. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update (DSD -2024-250) APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Statement of Significance for 103-109 King Street West Page 290 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 103-109 KING STREET WEST 175173 Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value Murahitc-dlec�tive2 30 ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 103-109 King Street West Legal Description: Plan 380 Pt Lot 9 Year Built: c. 1908 Architectural Style: Classic Revival Original Owner: Christian Huehn Original Use: Commercial Condition: Good Page 291 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 103-109 King Street West is a three storey early 20th century brick building built in the Classic Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.19 acre parcel of land located on the south side of King Street West between Gaukel Street and Ontario Street South 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 103-109 King Street West is recognized for its design, physical, historic and contextual values. Design / Physical Value The building is a representative example of the Classic Revival architectural style. The building is in good condition with many intact original elements. The building features brick construction of a colour unique to the area, a brick parapet wall with intricate brick details, brick pilasters, continuous stone lintels and sills, and original window openings. Front Fagade 103-109 King Street West fronts onto King Street West. It's facade is divided vertically into two sections by three piers, three storeys in height which create two bays. The first floor of the building contains storefronts and its appearance has been modernized. The second storey contains a row of six windows, three in each bay. The windows do not appear to be original and the window openings on the eastern -most bay have been reduced in size. Below the windows are stone sills, and above and dividing the second storey from the third is a continuous stone lintel. The third storey contains a row of eight windows, four in each bay and all of a size. The windows do not appear to be original. These windows are also framed by stone lintels and sills. The roofline possesses a brick parapet with decorative brickwork. Historical / Associative Value The building was built c. 1908 as part of the Huehn Block built by Christian Huehn, an accountant for the Breithaupt Leather Company. He was also the founder of the Fischman Spring Company and he presented Kitchener with the site for St. Mary's General Hospital. The building is also associated with the Freemasons community presence in the City of Kitchener. The Freemasons are the oldest and largest fraternal organization in the world, with bodies present in numerous countries. Within Ontario alone there are over 550 lodges, with 103-109 King Street West being the former home to Grand River Lodge 151. The first Masonic lodge within what was then the County of Waterloo was established in June 1861 and was instituted as Alma Lodge No. 72 in the Town of Galt. Grand River Lodge 151 was formed just one month later in July 1861. W. D. Perine was the first Master of the lodge and a known industrialist in the area. He and his brothers M.B Perine and J.S. Perine established the Doon Twine and Cordage Company in 1853, and the mill was the first of its kind in Canada to produce twine, rope, and curtain cordage. A number of other prominent male citizens have been members of the Freemasons, including but not limited to Alexander Millar (Berlin Business Lawyer), William Hendry (Manager of Ontario Mutual Life Assurance Company, now part of Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada), Joseph E. Seagram (founder of Seagram Distillery), David Forsyth (leading educationist), and more. Page 292 of 454 The construction of the Huehn Block, including 107 King Street West, provided an opportunity for the Grand River Masonic Lodge to acquire a space more suitable for their organization. The upper floors of the building were designed to include a lodge room, a dinner room, and other rooms. The building served as the centre for Masonic activity for 47 years (c. 1908 — c.1956). Contextual Value The contextual value of 103-109 King Street West relates to its contribution in maintaining the commercial character of the surrounding area, as well as its physical, 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 and is an area that has historically been recognized as the heart of the downtown and a focal point of the Region for development. The area is occupied by a mix of uses, with hotels, banks, and other commercial enterprises being the original anchors of the commercial core. Several of these historical anchors are still present and have been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, including the commercial building 115-117 King Street West directly adjacent to 103-109 King Street West to the west and 1-11 King Street West/18-20 Queen Street North (the Walper Hotel), 37 King Street West, and 41-45 King Street West in proximity to the east. Many other late -19th century and early -20th century commercial structures also remain and contribute further to the character of the streetscape and surrounding area. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 103-109 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the construction and Classic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o Brick parapet wall; o Brick construction, including brick colour; o Brick pilasters; o Continuous stone lintels and sills; and, o Window openings. Photographs Page 293 of 454 j WA 7Z iAiN f SECOND LOOK BOOKS & MORE Igor - v,71 " ��iry-r f:r4 ��'�� �.i`J7�7 E�../ Kr pi4t'�w� E'V'E t����,��,,'' �yr�rYT'��iu'!`°x S• ,�s +" . - _� � .. �" Fay . , _ e • - �� � ,. .. . OND LOOK 1 x Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 WARD(S) INVOLVED: All Wards DATE OF REPORT: July 10, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-332 SUBJECT: Proposed Update to the Designated Heritage Grant Program RECOMMENDATION: That staff be directed to finalize the draft revised Designated Heritage Grant Program and associated guidelines, attached as Appendix B to DSD -2024-332; and That staff be directed to finalize changes to the Designated Heritage Grant Program and associated guidelines with Kitchener City Council as part of the 2025 Budget. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to consult and seek support to update the City's Designated Heritage Grant Program (DHG Program) and implement new administration and operation guidelines as outlined in the draft Program Guidelines for the Designated Heritage Property Grant, attached as Appendix B to this report. • The key finding of this report is that the Designated Heritage Grant Program is intended to support the conservation efforts of property owners within the City. However, average project costs have increased. Recent City's undertakings have also led to the identification and designation of more cultural heritage resources. As such it is an appropriate time for the existing program to be reviewed and updated. • There is a $60,000.00 yearly increase to the Capital Budget. This must be approved by Kitchener City Council as part of Budget 2025 for some of the proposed changes to take effect. • Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting and consulting with Heritage Kitchener. • 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 296 of 454 BACKGROUND: History of the Designated Heritage Grant Program Kitchener's Designated Heritage Grant Program was first established on July 2, 2002, when Council passed By-law 2002-134. The program was updated three years later on July 4, 2005, when Council repealed the original by-law and passed By-law 2005-139 which altered the administrative procedures and operating guidelines of the program. The changes included minor housekeeping items as well as established the minimum grant value, notification requirements, and types of eligible work. The intent of the Designated Heritage Grant program is to provide funding for owners of properties designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, to be used towards the conservation or restoration of their cultural heritage resource. The protection and care of the of cultural heritage resources within the City of Kitchener is an important part of planning for the future. Kitchener has its own unique culture and heritage. Our places, spaces, and stories are integral to our identity. There are economic, environmental, and informational values as well to cultural heritage. Heritage conservation is capable of enhancing property value and assessments, attracting investments, and creating opportunities for tourism and other specialized industries. The most sustainable and environmentally friendly buildings are ones that already exist; heritage buildings contain embodied carbon, and their use or reuse reduces the release of emissions and material consumption while keeping waste material out of the landfill. It should be recognized that our heritage resources are a finite and non-renewable resource. The City plays a critical role and has a responsibility towards the conservation of cultural heritage properties. The Official Plan contains objectives and policies which require the City's cultural heritage resources be conserved in such a way that their heritage values, attributes, and integrity are retained. The administration of the Designated Heritage Grant Program is one such way in which the City can fulfil or support the fulfillment of this responsibility. Program Statistics and Performance The existing administrative and operating guidelines set out criteria for eligible conservation work and establishes the process for applicants to follow in making a submission. At present, the DHG Program may award applicants up to 50% of total eligible project costs, from a minimum of $500 to a maximum of $3000 per property per calendar year. Table 1 provides an overview of the statistics of the Designated Heritage Grant Program in the past 10 years, while Table 2 provides an overview of its performance. Page 297 of 454 Table 1: Statistics of the Designated Heritage Grant Program Program Year Number of Applications Applied For Number of Applications Issued Total Project Costs Average Project Costs 2014 20 13 $ 99,555.40 $ 7,658.11 2015 12 10 $ 99,358.11 $ 11,039.79 2016 20 13 $ 176,854.28 $ 13,604.18 2017 17 14 $ 195,988.87 $ 13,999.21 2018 24 14 $ 177,050.56 $ 12,646.47 2019 13 9 $ 403,076.28 $ 44,786.25 2020 13 10 $ 89,156.53 $ 8,915.65 2021 16 8 $ 188,520.17 $ 23,565.02 2022 21 16 $ 256,954.24 $ 16,059.64 2023 17 14 $ 199,609.80 $ 14,257.84 In summary, since 2014 an average of 17 grant applications are made every year and an average of 12 grants are issued. Grant applications that are submitted may not have been awarded due to several reasons, including being ineligible as per the criteria set out by the administrative operations and guidelines, being withdrawn by the applicant, orfunding being unavailable. Overall projects have seen a general increase in cost in the past ten years, with the exception of 2020 which may be attributed to the start COVID-19 pandemic. The median project costs in the past ten years have ranged from a minimum of $4,923.98 to a maximum of $14,228.16. In the most recent grant year (2023) the median project cost was $10,790.45. Table 2: Performance of the Designated Heritage Grant Program Program Year Grant Program Revenue Grant Amount Issued 2014 $8,865.00 $19,617.20 2015 $23,803.00 $35,821.18 2016 $30,739.00 $36,254.00 2017 $30,673.00 $27,497.48 2018 $30,607.00 $25,335.35 2019 $32,470.00 $22,096.14 2020 $32,470.00 $13,493.09 2021 $32,539.00 $29,995.48 2022 $32,539.00 $33,698.46 2023 $33,120.00 $38,381.62 Every year since 2016, $30,000 is added to the Heritage Grant Fund (capital account) annually, and the total grant amount issued generally exceeds the amount which is added. This is feasible only due to previous years in which the full grant funding available was not used. Page 298 of 454 Municipal Heritage Register Review Project On October 25, 2022, the Provincial government introduced More Homes, Built Faster: Ontario's Housing Supply Action Plan 2022-2023 and subsequently Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 to amend existing provincial legislation, including the Ontario Heritage Act. This was done to pursue the goal of increasing housing supply to address affordability in the Province of Ontario. One of the amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act contained in Bill 23 was the introduction of a two-year time -limit for the listing of non- designated properties on the Heritage Register. Prior to Bill 23, non -designated properties could be recognized and protected indefinitely on the Heritage Register. This amendment has eliminated the Heritage Register as a viable method of long-term recognition and protection of properties that are listed but not designated. As a result of Bill 23, Heritage Planning staff created a workplan that was presented to and endorsed by the Heritage Kitchener Committee on February 7t", 2023. The workplan, titled the Municipal Heritage Review Project, committed Heritage Planning staff to the review of 80 listed properties, to determine if they met sufficient criteria for designation. Implementation of the work plan has now commenced and is anticipated to continue until the end of 2026. As of the date of this report, a review has been complete for 78 properties. 10 properties are before the Committee as of the date of this report to be considered for designation. 26 properties have fully undergone the designation process. 27 properties are currently undergoing the designation process and are at various stages of completion. 15 properties have been reviewed and determined that no action should be taken at this time. It should be noted that Heritage Planning staff anticipate the review of more than 80 properties to be complete, due to an extension introduced by Bill 200, the Homeowner Protection Act, 2024 which received royal assent on June 6, 2024. Bill 200 extended the original timeline from January 1, 2025 to January 1, 2027. As a result of the Municipal Heritage Review Project, the number of heritage resources identified and designated within the City is anticipated to increase significantly. This, in combination with rising project costs, has prompted Heritage Planning staff to undertake a review of the Designated Heritage Grant Program. REPORT: Proposed Updates A review and comparative analysis of other municipal heritage programs as well as an analysis of the performance of the Designated Heritage Grant Program in the past 10 years (since 2014) has led staff to recommend that changes be made to the Designated Heritage Grant Program. The recommended changes are as follows: 1. The existing maximum grant value which can be awarded to a successful applicant is proposed to be increased from $3000 to $5000 per property per year, subject to the availability of funding. This amount was chosen as it reflected a former Provincial Heritage Grant Program. Page 299 of 454 2. An increase to the annual capital budget allocation per year from $30k to $90k to fund increased grants and introduce a new two-tiered system, which would permit two $15k grants per year for Special Projects. Work may be classified as a Special Project if it has multiple components and demonstrates that best conservation practices are being used, and thus by extension has a higher cost than the average application. This may include the repair or restoration of structural elements, should it be demonstrated that such work is required to conserve and stabilize original buildings and/or structures on the property. Work must be approved as a Special Project by Heritage Planning staff prior to applying, and additional criteria will be considered in the awarding of this type of grant. This includes giving priority to projects where the integrity of the cultural heritage resource may be threatened if work is not undertaken, and/or projects which seek to restore existing original elements over replacement or include the maximum retention of historic fabric. Preference will also be provided to properties that have not previously been awarded a Special Project grant. If the proposed changes to the programs are endorsed then, by association, the administrative procedures and guidelines for the program must be amended. The revised Guidelines for the Designated Heritage Grant Program includes the proposed updates outlined in this report and is attached as Attachment B to this report. The amendments also include minor changes to wording and formatting to improve legibility and ease of understanding for readers and to comply with the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. Heritage Grant Programs in Other Municipalities Table 3 summarizes the heritage grant programs available in fifteen different municipalities across Ontario. The research indicates that most programs offer matching grants of up to half (50%) of eligible costs. Notable, however, is the range in maximums permitted. They vary between $5,000 to $20,000, with Hamilton offering as much as $150,000 plus $20,000 for certain types of buildings in specific identified areas. Seven of the fifteen municipalities offer maximums of $5,000 for all work or general work, while one offers a maximum of $6,000. Four of the fifteen municipalities utilize tiered systems where the maximum allowed is dependent on certain criteria being met. These criteria may relate to the type of work proposed, scope of work proposed which classifies the projects as being either "General' or "Special", or the use or location of the subject property. Table 3: Comparison of Other Municipal Heritage Grant Programs Municipality Program Description Brampton Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $10,000. Page 300 of 454 Brantford Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $20,000. Burlington Grant up to 25% of project costs, for a maximum of $15,000. Caledon Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $6,000 for General Conservation Projects and $15,000 for Special Projects. Cambridge Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $5,000. Centre Wellington Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $10,000. Guelph No Heritage Grant Program Hamilton Matching grant up to 50% of project cost between $1,000- $5,000 or for structural work for commercial, institutional, industrial, or multi -residential buildings within specific identified areas, up to a maximum of $150,000 plus $20,000 for applicable studies or reports. Kingston Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $5,000 once every two years. Markham Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $5,000, or for commercial properties for a maximum of $15,000. Mississauga Matching grant up to 50% of projects costs, for a maximum of $5000 for general works, $10,000 for structural works, and $25,000 for special projects. Oakville Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $15,000. Richmond Hill Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $5,000. St. Catherines Matching grant up to 50% of project cost, for a maximum of $5,000. Waterloo No Heritage Grant Program STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 301 of 454 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget The review of the Designated Heritage Property Grant Program is being undertaken in two steps. The first step involves reviewing the existing program and its Administrative Procedures and Operating Guidelines (the subject of this report). A second step will involve a report addressing the Capital Budget allocated to the program. Changes to the administrative procedures and operating guidelines which are financial in nature include: • Establishing a two-tiered system which will categorize projects as either "General" or "Special"; • Increasing the maximum grant value for General Projects from $3000 to $5000 per property per year; and • Adding the opportunity for two Special Projects to be awarded a maximum of $15,000 per property per year. Under the existing program, which provides just over $30,000 from the Capital Budget to the Designated Heritage Grant Program annually, if all applicants are eligible for the maximum $3000 grant than the City could award 10-11 designated properties. Assuming the same parameters, the changes recommended in this report would result in an increase in the dollar value of the grants awarded but a decrease in the number of grants awarded. As such, Heritage Planning staff are requesting Council consideration to increase the existing Capital Budget for this program as part of its 2025 Capital Budget deliberations. If an additional $60,000 is granted to Capital Budget for the DHG Program, creating a total annual allocation of $90,000, then this would allow for 12 General Project grants be awarded at the maximum of $5,000 and two Special Project grants be awarded at $15,000 per program year. The program would then be able to perform at the same capacity as it historically has, while providing greater assistance to property owners completing conservation or maintenance to their heritage resource. Operating Budget The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. CONSULT — If applicable. COLLABORATE — If applicable. ENTRUST — If applicable. Page 302 of 454 PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter. APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Draft Guidelines for the Designated Heritage Grant Program Page 303 of 454 GUIDELINES FOR THE 0 rtl DESIGNATED HERITAGE GRANT PROGRAM August 2024 m i KITCHE NER 0 to Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1 ProgramOverview........................................................................................................................................ 2 SpecialProjects.........................................................................................................................................2 Eligibility........................................................................................................................................................ 