HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK Agenda - 2025-08-05
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8924
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9
DATE OF REPORT: June 16, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-305
SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-014
59 Park Street
Garage Demolition
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2025-V-014 to permit the demolition of an attached garage and detached shed at
the property municipally addressed as 59 Park Street be approved, in accordance
with the supplementary information submitted with this application and subject to the
following conditions:
1. That final demolition permit drawings be reviewed, and heritage clearance
provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a demolition
permit.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to present the proposed demolition of a non-original
attached garage and the removal of a non-original shed at the property municipally
addressed as 59 Park Street.
The key finding of this report is that the demolition is not anticipated to negatively impact
the cultural heritage value of the subject property, the Park Street streetscape, or the
Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District overall.
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Community engagement included consultation with the 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.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-014 proposes the demolition of a non-original
attached garage and non-original detached shed on the subject property municipally
addressed as 59 Park Street. The subject property is designated under Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act, being located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District
(VPAHCD). This HPA has been submitted in accordance with Section 42.1.4 of the Ontario
Heritage Act, which requires that property owners obtain approval from the municipality prior
to the demolition or removal of any structure on a designated property. The structures
proposed to be removed would not be classified as heritage attributes, and Heritage
Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed work will not negative impact the cultural
heritage value or significance of either the property itself, the Park Street streetscape, or the
surrounding VPAHCD.
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA-
2025-V-014for the property municipally addressed as 59 Park Street. The application is
seeking permission to demolish a non-original attached garageand detached rear-yard
shed.
The subject property is located on the south side of Park Street, between Victoria Street
South to the northeast and Jubilee Drive to the southwest. Itis designated under Part V of
the Ontario Heritage Act, being located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation
District(VPAHCD). It is not identified as a District SignificantA building. Due to its heritage
status this permit is being brought before Heritage Kitchener Committee, and in accordance
with Section 42.1.4 of the Ontario Heritage Act which requires consent of the municipality to
demolish or remove a building or structure on the property.
Figure 1: Location of Subject Property Identified by Solid RedLine. Adjacent Properties Part
of Associated Planning Application but not Heritage Permit Identified ByRed Dashed Line.
REPORT:
The subjectproperty currently contains a single-detached one-and-a-half-storey residential
dwelling, with attached garage. The VPAHCD Study provides the following description:
A 1&1/2 storey buff brick front-gabled Berlin Vernacular style residence with a closed-in
front porch. It is a well-
Regarding Park Street itself, the VPAHCD Study characterizes it as follows:
Park Street is a heavily trafficked primary arterial road extending from Victoria Street in the
west, through Victoria Park, to David Street in the east. The street width is comparatively
narrow for its traffic classification at 50 feet. The land use comprises 25 residential lots with
an average frontage of 50 feet and a depth of 110 feet. The setbacks, as with the street
width, are comparatively narrow at 18 feet. The residences are predominately circa 1920,
1&1/2 storey brick of solid character, with front verandahs, roof gables, and modest
embellishment. All are in sound condition and well maintained and near original in
appearance except for new metal trim cladding. Boulevard trees are full and plentiful at the
east end, but sparse in the centre of the block and to the west. Front gardens are modest,
with the occasional profusely flowered plot. Overall, the streetscape has architectural unity
but landscape disunity, changing from shady and enclosed by tree canopy to open and
exposed.
th
59 Park Street was constructed in the early 20 century, sometime between 1909-1916. It
is identified on the 1917 Fire Insurance Plan, though it is municipally addressed at this time
as 45 Tuerk Street. The architectural value of the property does not lie in its craftmanship or
architectural uniqueness, but rather the contribution it makes to the unity and character of
Park Street and the VPAHCD overall. It has maintained a high degree of integrity, being
largely unaltered or altered in a manner which is unobtrusive or suits the style of the building.
Figure 2: 1917 Fire Insurance Map with Subject Property Circled in Red
The attached garage is not original to the house and was constructed in 1965. It is concrete
block and frame construction, recessed to the rear so it is not prominently in view, and clad
in buff bricks that are a similar but deeper shade to the original buff bricks of the dwelling.
There is no cultural heritage value to the attached garage.
The exact construction date of the read detached shed is not known, but it is not original to
the property. There is no outbuilding identified on the latest Fire Insurance Map, dated 1947.
An outbuilding is however visible in aerial imagery from 1997. The shed is located behind
the attached garage, and due to its smaller scale and location is not visible from the street.
It is rectangular in shape, clad in grey-brown aluminum siding, and possesses a roof with a
small overhand over the front.
Figure 3: 1947 Fire Insurance Map with no Outbuilding Identified on the Subject Property
Figure 4: 1997 Aerial Photograph with Shed Visible on Subject Property
Figure 5: Rear Shed Proposed for Demolition.
Associated Planning Application
Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) Application (ZBA24/021/V/AP) was submitted in 2024 for
the properties municipally addressed as 169-183 Victoria Street South, located adjacent to
the subject property 59 Park Street. 59 Park Street was included in the application as well.
The ZBA proposed a zone change from MU-1 to MU-2 as well as the addition of site-specific
provisions which would allow for changes to required setbacks, building heights, floor space
ratio, and parking ratio. The intent of these amendments was to facilitate the construction of
an 8-storey multiple residential building with 120 dwelling units, 24 of which would be
affordable housing. Further, it was identified that an access easement would be required for
the development to 59 Park Street, as the hydro transformer and associated duct banks are
proposed to be housed on the property.
Though the bulk of the properties subject to the ZBA are not within the boundaries of the
VPAHCD and have no status under the Ontario Heritage Act, due to their adjacency to
cultural heritage resources and the minor inclusion of the designated 59 Park Street,
heritage conditions were identified as being required. This included the submission of a
Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA).
A draft HIA, dated June 2024 and prepared by McCallum Sather, was presented to the
st
Heritage Kitchener Committee on October 1, 2024. Responses from HK relating to the HIA
and proposed development included commentary around:
Lighting considerations, ensuring that the tone and brightness of outdoor lighting for
the new development was in keeping with the character of the surrounding HCD.
Any fencing being of an appropriate design to the context of the area and not blocking
views.
Incorporation of more design elements which reflect the rest of the Heritage
Conservation District to incorporate the new build better into the surrounding context.
Incorporation of greater stepbacks if feasible at the rear to create a better transition
from eight storeys to the adjacent one-and-a-half-storeys.
Salvage and reuse of material from the proposed building to be demolished, to keep
material out of landfills.
The comments of Heritage Kitchener have been provided to the applicant in addition to
Heritage Planning staff comments. Site Plan Application SPF25/027/V has now been
received by the City for the proposed development on the adjacent properties. The new
submission included an updated HIA and revised rendering of the proposed development.
Some commentary has already been addressed through the revisions that occurred
between the Zoning By-law Amendment processes and the submission of the Site Plan
Application. It is anticipated that outstanding items will be addressed as the Site Plan
process progresses. Additional heritage or heritage-related studies have been requested to
be submitted prior to full site plan approval. These additional studies include a:
Cultural Heritage Protection Plan
Documentation, Salvage and Reuse Plan
Risk Management Plan, Temporary Protection Plan
Hoarding and Construction Plan
Pre-construction Assessment Report of adjacent heritage properties
Vibration Monitoring Report
Site Lighting Plan.
Landscape Plan
Proposed Demolition of Garage
Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-014 is proposed to demolish the attached non-
original garage and the detached non-original shed. The intent of this proposal is to provide
greater setbacks between 59 Park Street and the proposed adjacent development, as well
as to create space for a hydro transformer and an access easement to a hydro transformer,
to be located in the rear yard of 59 Park Street. The proposed demolition of these structures
is not anticipated to affect the heritage value of the subject property or surrounding area.
Heritage Planning Comments
In reviewing the merits of this application, Heritage Planning staff would note the following:
The attached garage is not original to the subject property, being constructed in 1965.
While it is recessed back from the front façade and is of an appropriate size, scale,
and design so as to not impact the heritage integrity of 59 Park Street, neither does
it contribute to the subject properties heritage value or significance. The removal of
the garage will restore the building back to its original footprint.
construction is unknown, but it is not identified on the 1947 Fire Insurance Map (which
identified all outbuildings on properties) and is visible in a 1997 aerial photograph.
The rear yard shed is not visible from the streetscape, being located behind the
attached garage and of a smaller scale. It does not contribute to the heritage value
or significance of the subject property or surrounding Victoria Park Area Heritage
Conservation District.
A heritage permit application has been required for the proposed work not because
it is anticipated to have any negative impact on heritage attributes, but because the
demolition or removal of any building or structure on a designated property requires
Council approval.
The VPAHCD Plan contains policies and guidelines pertaining to demolition within
the HCD. While the policies do outline a presumption against demolition, they refer
specifically to the demolition of historic buildings and their associated heritage
attributes. The attached garage is not an identified heritage attribute of 59 Park
Street, nor is the detached shed. The removal of original heritage fabric is not
contemplated with this proposal.
The removal of the garage and shed will create greater separation between 59 Park
Street and the proposed adjacent 8-storey multiple-dwelling. In addition, its removal
is necessary to establish a hydro transformer and an access easement.
The hydro transformer will be screened from view from the public realm. Screening
options currently being contemplated in the site plan process include hedges as a
vegetative barrier.
The proposed work in this heritage permit application is not anticipated to negatively
impact the cultural heritage value or significance of the subject property, Park Street
streetscape, or the overall Victoria Park Area 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 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law. A building permit may be
required to demolish the attached garage and detached rear shed.
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
of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting.
CONSULT Heritage Kitchener has been consulted regarding the subject Heritage Permit
Application.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
Draft Heritage Impact Assessment 169-183 Victoria Street South and 59 Park
Street DSD-2024-407
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O 1990
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Heritage Permit Application Form HPA-2025-V-014
Attachment B Heritage Permit Application Supporting Documentation
2025 Page 1 of 10
HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION &
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Development & Housing Approvals
th
200 King Street West, 6Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4V6
519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca
PART A: SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The following requirements are designed to assist applicants in submitting sufficient information in order that
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@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
2025 Page 2 of 10
Repointing of brick
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.
2025 Page 3 of 10
Samples
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.
2025Heritage Permit Application 2025Heritage Kitchener Meeting Dates
Submission Deadlines
November 27, 2024 January 7, 2025
December 31, 2024 February 4,2025
January 28, 2025 March 4,2025
February 25, 2025 April 1, 2025
April 1,2025 May 6, 2025
April 29, 2025 June 3, 2025
- No July Meeting
July 1, 2025 August 5, 2025
July 29, 2025September 2, 2025
September 2, 2025 October 7, 2025
September 30, 2025 November 4, 2025
October 28, 2025 December 2, 2025
2025 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 endeavor 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:
2025 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
2025 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@kitchener.ca.
2025 Page 7 of 10
HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION &
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Development & Housing Approvals
th
200 King Street West, 6
Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4V6
519-741-2426; planning@kitchener.ca
STAFF USE ONLY
Date Received: Accepted By: Application Number:
HPA-
PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
1. NATURE OF APPLICATION
Exterior Interior Signage
y
Demolition New Construction Alteration Relocation
2. SUBJECT PROPERTY
6:!Qbsl!Tusffu
Municipal Address:
Legal Description (if know):
QMBO!215!MPU!7
y
Building/Structure Type: Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional
y
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
Obtjs!Tbmffn!)2111113397!Poubsjp!Mue/!boe!Mfhjpo!Ifjhiut!Wjdupsjb!Jod/*
Name:
Address:
Ljudifofs-!PO-!O3H!3C9
City/Province/Postal Code:
Phone:
obtjstbmffn656Ahnbjm/dpn
Email:
4. AGENT (if applicable)
Kfttj!NdMfmmbo
Name:
HTQ!Hspvq
Company:
83!Wjdupsjb!Tusffu!Tpvui-!Tvjuf!312
Address:
Ljudifofs-!PO!O3H!5Z:
City/Province/Postal Code:
Phone:
Email:
2025 Page 8 of 10
5.WRITTEN DESCRIPTION
Provide a written description of the project including any conservation methods proposed. Provide such detail
as materials to be used, measurements, paint colours, decorative details, whether any original building fabric
is to be removed or replaced, etc. Use additional pages as required. Please refer to the City of Kitchener
Heritage Permit Application Submission Guidelines for further direction.
Uif!cvjmejoh!bu!6:!Qbsl!Tusffu!jt!qspqptfe!up!cf!sfubjofe!jo.tjuv-!boe!xjmm!dpoujovf!up!cf!vujmj{fe
gps!sfoubm!ipvtjoh/!Ju!jt!qspqptfe!uibu!uif!mbufs!sfbs!hbsbhf!beejujpo!boe!tife-!xijdi!ep!opu!ibwf
ifsjubhf!wbmvf-!xjmm!cf!sfnpwfe/
6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work:
Sfnpwbm!pg!uif!mbufs!jodpohsvpvt!hbsbhf!beejujpo!boe!tife!xjmm!bmmpx!gps!b!njops!qpsujpo!pg!uif!cbdlzbse!bu!6:!Qbsl
Tusffuup!cf!vujmj{fe!gps!vujmjuz!qvsqptft-!xjui!op!boujdjqbufe!jnqbdu!po!uif!fyjtujoh!tusvduvsf!boe!xjmm!jodsfbtf!uif
tfucbdl!ejtubodf!cfuxffo!uif!ijtupsjd!ipvtf!boe!uif!qspqptfe!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!mpdbufe!bu!27:.294!Wjdupsjb
Tusffu!Tpvui/!Uijt!tfqbsbujpo!xjmm!cf!gvsuifs!tvqqmfnfoufe!xjui!qspqptfe!gfodjoh!boe!mboetdbqjoh/
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):
7. PROPOSED WORKS
Opw!31360!Kbo!3137
Opw!31360!Kbo!3137
a) Expected start date: Expected completion date:
Y
b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff?Yes No
Kfttjdb!Wjfjsb
- If yes, who did you speak to?
Y
c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? Yes No
- If yes, who did you speak to?
Y
d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? Yes No
TJUF!QMBO!BQQMJDBUJPO!.
e) Other related Building or Planning applications: Application number
TQG36013:0W
2025 Page 9 of 10
8.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
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 constitutesconsentforauthorized 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 ownerand
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.
Kvof!4se-!3136
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
Kvof!4se-!3136
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:
Obtjs!Tbmffn
I / We, , owner of the land that is subject of this application,
Kfttj!NdMfmmbo!)HTQ!Hspvq*
hereby authorize to act on my / our behalf in this regard.
Kvof!4se-!3136
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
Kvof!4se-!3136
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
The personal information on this form is collected under the legal authority of Section 33(2), Section 42(2),
and Section 42(2.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The information will be used for the purposes of
administering the Heritage Permit Application and ensuring appropriate service of notice of receipt under
Section 33(3) and Section 42(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act. If you have any questions about this collection
of personal information, please contact the Manager of Corporate Records, Legislated Services Division,
City of Kitchener (519-741-2769).