3 EligibleProperties.....................................................................................................................................3 EligibleWork.............................................................................................................................................3 Architect, Engineer and Other Study Fees................................................................................................4 IneligibleWork..........................................................................................................................................5 Application and Grant Process......................................................................................................................5 Pre-Consultation....................................................................................................................................... 5 ApplicationRequirements........................................................................................................................5 ApplicationProcess...................................................................................................................................6 Changes or Unsatisfactory Work..............................................................................................................6 Definitions..................................................................................................................................................... 7 ContactInformation......................................................................................................................................7 MoreResources............................................................................................................................................7 PhotoCredits................................................................................................................................................8 Page 305 of 454 a ►, Introduction Kitchener has its own unique culture and heritage. Our places, spaces, and stories are integral to our identity and play a role in the function and development of the City through various means, including creating a sense of place and cultural identity, attracting investment and specialized industries, and reducing material consumption and waste in landfills. The Ontario Heritage Act is the provincial legislation that provides municipalities with the tools and responsibility to identify, evaluate, and conserve cultural heritage resources that have value or interest to the community. Properties may be designated individually under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act or designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as part of a Heritage Conservation District. Owners of property in the City of Kitchener designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act may be eligible to receive an annual grant towards the conservation, reconstruction or restoration of their cultural heritage resource. The following procedures and operating guidelines are to be used in administering the program. 1 Page 306 of 454 Program Overview One grant application may be made per property per calendar year. The awarded grant amount for approved applications is up to one half (50%) of eligible project costs, from a minimum of $500 to a maximum of: • $5,000 for General Projects • $15, 000 for Special Projects The final grant amount awarded to a successful applicant will be based on the estimated cost of work submitted as part of a complete grant application. If some or all of the work is to be completed by the property owner, grant funding calculations will be based on 50% of the cost of eligible materials. No funding will be provided for labour. The deadline for the submission of a Special Project or General Project application is April 15th of the grant year. Grants will be awarded with priority given to structural need and urgency of the project as determined by Heritage Planning staff or designate, and thereafter in the order in which they are received. There are additional consideration for applications for Special Projects. Successful applications will be confirmed after April 15tH z Grant applications for General Projects may be submitted and considered after the submission deadline subject to the availability of funding. Applications submitted after the deadline will also be awarded in the order in which they are received. Please contact Heritage Planning staff prior to applying if the deadline has passed, to confirm availability of funding. Special Project grant applications may not be awarded after the April 15th submission deadline, as Special Project funding may be made available for additional General Projects. Special Projects Funding for a maximum of two Special Project is awarded annually. Work must be approved as a Special Project by Heritage Planning staff prior to applying. Special projects will have multiple components and must demonstrate that best conservation practices are being used. These practices must be in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, the Standard and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, and/or applicable Heritage Conservation District Plans. Priority will be given to projects where the integrity of the cultural heritage resource may be threatened if work is not undertaken, and/or which seek to restore existing original elements over replacement or include the maximum retention of historic fabric. Preference will be provided to properties that have not previously received a Special Project grant. 2 Page 307 of 454 Special projects may include the repair or restoration of structural elements, should it be demonstrated that such work is required to conserve and stabilize original buildings and/or structures on the property. Eligibility Eligible Properties The heritage grant is only available to properties that are individually designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act or that are within a Heritage Conservation District designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. To determine if your property has heritage status, please refer to the Municipal Heritage Register available online or contact Heritage Planning staff. Properties must also be free of compliance orders, enforcement orders issued under property standards and maintenance by- laws, and any other outstanding fees, fines, orders, or statutory violations in order to be eligible, unless the grant application addresses these orders. The requirement may be waived in other exceptional circumstances and at the discretion of Heritage Planning staff or designate. Designated heritage properties owned by any level of government are not eligible for funding except where a non-profit community group has assumed responsibility for maintenance of the building. In such cases, an application for the heritage grant may be made by such organization as the agent with a letter of consent from the Owner. Eligible Work Eligible projects fall into three categories: • Conservation / Preservation of existing architectural elements which are significant to the cultural heritage value of the property and are identified in designating by-laws or heritage conservation district plans. • Reconstruction of architectural elements which are significant to the cultural heritage value of the property, are identified in designating by-laws or heritage conservation district plans, and which still exist, but which are beyond conservation or repair. • Restoration of significant architectural features which have been lost, but for which there exists documentation to support appropriate reproduction as per the original. 3 Page 308 of 454 Eligible conservation work may include, but is not limited to, the following: • Preservation or restoration of original exterior cladding and roofing, excluding asphalt shingles. This also includes the removal of modern or non -historic material and replacement with materials matching the original where they can be documented. • Cleaning and repair or re -pointing of masonry and stonework to match original in material and appearance. • Repair or replacement of architectural features such as porches, verandahs, balconies, chimneys, or other original elements. • Repairs to historic windows, including storm windows, stain glass windows, doors, and other structural openings or replacement to match original in terms of material, details, and design. • Repairs or replacement of decorative architectural detailing, millwork, and trim including brackets, soffits, fascia, and cornices. • Painting of the exterior based on documentary evidence of original colours and if completed following best heritage conservation processes for repainting, where the process has been agreed to by Heritage Planning staff or a designate. A property may receive only one grant for exterior painting within a 10 -year period. • Preservation or restoration of grave markers, tombs, mausolea, dead houses, stone walls, wrought iron gates and fences, or other significant features within cemeteries as identified by the designating by-law. The grant is only available for projects which have obtained all necessary approvals, including heritage permits and building permits, if required. For Part IV properties, the project must conserve or enhance elements identified as heritage attributes of the property. For Part V properties, the project must be conducted in accordance with the design guidelines and/or policies of the applicable Heritage Conservation District Plan adopted by the Municipality. Architect, Engineer and Other Study Fees The Heritage Grant may include one half of the fee for architectural and engineering services, feasibility or technical studies including paint analysis, and the preparation of drawings if such material is identified as being required as part of a complete heritage grant application submission. The work must directly relate to the proposed conservation projects. :l Page 309 of 454 Ineligible Work Ineligible projects include, but are not limited to, the following: • Projects of a non -historic nature, such as the introduction of new features or work on existing features which are not identified heritage attributes, or which are not regarded as having heritage value or significance. • Repair or replacement of windows or doors which are not original (e.g., vinyl windows or a window material that otherwise is not compatible), unless the window replacement is a restoration project. • Interior projects, unless the features are specifically identified as heritage attributes within the designating by- laws, as determined by the Heritage Planning staff or designate. • Repair or replacement of non - original siding or roofing materials (aluminum siding, asphalt shingles, etc). • Landscaping. • Driveway paving and repairs. • Installation or repairs to heating or cooling system or other energy efficiency upgrades. • Work that has already been started or completed at the time of application. Retroactive grant funding may only be approved on an emergency basis and at the discretion of Heritage Planning staff or designate. Application and Grant Process Pre -Consultation For General Projects, applicants are encouraged but not required to consult with Heritage Planning staff prior to the submission of a Grant Application. For Special Projects, consultation with Heritage Planning staff is required prior to the submission of a Grant Application. Applicants for a Heritage Grant should consult with Heritage Planning staff as early as possible in the process of planning a project. This pre -consultation may aid in avoiding ineligible proposals, delays in application processing, and helps to establish the full extent of requirements for a complete application submission including if a Heritage Permit Application is required. Application Requirements Application requirements may vary and may include additional material not identified below. The full extent of required material will be determined by the Heritage Planning staff or designate. • Completed application form. • Detailed project description including why the work is required and proposed materials and methodology. • Cost estimate with itemized labour and material expenses.. • Recent images of the specific area of work for the proposed project and all fagades of the building's exterior. • Any relevant plans, documentation, or studies. • Grant Application Fee. I: Page 310 of 454 Application Process The application process is as follows: 1. Pre -consultation (required for Special Projects, recommended for General Projects). 2. Submission of Grant Application by Property Owner or authorized agent. 3. Review of Application by Heritage Planning staff and confirmation of complete application. 4. Confirmation of conditional approval or refusal of grant application after April 15tH 5. Property owners to confirm their intent to proceed with the project. 6. Property owners to fulfill conditions, including submission of a Heritage Permit Application if required. 7. Project completion, site inspection by Heritage Planning staff of final work to ensure conformity, and submission of final invoices. Invoices are due by the last business day of the grant year. 8. Release of Grant Cheque (delivered via mail). Depending on the designation and the proposed project to be undertaken, a Heritage Permit Application may be required to be submitted and reviewed by the Heritage Kitchener Committee and/or Council. All projects must be completed within the calendar year for which the grant has been approved unless this deadline is extended by Heritage Planning staff or designate at their discretion. Changes or Unsatisfactory Work Applicants are required to contact the City if there are proposed changes to the approved scope of work. Work should not commence or continue unless these proposed changes are approved by Heritage Planning staff or a designate. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in projects being deemed ineligible and the grant not being awarded. Work in which the final quality is unsatisfactory, poor, or defective with minor and/or major problems may result in projects being deemed ineligible and the grant not being awarded. L" Page 311 of 454 Definition., - Applicant: Refers to the Owner of the property applying for a Designated Heritage Property Grant, or their agent if authorized in writing by the Owner. City: Refers to the Corporation of the City of Kitchener. Cultural Heritage Value or Interest: The design/physical, historical/associative, contextual, or other value or significance of a Designated Heritage Property for past, present, or future generations, embodied in its heritage attributes. Emergency Basis: Work to damaged materials that were a result of unexpected events that include, but are not limited to, inclement weather, vandalism, fire, or accident. Heritage Attributes: In relation to real property and the buildings and structures on the real property, the elements which contribute to the cultural heritage value or interest. Heritage Conservation District: A geographical area identified as having cultural heritage value and designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. Contact Information For more information about the Designated Heritage Grant Program, or for advice or guidance on projects specific to your property, please contact Heritage Planning staff. Email: Heritage@Kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2426 More Resources City of Kitchener Heritage Properties and Districts Webpage (www. kitchener.ca/heritage) Ontario Heritaize Act Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada Ontario Heritage Trust Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties 7 Page 312 of 454 Photo Credits Cover Page: Published by Valentine -Black Co. Ltd., provided by Kitchener Public Library Page 1: Published by MacCallum, James J, provided by Waterloo Historical Society Page 2: Provided by Waterloo Historical Society Page 3: Provided by Waterloo Historical Society Page 4: Provided by Waterloo Historical Society Page 6: Provided by Waterloo Historical Society Page 8: Published by Valentine -Black Co. Ltd., provided by Kitchener Public Library D�i �.rf.' 7.i1i►I1: Page 313 of 454 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 6, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7602 DATE OF REPORT: July 22, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-333 SUBJECT: Municipal Heritage Register Review August 2024 Update RECOMMENDATION: The pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest be recognized, and designation be pursued for the following properties: • 83 Benton Street • 107 Courtland Avenue East • 621 King Street West • 47 Onward Avenue • 33 Queen Street South • 44-54 Queen Street South • 148 Margaret Avenue • 100 Margaret Avenue • 104-106 Margaret Avenue • 112 Margaret Avenue REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to recommend pursuing designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act for ten properties that are currently listed as non -designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register. • The key finding of this report is that the properties possess design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual value and meet the criteria for designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended through Ontario Regulation 569/22). • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included consultation with the Heritage Kitchener Committee. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: On January 1 st, 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 *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 314 of 454 Heritage Register to be evaluated to determine if they meet the criteria for heritage designation before January 1 st, 2025. Bill 200, the Homeowners Protection Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. Listed properties are properties that have not been designated, but that the municipal Council believes to be of cultural heritage value or interest. The criteria 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 work plan has now commenced. This report contains a summary of the findings for the properties recently reviewed, and recommendations for next steps. Progress on Work Plan Implementation As part of the work plan proposed in February 2023, Heritage Planning Staff committed to the review of 80 properties listed on the Municipal Heritage Register prior to January 1, 2025. As of the date of this report, a review has been complete for 78 properties. 10 properties are before the Committee as of the date of this report to be considered for designation. 26 properties have fully undergone the designation process. 27 properties are currently undergoing the designation process and are at various stages of completion. 15 properties have been reviewed and determined that no action should be taken at this time. Bill 200, the Homeowners Protection Act, 2024, extended the time municipalities have to designate properties listed on their municipal heritage registers until January 1, 2027. Staff are working on a updated Work Plan and will bring it forward to Heritage Kitchener later this year. 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, 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. Page 315 of 454 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). The following 10 properties were reviewed and meet the following criteria: 83 Benton Street The subject property municipally addressed as 83 Benton Street meets two (2) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Ref. 569/22): • 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 or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significance to a community. 107 Courtland Avenue East The subject property municipally addressed as 107 Courtland Avenue East meets five (5) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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. Page 316 of 454 • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. 621 King Street West The subject property municipally addressed as 621 King Street West meets six (6) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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. • 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 physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. 47 Onward Avenue The subject property municipally addressed as 47 Onward Avenue meets five (5) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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. 33 Queen Street South The subject property municipally addressed as 33 Queen Street South meets three (3) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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 contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. Page 317 of 454 • The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. 44-54 Queen Street South The subject property municipally addressed as 44-54 Queen Street South meets three (3) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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 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. 148 Margaret Avenue The subject property municipally addressed as 148 Margaret Avenue meets four (4) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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 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. 100 Margaret Avenue The subject property municipally addressed as 100 Margaret Avenue meets four (4) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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 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. 104-106 Margaret Avenue The subject property municipally addressed as 104-106 Margaret Avenue meets four (4) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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. Page 318 of 454 • 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. 112 Margaret Avenue The subject property municipally addressed as 112 Margaret Avenue meets four (4) of the nine (9) criteria of O. Reg. 9/06 (amended through O. Reg. 569/22): • 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 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. Heritage Kitchener Committee Options Option 1 — Pursuing Designation for this property 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 a Notice of Intention to Designate back to the Committee to initiate the designation process. 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, 2027. Option 2 — Deferring the Designation Process Should Heritage Kitchener vote to defer the designation process for these properties, they will remain listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register until January 1, 2027, after which it will have to be removed. The process of designating these properties can be started at any time until January 1, 2027. 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, 2027, after which it 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, 2032. Page 319 of 454 It should be noted that, per the endorsed work plan, staff are currently undertaking evaluations for high priority properties that are in located in areas of the City that are experiencing significant redevelopment. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. 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 • Kitchener Municipal Heritage Register Review — August Update — DSD -2023-309 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — January 2024 Update — DSD -2024-022 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — March 2024 Update — DSD -2024-093 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — April 2024 Update — DSD -2024-131 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — May 2024 Update — DSD -2024-194 • Municipal Heritage Register Review — June 2024 Update — DSD -2024-250 • Ontario Heritage Act, 2022 Updated Statement of Significance 0 AN I ATM 41l WS APPROVED BY ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Attachment B - Attachment C - Attachment D - Attachment E - Attachment F - Attachment G - Attachment H Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Updated Statement of Significance — 83 Benton Street Updated Statement of Significance — 107 Courtland Avenue East Updated Statement of Significance — 621 King Street West Updated Statement of Significance — 47 Onward Avenue Updated Statement of Significance — 33 Queen Street South Updated Statement of Significance — 44-54 Queen Street South Updated Statement of Significance — 148 Margaret Avenue Updated Statement of Significance — 100 Margaret Avenue Page 320 of 454 Attachment I - Updated Statement of Significance — 104-106 Margaret Avenue Attachment J - Updated Statement of Significance — 112 Margaret Avenue Page 321 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 83 Benton Street Figure 1.0: Location Map — 83 Benton Street Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ❑Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 83 Benton Street Legal Description: Plan 205 Part Lot 2, 4, 7, 9 and 10 Together with & Subject to ROW Year Built: c. 1886 Architectural Style: Italianate Original Owner: Adeline & Conrad Bitzer Original Use: Residential Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 83 Benton Street is a two-storey late 19th century brick house built in the Italianate architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.32 -acre parcel of land located on the east side of Benton Street between St. George Street and Church Street in the Cedar Hill Planning Community of the City of Kitchener Page 322 of 454 within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the house. Heritage Value 83 Benton Street is recognized for its design/physical and historical/associative values Desian/Phvsical Value The Italianate architectural style originates from the romanticism of the mid -1800s. Italianate buildings are often two -stories in height and, feature low-pitched roof with wide eaves and brackets beneath; tall, narrow arched windows; and, a square cupola or tower (McAlester, 1984). Six principal subtypes can be distinguished, including approximately 15% that represent the centered gable subtype that may showcase a simple or compound plan with a front facing centred gable that projects from a low- pitched hipped roof (McAlester, 1984). In 1865, The Canada Farmerjournal printed elevations and plans for a two-story square plan farmhouse with a symmetrical design featuring a centred gable frontispiece, hung windows with hood molds, corner quoins, chimneys and panelled front door with transom and side Iites (Blumenson, 1990; Kyles, 2016). These elevations and plans were unique to Ontario. 83 Benton Street demonstrates design/physical value as a unique example of the Italianate architectural style and a rare example of the Italianate subtype known as centered gable. This example of the centred gable subtype is a variation of the farmhouse elevations and plans introduced in 1865. The building is two -stories in height and features a low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower, a front -facing centered gable with lunette window, wide overhanging eaves supported by decorative brackets, tall and narrow segmentally arched door and window openings, double entrance door, and a full -width hipped roof one -storey verandah with square beveled corner posts and decorative brackets. The 1/1 hung windows do not appear to be original as their flathead does not match the segmentally arched window opening. The house is in good condition. Front Elevation (North Fa(;ade) The front facade of the building is three bays wide and faces Benton Street. The prominent centre bay features buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; a front -facing centred gable containing a lunette window with brick surround and wood sill; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills; full -width hipped roof one -storey verandah with square beveled corner posts and decorative woodwork; and, a double entrance segmentally arched wood door with lower panels and upper lites. The two end bays are setback approximately 16 feet from the centre bay, are about 6 feet wide, and the ridge of their cross -hipped roofline aligns with the rear of the main hip roof. These bays feature buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched cross -hipped roof; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) brackets; fascia, soffit and frieze board; rubble stone foundation and, the eastern bay displays segmentally arched false window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills while the western bay displays segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills. Side Elevation (East Fagade) The side fagade of the original building is three bays wide. The bay closest to Benton Street features buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; wide Page 323 of 454 overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; evidence of an original chimney; and, rubble stone foundation. The middle bay features buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched cross -hipped roof; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; paired segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on both the first- and second -storey; and, rubble stone foundation. The end bay has minimal visibility from the sidewalk and Benton Street. Side Elevation (West Fagade) The side fagade of the original building is three bays wide. The bay closest to Benton Street features buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; evidence of an original chimney; and, rubble stone foundation. The middle bay features buff (yellow) brick construction; a low-pitched cross -hipped roof; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; paired segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on both the first- and second -storey; and, rubble stone foundation. The end bay is visible from St. George Street and features: buff (yellow) brick construction; gable roofline; wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; fascia, soffit and frieze board; segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on both the first- and second -storey; a door opening on both the first- and second -storey; and, rubble stone foundation. This fagade also features a non -original two-storey verandah. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative values relate to an early property owner, the original building owner and the Bitzer family. The property (lot 20) was purchased by Christopher Blum in 1871 (Bitzer, 2014). Christopher Blum was the great -great-uncle of property owner in 2014 (Bitzer, 2014). His niece and husband, Adeline and Conrad Bitzer, built the building around 1886 (Bitzer, 2014). Conrad Bitzer (b. January 11, 1853; d. September 22, 1903) was an honoured citizen who practiced law, held several political offices and was actively involved in various associations and boards. Conrad obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Toronto in 1878 and went on to study law in the office of Bowlby and Clement in Berlin until he was called to the bar in 1881 (Berliner Journal, 1903). He ws the first German-speaking lawyer in Berlin (Wikipedia, 2023). Between 1882 and 1892 he practiced law in partnership with Alex Millar, K.C. and in 1892 he began his independent practice (Berliner Journal, 1903). Conrad served as Deputy Reeve and Reeve of the Town and County Council in 1890 and 1891 and Mayor of Berlin in 1892 (Berliner Journal, 1903). He was a member of the Berlin School Board, the Berlin High School Board, the Berlin High School ex -Pupil's Association, the St. Peter's Lutheran Church, the local YMCA, and the liberal party (Berliner Journal, 1903). His involvement with the school boards continued until his death in 1903 (Bitzer, 2014). He also served on the finance and railroad committee of the second Saengerfest festival committee in 1897 (Berliner Journal, 1897). Conrad and Adeline had six children who were born and/or raised at the family home located at 83 Benton Street (Koch, 1986; Wikipedia, 2023). Three of their children held political offices and were active in various associations and boards. Arno Lindner Bitzer (b. February 7, 1858; d. July 16, 1933) served as an alderman between 1917 and 1919 (Bitzer, 2014; Bonk, 2024). Armin Moritz "Arnie" Bitzer (b. October 4, 1885; d. 1967) was an electrical engineer (KW Record, 1967; Bonk, 2024). He served as a lieutenant with the Canadian Signal Corps during WWI, the Public Utilities Commission in 1939 and 1940, the Family Relief Board, and the secretary of the Kitchener Taxpayers Association (KW Record, 1967). Armin served as an alderman between 1958 and 1960 (Bitzer, 2014) and was a Page 324 of 454 vocal opponent of the civic centre project, which he appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (KW Record, 1967). Wilfrid Laurier Bitzer (b. February 10, 1896; d. 1996) was born in the house at 83 Benton Street (Bonk, 2024; Koch, 1986). He was the youngest child and was named after Wilfrid Laurier who was the Prime Minister at the time of his birth (KW Record, 1996. Wilfrid Laurier Bitzer began his real estate career in the 1940s and retired in 1990 at the age of 94 (KW Record, 1996; KW Record, 1990). Wilfrid partnered with Michael Budaker forming the real estate firm of Bitzer-Budaker Ltd., which operated between 1983 and 1990 (KW Record, 1990). He was the president of the K -W Real Estate Board in 1951 (KW Record, 1996). Wilfrid was also active in the German community and was known as the German `Godfather' (KW Record, 1981). He was a founding member and a long-time president of the Trans Canada Alliance of German Canadians, a founding and honorary member of the German Business and Professional Men's Association and the founder of the Canadian Society for German Relief (KW Record, 1996). His work with the Canadian Society for German Relief earned him a Federal Republic of Germany's Medal First Class in 1975 (KW Record, 1996). He was honoured in 1981 for his work with the German community that included helping German immigrants to come to Kitchener, helping them with language barriers, helping them process immigration forms and acting as a liaison between West Germany and its former citizens (KW Record, 1981). He was the Honorary German Consul between 1956 and 1981 (Bitzer, 2014). He served as a Kitchener Alderman from 1954 to 1957 and was active with other community groups including the Granite Club, the Rotary Club of Kitchener and the Concordia Club (KW Record, 1996). At the time of his death, Wilfrid was known in the real estate industry as it's "elder statesman" (KW Record, 1996). Paul Jewitt Bizer (b. 1931, d. May 12, 2020) was the grandson of Conrad and Adeline Bitzer (Bonk, 2024). Paul was born in Toronto but returned to his ancestral home at 83 Benton Street when he was nine years old (KW Record, 2020). He attended Kitchener Collegiate Institute and Waterloo College (now Wilfrid Laurier University) before becoming a civil servant in the Saskatchewan government (KW Record, 2020). He served as a Kitchener Alderman between 1977-1979 and helped to launch the Centre in the Square (Bitzer, 2014; KW Record, 2020). He was a lifelong member of the United Church of Canada, including Trinity United Church in Kitchener (KW Record, 2020). The Bitzer family was honoured on the German Pioneer's Day in 2012 (Bitzer, 2014). Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 83 Benton Street resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the Italianate architectural style of the house, including: o Front Elevation (North Fagade) ■ three bays; ■ orientation towards Benton Street; ■ prominent centre bay features: • buff (yellow) brick construction; • low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; • front -facing centred gable containing a lunette window with brick surround and wood sill; • wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; • fascia, soffit and frieze board; • segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills; Page 325 of 454 N 0 References • full -width hipped roof one -storey verandah with square beveled corner posts and decorative woodwork; and, • double entrance segmentally arched wood door with lower panels and upper lites. ■ two end bays feature: • a setback approximately 16 feet from the centre bay; • buff (yellow) brick construction; • low-pitched cross -hipped roof; • wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) brackets; • fascia, soffit and frieze board; • rubble stone foundation; and, • eastern bay displays segmentally arched false window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills while the western bay displays segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills. Side Elevation (East Fagade) ■ three bays; ■ buff (yellow) brick construction; ■ low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; ■ wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; ■ fascia, soffit and frieze board; ■ evidence of an original chimney; ■ paired segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on both the first- and second -storey; and, ■ rubble stone foundation. Side Elevation (West Fagade) ■ three bays; ■ buff (yellow) brick construction; ■ low-pitched hipped roof with the remnants of a cupola or tower; ■ rear facing gable at the back of the house; ■ wide overhanging eaves supported by large (not paired) decorative brackets and small (paired) decorative modillions; ■ fascia, soffit and frieze board; ■ evidence of an original chimney; ■ paired segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and wood sills on both the first- and second -storey; ■ door openings on both the first- and second -storey; and, ■ rubble stone foundation. Berliner Journal. (1897). The Second Saengerfest. Berliner Journal: Berlin, Ontario. Berliner Journal. (1903). Death of Conrad Bitzer. Succumbs to Typhoid Fever, - An Honored Citizen and Ex -Mayor of Berlin. Berliner Journal: Berlin, Ontario. Bitzer, B. (2014). E-mail to Michelle Drake dated May 15, 2014 regarding the heritage evaluation of 83 Benton Street. Page 326 of 454 Blumenson. (1990). Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms: 1784 -Present. Fitzhenry & Whiteside: Leaside, Ontario. Bonk, D. (2024). Waterloo Region Generations: A record of the people of Waterloo Region, Ontario. https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/ Koch, H. (1986). Real estate broker, 90, is aiming for 110. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. KW Record. (1967). Former Alderman: Armin Bitzer Dies At Civic Hearing. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. KW Record. (1981). German `Godfather' Honored at Dinner. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. KW Record. (1990). Bitzer retires at 94. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. KW Record. (1996). Obituary: Bitzer dedicated life to heritage, home town. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. KW Record. (2020). Paul Jewitt Bitzer obituary. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. Kyles. (2016). Building Styles. Italianate (1850-0900). Accessed on July 22, 2024 from http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/itaIianate.htm. McAlester. (1984). A Field Guide to American Houses. Random House: Toronto, Ontario. Photographs Front Elevation (North Fagade) — 83 Benton Street Page 327 of 454 Side Elevation (East Facade) — 83 Benton Street Side Elevation (West Fagade) — 83 Benton Street Page 328 of 454 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 83 Benton Street Address: c. 1886, Italianate Description: Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: July 3, 2024 (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: El Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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. Page 329 of 454 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X associative value Yes ❑ 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 value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ 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 X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ important in defining, maintaining or Page 330 of 454 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. Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the 8. The property has interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ physically, noteworthy? Completeness: functionally, visually Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ or historically linked Yes ❑ other original to its surroundings. outbuildings, notable *Additional archival work landscaping or may be required. features that 9. The property has complete the site? contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Page 331 of 454 Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑ occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑ most of its original materials and 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X good Yes ❑ condition? *E.g. - Could be a good candidate Page 332 of 454 for adaptive re- use if possible and contribute towards equity- building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑X Commercial ❑ What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ present Office ❑ Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Page 333 of 454 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? * 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. N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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 Page 334 of 454 ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 335 of 454 h 36 a STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 107 Courtland Avenue South 97 ` 122 /34 103 24 Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 1230 ,134 .138' 10 141 '-, X451 r 1 1 t1 70 17: 17i' - X176 0. ,1 182 179 1883 ' d 126 ®Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address -107 Courtland Avenue East Legal Description: Plan 419 Lot 4-9 Part Lot 10 & 11 GCT Lot 277 Year Built: c. 1928 Architectural Style: Vernacular example of Beaux Arts Classicism Original Owner: Public School Board Original Use: Public Elementary School Condition: Good Page 336 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The property municipally addressed as 107 Courtland Avenue East is a two-storey 20th century brick school built as a Vernacular example of the Beaux Arts Classicism architectural style. The school is situated on a 3.96 -acre parcel of land located on the south side of Courtland Avenue East between Peter Street and Cedar Street in the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Secondary Plan of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the school. Heritage Value 107 Courtland Avenue East is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The property municipally addressed as 107 Courtland Avenue East demonstrates design/physical value as a rare example of a two-storey 20th century brick school built as a Vernacular example of the Beaux Arts Classicism architectural style. In Ontario, the Beaux-Arts Classicism architectural style was present between 1900 and 1945, and primarily used for public and semipublic buildings, such as post offices, banks and libraries (Blumenson, 1990). Ontario architects generally preferred a Classical interpretation of the Roman or Greek architecture but on a smaller scale (Blumenson, 1990). This preference can be seen in the scale, symmetry, and simplicity of the Courtland Avenue Public School building design. The design also pays tribute to the semi -circular arches of the main entrance, bell tower, and second floor windows of an earlier school on the site through the use of blind semi -circular stone arches. Front (North Elevation) FaQade The front facade faces Courtland Avenue East and features a symmetrical facade with five bays and a flat roof. The central bay features: yellow brick and stone materials; a classical frontispiece that is raised from the ground features smooth pilasters with simple moulded base and a crown cap topped by an entablature; the entablature features a plain architrave, a decorative frieze with round reliefs, and a moulded cornice with dentils; above the entablature sits a stone sign that reads "COURTLAND"; copper flashing is used above the entablature, the stone sign, the second floor stone belt course, and