2025 Page 10 of 10
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:
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
Heritage Values
mcCallumSather BackgroundHeritage Status
Executive Summary
Impacts on Heritage Values
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Proposed Development
mcCallumSather
Executive Summary
Conclusion
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Introduction
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Background
mcCallumSather
Introduction
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
L
A
N
C
RSA
TSE
ET
Introduction
1
0
4
Y
W
H
R
8
Y
W
H
N
E
D
R
YR
A
W
R
I
A
F
D
V
V
L
R
.
B
R LR
A
CK
NE
.
N
.
C
N
D
R
D
T
E
S
N
E A
R
D
C
U
O
WIT
N
A
M
S
A
N
T
A
T
M
O
G
B
O
N
O
S
T
A
EW
V
A
Y
E
L
R
Y
I
K
H
P
E
S
A
T
G
R
S
O
E
T
M
G
S
EO
N
NIH
OK
C
D
R
T
SN
D
R
AO
G
R
U
NR
B
D
U
E
H
T
L
S
D
R
S
TW
ERS
CAST
LAN
M
D
R
A
N
A
M
E
L
L
A
LH
R
E
B
H
C
S
I
F
P
E
G
D
I
RW
T
B
S
R
E
B
E
W
W
U
O
DM
T
T
V
S
S
E
L
W
B
G
N
I
S
W
KE
N
V
A
E
T
N
E
O
M
LU
E
B
Q
Y
KD
R
P
W
DR
R
T
N
UE
OA
ML
T
GS
S
S
E
O
WU
O
TR
T
S
E
N
O
D
C
R
D
N
A
L
H
G
I
H
S
T
S
D
LV
B
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Introduction
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Introduction
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather 52 Henry Street, c.1910 (no picture available)48 Henry Street, c. 191055 Park Street, pre-1911163-165 Victoria Street South, c.1924189-193 Victoria Street South, including
55-57 Henry Street, 1914
Introduction
E
T
S
G
N
I
K
1
0
4
Y
W
H
8
Y
W
H
N
E
D
R
YR
A
R
W
E
R
I
A
F
D
V
V
L
LR
B
B
LR
A
CK
N
I
K
A
N
N
A
B
R
R
A
T
E
W
S
T
E A
R
D
C
U
O
WT
I
N
MA
S
A
N
T
A
T
M
O
G
T
N
CO
S
IT
A
W
V
Y
K
P
A
G
R
OE
T
D
M
S
RO
E
H
N
EO
C
L
A
D
D
R
G
N
N
D
IR
O
G
R
U
R
M
B
S
U
OA
H
R
O
S
B
E
N
S
ED
E
L
V
R
T
RA
S
A
DS
W
ST
STER
ANCA H
L
N
M
C
AD
NR
A
L
N
A
O
TTEM
L
L
SA
T
RLH
R
GUL
BE
H
L
RC
IS
OI
N
F
I
M
C
O
L
PL
E
E
GW
D
I
RW
T
B
S
R
E
B
E
W
E
D
R
T
N
W
U
O
M
T
T
S
S
E
W
T
G
S
N
I
W
W
K
E
V
O
A
T
G
N
O
S
M
L
A
E
B
L
G
D
R
W
DR
R
T
N
UE
O
L
M
T
S
S
S
E
WU
O
R
T
.
S
R
.
N
.
C
D
BLV
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
Introduction
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Background Research & Analysis
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Background Research & Analysis
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Background Research & Analysis
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Architectural
mcCallumSather
Historical / AssociativeContextual / Landscape
General Standards:
Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Additional Standards for Rehabilitation:Additional Standards for Restoration:
mcCallumSather Summary
Heritage Policies & Framework
s history
’
Respect for historical materialRespect for original fabric Respect for the buildingReversibilityLegibilityMaintenance
3.4.5.6.7.8.Summary
Respect for documentary evidenceRespect for the original location
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment 4.6 Cultural Heritage and Archaeology1.2.
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
Summary
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Summary
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Heritage Policies & Framework
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather Summary
Heritage Policies & Framework
Public RealmPedestrianDesignDensityHeightMaterialsRoofsWindows
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather VerandahsColoursConservationPreservation / ConservationLandscaping Summary
Heritage Policies & Framework
PreservationRehabilitation
1.2.
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Restoration
mcCallumSather 3.
Heritage Policies & Framework
LinkagesParkingStreetscapeSignageLightingPedestrian LinkageFuture Development OpportunityRedevelopment Opportunity
•••••1.2.3.
Building Design
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment•
Gateway OpportunityStreetscape StrategyRedevelopment OpportunityStreetscape StrategyGateway
mcCallumSather 4.5.6.7.8.Summary
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Proposed Development
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Impact Assessment
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Impact Assessment
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Conservation Approach
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
Appendices
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Terms of Reference
Heritage Impact Assessment
Study Description:
A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is a study to determine the impacts to known and potential
cultural heritage resources within a defined area proposed for future repair, alteration or development.
The study shall include an inventory of all cultural heritage resources within the planning application
area. The study results in a report which identifies all known cultural heritage resources, evaluates
the significance of the resources, and makes recommendations toward mitigative measures that
would minimize negative impacts to those resources. This document sets out the standard
requirements that must be included in an HIA.
Purpose:
The purpose of this Terms of
for the preparation ofaHeritage Impact Assessmentsubmitted to the City of Kitchener. Compliance
with these guidelines will help to expedite review times and mitigate the need for further revisions and
submissions. Failure to satisfy the requirements set out in this TOR may result in an application being
deemed incomplete. If an application is deemed incomplete it will be returned to the applicant to
satisfy the necessary submission requirements.
When it is Required:
A Heritage Impact Assessment may be required on a property which is includedistoric
BuildingsInventory; listed as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the
Ontario Heritage Act; or where development
is proposed adjacent to a protected heritage property (i.e. designated property). The requirement may
also apply to unknown or recorded cultural heritage resources which are discovered during the
development application stage or construction.
It is important to recognize the need for an HIA at the earliest possible stage of development,
alteration or proposed repair. Notice will be given to the property owner and/or their representative as
early as possible. When the property is the subject of adevelopment application, notice of an HIA
requirement will typically be given at the pre-application meeting, followed by written notification. The
notice will inform the property owner of any known heritage resources specific to the subject property
and provide guidelines to completing the HIA.
The City may scope the requisite information to be contained in the HIA on a case-by-case basis, and
in consultation with any applicable external agencies through the pre-consultation process.
Last Updated September 5, 2024
Qualified Person:
AHeritage Impact Assessmentshould be prepared by or under the direction of a professional who
demonstrates a level of professional understanding and competence in the field of heritage
conservation and who is registered with the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP)
and in good standing. The CAHP that has authored or overseenthe report shall take professional
responsibility for its contents and the accuracy of the information contained therein.The report will also
include a reference forany literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and
referenced in the report.
Applicable Legislation:
Section 2 of the Planning Act indicates that Council shall have regard to matters of Provincial interest
including the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or
scientific interest. Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decisions of Council shall be consistent
with the Provincial Policy Statement.
Policy 4.6.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement requires thatprotected heritage property which may
contain built heritage resources of cultural heritage landscapes, shall be conserved. The Provincial
Policy Statement also encourages planning authorities to develop and implement proactive strategies
for the conservation of significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. The
Provincial Policy Statement defines a built heritage resource asa building, structure, installation or any
manu
interest as identified by a community, including an indigenous community.Conserved is defined as
meaning the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources, cultural
heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their cultural heritage
value or interest is retained under the Ontario Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the
implementation of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment,
heritage impact assessment, and/or other heritage studies. Mitigative measures and/or alternative
development approaches can be included in these plans and assessments.
Report Contents:
The HIAshall include, but is not limited to, the following sections/information.
A.Introduction:
Ownership/applicant information.
Party/firm retained to write the report.
The address of the subject property.
Purpose of the Heritage Impact Assessment.
Last Updated September 5, 2024
B.Site Descriptionand Context Analysis:
A description of the location of the site and its municipal and legal property address.
A detailed site history,includinga listof owners from the Land Registry Office and formersite
use(s).
A written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject
properties includingbuilding elements, building materials, architectural and interior finishes,
natural heritage elements, and landscaping. The description will also include a chronological
Identification of adjacent heritage resources, including protected or listed heritage properties,
Cultural Heritage Corridors.
Aclear statement of the conclusions regarding the cultural heritage value and interest of the
subject property, clear identification of the specific Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria met,and a
bullet point list of heritage attributes.
o If applicable, the statement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent
protected heritage property.
Documentation of the subject properties to includecurrent photographs of each elevation of
the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an
appropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site details. Documentation
shall also include where available, current floor plans, and historical photos, drawings or other
available and relevant archival material.
C.Summary of Development Proposal
A detailed description of the proposed repair, alteration, or development including site design,
any new structures or buildings, new proposed uses, and site details such as landscaping and
lighting.
A review of any buildings, structures or vegetation to be removed.
A schedule of development phasing if multiple phases are proposed.
Visuals (including but not limited to maps, aerial photography/imagery, renderings,
photographs)
D.Existing Planning Framework / Policy Review
Identification of the relevant regulatory frameworks and policies, including:
o The Planning Act
Last Updated September 5, 2024
o The Ontario Heritage Act
o The Provincial Policy Statement
o The Regional Official Plan
o The City of Kitchener Official Plan
o The City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study
o Applicable Heritage Conservation District Plans
o Applicable draft legislation (including bills which have not yet received Royal Assent);
and
o Any other applicable policy documents, studies, guidelines, and standards that pertain
to the subject lands and proposal.
Written analysis of how the proposed alteration/development is consistent with and/or
conforms to the relevant land use planning framework.
E.Impact Analysis
Detailed consideration of potential negative impacts,as identified in the Ministry of Tourism,
,of the proposed alteration/development on all
identified heritage resources.
o Negative impacts may include but are not limited torepair/alterations that are not
sympathetic or compatible with the cultural heritage resource,demolition/destructionof
all or part of a cultural heritage resource,shadow impacts, isolation of heritage
resources, direct or indirect obstruction of view, incompatible changes in land use, land
disturbancesetc.
The scale or level of each impact should be clearly stated, and appropriate and comprehensive
justification of each conclusion provided.
The influence and potential impact of the development on the setting and character of the
subject property, surrounding area, and anyadjacent protected heritage propertyshould be
addressed.
For applications contemplating demolition, consideration of the embodied carbon emissions
and material waste impact shall be included. Embodied carbon refers to emissions from the
materials, construction process of a building, maintenance, repair, and its demolition and
disposal. Considerable carbon emissions are involved in the demolition and rebuilding of
structures. In addition, demolition can result in significant material waste. Finding appropriate
balances between demolition and new build as opposed to reuse and retrofitting of existing
buildings is crucial for both heritage conservation and sustainability.
Any supporting studies which aided in the conclusions of the impact analysis shall be
identified, and a brief summary of the findings and conclusions provided.
Last Updated September 5, 2024
F.Alternative Options and Recommendations
Options shall be provided that explain how the significant cultural heritage resources may be
conserved. These may include, but are not limited to, preservation/conservation in situ, adaptive
re-use, integration of all or part of the heritage resource, relocation. Each alternativeshould
create a sympathetic context for the heritage resource.
Recommendations shall be made for mitigation measures which address and minimize identified
adverse impacts. These mitigation measures should follow best conservation
practices/principlesand, when implemented, ensure that appropriate conservation is achieved.
G.Conclusion
Concluding statement summarizing the heritage value of the subject property, the anticipated
impacts as a result of the proposed alteration/development etc, and the adherence to policy
frameworks and best heritage conservation practices/principles.
Summary of recommended mitigationmeasures to be implemented.
H.Mandatory Recommendation
If the property(s) being assessed are included on the Inventory of Historic Buildings, do the
properties meet the criteria for listing on the Municipal Heritage Register as a Non-Designated
Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest?
o Clear justification should be provided on why the consultant believes the property does
or does not meet criteria for listing.
If the property(s) is listed as a non-
Municipal Heritage Register, do the properties meet the criteria for heritage designation under
Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act?
o Clear justification should be provided on why the consultant believes the property does
or does not meet criteria for listing.
Regardless of the failure to meet criteria for heritage listing or designation, do the properties
warrant conservation as per the definition in the Provincial Policy Statement? Why or why not?
Approval Process
One (1) digital pdf copy shall be provided to Heritage Planning staff. The HIA will be reviewed by
Heritage Planning staff and a recommendation will be made to the Director of Development and
Housing Approvals. Approval of the HIA by either the Director ofDevelopment and Housing
Approvals or the Heritage Planner is required prior to issuance of approval of the application.
Last Updated September 5, 2024
Additional Information
1.City staff reserve the right to require a peer review of submitted material, to be conducted by a
qualified heritage consultant at the expense of the applicant. The applicant will be notified of
An accepted HIA will become part
of the further processing of a development application under the direction of the Planning
Division. The recommendations within the final approved version of the HIA may be incorporated
into development related legal agreements between the City and the proponent at the discretion
of the municipality.
2.Deeming an application complete does not guarantee that the contents of the study are
acceptable to City staff and/or that the application will be approved.
3.If a request for a HIA is not made at an earlier stage in the development process, this does not
preclude the City from requesting a HIA at a later stage. Once an application has been
and/or studies
following a more detailed review to assess the implications of an application for approval.
4.The City of Kitchener is committed to complying with the Accessibility for Ontarians with
Disabilities Act (AODA). In our everyday work with businesses institutions, and community
partners we anticipate the same commitment to AODA compliance. Therefore, the HIA must
5.The City reserves the right to request an updated study, or an addendum thereto, should staff
determine that changes in the development proposal or changes to legislation warrant
further/modified planning analysis.
6.Documents and all related information submitted to the City as part of a complete development
application are considered public documents once submitted.
7.This Terms of Reference document is intended to be used for guideline purposes only and will
be used to provide technical direction throughout the planning and development process.
Completion of a report in alignment with the requirements of this Terms of Reference will not
guarantee approval of the development application in question.
8.This TOR is relevant at the time of publishing and will be updated as necessary to reflect
ensure the report is prepared in accordance with the most recent version of the TOR issued by
the City.
Last Updated September 5, 2024
Appendices
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Municipal Heritage Register Disclaimer
The City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register is provided by the City for
informational purposes only. The City of Kitchener endeavours to keep the
Municipal Heritage Register current, accurate and complete; however, the City reserves the right
to change or modify the Municipal Heritage Register and the information contained within the
Municipal Heritage Register at any time without notice.
The Municipal Heritage Register includes property held in private ownership. Please respect the
rights of local residents and property owners. Do not trespass on private property or harm
heritage features.