the roof; stone belt courses are located below the first floor windows and above the second floor windows; a pair of window openings with a stone surround; and, a bronze plaque that reads "Courtland Senior Public School 1890 — 1990 to Commemorate One Hundred Years in Education." The two bays on either side of the central bay feature: four flatheaded basement windows; yellow brick and stone materials; a stone belt course below the first floor windows and above the second floor windows; the belt course above the second floor windows feature decorative stone reliefs; a window pattern on both the first and second floor that features a single flatheaded 1/1 window with enclosed transom and a stone sill, a ribbon of three flatheaded 1/1 windows with enclosed transom and a stone sill, and another single flatheaded 1/1 window with an enclosed transom and a stone sill; and, copper flashing on the entablature, stone sign, second floor belt course, and roof. The two end bays feature: yellow brick and stone materials; three flatheaded basement windows; a stone belt course that aligns with the bottom of the first floor windows and a broken stone belt course Page 337 of 454 that aligns with the top of the second floor windows; blind stone semi -circular arches with decorative central keystones (agraffe) supported by fluted pilasters with plain bases and crown caps; stone cartouches above the blind concrete arches; and, stone medallions with brick surrounds. Side (East) Facade The side fagade faces East but only a portion of the circa 1928 fagade is visible because the 1964 addition was built on to the East fagade. The portion of the circa 1928 building that can be seen features: yellow brick and stone materials; two flathead enclosed basement windows; a stone belt course below the first -floor windows and above the second floor windows; a single flatheaded 1/1 window with an enclosed transom and a stone sill on both the first- and second -storey; a ribbon of three flatheaded 1/1 windows with enclosed transoms and a stone sill on both the first- and second - storey; and, copper flashing on the roof. Side (West) Facade The side fagade faces West and features: yellow brick and stone; four flathead basement windows with stone sills; a stone belt course below the first -floor windows and above the second -floor windows; a ribbon of three 1/1 flatheaded windows with enclosed transom and stone sills bookended by a single 1/1 window with an enclosed transom and stone sills on both the first- and second -storey; and, copper flashing on the roof. Rear (South) FaQade The rear fagade faces South and consists entirely of the 1964 addition. Addition (1964) A one storey addition was built of the south fagade of 107 Courtland Avenue East. The addition is set back behind the frontline of the circa 1928 building. The addition is constructed of brown brick and features the school's name "COURLTAND SENIOR PUBLIC SCHOOL" as well as the Waterloo Region District School Board logo. The addition does not detract from the character of 107 Courtland Avenue, or the character of the Courtland Avenue East streetscape as it is setback from the original fagade, lower in height, and situated on a lower elevation of land. Historical/Associative Value The property municipally addressed as 107 Courtland Avenue East has historical/associative value due to its direct association with public education and because it demonstrates the work of an architect and builder who were significant to Berlin (now Kitchener). The subject property was the third site for a public school in the Berlin (now Kitchener). The original building was constructed in 1890 as a four -room school at a cost of $5500 (Berliner Journal, 1890). It's first principal was Mary Cairnes (WRDSB, 2015). The first sub -principal was Miss Edith Matheson (1890-1891) and the second principal was Miss M.B. Tier (1891-1904) (Noonan, 1975; WRDSB, 2015). In 1903, four new classrooms were added to the school at a cost of $3000 (WRDSB, 2015). Later principals included Arthur Foster (1905-1912), Peter Fischer (1912-1917), W.G. Bain (1917-1919 & 1920-1927), and, Olive Matthews (1919-1920) (Noonan, 1975; WRDSB, 2015). Peter Fisher was one of four founding members of the Waterloo Historical Society (The Record, 2012). The current building was designed by Bernal A. Jones and constructed by the Dunker Brothers (William and Albert) in 1928 at a cost of $94,297 (WRDSB, 2015). B.A. Jones attended the Toronto Page 338 of 454 Technical School and worked as a draftsman for Frank Darling, in the office of Darling and Pearson, between 1908 and 1922 (Hill, 2009). B.A. Jones moved to Kitchener in 1922 and worked with W.H.E. Schmalz until opening his own office in 1926 (Hill, 2009). During that time, B.A. Jones assisted W.H.E. Schmalz design the 1922-23 Kitchener City Hall. B.A. Jones is also responsible for the design of several other important buildings in Kitchener such as the 1927 KW Granite Club, the 1932 Public Utilities Building and the 1936-37 Church of the Good Shepherd (Hill, 2009). The Dunker Brothers were a well-known and respected local building company that operated between 1887 and 1974 (Parks Canada, 2013). They were responsible for the construction of several other important buildings in Kitchener such as the 1927 KW Granite Club and the 1938-39 Registry Theatre (Parks Canada, 2013; Schmidt, 1977). Students were sent to nearby schools during construction and the first principal of the newly renovated and expanded school was Stanley Hodgins (1927-1937) (WRDSB, 2015). A major renovation circa 1964 required the demolition of two single detached dwellings to construct a $500,000 addition to the side and rear of the building to convert the school from a primary to a senior public school (KW Record, 1964; WRDSB, 2015). This renovation required the demolition of eight rooms, the addition of six new classrooms along with rooms for music, art, industrial arts, home economics, science and a double gymnasium with showers and changes rooms (WRDSB, 2015). The additions maintained the front portion of the 1928 building. Post renovation, the principal was William H. Taylor (1965-1970). Mr. Taylor was community minded contributing to local sports and being honoured by the Mayor for 20 years of service as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission (WRDSB, 2015). Contextual Value The contextual value relates to how the property is physically, functionally, and historically linked to its surroundings. The building is physically and historically linked to its original site, and continues to function as a senior public school. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 107 Courtland Avenue East resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the design/physical value of the brick school built as a Vernacular example of the Beaux Arts Classicism architectural style, including: Front (North) Fagade o a symmetrical fagade with five bays; o a flat roof; o a central bay with: ■ yellow brick and stone; ■ concrete classical main entrance door surround with pilasters and entablature; ■ the entablature features a plain architrave, a frieze with round reliefs, ■ a moulded cornice with dentils; ■ a stone sign that reads "COURTLAND"; ■ copper flashing is used above the entablature, the stone sign, the second -floor stone belt course, and the roof; ■ a stone belt course below the first floor windows; ■ a stone belt course above the second floor windows; ■ a pair of window openings with a stone surround; and, Page 339 of 454 ■ a bronze plague that reads "Courtland Senior Public School 1890 — 1990 to Commemorate One Hundred Years in Education." o the two bays on either side of the central bay feature: ■ four flatheaded basement windows; ■ yellow brick; ■ a stone belt course below the first floor windows; ■ a window pattern on both the first and second floor that features a single window opening with a stone sill, a ribbon of three window openings with a stone sill, and another single window opening with a stone sill; ■ a second stone belt course above the second floor windows; ■ the belt course features decorative concrete embellishments; ■ copper flashing; and, ■ copper flashing on the roof. o the two end bays feature: ■ yellow brick and concrete; ■ three flatheaded basement windows; ■ a concrete belt course below the first -floor windows; ■ blind stone semi -circular arches with decorative central keystones (agraffe) supported by fluted pilasters with plain bases and crown caps; ■ stone cartouches above the blind concrete arches; and, ■ stone medallions with brick surrounds. • Side (East) Fagade o portion of the circa 1928 fagade, which is visible; o yellow brick and stone materials; o two flathead enclosed basement windows; o a stone belt course below the first -floor windows and above the second floor windows; o a single flatheaded 1 /1 window with an enclosed transom and a stone sill on both the first- and second -storey; o a ribbon of three flatheaded 1/1 windows with enclosed transoms and a stone sill on both the first- and second -storey; and, o copper flashing on the roof. • Side (West) Fagade o yellow brick and stone; o four flathead basement windows with stone sills; o a stone belt course below the first -floor windows and above the second -floor windows; o a ribbon of three 1/1 flatheaded windows with enclosed transom and stone sills bookended by a single 1/1 window with an enclosed transom and stone sills on both the first- and second -storey; and, o copper flashing on the roof. RPfPrPnr_Pc Berliner Journal. (1890). New Buildings in Berlin. Berliner Journal: Berlin, Ontario. Hill, R. (2009). Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Canada 1800-1950. Retrieved from http://www.dictionaryofarchitectsincanada.org/architects/view/173 on October 4, 2013. Noonan, G. (1975). A History of Kitchener. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Page 340 of 454 Parks Canada. (2013). Canada's Historic Places. Registry Theatre. Retrieved from http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-Iieu.aspx?id=12427 on October 4, 2013. Unknown. (1990). Courtland 1890-1990 (100th anniversary program). Courtland Public School: Kitchener, Ontario. Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB). (2015). Principals and Vice -Principals Courtland Avenue P. S. 1890-2015. WRDSB: Kitchener, ON. Photographs Front Elevation (North Facade) — 107 Courtand Avenue East 04 Side Elevation (West Fagade) — 107 Courtland Avenue East Page 341 of 454 ,^' � =h- h0, a 1;' �'lM SY" y 1°' 'w �yYw�~ ��'K•"•r / Y �, , w lti 4 �' 3+..•d�r ��� � * - 4 � _moi Side Elevation (East Fagade) — 107 Courtland Avenue East Rear Elevation (South Fagade) — 107 Courtland Avenue East Page 342 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 107 Courtland Avenue East Address: Public school, c. 1928, Beaux Arts Classicism Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: April 24, 2024 El Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ 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 X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ 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 343 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it demonstrates or Page 344 of 454 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 X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 Page 345 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑X occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑X most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 11 of 15 Page 346 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X good Yes ❑X 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Page 12 of 15 Page 347 of 454 1 KrTCHEN�R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other X Institutional — School present Office ❑ Other ❑ - function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑X Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 13 of 15 Page 348 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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: Page 14 of 15 Page 349 of 454 General / Additional Notes TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: 1 KrT HENER Page 15 of 15 Page 350 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 607-641 KING ST W/5-35 WELLINGTON ST S ❑ 621 King Street West 607-641 King Street West / 5-35 Wellington Street South Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Social Value ®Historic/Associative Value ❑Economic Value ®Contextual Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 607-641 King Street West/5-35 Wellington Street South (Yellow Outline) Address for Designation Purposes: 621 King Street West (Red Outline) Legal Description: Plan 377 Lots 67 to 73 and 109 PT Lots 22 to 30 and 489 Streets and Lanes Lot 112 PT Lot 32 RP 58R-3202 PT Part 1 RP 58R-3390 PT Part 5 RP 58R-3594 PT Part 1 RP 58R- 19198 Parts 1 TO 3 Year Built: 1897 Architectural Style: Romanesque Original Owner: Jacob Kaufman Original Use: Residential Condition: Good Page 351 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource The address for designation purposes is 621 King Street West. The subject property is a late 19th century brick building built in the Romanesque architectural style. The building is situated on large parcel of land associated with a multi -building redevelopment. The subject property is located on the south side of King Street West between Wellington Street South and Victoria Street South in the K -W Hospital Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the two -and -a -half storey late 19th century brick building. Heritage Value The subject property municipally addressed as 621 King Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design and physical value relate to the style and material of the building. The building is a rare and unique example of a late 19th century building built in the Romanesque architectural style and a rare example in Berlin/Kitchener of the use of tooled red sandstone as a building material. The building plan is primarily rectangular with a hip roof, two projecting bays, three gable dormers, and two turrets. The building has many intact heritage attributes in good condition. Front (North Elevation) Facade The front fagade of the building faces King Street West. The original 1896 building is three bays wide. The central bay is two -storeys and forms part of the main rectangular building plan with hip roof. The central bay features: red brick; 1/1 hung window with rusticated stone header and sill; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing; and, hexagonal slate tile hip roof. The left bay is a three-storey square tower with a pyramidal turret. The tower features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; ribbon of three windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; ribbon of three stained glass windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; decorative rusticated sandstone blocks; carved stone gargoyle; ribbon of three semi -circular 1/1 windows, including stained glass, with continuous header and sill separated by half -round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; moulded cornice, plain frieze, fascia, and soffits; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. The right bay is two -and -a -half storey square tower with a pyramidal turret. The tower features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; 1897 date stone with ostrich feather motif; two 1/1 hung windows with brick voussoirs; a 1/1 hung window with stained glass; round red brick brick buttresses with a decorative stone pointed cap; decorative red brick below the eaves; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing/trim; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. Side (West Elevation) Facade The side fagade is an interior elevation that faces a new multi-storey residential building. The original building consists of three bays. The left bay is two -and -a -half storey square tower with a pyramidal turret. The tower features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; round red brick brick buttresses with a decorative stone pointed cap; Page 352 of 454 decorative red brick below the eaves; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing/trim; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. The middle bay is a two -and -a -half storey projection with a gable roofline that transitions to a half - hexagon roofline. This bay features: three window openings on the main floor; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated stone headers and sills on the second floor; a stone band between the second and third storey; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated stone headers; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with chimney. The right bay is two -storeys. The second storey features four different window sizes with rusticated stone headers and sills; corbelled red sandstone; a hipped roof dormer clad with siding (no window); and, a hipped slate tile roof. Side (East Elevation) FaQade The side fagade faces East looking towards the former Kaufman Rubber Factory (now the Kaufman Lofts). The original building consists of four bays. The left bay is two -storeys with features that include: the hipped slate tile roof; the hipped roof dormer; decorative corbelled red brick; three window openings on the second -storey with 1/1 windows with rusticated stone headers and sills; and, a rusticated stone foundation. The first -storey appears to have undergone some changes. The next bay features a front facing gable. The gable is clad with horizontal siding and features a semi -circular archway with vertical planks acting as a guard rail. Like the west elevation, the first and second storey project forward in a hexagonal shape. The projecting bay features: decorative corbelled red brick; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated headers and sills on both the first and second storey; and, a rusticated stone foundation. The next bay is two -storeys and narrow. This bay features: decorative corbelled red brick; window with rusticated stone header and sill; large double door opening; and, rusticated stone foundation. The right bay is a square tower with a pyramidal turret. The tower features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; ribbon of three windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; ribbon of three stained glass windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; rusticated decorative red sandstone blocks; carved stone gargoyle; ribbon of three semi -circular 1/1 windows, including stained glass, with continuous header and sill separated by half -round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; moulded cornice, plain frieze, fascia, and soffits; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. Rear (South Elevation) Facade The majority of the rear fagade was covered with an addition. This addition has been removed. The rear facade features that remain are the slate tile roof; the hipped roof dormer; decorative corbelled red brick; and, at least three window openings with rusticated stone headers and sills. Infnrinr The most important interior features are the entry parlour and staircase, the office with visual connection to the former Kaufman Rubber Factory (now the Kaufman Lofts), and the stained glass. Page 353 of 454 Historical/Associative Value The historical and associative values relate to the subject properties direct associations with the Kaufman family, Jacob and Mary (nee Eidt Ratz) Kaufman, the architect Menno Schlicter Detweiler, Alvin Ratz (A.R.) Kaufman (son of Jacob Kaufman), the rubber making industry, the Ratz-Bechtel funeral home, and Barnett and Rieder-Hymmen architects. The building was built by Jacob Kaufman as his residence in 1897. The residence was built as a 2'/2 storey house of red sandstone and red brick for a total cost of $13,000 (Berliner Journal, 1897). At the time, red sandstone was a rare building material and the building featured some of the most ornate stone and woodwork (interior) in the Region. The total cost was almost double the cost of the Lang residence and at least six times the cost of the average house built in 1897. Both Jacob and his son A.R. Kaufman resided in the building at 621 King Street West. The building was designed by Menno Schlicter Detweiler (1868-1907) who began his career in Berlin (now Kitchener). Detweiler was born in Blair, Ontario and may have trained with local architects. He changed the spelling of his last name to Detwiler post 1900. He studied at the Chicago Art Institute and opened his first office in Columbus, Ohio. Later he moved to Minneapolis before relocating to Austin, Minnesota where he died at age 39. His only known work in Canada was the design of a mansion for Jacob Kaufman at 621 King Street West in 1897. His most significant commission by Bell & Detwiler was the refined Beaux-Arts design for the monumental State Capitol Building in Pierre, South Dakota, built in 1907 and still standing in 2024. The residence overlooked Kaufman Rubber Company Limited located east of the residence on King Street. Jacob Kaufman (1847-1920) founded the Kaufman Rubber Company Limited, later known as Kaufman Footwear, in 1907. A.R. Kaufman was instrumental in convincing his father, Jacob Kaufman, to begin Kaufman Rubber Company and was an integral part of the company's management from the beginning. The facility opened for production in 1908 with 350 employees and immediately became one of the largest industries in Berlin. The company's first products consisted of a variety of rubber footwear for the Canadian trade and for export to England, Australia, New Zealand and other countries. As production grew, the building expanded in 1911, 1920 and again in 1925 covering an entire city block and then employing some 700 employees. Under A.R. Kaufman's leadership, the company significantly expanded its line of rubber products. After Jacob Kaufman's death in 1920, A.R. Kaufman (1885-1979) became President and General Manager of the Kaufman Rubber Company. Following World War II, he founded Kaufman Furniture in Collingwood, Ontario. When A.R. Kaufman retired as President and became Chairman of the Board in 1964, his son William H. Kaufman succeeded him as President, having previously managed the Collingwood furniture division. William H. Kaufman continued diversifying, introducing new manufacturing, and marketing techniques and some of the company's most successful product lines such as the Sorel line of winter sport boots. In 1967, with over 800 employees at the King Street plant, a 100,000 square foot warehouse was constructed at Wellington Street and Shirley Avenue. In 1986, William H. Kaufman relinquished his position of President but remained Chairman of the Board of Directors. A fourth generation of Kaufman's continued to be directly associated with the management of the company with Tom Kaufman, William H. Kaufman's son, serving as Executive Vice -President of Kaufman Footwear. Kaufman Footwear declared bankruptcy in 2000. Kaufman Footwear not only had a significant influence on Kitchener's industrial heritage but also had a major impact on the local economy as the workplace of thousands of Kitchener residents over the years, often successive generations. The factory building has been a physical landmark in Kitchener for over a century, dominating the intersection of King Street and Victoria Street South (formerly Wilmot Street) and Page 354 of 454 serving as a gateway to the downtown. The original Kaufman Rubber Company Limited still stands but has been converted to residential condominium units. As a family, the Kaufman's are one of Kitchener's most prominent, well regarded for their business acumen, their innovation, their public service, and their philanthropy. The Kaufman family is famed not only for their entrepreneurial genius, but also for their commitment to community involvement and public service. Generations of Kaufman's have contributed in many significant ways to the YMCA, YWCA, K -W Hospital, and other organizations, and have served on numerous community and City Boards. Of note is the diversity of their influence, from directing the construction of the first sewage disposal system in Berlin (Jacob Kaufman); to supporting the YWCA and the Berlin Hospital (Mary Kaufman) to serving 38 years as Chairman of the City's Planning Board and founding one of the first birth control information centres in Canada (A.R. Kaufman); to receiving National recognition for volunteer service for health and welfare issues (William H. Kaufman). The A.R. Kaufman Charitable Foundation was established in 1973 and upon A.R. Kaufman's death in 1979, $1 million was distributed to local charitable organizations over a five-year period (K -W Record, 1979). As an example, the Foundation funded the first Electrocardiogram Cardiac Analysis Monitor for Twin City doctors at a cost of $77,000 (K -W Record, 1980). The Ratz-Bechtel funeral home was first known as the Orton S. (O.S.) Bechtel funeral home in 1925 on Queen Street South. The Queen Street South building was demolished for the extension of Charles Street. In 1928, Edward Ratz, then mayor of Kitchener (previously an alderman 1917-1925), joined the funeral business with O. S. Bechtel and they formally changed the business name to Ratz- Bechtel Ltd. They operated out of 178 Queen Street South in 1930 until they moved to 621 King Street West in 1949 (K -W Record, 1967). Edward Ratz died in December 1954. O.S. Bechtel sold half his interest of the Ratz-Bechtel funeral business to Lewis Hahn of New Hamburg in 1967 (K -W Record, 1967). A year later, in 1968, both Bechtel and Hahn announced the plans to double the size of its building with an 8,500 square foot expansion (K -W Record, 1968) to add a chapel that would accommodate 150 people. These plans were designed by Barnett and Rieder-Hymmen and constructed by Brandon Construction Limited (K -W Record, 1968). The plans proposed a Georgian - style building constructed of red brick with a steep hip roof and exposed ceiling beams, along with the enclosure of the verandah of the Kaufman house with red brick to blend with the chapel, and a columned entrance between the Kaufman house and the new chapel (K -W Record, 1968). In 1971, the Ratz-Bechtel funeral business was sold to Richard J. Cline of Burlington, in 1989 the business is amalgamated with the Loewen Group Inc of Burnaby B.C, and in 2006 the business was acquired by Service Corporation International (Canada). After operating for 66 years at 621 King Street West, the Ratz-Bechtel funeral business performed its last funeral and offered a final public viewing in December of 2015 (K -W Record, 2015). The chapel and column entrance were demolished circa 1920 to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands. The enclosed verandah remains along with the rest of the Kaufman house. The architectural firm of Barnett and Rieder (later known as Rieder, Hymmen and Lobban) designed some of Kitchener's most important public buildings of the 1950s and 60s, including the main branch of the Kitchener Public Library, the Duke Street parking garage, Centre in the Square, Eastwood Collegiate and Highland Baptist Church (Waterloo Region Record, 2016). Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the visual and historic link to its surroundings. The location for the Kaufman House was chosen so that Jacob could see the Kaufman Footwear Company Limited from Page 355 of 454 his office on the second floor of 621 King Street West. As part of the redevelopment of the lands surround the Kaufman House, the approved HIA recommends that open space be used to maintain a view corridor to continue to visually connect the house to the factory (mcCallum Sather, 2018). Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 621 King Street West resides in the following heritage attributes: • All elements related to the design/physical value of the Kaufman House built in the Romanesque architectural style, including: o All elements of the three -bay front (south) fagade, including: ■ Two-storey central bay with hip roof features: red brick; 1/1 hung window with rusticated stone header and sill; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing; and, hexagonal slate tile hip roof. ■ Three-storey square tower with a pyramidal turret features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; ribbon of three windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; ribbon of three stained glass windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; decorative rusticated sandstone blocks; carved stone gargoyle; ribbon of three semi -circular 1/1 windows, including stained glass, with continuous header and sill separated by half -round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; moulded cornice, plain frieze, fascia, and soffits; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. ■ Two -and -a -half storey square tower with a pyramidal turret, which features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; 1897 date stone with ostrich feather motif; two 1/1 hung windows with brick voussoirs; a 1/1 hung window with stained glass; round red brick buttresses with a decorative stone pointed cap; decorative red brick below the eaves; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing/trim; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. o All elements of the three -bay side (west) fagade, including: ■ Two -and -a -half storey square tower with a pyramidal turret, which features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; round red brick buttresses with a decorative stone pointed cap; decorative red brick below the eaves; corbelled rusticated red sandstone; copper flashing/trim; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. ■ Two -and -a -half storey projection with a gable roofline that transitions to a half - hexagon roofline. This bay features: three window openings on the main floor; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated stone headers and sills on the second floor; a stone band between the second and third storey; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated stone headers; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with chimney. ■ Two-storey bay, which features four different window sizes with rusticated stone headers and sills; corbelled red sandstone; a hipped roof dormer clad with siding (no window); and, a hipped slate tile roof. o All elements of the four -bay side (east) fagade, including: ■ Two-storey bay, which features: hipped slate tile roof; hipped roof dormer; decorative corbelled red brick; three window openings on the second -storey with 1/1 windows with rusticated stone headers and sills; and, a rusticated stone foundation. Page 356 of 454 N 0 References ■ Two -and -a -half storey hexagonal shaped projecting bay, which features: front facing gable clad with horizontal siding; semi -circular archway with vertical planks acting as a guard rail; decorative corbelled red brick; three 1/1 hung windows with rusticated headers and sills on both the first and second storey; and, a rusticated stone foundation. ■ Two-storey bay, which features: decorative corbelled red brick; window with rusticated stone header and sill; large double door opening; and, rusticated stone foundation. ■ Three-storey square tower with a pyramidal turret features: red brick; tooled red sandstone; ribbon of three windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; ribbon of three stained glass windows with continuous rusticated stone header and sill; rusticated decorative red sandstone blocks; carved stone gargoyle; ribbon of three semi -circular 1/1 windows, including stained glass, with continuous header and sill separated by half -round stone columns with Corinthian capitals and a simple base; moulded cornice, plain frieze, fascia, and soffits; and, hexagonal slate tile roof with finial. All elements of the rear (north) fagade, including: ■ slate tile roof; hipped roof dormer; decorative corbelled red brick; and, at least three window openings with rusticated stone headers and sills. The interior heritage attributes are limited to the following: ■ the entry parlour and staircase, the office with visual connection to the former Kaufman Rubber Factory (now the Kaufman Lofts), and the stained glass. Berliner Journal. (1897). Berlin's Progress: 213 New Buildings and Improvements. Berliner Journal: Berlin (now Kitchener), Ontario. Hill, R.G. (2022). Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Canada 1800 — 1950. Retrieved from: http.//www.dictionaryofarchitectsincanada.org/ on May 27, 2024. Kitchener -Waterloo Record (1964). A.R. Kaufman retires at age 79. Kitchener -Waterloo Record: Kitchener, Ontario. Kitchener -Waterloo Record. (1967). He Will Retire After 9,686 Funerals in 42 Years. Kitchener - Waterloo Record: Kitchener, Ontario. K -W Record. (1968). Ratz-Bechtel Ltd. to Double Facilities. K -W Record: Kitchener, Ontario. mcCallumSather. (2018). Heritage Impact Assessment — Stage 2, 16040, 621 King Street West. mcCallumSather: Hamilton, ON. MSA Making Sustainable Architecture Prime Consultant. (2016). Heritage Impact Assessment — Stage 1, 16040, 621 King Street West (SIXO Development). MSA: Hamilton, ON. Thompson, C.. (2016). An architect who shaped modern Kitchener. Waterloo Region Record: Kitchener, Ontario. Page 357 of 454 Photographs Front Elevation (North Fagade) — 621 King Street West Side Elevation (East Fagade) — 621 King Street West Page 358 of 454 Side Elevation (West Fagade) — 621 King Street West Page 359 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 621 King Street West Address: Former Kaufman House and Ratz-Bechtel Funeral Home Description: (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: April 16, 2024 ❑Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown X No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or Page 360 of 454 1 KrT HENER 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 ❑ 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 ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑X because it demonstrates or Page 11 of 17 Page 361 of 454 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 X because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Page 12 of 17 Page 362 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Criteria Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑ occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑ most of its original materials and design features? Please refer to the list of heritage attributes within the Page 13 of 17 Page 363 of 454 1 KrT HEN�R Statement of Significance and indicate which elements are still existing and which ones have been removed. Alterations: Are there N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X good Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Page 14 of 17 Page 364 of 454 1 KrTMh,!R topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑X Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑X - Vacant: To be present Office ❑ Other ❑ - determined as part of a redevelopment function of the project subject property? * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ the cultural ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Page 15 of 17 Page 365 of 454 1 KrTcHEN�R Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 Page 16 of 17 Page 366 of 454 ❑ 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 of Y Page 367 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 47 Onward Avenue Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 47 Onward Avenue Legal Description: Plan 309 Part Lots 30, 34-38 Year Built: 1935 Architectural Style: Gothic Revival Original Owner: Original Use: Institutional — Religious (Church) Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 47 Onward Avenue is a mid -20th century building built in the Gothic architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.85 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Onward Avenue between Crescent Street and Weber Street East in the King East Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the church. Page 368 of 454 Heritage Value 47 Onward Avenue is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design and physical values relate to the Gothic Revival architectural style of the building. 47 Onward Avenue is a notable example of a 19th century Gothic Revival church demonstrating the Decorated style that commonly includes windows that are decorated with foils, carved doors, and restrained leaf patterns (Kyles, 2016). Gothic Revival Churches can be divided into two groups: the pre -1841 romantic Gothic and the post -1841 churches influenced by the writings of Augustus Pugin and John Ruskin who felt Medieval architecture was the true architecture for the Christian world (Kyles, 2016). The composition of buildings influenced by the Gothic Revival architectural style often feature symmetrical plans, steep roof and gable pitches, and breaks in the continuity of elevations by projecting or recessed bays (Fram, 1988). The details emphasize verticality (Fram, 1988). The style represents the "beginning of the "true" ecclesiological church styles, for all denominations, featuring pointed arches and ornate carvings" (Frame, 1988). Front Elevation (West FaQade) The front fagade faces Onward Avenue, is built with varied coloured brick, and features a three bay wide symmetrical fagade with buttresses between each bay and a steeply pitched front -gabled parapet roof. The central bay features: varied coloured brick construction; stepped buttresses; the front -gabled parapet roof; large, pointed arch (lancet) leaded -glass window decorated with trefoils in the tracery and embellished mullions and muntins; stepped brick pointed arch (lancet) window surround with stone drip -mold, label stops and sill; and, one -storey projecting front entrance with stairs leading to an exterior vestibule with double wood doors featuring three lower wood panels and three upper leaded - glass lites, a leaded -glass transom and a stone entrance surround with a segmental arch and two half side-lites topped with the "OLIVET EVANGELIAL CHURCH" stone sign. The left bay features: varied coloured brick; side view of steeply pitched cross -gable roof; pointed arch (lancet) window with tracery, leaded -glass, brick voussoir and stone sill; and, stone banding above the basement window. The right bay features: varied coloured brick; side view of steeply pitched cross -gable roof; round leaded -glass window with tracery and brick surround; two flatheaded rectangular leaded -glass windows with continuous brick voussoir and continuous stone sill; 1935 datestone; stone banding above the basement window; and, a flatheaded rectangular basement window. Side Elevation (North FaQade) The side elevation (north fagade) is built with varied coloured brick and features four bays with two of the bays forming the steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof. In addition, this elevation features: buttresses on either side of the north-west steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof; pointed arch (lancet) windows with tracery, leaded -glass, brick voussoirs and stone sills on all four bays (four of five windows are fully visible from the exterior); flatheaded man door with steps to grass; stone banding above the basement windows; and, flatheaded rectangular basement windows. Page 369 of 454 Side Elevation (South Fa(;ade) The side elevation (south fagade) is built with varied colour brick and features two bays that are still fully visible post additions. In addition, this elevation features: buttresses on either side of the south- west steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof; pointed arch (lancet) windows with tracery, leaded - glass, brick voussoirs and stone sills on all four bays (three of five windows are fully visible from the exterior); flatheaded window with brick voussoir and stone sill; stone banding above the basement windows; and, flatheaded rectangular basement windows. A sympathetic addition was constructed to the south-east corner of the south fagade in 2017. This addition is subordinate to the original building and distinguishes between old and new through location, roofline, door and window design and placement, and materials. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative values relate to the original and current use of the building and its association with the Olivet United Church (originally the Olivet Evangelical Church). During the 1920s, two Evangelical churches served Kitchener: Zion, the mother church, and Calvary. On April 7, 1925, a Zion committee, consisting of Mrs. Mary Kaufman, A.L. Breithaupt, H.M. Cook, and E.E. Ratz, decided to explore opportunities for a church in the East Ward of Kitchener (Hirschman, C.A., 1939). The site on Onward Avenue was selected in 1931 and the mission was officially named Olivet, meaning Mount of Olives after one of the mountains associated with Jesus' ministry around Jerusalem, in 1932. The cornerstone for the building was laid on September 1, 1935 and dedication services were held on March 8 and 19, 1936 (Hirschman, C.A., 1939). The Olivet Evangelical Church joined the United Church of Canada in 1968. The Olivet United Church congregation of about 55-70 members led by Pastor Randy Banks ceased to exist in June 2015 when their building was sold to Rockway Mennonite Church (Thompson, C., 2015). According to the Rockway Mennonite Church (2024) website, Pastor Ed Metzler spoke to 51 people when Rockway Mennonite Church held its first service at the Rockway Mennonite School on October 2, 1960. Howard Good became a part-time pastor between 1961 and 1967. The church was accepted as a congregation of the Mennonite Conference of Ontario in June 1962. John W. Snyder, a member from the congregation, was the part-time pastor/coordinator between 1967 and 1990 during this time the Rockway Mennonite Church's program was largely led by lay people within the congregation leading worship and preaching. In the mid -1970's Rockway Mennonite Church joined the Conference of Mennonites in Canada and the General Conference Mennonite Church leading to the merger of these denominations in the 1990's. The congregation met at Rockway Mennonite School between 1960 to 2005. In the fall of 2005, the congregation moved to a shared facility with Zion United Church located at 32 Weber Street West in Downtown Kitchener. Unfortunately, in 2015, the Zion congregation dissolved requiring Rockway Mennonite Church to search for a new space. In 2016, the congregation moved into the former Olivet United Church, marking the first time Rockway Mennonite Church owned its own building. At present, Rockway Mennonite Church is affiliated with the Mennonite Church Eastern Canada, the Mennonite Church Canada, and the Mennonite World Conference. Approximately 100 people attend on Sundays. Contextual Value The contextual value relates to the streetscape and linkages to the buildings surroundings. The building contributes to the continuity and character of the streetscape. The height and proportions of the building blend well with the residential streetscape, including the wide central island with mature Page 370 of 454 trees. The building is also physically and historically linked to its surroundings. At the time of construction, the building was located at the outer limits of residential development and the site was therefore selected to serve the East Ward of Kitchener. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 47 Onward Avenue resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and the Gothic Revival architectural style of the building, including: o Roof and roofline; o Varied coloured brick construction; o Front (West) Facade ■ Three bay wide symmetrical fagade with buttresses between each bay and a steeply pitched front -gabled parapet roof; ■ The central bay features: • stepped buttresses; • the front -gabled parapet roof; • large, pointed arch (lancet) leaded -glass window decorated with trefoils in the tracery and embellished mullions and muntins; • stepped brick pointed arch (lancet) window surround with stone drip -mold, label stops and sill; and, • one -storey projecting front entrance with stairs leading to an exterior vestibule with double wood doors featuring three lower wood panels and three upper leaded -glass lites, a leaded -glass transom and a stone entrance surround with a segmental arch and two half side-lites topped with the "OLIVET EVANGELIAL CHURCH" stone sign. ■ The left bay features: • side view of steeply pitched cross -gable roof; • pointed arch (lancet) window with tracery, leaded -glass, brick voussoir and stone sill; and, • stone banding above the basement window. ■ The right bay features: • side view of steeply pitched cross -gable roof; • round leaded -glass window with tracery and brick surround; • two flatheaded rectangular leaded -glass windows with continuous brick voussoir and continuous stone sill; • "1935" datestone; • stone banding above the basement window; and, • a flatheaded rectangular basement window. o Side (North) Fagade ■ Four bays with two of the bays forming the steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof; ■ In addition, this elevation features: buttresses on either side of the north-west steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof; pointed arch (lancet) windows with tracery, leaded -glass, brick voussoirs and stone sills on all four bays (four of five windows are fully visible from the exterior); flatheaded man door with steps to Page 371 of 454 grass; stone banding above the basement windows; and, flatheaded rectangular basement windows. o Side (South) Fagade ■ two bays that are still fully visible ■ buttresses on either side of the south-west steeply pitched cross -gable parapet roof; ■ pointed arch (lancet) windows with tracery, leaded -glass, brick voussoirs and stone sills on all four bays (three of five windows are fully visible from the exterior); ■ flatheaded window with brick voussoir and stone sill; ■ stone banding above the basement windows; and, ■ flatheaded rectangular basement windows. RPfPrPnr_Pc Hirschman, Carl A. (1939). 100th Anniversary 1839-1939 Zion Evangelical Church. Zion Evangelical Church: Kitchener, Ontario. Our History. (2024, July 12). Rockway Mennonite Church. https-//rockwaymc.ca/welcome-2/our- history/ Thompson, C. (2015). Keeping the faith: Local churches are reinventing themselves in the face of aging congregations, buildings. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario. Photographs Front Elevation (West Fagade) Page 372 of 454 4 b. lY } ,R _--MINIM AO' Side Elevation (South Fagade) Page 374 of 454 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 47 Onward Avenue Address: Church, 1935, Gothic Revival Description: Michelle Drake Recorder: — Date: June 5, 2024 (date of construction, architectural style, etc) Photographs Attached: El Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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. Page 375 of 454 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ 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 or 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 occured. Additional archival work may be required. 6. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑X important in defining, maintaining or Page 376 of 454 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. Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the 8. The property has interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ Yes ❑X physically, noteworthy? Completeness: functionally, visually Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ or historically linked Yes ❑ other original to its surroundings. outbuildings, notable *Additional archival work landscaping or may be required. features that 9. The property has complete the site? contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ arrangement, Yes ❑ finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Completeness: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ structure have Yes ❑ other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Page 377 of 454 Site Integrity: Does the N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X structure Yes ❑ occupy its original site? * If relocated, is it relocated on its original site, moved from another site, etc. Alterations: Does this N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑X building retain Yes ❑ most of its original materials and 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ additional Yes ❑ elements or features that should be added to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes X good Yes ❑ condition? *E.g. - Could be a good candidate Page 378 of 454 for adaptive re- use if possible and contribute towards equity- building and climate change action. Indigenous History: Could N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ this site be of ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required importance to Indigenous heritage and history? *E.g. - Site within 300m of water sources, near distinct N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ topographical ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required 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: Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ What is the Commercial ❑ Office ❑ Other X Institutional — present Office ❑ Other ❑ - Religious/Church function of the subject property? * Other may include vacant, social institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Page 379 of 454 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 Page 380 of 454 Diversity and N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Inclusion: ❑ Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required Does the subject property contribute to N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ the cultural 0 Additional Research Required ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of people? Does the subject property have intangible value to a specific community of 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 Page 380 of 454 ❑ Additional Research Required Other: General / Additional Notes TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 381 of 454 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 33 Queen Street South Tile Mural CI *. sf �4 , 66 'The Value Of Onel The Power Of Many Mural ` 88 94 98 100 ? Summary of Significance ® Design/Physical Value ❑ Historical Value ® Contextual Value Municipal Address: 33 Queen Street South Legal Description: Plan 304 Pt Lot 2 & 3 Year Built: c. 1880 Architectural Styles: Renaissance Revival Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Commerical Condition: Good Description of Cultural Heritage Resource CITY COMMERCIAL ❑Social Value ® Economic Value ❑ Environmental Value 32 K -W Oktoberfesl Official Retail Stoi Z f stPlatz 33 Queen Street South is a three storey late 19th century brick commercial building built in the Renaissance Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.1 acre parcel of land located Page 382 of 454 on the east side of Queen Street South between King Street and Charles Street in the Downtown 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 33 Queen Street South is recognized for its design/physical and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The building is a early representative example of the Renaissance Revival architectural style located within the commercial downtown core of present-day Kitchener. Built c. 1880, this building could most likely be one of the oldest buildings in the City. The building has a rectangular plan, is 3 storeys in height, and is in good condition even though the brick and some decorative elements have been painted. Front (North) Facade The ground -storey of the front fagade is being used for commercial purposes and has been significantly altered. Above the ground storey, the second and third storeys have 6 fixed windows over awnings with winged gable hoods supported by brackets at each end and sills. Above the third storey window, there are decorative alternating high and low stepped brick courses. The roof is flat, with a paneled frieze, decorative brackets, and a projecting cornice with a moulded fascia. Side (East) Facade The east elevation of the building contains five segmentally arched fixed windows over awnings and sills, with the second and third storeys having fourteen segmentally arched fixed windows over awnings with sills. Rear (South) Facade The rear fagade has also been extensively altered. There is a door and a window on the ground floor, with the second and third storeys having five segmentally arched fixed windows with awnings and sills. Side (West) Facade There are no notable features on this fagade as it is adjoined to the neighboring building. Contextual Value 33 Queen Street South has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. The building exists in its original location within the downtown core. The property also has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of the area. The building contributes to the visual and architectural continuity of the streetscape, and forms part of the historic Downtown. The building is located on Queen Street South, which served as an important historic transportation route and continues to serve as an important transportation route into the Downtown. Page 383 of 454 Other Values Economic Value Even though no notable businesses have operated out of this building, this building does contribute to the economic development of Berlin and Kitchener. Located on the main economic intersection of Berlin, where the first buildings of present-day downtown core were built, this building contributes to how Kitchener has developed over time. Heritage Attributes The heritage attributes of 33 Queen Street South resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Renaissance Revival architectural style (excluding the ground storey) of the building including: o Location, orientation and massing of the building; o Rectangular Plan- o Flat roof and roofline; o Brick construction; o Window openings on the front facade, and the segmentally arched window openings on the east and south elevations and sills; o Alternating high and low stepped brick courses; o Panelled frieze; and o Bracketed projecting cornice with a moulded fascia. o Winged gabled hoods with decorative brackets on each end; All elements related to the contextual value of the building, including: o Its original location on Queen Street South and its contribution to the Queen Street South commercial streetscape. Page 384 of 454 A07- print imPrint GU 1 e (�uecn 54rect Common' Cafe ➢�P11Se 1 Cape 3 Or 133 Queen Street South — East (side) elevation Page 386 of 454 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM Page 387 of 454 33 Queen Street South Address: Commerical Description: Photographs Attached: OFront Facade Deeksha Choudhry Recorder: June 15, 2024 Date: ❑ Left Fagade 0 Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade 0 Details ❑ Setting Designation Criteria Recorder —Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff Committee 1. This property has design value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Page 388 of 454 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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 associative value Yes ❑ 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 value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ Yes 0 important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area. Page 389 of 454 * E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a neighbourhood or helps establish the (historic) rural character of an area. Recorder Heritage Kitchener 8. The property has Committee Interior: Is the interior contextual value N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ Yes 0 physically, ❑ noteworthy? functionally, visually Completeness: Does this or historically linked structure have other original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 to its surroundings. ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ outbuildings, notable Yes ❑ *Additional archival work 0 landscaping or external may be required. features that complete the 9. The property has site? contextual value N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ site? Yes ❑ *within the region, city or 0 neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ craftsmanship and/or detail Yes ❑ Yes ❑ noteworthy? Completeness: Does this structure have other original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ outbuildings, notable Yes ❑ Yes 0 landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ site? Yes ❑ Yes 0 Page 390 of 454 * 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ materials and design features? Yes ❑ Yes 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 features that should be added Yes ❑ Yes ❑ to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes 0 *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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Y N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and es ❑ 0 Additional Research Required 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. Could there be any urban N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous history associated 0 Additional Research Required with the property? N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Y * Additional archival work may be es ❑ required. ❑ Additional Research Required Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Com function of the subject Commercial ❑ mercial ❑ property? Office ❑ Other ❑ Church Office ❑ Other 0 - Industrial * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Page 391 of 454 Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Y N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ the subject property es ❑ contribute to the cultural ❑ Additional Research ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of Required people? Does the subject property N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ have intangible value to a N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Y specific community of people? es ❑ ❑Additional Research Required * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim ❑ Additional Research Society of Waterloo & Wellington Required 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 0 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 392 of 454 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification: Page 393 of 454 Page 394 of 454 \ 7 \ Q CITY COMMERCIAL CORE R3 85 \: 35 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 44-54 Queen Street South 98 100 / 11104' Summary of Significance ® Design/Physical Value ❑ Historical Value ® Contextual Value O ,� -• /' 33 Tile Mural �♦ P � / ^4 43 / 4 \ 66 i 53' f, ` --55 Of One`.The Power Of Many Mural 30� 88 ❑Social Value ® Economic Value ❑ Environmental Value Municipal Address: 44-54 Queen Street South Legal Description: Plan 391 PT LOT 5 & 6 Year Built: c. 1900-1907 Architectural Styles: Classical Revival Original Owner: Unknown Original Use: Commercial Condition: Good / 19 29 <s <q�F� Charles & F Benton Garage �\ [24 53 55 21 28 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 44-54 Queen Street South is a 3 -storey circa 1900-1907 brick commercial building built in the Classical Revival architectural style. The building is situated on a 0.19 acre parcel of land located on the west side Page 395 of 454 of Queen Street South between King Street and Charles Street in the Commercial Core Area 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 44-54 Queen Street South is recognized for its design/physical and contextual values. Design/Physical Value The building is a early representative example of the Classic Revival architectural style located within the commercial downtown core of present-day Kitchener. Built c. 1900- 1907, this building could most likely be one of the oldest buildings in the City. The building has a rectangular plan, a flat roof, is 3 storeys in height, and is in good condition. Front (South) Facade The ground -storey of the front facade is being used for commercial purposes and has been significantly altered. Above the ground storey, the second and third storey can be divided into three bays with four brick pilasters with stone capitals. Each bay includes four 2/2 awnings with fixed rectangular window pattern, two on each floor, with decorative stone label moulds and sills. Above the third storey windows and stone capitals are decorative alternative stepped brick courses. The building has a flat roof with a decorative brick pilasters and intricate brick blind arcade above the cornice. Side (East) Facade The east facade is a blank fagade and does not contain any windows. Rear (North) Facade The rear fagade has been extensively altered. The main storey of the building has been parged with cement with altered door openings. The second and third storey contain six awnings over fixed windows on each storey with concrete headers. Side (West) Facade There are no notable features on the west fagade as it is adjoined to the neighboring building. Contextual Value 44-54 Queen Street South has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. The building exists in its original location within the downtown core. The property also has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of the area. The building contributes to the visual and architectural continuity of the streetscape, and forms part of the historic Downtown. The building is located on Queen Street South, which served as an important historic transportation route and continues to serve as an important transportation route into the Downtown. Other Values Page 396 of 454 Economic Value Even though no notable businesses have operated out of this building, this building does contribute to the economic development of Berlin and Kitchener. Located on the main economic intersection of Berlin, where the first buildings of present-day downtown core were built, this building contributes to how Kitchener has developed over time. Heritage Attributes The heritage attributes of 44-54 Queen Street South resides in the following heritage attributes: ■ All elements related to the construction and Classical Revival architectural style (excluding the ground storey) of the building including: o Location, orientation and massing of the building; o Rectangular Plan; o Flat roof and roofline; o Brick construction with stone accents; o Window openings on the front fagade with stone label moulds and sills, and window openings on the rear facade, o Brick pilasters with stone capitals; o Alternating stepped brick courses; o Projecting cornice; and o Brick pilasters and intricate brick blind arcade above the cornice. ■ All elements related to the contextual value of the building, including: o Its original location on Queen Street South and its contribution to the Queen Street South commercial streetscape. Page 397 of 454 Photos F 1 44-54 Queen Street South — Front Facade Page 398 of 454 Page 399 of 454 0—� som"m L i lk CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 44-54 Queen Street South Address: Commerical Description: Photographs Attached: OFront Facade Deeksha Choudhry Recorder: June 15, 2024 Date: ❑ Left Fagade 0 Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade 0 Details ❑ Setting Designation Criteria Recorder— Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff Committee 1. This property has design value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ physical value Yes ❑ Yes 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 physical value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Page 401 of 454 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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 associative value Yes ❑ 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 value or N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, Page 402 of 454 designer or theorist Recorder Heritage Kitchener who is significant to a Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, community. * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ Yes 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is Yes ❑ Yes 0 physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. *Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Page 403 of 454 craftsmanship and/or detail Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ noteworthy? Yes ❑ Completeness: Does this structure have other original N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ outbuildings, notable Yes ❑ Yes 0 landscaping or external features that complete the site? Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ site? Yes ❑ Yes 0 * 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ materials and design features? Yes ❑ Yes 0 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 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 features that should be added Yes ❑ Yes ❑ to the heritage attribute list? Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes 0 *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 N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Y N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and es ❑ 0 Additional Research Required 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. Could there be any urban N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous history associated 0 Additional Research Required with the property? Page 404 of 454 * Additional archival work may be required. N/A 0 Unknown ❑ No ❑ Y es ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Com function of the subject Commercial ❑ mercial ❑ property? Office ❑ Other ❑ Church Office ❑ Other 0 - Industrial * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Y N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ the subject property es ❑ contribute to the cultural ❑ Additional Research ❑ Additional Research Required heritage of a community of Required people? Does the subject property N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No 0 Yes ❑ have intangible value to a N/A ❑ Unknown 0 No ❑ Y specific community of people? es ❑ ❑Additional Research Required * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim ❑ Additional Research Society of Waterloo & Wellington Required 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 0 If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up ❑ Keep on the Municipal Heritage Register Page 405 of 454 ❑ 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 406 of 454 Page 407 of 454 1:3:3 V 20 ,yy 2'2 Vpu �1 2� STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value 148 MARGARET AVENUE 1 �;1�3141� �316 s 0 Sia; ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value rr_ 3 �h r� 'P Municipal Address: 148 Margaret Avenue Legal Description: Plan 376 Part Lot 451 and 454 Year Built: 1947 (original); 1955 (garage conversion); 1969 (addition); 1974 (turret over entrance and bay window) Architectural Styles: Tudor Revival Original Owner: George Kreutner Original Use: Residential Condition: Excellent Page 408 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 148 Margaret Avenue is a two storey mid -20th century house built in the Tudor Revival architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.30 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Margaret Avenue between Louisa Street and Adam Street in the Mt. Hope Huron Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the house. Heritage Value 148 Margaret Avenue is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design value relates to the architecture of the dwelling. It is a unique and rare example of the Turdor Revival architectural style, being only one of five houses built in this style within the Region of Waterloo. The dwelling is in excellent condition and features; irregular plan; hipped roof with front gable; central tower with conical roof; stained glass windows; half-timber detailing; stone and brick cladding; bay window; rectangular windows; wood door with glazing and transom; wood garage door with wood man door; and, concrete foundation. Modifications Modifications to the building since its original construction include the introduction of a new turret entrance and bay window on the ground floor, as well as a metal roof. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative value of the building relates to the original owner and builder, Michael Kraus. He was a prominent member of the New Apostolic Church, first joining in 1932 and then being ordained into the ministry one year later. In 1955 he was ordained as an apostle and three years later, in 1958, was appointed District Apostle for Canada. His impact on the global growth of the New Apostolic Church was so significant that, at his funeral, Chief Apostle Richard Fehr compared it to the missionary work of Paul the Apostle of biblical times. In addition to his minister work, Michael Kraus was an entrepreneur. He founded Kraus Carpet Mills in 1959, and Strudex Fibres in 1971. At the time of his death in 2003, Kraus Carpet Mills was the largest Canadian -owned carpet manufacture. According to his obituary "his tireless work and inspiring leadership had an enduring impact on the business and church communities that he served with distinction" (Floor Daily, 2014). Michael Kraus also contributed directly to the development of the built environment along Margaret Avenue, having financed and built several buildings along the street including the New Apostolic Church at 160 Margaret, a single -detached residential dwelling constructed in the turdor revival style at 148 Margaret Avenue, and three apartment buildings constructed in the vernacular architectural style located at 100-112 Margaret Avenue. Contextual Value Page 409 of 454 The contextual values relate to the contribution that the residency makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape and the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property is located within the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape, a stable residential neighbourhood which contains all amenities or services an integrated community might require. It is characterized by features such as roads set at angles or parallel to the Grand Trunk Rail Line, gentle topography, an inventory of mature trees, and small to medium sized residential dwellings that demonstrate a variety of different detailing but are consistent in their scale and spacing, yielding an overall cohesive and complimentary composition. The setbacks, scale, orientation, and materials used for 148 Margaret Avenue is consistent with that seen in adjacent or surrounding residential properties, and the presence of mature trees in both the side and front yard further contribute to maintaining the character of the streetscape. The building is also physically, visually, historically, and functionally linked to its surroundings as it remains in-situ and maintains its original residential use. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 148 Margaret Avenue resides in the following attributes: ■ All elements related to the Tudor Revival architectural style of the house, including: o irregular plan; o hipped roof with front gable; o central tower with conical roof; o windows and window openings, including: ■ stained glass windows; ■ bay window; ■ rectangular windows; o half-timber detailing; o stone and brick cladding; o wood door with glazing and transom; o wood garage door with wood man door; and, o concrete foundation. All elements related to the contextual value, including: o Location of the house and contribution that it makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape; and o Orientation towards Margaret Avenue. Page 410 of 454 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 100, 104-106, 112 Margaret Ave Address: Apartments (100-106 twins, 112 very similar slight mod) Description: Photographs Attached: Jessica Vieira .der: July 17, 2024 ❑X Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑X Setting 1. This property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it is a Yes Nx Yes ❑ rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. *e.g., constructed with a unique material Page 413 of 454 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 ❑ Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it yields, Yes ❑ Yes ❑ or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ® Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is Page 414 of 454 significant to a Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior community. arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is important Yes ® Yes ❑ 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 physically, Yes ® Yes ❑ functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? Yes ❑ Page 415 of 454 Page 416 of 454 Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑X * 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 ❑ 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 ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *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 ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and history? ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required El 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. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 71 * Additional archival work may be ❑ Additional Research Required required. Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential © Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercia function of the subject property? Commercial ❑ 1 ❑ Office El Other El Office El Other El- *Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the subject property contribute to ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required the cultural heritage of a ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? Page 416 of 454 Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ intangible value to a specific N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? ❑ E] Additional Research Required * 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 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification Notes Page 417 of 454 Page 418 of 454 1:3:3 V 20 ,yy 2'2 Vpu �1 2� STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 100 MARGARET AVE N U E 1 �;1�3141� �316 s 0 Sia; rr_ Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 100 Margaret Avenue Legal Description: Plan 34 Part Lot 2 Year Built: 1939 (original); 1940 (addition) Architectural Styles: Vernacular with Gothic and Art Deco influences Original Owner: Michael Kraus Original Use: Residential (multiple dwelling) Condition: Good 3 �h r� 'P Page 419 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 100 Margaret Avenue is a three storey mid -20th century brick apartment constructed in the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences. It is one of three apartment buildings located adjacently and designed in this style, though each is located on its own independent lot. 100 Margaret Avenue is situated on a 0.15 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Margaret Avenue between Breitahupt Street and Wellington Street in the Mt. Hope Huron Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the apartment building. Heritage Value 100 Margaret Avenue is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design value relates to the architecture of the apartment building. The building is a unique example of the vernacular architectural style with influence from both the gothic and art deco architectural styles and is in good condition. It features: hipped roof; angled corners; symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; red -yellow brick; two storey glass blocks at center with concrete sill; glass blocks on angled corners with concrete sills; 1/1 rectangular windows with concrete sills; Gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing and concrete quoin surround; and, parged concrete foundation. The apartment buildings located at 100 Margaret Avenue, 104-106 Margaret Avenue, and 112 Margaret Avenue share a design. However, while 100 Margaret Avenue and 104-106 Margaret Avenue are twin buildings, there are minor differences with the features and appearance of 112 Margaret Avenue. Front Fagade The front fagade of the building is symmetrical in its design and massing. It can be divided into three sections; the northern -most and southern -most sections are recessed back from the central section and are larger in width. The two side sections contain angled corners with three glass block windows and three single hung windows. The projecting central section contains the front entrance with gothic shaped double wood doors, concrete quoin surround, a long glass bock window that spans the full vertical length of the second storey and into the third storey, a double casement window, and a high and sharply angled gable. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative value of the building relates to the original owner and builder, Michael Kraus. He was a prominent member of the New Apostolic Church, first joining in 1932 and then being ordained into the ministry one year later. In 1955 he was ordained as an apostle and three years later, in 1958, was appointed District Apostle for Canada. His impact on the global growth of the New Apostolic Church was so significant that, at his funeral, Chief Apostle Richard Fehr compared it to the missionary work of Paul the Apostle of biblical times. In addition to his minister work, Michael Kraus was an entrepreneur. He founded Kraus Carpet Mills in 1959, and Strudex Fibres in 1971. At the time Page 420 of 454 of his death in 2003, Kraus Carpet Mills was the largest Canadian -owned carpet manufacture. According to his obituary "his tireless work and inspiring leadership had an enduring impact on the business and church communities that he served with distinction" (Floor Daily, 2014). Michael Kraus also contributed directly to the development of the built environment along Margaret Avenue, having financed and built several buildings along the street including the New Apostolic Church at 160 Margaret, a single -detached residential dwelling constructed in the turdor revival style at 148 Margaret Avenue, and three apartment buildings constructed in the vernacular architectural style located at 100-112 Margaret Avenue. The historic and associative value of the building also lays with its architect, William Herbert Eugene Schmalz. A native of Berlin (now Kitchener) and the son of former Mayor W.H. Schmalz, W.H.E. Schmalz had an active career within the area which spanned from 1914 until after 1960. Notable works he completed include the 1922 Kitchener City Hall (in conjunction with B.A. Jones through their firm Schmalz & Jones, dissolved in 1926), the fourth office of the Economical Mutual Fire Insurance Company at 16-20 Queen Street North (in conjunction with Charles Knechtel), the War Memorial Cenotaph, alterations to the Waterloo County Gaol, and several churches which remain at the time of this report in 2024. Through his work Schmalz contributed to the existing appearance of Kitchener's built landscape. In addition to his prolific architectural career, W.H.E.Schmalz was an engaged citizen who served with distinction on the board of many local community groups and held much interest in the City's history and development. He was President of the Ontario Pioneer Community Foundation from 1956-57 and aided in the planning, development, and operation of Doon Pioneer Village. He also acted as president of the Waterloo Historical Society, and further was a frequent contributor to its annual volumes. It has been noted that much of the strength and success of the Waterloo Historical Society can be attributed to the determination and enthusiasm of its founding members, including W.H. Breithaupt Peter Fisher, Mabel Dunham, and W.H.E. Schmalz. He also held office in, or was a long-time member of, the Chamber of Commerce, the Kitchener Parks Board, the K -W Hospital Board, the Kiwanis Club, the Kitchener Musical Society, the Kitchener Young Men's Club, the Kitchener Racing Canoe Club and the Lutheran Church. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the apartment building makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape and the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property is located within the Warehouse District Cultural Heritage Landscape, a geographical area which encompasses a number of remaining historical industrial factories. In relation to this are the residential neighbourhoods which immediately surround the historic factories, which are comprised of mostly -brick homes in which the workers lived. The property is also adjacent to the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape, which contains an approximately 630 metre length of Margaret Avenue. The Mt Hope/Breithaupt area is a stable residential neighbourhood which contains all amenities or services an integrated community might require. It is characterized by features such as roads set at angles or parallel to the Grand Trunk Rail Line, gentle topography, an inventory of mature trees, and small to medium sized residential dwellings that demonstrate a variety of different detailing but are consistent in their scale and spacing, yielding an overall cohesive and complimentary composition. The setbacks, scale, orientation, materials used, and design of 100 Margaret Avenue is consistent with that seen in adjacent or surrounding residential properties, and the presence of mature trees in the front yard further contribute to maintaining the character of the streetscape. Page 421 of 454 The building is also physically, visually, historically, and functionally linked to its surroundings as it remains in-situ and maintains its original residential use. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 100 Margaret Avenue resides in the following attributes: ■ All elements related to the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences, including: o Scale and massing of the building; o hipped roof; o angled wall corners of the front fagade; o symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; o red -yellow-brown brick construction; o windows and window openings, including: ■ glass blocks at center with concrete sill; ■ glass blocks on angled wall corners with concrete sills; o concrete sills; o front door opening and front Gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing; o concrete quoin surround around entrance; and, o parged concrete foundation. ■ All elements related to the contextual value, including: o Location of the house and contribution that it makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape; o Orientation towards Margaret Street o Relationship to the neighbouring 104-106 Margaret Avenue and 112 Margaret Avenue as being of similar construction date and style Page 422 of 454 r 0 Page 423 of 454 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 100, 104-106, 112 Margaret Ave Address: Apartments (100-106 twins, 112 very similar slight mod) Description: Photographs Attached: Jessica Vieira :der: July 17, 2024 ❑X Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑X Setting 1. This property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it is a Yes Nx Yes ❑ rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. *e.g., constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates challenging geometric designs etc. Page 425 of 454 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. * Additional archival work may be required. N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® Yes ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ 5. The property has historical or associative N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it yields, Yes ❑ Yes ❑ or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ 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. Page 426 of 454 7. The property has Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is important Yes ® Yes ❑ in defining, maintaining N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external Yes ❑ or supporting the features that complete the site? 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 physically, Yes ® Yes ❑ functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? Yes ❑ Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ notable landscaping or external Yes ❑ features that complete the site? Page 427 of 454 Site Integrity: Does the structure occupy its original site? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X * 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 ❑ 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 ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *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 ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and history? ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required El 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. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 71 * Additional archival work may be ❑ Additional Research Required required. Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential © Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercia function of the subject property? Commercial ❑ 1 ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ - * Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the subject property contribute to ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required the cultural heritage of a ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ intangible value to a specific N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? 71 Page 428 of 454 * E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim ❑ Additional Research Required Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the f rst 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 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification Notes Page 429 of 454 s5 1:3:3 V 20 ,yy 2'2 Vpu �1 2� STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 104-106 MARGARET AVENUE 1 �;1�3141� �316 s 0 Sia; rr_ Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 104-106 Margaret Avenue Legal Description: Plan 34 Part Lot 2 and 3 Year Built: 1939 (original); 1941 (addition) Architectural Styles: Vernacular with Gothic and Art Deco influences Original Owner: Michael Kraus Original Use: Residential (multiple dwelling) Condition: Good 3 �h r� 'P Page 430 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 104-106 Margaret Avenue is a three storey mid -20th century brick apartment constructed in the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences. It is one of three apartment buildings located adjacently and designed in this style, though each is located on its own independent lot. 104-106 Margaret Avenue is situated on a 0.15 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Margaret Avenue between Breitahupt Street and Wellington Street in the Mt. Hope Huron Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the apartment building. Heritage Value 104-106 Margaret Avenue is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design value relates to the architecture of the apartment building. The building is a unique example of the vernacular architectural style with influence from both the gothic and art deco architectural styles and is in good condition. It features: hipped roof; angled corners; symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; red -yellow brick; two storey glass blocks at center with concrete sill; glass blocks on angled corners with concrete sills; 1/1 rectangular windows with concrete sills; Gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing and concrete quoin surround; and, parged concrete foundation. The apartment buildings located at 100 Margaret Avenue, 104-106 Margaret Avenue, and 112 Margaret Avenue share a design. However, while 100 Margaret Avenue and 104-106 Margaret Avenue are twin buildings, there are minor differences with the features and appearance of 112 Margaret Avenue. Front Fagade The front fagade of the building is symmetrical in its design and massing. It can be divided into three sections; the northern -most and southern -most sections are recessed back from the central section and are larger in width. The two side sections contain angled corners with three glass block windows and three single hung windows. The projecting central section contains the front entrance with gothic shaped double wood doors, concrete quoin surround, a long glass bock window that spans the full vertical length of the second storey and into the third storey, a double casement window, and a high and sharply angled gable. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative value of the building relates to the original owner and builder, Michael Kraus. He was a prominent member of the New Apostolic Church, first joining in 1932 and then being ordained into the ministry one year later. In 1955 he was ordained as an apostle and three years later, in 1958, was appointed District Apostle for Canada. His impact on the global growth of the New Apostolic Church was so significant that, at his funeral, Chief Apostle Richard Fehr compared it to the missionary work of Paul the Apostle of biblical times. In addition to his minister work, Michael Kraus Page 431 of 454 was an entrepreneur. He founded Kraus Carpet Mills in 1959, and Strudex Fibres in 1971. At the time of his death in 2003, Kraus Carpet Mills was the largest Canadian -owned carpet manufacture. According to his obituary "his tireless work and inspiring leadership had an enduring impact on the business and church communities that he served with distinction" (Floor Daily, 2014). Michael Kraus also contributed directly to the development of the built environment along Margaret Avenue, having financed and built several buildings along the street including the New Apostolic Church at 160 Margaret, a single -detached residential dwelling constructed in the turdor revival style at 148 Margaret Avenue, and three apartment buildings constructed in the vernacular architectural style located at 100-112 Margaret Avenue. The historic and associative value of the building also lays with its architect, William Herbert Eugene Schmalz. A native of Berlin (now Kitchener) and the son of former Mayor W.H. Schmalz, W.H.E. Schmalz had an active career within the area which spanned from 1914 until after 1960. Notable works he completed include the 1922 Kitchener City Hall (in conjunction with B.A. Jones through their firm Schmalz & Jones, dissolved in 1926), the fourth office of the Economical Mutual Fire Insurance Company at 16-20 Queen Street North (in conjunction with Charles Knechtel), the War Memorial Cenotaph, alterations to the Waterloo County Gaol, and several churches which remain at the time of this report in 2024. Through his work Schmalz contributed to the existing appearance of Kitchener's built landscape. In addition to his prolific architectural career, W.H.E.Schmalz was an engaged citizen who served with distinction on the board of many local community groups and held much interest in the City's history and development. He was President of the Ontario Pioneer Community Foundation from 1956-57 and aided in the planning, development, and operation of Doon Pioneer Village. He also acted as president of the Waterloo Historical Society, and further was a frequent contributor to its annual volumes. It has been noted that much of the strength and success of the Waterloo Historical Society can be attributed to the determination and enthusiasm of its founding members, including W.H. Breithaupt Peter Fisher, Mabel Dunham, and W.H.E. Schmalz. He also held office in, or was a long-time member of, the Chamber of Commerce, the Kitchener Parks Board, the K -W Hospital Board, the Kiwanis Club, the Kitchener Musical Society, the Kitchener Young Men's Club, the Kitchener Racing Canoe Club and the Lutheran Church. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the apartment building makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape and the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property is located within the Warehouse District Cultural Heritage Landscape, a geographical area which encompasses a number of remaining historical industrial factories. In relation to this are the residential neighbourhoods which immediately surround the historic factories, which are comprised of mostly -brick homes in which the workers lived. The property is also adjacent to the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape, which contains an approximately 630 metre length of Margaret Avenue. The Mt Hope/Breithaupt area is a stable residential neighbourhood which contains all amenities or services an integrated community might require. It is characterized by features such as roads set at angles or parallel to the Grand Trunk Rail Line, gentle topography, an inventory of mature trees, and small to medium sized residential dwellings that demonstrate a variety of different detailing but are consistent in their scale and spacing, yielding an overall cohesive and complimentary composition. The setbacks, scale, orientation, materials used, and design of 104-106 Margaret Avenue is consistent with that seen in Page 432 of 454 adjacent or surrounding residential properties, and the presence of mature trees in the front yard further contribute to maintaining the character of the streetscape. The building is also physically, visually, historically, and functionally linked to its surroundings as it remains in-situ and maintains its original residential use. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 104-106 Margaret Avenue resides in the following attributes: ■ All elements related to the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences, including: o Scale and massing of the building; o hipped roof; o angled wall corners of the front fagade; o symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; o red -yellow-brown brick construction; o windows and window openings, including: ■ glass blocks at center with concrete sill; ■ glass blocks on angled wall corners with concrete sills; o concrete sills; o front door opening and front Gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing; o concrete quoin surround around entrance; and, o parged concrete foundation. ■ All elements related to the contextual value, including: o Location of the house and contribution that it makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape; o Orientation towards Margaret Street o Relationship to the neighbouring 100 Margaret Avenue and 112 Margaret Avenue as being of similar construction date and style Page 433 of 454 Photographs yy4' Page 434 of 454 u 5 V 44 iA- } �~ ■ 1J - g u 5 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 100, 104-106, 112 Margaret Ave Address: Apartments (100-106 twins, 112 very similar slight mod) Description: Photographs Attached: Jessica Vieira :der: July 17, 2024 ❑X Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑X Setting 1. This property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it is a Yes Nx Yes ❑ rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. *e.g., constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates Page 436 of 454 challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it yields, Yes ❑ Yes ❑ or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ® Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is Page 437 of 454 significant to a Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior community. arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is important Yes ® Yes ❑ 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 physically, Yes ® Yes ❑ functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? Yes ❑ Page 438 of 454 Page 439 of 454 Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑X * 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 ❑ 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 ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *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 ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and history? ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required El 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. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 71 * Additional archival work may be ❑ Additional Research Required required. Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential © Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercia function of the subject property? Commercial ❑ 1 ❑ Office El Other El Office El Other El- *Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the subject property contribute to ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required the cultural heritage of a ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? Page 439 of 454 Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ intangible value to a specific N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? ❑ E] Additional Research Required * 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 TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF: Date of Property Owner Notification Notes Page 440 of 454 Page 441 of 454 1:3:3 V 20 ,yy zis 2'2 Vpu �1 2� STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 112 MARGARET AVENUE 1 �;1�3141� �316 s 0 Sia; rr_ Summary of Significance ®Design/Physical Value ®Historical Value ®Contextual Value ❑Social Value ❑Economic Value ❑Environmental Value Municipal Address: 104-106 Margaret Avenue Legal Description: Plan 34 Part Lot 3 and 4 Year Built: 1941 (original) Architectural Styles: Vernacular with Gothic and Art Deco influences Original Owner: Michael Kraus Original Use: Residential (multiple dwelling) Condition: Good 3 �h r� 'P Page 442 of 454 Description of Cultural Heritage Resource 112 Margaret Avenue is a three storey mid -20th century brick apartment constructed in the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences. It is one of three apartment buildings located adjacently and designed in this style, though each is located on its own independent lot. 112 Margaret Avenue is situated on a 0.14 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Margaret Avenue between Breitahupt Street and Wellington Street in the Mt. Hope Huron Park Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the apartment building. Heritage Value 112 Margaret Avenue is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values. Desipn/Physical Value The design value relates to the architecture of the apartment building. The building is a unique example of the vernacular architectural style with influence from both the gothic and art deco architectural styles and is in good condition. It features: hipped roof; symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; red -yellow-brown brick; double window with one fixed pane and one single hung; stone sill and decorative stone accents surrounding window openings; gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing and rusticated stone quoin surround; and, rusticated stone foundation. The apartment buildings located at 100 Margaret Avenue, 104-106 Margaret Avenue, and 112 Margaret Avenue share a design. However, while 100 Margaret Avenue and 104-106 Margaret Avenue are twin buildings, there are minor differences with the features and appearance of 112 Margaret Avenue. Front Fagade The front fagade of the building is symmetrical in its design and massing. It can be divided into three sections; the northern -most and southern -most sections are recessed back from the central section and are larger in width. All sections contain three double windows with one fixed paned and one single hung. The windows have decorative stone accents and rusticated stone sills. The projecting central section contains the front entrance with gothic shaped double wood doors and rusticated stone quoin surround. There is rusticated stone foundation on each side. Historical/Associative Value The historic and associative value of the building relates to the original owner and builder, Michael Kraus. He was a prominent member of the New Apostolic Church, first joining in 1932 and then being ordained into the ministry one year later. In 1955 he was ordained as an apostle and three years later, in 1958, was appointed District Apostle for Canada. His impact on the global growth of the New Apostolic Church was so significant that, at his funeral, Chief Apostle Richard Fehr compared it to the missionary work of Paul the Apostle of biblical times. In addition to his minister work, Michael Kraus was an entrepreneur. He founded Kraus Carpet Mills in 1959, and Strudex Fibres in 1971. At the time of his death in 2003, Kraus Carpet Mills was the largest Canadian -owned carpet manufacture. Page 443 of 454 According to his obituary "his tireless work and inspiring leadership had an enduring impact on the business and church communities that he served with distinction" (Floor Daily, 2014). Michael Kraus also contributed directly to the development of the built environment along Margaret Avenue, having financed and built several buildings along the street including the New Apostolic Church at 160 Margaret, a single -detached residential dwelling constructed in the turdor revival style at 148 Margaret Avenue, and three apartment buildings constructed in the vernacular architectural style located at 100-112 Margaret Avenue. The historic and associative value of the building also lays with its architect, William Herbert Eugene Schmalz. A native of Berlin (now Kitchener) and the son of former Mayor W.H. Schmalz, W.H.E. Schmalz had an active career within the area which spanned from 1914 until after 1960. Notable works he completed include the 1922 Kitchener City Hall (in conjunction with B.A. Jones through their firm Schmalz & Jones, dissolved in 1926), the fourth office of the Economical Mutual Fire Insurance Company at 16-20 Queen Street North (in conjunction with Charles Knechtel), the War Memorial Cenotaph, alterations to the Waterloo County Gaol, and several churches which remain at the time of this report in 2024. Through his work Schmalz contributed to the existing appearance of Kitchener's built landscape. In addition to his prolific architectural career, W.H.E.Schmalz was an engaged citizen who served with distinction on the board of many local community groups and held much interest in the City's history and development. He was President of the Ontario Pioneer Community Foundation from 1956-57 and aided in the planning, development, and operation of Doon Pioneer Village. He also acted as president of the Waterloo Historical Society, and further was a frequent contributor to its annual volumes. It has been noted that much of the strength and success of the Waterloo Historical Society can be attributed to the determination and enthusiasm of its founding members, including W.H. Breithaupt Peter Fisher, Mabel Dunham, and W.H.E. Schmalz. He also held office in, or was a long-time member of, the Chamber of Commerce, the Kitchener Parks Board, the K -W Hospital Board, the Kiwanis Club, the Kitchener Musical Society, the Kitchener Young Men's Club, the Kitchener Racing Canoe Club and the Lutheran Church. Contextual Value The contextual values relate to the contribution that the apartment building makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape and the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The property is located within the Warehouse District Cultural Heritage Landscape, a geographical area which encompasses a number of remaining historical industrial factories. In relation to this are the residential neighbourhoods which immediately surround the historic factories, which are comprised of mostly -brick homes in which the workers lived. The property is also adjacent to the Mt Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape, which contains an approximately 630 metre length of Margaret Avenue. The Mt Hope/Breithaupt area is a stable residential neighbourhood which contains all amenities or services an integrated community might require. It is characterized by features such as roads set at angles or parallel to the Grand Trunk Rail Line, gentle topography, an inventory of mature trees, and small to medium sized residential dwellings that demonstrate a variety of different detailing but are consistent in their scale and spacing, yielding an overall cohesive and complimentary composition. The setbacks, scale, orientation, materials used, and design of 104-106 Margaret Avenue is consistent with that seen in adjacent or surrounding residential properties, and the presence of mature trees in the front yard further contribute to maintaining the character of the streetscape. Page 444 of 454 The building is also physically, visually, historically, and functionally linked to its surroundings as it remains in-situ and maintains its original residential use. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 112 Margaret Avenue resides in the following attributes: ■ All elements related to the Vernacular architectural style with Gothic and Art Deco influences, including: o Scale and massing of the building; o hipped roof; o angled wall corners of the front fagade; o symmetrical full height central projecting gable bay at entrance; o red -yellow-brown brick construction; o window openings; o stone sill and decorative stone accents surrounding window openings o front door opening and front Gothic shaped double wood doors with glazing; o rusticated stone quoin surround; and o rusticated stone foundation. ■ All elements related to the contextual value, including: o Location of the house and contribution that it makes to the continuity and character of the Margaret Avenue streetscape; o Orientation towards Margaret Street o Relationship to the neighbouring 100 Margaret Avenue and 104-106 Margaret Avenue as being of similar construction date and style Page 445 of 454 a ZI, .1 UA- CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM 100, 104-106, 112 Margaret Ave Address: Apartments (100-106 twins, 112 very similar slight mod) Description: Photographs Attached: Jessica Vieira :der: July 17, 2024 ❑X Front Facade ❑ Left Fagade ❑ Right Fagade ❑ Rear Facade ❑ Details ❑X Setting 1. This property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it is a Yes Nx Yes ❑ rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method. 2. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. 3. The property has design value or physical N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it Yes ❑ Yes ❑ demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. *e.g., constructed with a unique material combination or use, incorporates Page 448 of 454 challenging geometric designs etc. 4. The property has historical value or N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ❑ Yes ❑ 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ value because it yields, Yes ❑ Yes ❑ or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture. * E.g - 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 N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ associative value Yes ® Yes ❑ because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is Page 449 of 454 significant to a Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior community. arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? * Additional archival work may be required. 7. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is important Yes ® Yes ❑ 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 physically, Yes ® Yes ❑ functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * Additional archival work may be required. 9. The property has contextual value N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ® N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ because it is a Yes ❑ Yes ❑ landmark. *within the region, city or neighborhood. Notes Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee Interior: Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship N/A ❑X Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ and/or detail noteworthy? Yes ❑ Page 450 of 454 Page 451 of 454 Completeness: Does this structure have other original outbuildings, N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ 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 ❑ Yes ❑X * 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 ❑ 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 ❑X N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ added to the heritage attribute list? Yes ❑ Condition: Is the building in good condition? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑X *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 ❑X No ❑ Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ Indigenous heritage and history? ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required El 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. Could there be any urban Indigenous history associated with N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the property? N/A ❑ Unknown ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑ Additional Research Required 71 * Additional archival work may be ❑ Additional Research Required required. Function: What is the present Unknown ❑ Residential © Unknown ❑ Residential ❑ Commercia function of the subject property? Commercial ❑ 1 ❑ Office El Other El Office El Other El- *Other may include vacant, social, institutional, etc. and important for the community from an equity building perspective. Diversity and Inclusion: Does N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ the subject property contribute to ❑ ❑ Additional Research Required the cultural heritage of a ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? Page 451 of 454 Does the subject property have N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ intangible value to a specific N/A ❑ Unknown ❑ No ❑X Yes ❑ Additional Research Required community of people? ❑ E] Additional Research Required * E.g.-Waterloo Masjid (Muslim Society of Waterloo & Wellington Counties) was the first established Islamic Center and Masiid 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 0 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 Notes Page 452 of 454 Page 453 of 454 LO 4- 0 LO N LL Q) Yo c o w o U? a c Lr) m Z U O O_ L_ c ° L r o 3 o 06 `O o c 1. '5 � o 00 I �' T (E Oa3 i 'S O C 3 O .o . N m N 0 o r 0 O E cl N o L 0 °�1 m W 0 a) o❑ c L A c o ❑ o o E m LL cug w aE o cu -0 o ° `u a O LL E — a c m D) c o o o� L C N O o O E X W cl A O o � � � v � tl en ami V N O H�y� 000 o o o o U � � cu cu cu cu cu cu cu � o Z) a •� V H co 1,o W' t'y N W Oo) co 7 00 r N OM1 � 0 O O O r r N N 7 7 7 7 7 � '�, FY N O N O7 N N N O N N O N N O N N O N N O N LL ❑ ❑ ❑ m ❑ ❑ ❑ V' V �. Or N � U a v Ca a v d N o m v w I oaL o v Q E o 0 w E _ o U m N (n (6 a I w o m N N U L,L d maj N M o M z5 ❑6 o 2 r O O J O � N M M Q N M O y O O O o O O O � iii > > > > 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 z 000 N N N o N o N o N o N a a a a as as a xxx x x x x r N M c0 1� WO r r N M �O 1� W O) r O N N N N M N cq N N N N N N N N N O M M LO 4- 0 LO N LL