For confirmation of a property's status on the City of Kitchener's Municipal
Heritage Register, please contact Heritage Planning staff at heritage@kitchener.ca
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
INDEX OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTIESFebruary 28, 2024
OF HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST
Date Added by Inventory Inventory
Council ResolutionRegister PageReferencePage
Address
A
55Aberdeen RoadJune 1, 2015
69
Agnes StreetJune 30, 2014
100
Ahrens Street WestSeptember 20, 2010
111
Ahrens Street WestJune 1, 2015
8-16Arthur PlaceJanuary 27, 2014
B
May 27, 2014
19Benton Street
51Benton StreetJune 30, 2014
79Benton StreetJune 30, 2014
83
Benton StreetJune 30, 2014
112Benton StreetJune 1, 2015
156Benton StreetFebruary 1, 2010
10Bingeman StreetJanuary 27, 2014
141
Borden Avenue NorthApril 27, 2015
51Breithaupt Street June 29, 2009
300Breithaupt Street/72 St. Leger StreetAugust 24, 2009
(Circa 1912 portion only)
325Breithaupt Street June 29, 2009
40Bridge Street WestApril 27, 2015
C
234Cameron Street NorthMay 27, 2014
2Carisbrook Drive January 12, 2009
255Carwood AvenueApril 27, 2015
442Caryndale DriveApril 27, 2015
33Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
35Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
37Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
39Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
41Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
43Cedar Street NorthJune 30, 2014
301Charles Street EastFebruary 1, 2010
1-3Charles Street West/84-88 Queen Street South September 7, 2010
22-26Charles Street WestOctober 13, 2009
113-151Charles Street West/170-188 Joseph Street/June 1, 2015
3-44 Francis Street South
30Cherry StreetJune 30, 2014
40Cherry StreetJune 30, 2014
101Church StreetJune 30, 2014
16Clarence PlaceMay 26, 2014
40
College StreetJanuary 27, 2014
46-56College StreetJanuary 27, 2014
98
Corfield DriveApril 27, 2015
35Courtland Avenue WestFebruary 1, 2010
63Courtland Avenue EastJanuary 27, 2014
107Courtland Avenue EastJanuary 27, 2014
160Courtland Avenue EastJanuary 27, 2014
53Church StreetMay 27, 2014
142Church StreetJanuary 27, 2014
D
500Doon Valley DriveJune 1, 2015
15-29
Duke Street East October 13, 2009
187
Duke Street EastJune 30, 2014
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
INDEX OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTIESFebruary 28, 2024
OF HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST
Date Added by Inventory Inventory
Council ResolutionRegister PageReferencePage
Address
D (CONT'D)
189Duke Street EastJune 30, 2014
10Duke Street West October 13, 2009
30-32Duke Street WestJune 30, 2014
56Duke Street WestMarch 26, 2012
156Duke Street West October 13, 2009
241Duke Street West/55 Victoria Street North May 13, 2013
283Duke Street WestJune 30, 2014
286Duke Street WestJanuary 27, 2014
E
400East AvenueJanuary 27, 2014
92Edgehill DriveJune 1, 2015
F
200Fairway Road South
(Notice of Intention to Demolish - Former Sears Building - June 1, 2015
November 19, 2018)
7Fischer CourtSeptember 15, 2008
255Fischer Hallman RoadApril 27, 2015
1255-1291Fischer Hallman RoadOctober 13, 2009
(Notice of Intention to Demolish - June 13, 2016)
1541Fischer Hallman RoadJune 1, 2015
1940Fischer Hallman Road October 13, 2009
1970Fischer Hallman RoadAugust 29, 2011
*7Floral Street (Rockway Gardens)June 10, 2013
42Francis Street NorthJune 30, 2014
3-44Francis Street South/113-151 Charles Street West/June 1, 2015
170-188 Joseph Street
97Frederick Street April 27, 2009
240Frederick StreetMay 26, 2014
265Frederick StreetMay 26, 2014
G
40Gage AvenueJune 30, 2014
27Gaukel Street June 29, 2009
236Gehl PlaceAugust 29, 2011
101Glasgow Street/149 Strange StreetDecember 14, 2015
314Glasgow StreetJune 1, 2015
418Glasgow StreetJune 1, 2015
6Gordon AvenueSeptember 15, 2008
H
31Herbert StreetApril 27, 2015
600Heritage DriveJune 1, 2015
43Highland Road WestApril 27, 2015
135Highland Road WestApril 27, 2015
10Huron RoadApril 27, 2015
1664Huron RoadSeptember 7, 2010
1865Huron RoadAugust 29, 2011
1925Huron RoadJanuary 12, 2009
Huron Road (Plan 585 Lots 18, 19, and 20, April 27, 2009
Part Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 21 SS Huron
Road German Company Tract Part Lot 149)
I
11Irvin StreetMay 26, 2014
14Irvin StreetMay 26, 2014
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
INDEX OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTIESFebruary 28, 2024
OF HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST
Date Added by Inventory Inventory
Council ResolutionRegister PageReferencePage
Address
I(CON'TD)
18Irvin StreetMay 26, 2014
38-40Irvin StreetJune 30, 2014
J
170-188Joseph Street/113-151 Charles Street West/June 1, 2015
3-44 Francis Street South
K
53-61King Street EastSeptember 7, 2010
69King Street EastJanuary 27, 2014
1027King Street EastFebruary 1, 2010
**1405King Street East (Rockway Garden)June 10, 2013
3570King Street EastJanuary 27, 2014
(Notice of Intention to Demolish - Former Old Men's
Residence - May 9, 2022)
3571King Street EastJune 30, 2014
4336 King Street EastJune 1, 2015
55King Street WestSeptember 7, 2010
72-78King Street WestJanuary 12, 2009
82-86King Street WestJanuary 12, 2009
83-85King Street WestApril 27, 2009
87-91King Street West April 27, 2009
90King Street WestJanuary 12, 2009
93-95King Street WestApril 27, 2009
97-99King Street West April 27, 2009
103-109King Street West April 27, 2009
200King Street West June 29, 2009
305King Street WestSeptember 7, 2010
621King Street West June 29, 2009
709King Street West April 27, 2009
L
160Lancaster Street EastMay 26, 2014
201Lancaster Street EastJune 30, 2014
20Linden AvenueMay 26, 2014
300Lookout LaneApril 27, 2015
58Louisa StreetMay 26, 2014
86Louisa StreetMay 26, 2014
304 Louisa StreetJune 30, 2014
M
91Madison Avenue SouthMay 26, 2014
148Madison Avenue SouthJanuary 27, 2014
87Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
100Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
104-106Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
112Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
136Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
148Margaret AvenueJune 30, 2014
160Margaret AvenueJune 1, 2015
49Mary StreetMay 26, 2014
79Moore Avenue/54-68 Shanley StreetMay 13, 2013
81Moore AvenueAugust 29, 2011
N
398New Dundee RoadJune 1, 2015
1478New Dundee RoadJune 1, 2015
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
INDEX OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTIESFebruary 28, 2024
OF HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST
Date Added by Inventory Inventory
Council ResolutionRegister PageReferencePage
Address
O
13-15Oak StreetJanuary 27, 2014
Old Mill Road (Ferrie Mill)April 27, 2015
1755Old Mill RoadApril 27, 2015
18-24Ontario Street NorthJanuary 12, 2009
33Ontario Street NorthSeptember 7, 2010
149-151Ontario Street North April 27, 2009
47Onward Avenue (Olivet Mission Church)August 29, 2011Horne16
105Onward AvenueApril 27, 2015
P
11-15Pandora Avenue NorthFebruary 1, 2010
41Pandora Avenue NorthJune 30, 2014
350Park StreetJune 1, 2015
432Plains RoadMarch 26, 2012
Q
1Queen Street North/4-30 King Street EastSeptember 7, 2010
16-20Queen Street North September 7, 2010
43-49Queen Street North September 7, 2010
85Queen Street NorthJune 30, 2014
33Queen Street South April 27, 2009
43Queen Street South April 27, 2009
44-54Queen Street SouthJanuary 12, 2009
45Queen Street South January 12, 2009
53-55Queen Street South April 27, 2009
84-88Queen Street South/1-3 Charles Street WestSeptember 7, 2010
754Queen Street SouthApril 27, 2015
834Queens BoulevardApril 27, 2015
R
271Reidel Drive January 12, 2009
35Roos StreetJune 1, 2015
5Rusholme RoadApril 27, 2015
44Rusholme RoadApril 27, 2015
S
79-81St. George StreetJune 30, 2014
72St. Leger Street/300 Breithaupt StreetAugust 24, 2009
(Circa 1912 portion only)
100St. Leger StreetApril 27, 2015
91Scott StreetJune 10, 2013
29Shanley StreetMay 26, 2014
54-68Shanley Street/79 Moore AvenueMay 13, 2013
285Simeon StreetApril 27, 2015
57-61Stirling Avenue NorthMay 26, 2014
394Stirling Avenue SouthApril 27, 2015
396-398Stirling Avenue SouthApril 27, 2015
25Strange StreetMay 26, 2014
85Strange StreetMay 26, 2014
99Strange StreetSeptember 7, 2010
149Strange Street/101 Glasgow StreetDecember 14, 2015
217Strange StreetApril 27, 2015
T
1434Trussler RoadAugust 29, 2011
1478Trussler RoadAugust 29, 2011
1738Trussler Road April 27, 2009
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
INDEX OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTIESFebruary 28, 2024
OF HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST
Date Added by Inventory Inventory
Council ResolutionRegister PageReferencePage
Address
T(CONT'D)
15Tyson DriveJune 1, 2015
U
80-86Union Boulevard/571 York StreetJune 1, 2015
1254Union StreetJune 1, 2015
V
55Victoria Street North/241 Duke Street WestJune 10, 2013
171-173Victoria Street North April 27, 2009
182Victoria Street North September 7, 2010
86Victoria Street SouthJanuary 27, 2014
131Victoria Street SouthFebruary 1, 2010
142Victoria Street SouthFebruary 1, 2010
163-165Victoria Street SouthFebruary 1, 2010
187-193Victoria Street SouthFebruary 1, 2010
W
85Walter StreetSeptember 7, 2010
23Water Street NorthJune 29, 2009
115Water Street North January 12, 2009
82-84Waterloo StreetJune 30, 2014
20Weber Street EastMarch 26, 2012
257Weber Street EastMay 26, 2014
265Weber Street EastApril 27, 2015
278Weber Street EastApril 27, 2015
41Weber Street WestMarch 26, 2012
126Weber Street WestMay 26, 2014
130Weber Street WestJune 30, 2014
136Weber Street WestMay 26, 2014
12Wellington Street NorthOctober 13, 2009
49Woolwich StreetApril 27, 2015
Y
571York Street/80-86 Union BoulevardJune 1, 2015
Municipal Heritage Register Disclaimer
The City of Kitchener's Municipal Heritage Register is provided by the City for
informational purposes only. The City of Kitchener endeavours to keep the
Municipal Heritage Register current, accurate and complete; however, the City reserves the right
to change or modify the Municipal Heritage Register and the information contained within the
Municipal Heritage Register at any time without notice.
The Municipal Heritage Register includes property held in private ownership. Please respect the
rights of local residents and property owners. Do not trespass on private property or harm
heritage features.
For confirmation of a property's status on the City of Kitchener's Municipal
Heritage Register, please contact Heritage Planning Staff at heritage@kitchener.ca
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
A
Shea 1989 V.21
37Ahrens Street West31
Collishaw74
Simpson31
41Ahrens Street West (House of Beautiful Birds)32
67-69Ahrens Street West74
119Arlington Boulevard (Roman Catholic & Protestant 30
Mausoleums/Woodland Cemetery)
B
43Benton Street11Campbell125
69Biehn Drive (David Weber House)7Shantz116
811-831Bleams Road13Shantz118
1385Bleams Road (Williamsburg School)40Shantz120
Lamb4
41Bloomingdale Road50
Kolaritsch55
Lamb6
76Bloomingdale Road (Free Church of Bridgeport)1
Kolaritsch60
518Bridgeport Road141-143
50Brookside Crescent139-140
28Burgetz Avenuetbd
C
40Chapel Hill Drivetbd
Collishaw90
90Church Street33
Shantz40
138Church Street23Collishaw13
2135Countrystone Place (formerly 1105 Glasgow Street)35Shantz194
24Courtland Avenue Easttbd
26Courtland Avenue Easttbd
Shea 1989 V.117
30Courtland Avenue East64
Shantz46
Shea 19886
Shea 1989 V.117
34Courtland Avenue East (Nelson Terrace)52
Shantz46
Shea 19886
153Courtland Avenue East25Collishaw25
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
D
Dodge Drive (formerly 1904 Dodge Drive - School
32027Shantz122
Section No. 22)
39Doon Valley Drive & Part of Former Right-of-Way62Shantz124
Shantz126
883Doon Village Road18-19
Simpson93A
Shantz132
1165Doon Village Road15
Kobayashi21
2-22Duke Street Easttbd
Shea 1989 V.128
120Duke Street West (former St. Jerome's High School)67-69
Simpson5/39
Misc. Vol.171
318Duke Street West (former Fire Hall No. 2)96-97Shea 1989 V.231
26Durham Street22Shantz146
E
33Eby Street South ΛbƚƷźĭĻ ƚŅ LƓƷĻƓƷźƚƓΏağƩ ЎͲ ЋЉЋЍΜ tbd
F
70Francis Street Northtbd
122Frederick Street (County of Waterloo Registry Office)60Misc. Vol.229
171Frederick Street (Suddaby Public School)4Collishaw16
181Frederick Street147-149
Shea 1989 V.236
209Frederick Street - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ ЋЉЉЋ 58
Collishaw26
Shantz18
234Frederick Street57
Misc. Vol.179
239-241Frederick Street (Pequegnat House)53-54
Misc. Vol.29
362Frederick Street34Collishaw4
369144-146
Frederick Street
G
279Glasgow Street10Shantz188
379Glasgow Street84-85
35Gordon Avenue63Misc. Vol.259
Graber Place (Harvey Graber Transformer Station) -
133N/AMisc. Vol.251
5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ
397Gravel Ridge Trail (formerly 2062 Bleams Road)98-100Misc. V.156
Ryan 1991 V.19
20Greenbrook Drive (Greenbrook Pumping Station)82-83
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
H
73Heins Avenue/150 Water Street South20Shantz104
82Heins Avenue 44Shea 198817
Hidden Valley Road - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ
772N/AMisc. Vol.248
Highland Road West - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ (Repealed by Bylaw #90-
1198N/A
147 - January 27, 1992)
I
J
25Joseph Street (former Victoria Public School)42-43
163Joseph Street 14Collishaw72
Joseph Street/14 Linden Avenue - Lang Site 'B' - Smokestack
189117-118Campbell52
(aka 189-195 Joseph Street)
300Joseph Schoerg Crescent (formerly 437 Pioneer Tower Road)92-95Misc. V.234
Ryan 1991 V.261
Misc. V.2153
Joseph Schoerg Crescent (farmhouse - formerly 381 Pioneer
33077Misc. V.234
Tower Road)
Ryan 1991 V.2 56
Joseph Schoerg Crescent (barn foundation - formerly 381
33078-79Misc. V.234
Pioneer Tower Road)
Ryan 1991 V.2 56
K
King Street East (Freeport Bridge)8994
1King Street East (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce - 46-47Shantz60
"Germania Block", former Bank of Hamilton/Fellman's Block)Collishaw62
Misc. Vol.11
4King Street East/1 Queen Street Northtbd
67King Street Easttbd
70King Street East (Toronto-Dominion Bank)105-106
137-147King Street East111-112
800King Street East (First Mennonite Church & Cemetery)134-136
3734King Street East (Outbuilding)45Misc. Vol. 16
Collishaw81
1-11King Street West/18-20 Queen Street South (Walper12
Shantz62
Hotel)
Shea 1989 V.245
37-39King Street West (former Kabel's)55
Shantz64
Shea 1989 V.249
45King Street West (The Berlin, former Nelco Hardware)56
Shantz66
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
K(CONT'D)
47King Street West (Dunker/Medical Arts Building) - N/AShea 1989 V.253
Withdrawn (Notice of Intention Repealed March 19, 1990) - Shantz68
5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ
54-68King Street Westtbd
Shantz70
117King Street West (Matter of Taste Coffee Bar,21
Campbell54
former Provident Bookstore)
144-150King Street Westtbd
156-158King Street West (P. Hymmen Hardware) - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ 109-110
191-195King Street West (former P.U.C. Building)16Shantz72
Shea 1989 V.258/64
410King Street West (The Kaufman Lofts, former Kaufman 70-73
Collishaw89
Footwear)
Campbell11/15
King Street West (Kitchener-Waterloo Collegiate &
7872
Vocational School
L
Linden Avenue/189 Joseph Street - Lang Site 'B' - Smokestack
14117-118Campbell52
(aka 189-195 Joseph Street)
Louisa Street/128 Margaret Avenue
32575-76
(Margaret Avenue Senior Public School)
M
Margaret Avenue/116 Queen Street North (Wrought Iron
1224Horne23
Fence around the Church of the Good Shepherd)
Margaret Avenue/325 Louisa Street
12875-76
(Margaret Avenue Senior Public School)
Shantz150
59Marianne Dorn Trail (formerly 324 Old Huron Road)123-124
Simpson94
Ryan 1991 V.211
Shantz26
5Maurice Street59
Simpson62
Simpson46
25Maynard Avenue26
Collishaw34
45Mill Street61Collishaw82
501-545Morrison Road/10 Sims Estate Place - Estate House/Common 101-104Misc. V.113
Elements (formerly 787-811 Morrison Road, commonly Misc. V.115
known as Sims Estate, Chicopee)
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
N
508New Dundee Road125-127Ryan V.244
628New Dundee Roadtbd
O
Shantz154
1754Old Mill Road (Homer Watson House)3
Misc. Vol.2105
48Ontario Street North (former Canadian Legion/Bell Co.)128-130
920Orr Court (formerly 1683 Huron Road)131-133
P
181Park Street39Shantz78
1Pequegnat Avenue65
Shantz164
20Pinnacle Drive8
Simpson98
37Pinnacle Drive (Red Lion Inn)6Shantz166
Q
1Queen Street North/4 King Street Easttbd
60Queen Street Northtbd
73-77Queen Street North/20 Weber Street East (Governor's House 5Shantz20
& Waterloo County Gaol, commonly known as County Collishaw9
Courthouse)Collishaw51
Simpson52
108Queen Street North28-29
Collishaw35
Misc. Vol.339
Queen Street North/12 Margaret Avenue (Wrought Iron
11624Horne23
Fence around the Church of the Good Shepherd)
Collishaw81
18-20Queen Street South/1-11 King Street West (Walper12
Shantz62
Hotel)
58Queen Street Southtbd
66Queen Street Southtbd
90-92Queen Street Southtbd
Shea 1989 V.137
214Queen Street South (York Apartments)113-116
Shantz82
Collishaw32
307Queen Street South (Bread and Roses Co-operative Homes, 48-49
Campbell62
former Rumpel Felt Company & most recently MacDonald-
Misc. Vol.13
Westburne Building)
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
R
Shantz178
630Robert Ferrie Drive (formerly 393 Tilt Drive)90
Kobayashi3
Ryan 1991 V.299
23Roland Street (Karl Mueller House)36
S
Shantz152
68Saddlebrook Court (formerly 710 Huron Road)137-138
Simpson91
Ryan 1991 V.218
17Schneider Avenue (The Bugg House)51Misc. Vol.121
43Schneider Avenue41Shantz92
Shantz94
76Schneider Avenue9
Simpson82A
87Scott Street/82 Weber Street Easttbd
73Shanley Street150-151
35&43Sheldon Avenue Northtbd
Simpson83
38Shirk Place (Jacob Shoemaker House)17
Lamb20
Kolaritsch14
10Sims Estate Place/501-545 Morrison Road - Estate 101-104Misc. V.113
House/Common Elements (formerly 787-811 Morrison Road, Misc. V.115
commonly known as Sims Estate, Chicopee)
1445Strasburg Road (Strasburg Lutheran Pioneer Cemetery, 37
former German Evangelical Lutheran Church Cemetery)
Shantz174
500Stauffer Drive119-122
Ryan 1991 V.279
T
U
V
60Victoria Street North ΛbƚƷźĭĻ ƚŅ LƓƷĻƓƷźƚƓΏağƩ ЎͲ ЋЉЋЍΜ tbd
97Victoria Street North152-153
176Victoria Street North88
Victoria Street South - źƷŷķƩğǞƓ (Notice of Intention -
7291Campbell74
Repealed October 22, 2007)
CITY OF KITCHENER ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT
PART IVFebruary 28, 2024
DESIGNATED PROPERTY INDEX
Register Inventory Inventory
PageReferencePage
Address
(CONT'D)
V
72tbd
Victoria Street South ΛbƚƷźĭĻ ƚŅ LƓƷĻƓƷźƚƓΏağƩ ЎͲ ЋЉЋЍΜ
Victoria Street South
120tbd
W
64Water Street Northtbd
100Water Street South38
150Water Street South/73 Heins Avenue20Shantz104
20Weber Street East/73-77 Queen Street North (Governor's 5Shantz20
House & Waterloo County Gaol, commonly known as County Collishaw9
Courthouse)Collishaw51
82Weber Street East/87 Scott Streettbd
Woodside Avenue (Harry Class Pool, former Woodside
11566Misc. Vol.157
Municipal Pool)
80Woolner Trail (formerly 748 Zeller Drive)80-81Misc. Vol.11
X
Y
11Young Street (former Mayfair Hotel) - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ ЋЉЊЎ 107-108
31Young Street - 5ĻƒƚƌźƭŷĻķ ЋЉЉЏ 86-87Campbell32
73Young Streettbd
Z
INDEX OF BUILDINGS PROTECTED UNDER
OTHER LEGISLATION
Weber Street West (CNR Station - see index of Buildings
N/ACollishaw86
Protected Under Other Legslation)
Misc. Vol.31
Statement of Significance
163-165 VICTORIA STREET SOUTH
Municipal Address:
163-165 Victoria Street South,Kitchener
Legal Description:
Plan 104 Lot 2
Year Built:c. 1924
Architectural Style:Vernacular
Original Owner:
Original Use:Residential
Condition:Good
Description of Historic Place
th
163-165 Victoria Street Southisaonestoreyearly 20century buildingbuilt in the
Vernacular architectural stylewith minor Art Deco influences.The buildingis situated on
a0.12acre parcel of land located on the eastsideof Victoria Street Southbetween
Park Streetand Theresa Streetin the Victoria ParkPlanning Communityof the City of
Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributesto the
heritage value isthe residentialbuilding.
Heritage Value
163-165 Victoria Street Southis recognized for itsdesign and physical values.
The design and physical valuesrelate tothe Vernacular architecture of the building,
including the minor Art Deco influences. The building is in good condition. The building
features: red/black rugged brick; 6/1 windows with concrete headers and sills; single 6
pane windows with concrete headers and sills; small decorative concrete floral motifs;
verandah in front of residential portion of building; and, a storefront in front of the
commercial portion of the building.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 163-165 Victoria Street Southresides in the following heritage
attributes:
All elements related to the construction andArt Decoarchitectural style of the
building, including:
o Roof and roofline;
o Windows and window openings, including:
6/1 windows with concrete headers and sills;
Single 6 pane windows with concrete headers and sills;
o Doors and door openings;
o Small decorative concrete floral motifs;
o Verandah in front of residential portion of building; and,
o Storefront in front of the commercial portion of the building.
Photos
163-165 Victoria Street South
163-165 Victoria Street South
163-165 Victoria Street South
163-165 Victoria Street South
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
, 2009
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
August 13
No
No
No
:No
Date
Unknown
Unknown Unknown Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown Unknown
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
Setting
N/A
N/AN/AN/A
N/A
N/A
YWC/MW
N/A
N/AN/A
:
N/A
YesYes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Details
Yes
YesYes
Yes
Recorder Name
NoNo
No No
No
No
No
NoNoNo
RECORDER
RECORDER
nown
Rear Façade
Unknown Unknown
UnknownUnknown
Unknown
els; built for people who live within walking distance (rather than cars)
Unknown
Unknown
UnkUnknown
Unknown
c. 1924
:
N/AN/A
N/A
N/AN/A
N/A
N/A
N
C
N/AN/A
N/AR
Period
Right Façade
outbuildings,
ntinuity
example
?
of construction?
early
example of a
type
)
or
ts of its design,
or
method
neighbourhood or area?
neighbourhood?
meri
unique
Left Façade
external features that
style
or
ic achievement?
unique
or
,
city or
of the
rarerare
,,
teworthy?
material
degree of importance
cular
notablenotable
al link to its surroundings?
Façade
lar architectural
le landscaping or
visu
r character of the street,
Front
indicate
structure becausecomposition, craftsmanship or details?Does this structure demonstrate a high degreeof technical or scientifoIs the setting or orientation of the structureor landscaping
noteworthy?Does it provide a physical, historical, functionalwithin the region,(notabcomplete the site?
particuIs this a particularly attractive or uniqueIs the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship Does this structure contribute to the coorIs this a particularly important visual
landmark Does this structure have other original
Is this a Is this a
of a partiand/or detail norugged brick, concrete headers and sills, concrete flower motifs, wood windows, roofline, brick details, porchrelationship of residential to commercial storefront;
concrete lint
165 Victoria Street South
-
:
163
:
Committee:
-
Field Team:
City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form AddressDescriptionPhotographs:Design or Physical Value StyleConstruction Design
InteriorNotesSub Contextual Value ContinuitySetting Landmark Completeness
Notes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
N/AN/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
RECORDER
RECORDER
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
organization
t?
?
with and/or
s
place, an event,
over time?
t of its original materials
within the City
aken place
the important contribution it
rugged red/black brick similar to a few houses on Park Street; scale of building fits with residential
or unique
e definition of a significant built heritage
valued for
ce of brick sign features?
the structure occupy its original site?
if relocated, i.e. relocated on it
ignificant
:
is s
ote
Doesoriginal site, moved from another site, etc.
at
nderstanding of the history of a
Does this building retain mosIs this building in good condition?
Is this a notable structure due to sympatheticalterations that have t
N
and de
u
roperty or structure have strong associations
Committee: choi
-
property or structure
Field Team:Sub Integrity Site Alterations ConditionNotesField Team:Historical or Associative Value & Significance Does this pcontribute
to the understanding of a belief, person, activity, or institution thIs the original, previous or existing use significant?Does this property meet thresource or cultural heritage landscape,
as identified in the Provincial Policy Statement under the Ontario Planning AcAmakes to our or a people?Notes
Statement of Significance
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Street
Municipal Address:
187-193 Victoria Street South /
55-57 Henry Street, Kitchener
Legal Description:
Plan 107 Lots 29 and 30
Year Built:1914
Architectural Style:
Queen Anne
Original Owner:The Berlin Building
And Supply Company
Original Use:Residential
Condition:Good
Description of Historic Place
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Streetisatwostoreyearly 20thcentury
apartment buildingbuilt in the Queen Annearchitectural style. The buildingis situated
on a 0.21acre parcel of land located on the eastsideof Victoria Street Southbetween
Walnut Streetand Henry Streetin the Victoria ParkPlanning Communityof the City of
Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributesto the
heritage value isthe residentialapartment building.
Heritage Value
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Streetis recognized for itsdesign and
physical values.
The design and physical valuesrelate totheQueen Annearchitectural style that is in
good condition with many intact original elements. The building features:
plan; red brick; flat roof; continuous castellated parapet along the north and east
elevations; projecting cornice with a plain frieze supported by block modillions over a
dentillated fascia; two identical entrances on Victoria Street that include a two bay
porch with concrete side steps, lattice at the base, brick piers with tapering pillars that
support the pediment roof, shingle hand rail, and cement lintels and sills; square picture
windows with transoms, including stained glass transoms; 1/1 double hung windows
with concrete lintels and sills; one entrance on Henry Street that is identical to the
entrances on Victoria Street; three oriel windows with 9/1 hung windows; and, date
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Streetresides in the
following heritage attributes:
All elements related to the construction andQueen Anne architectural style of the
building, including:
o
o red brick;
o roof and roofline, including:
flat roof;
continuous castellated parapet along the north and east elevations;
projecting cornice with a plain frieze supported by block modillions
over a dentillated fascia;
o two identical entrances on Victoria Street that include a two bay porch with
concrete side steps, lattice at the base, brick piers with tapering pillars that
support the pediment roof, shingle hand rail, and cement lintels and sills;
o windows and window openings, including:
square picture windows with transoms, including stained glass
transoms;
1/1 double hung windows with concrete lintels and sills;
three oriel windows with 9/1 hung windows;
o entrance on Henry Street that is identical to the entrances on Victoria
Street; and,
o
Photos
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Street (Victoria StreetElevation)
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Street (Victoria Street Elevation)
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Street (Victoria Street Elevation)
187-193 Victoria Street South / 55-57 Henry Street (Henry Street Elevation)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
, 2009
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
August 13
No
No
:NoNo
Date
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
nknown
U
Unknown
Unknown Unknown
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
N/A
Setting
N/A
N/AN/A
N/A
N/A
YWC/MW
N/A
N/AN/A
:
N/A
YesYes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Details
Yes
Yes
YesYes
Recorder Name
NoNo
No No
No
No
No
NoNoNo
ginal doors and windows
RECORDER
RECORDER
Rear Façade
Unknown Unknown
UnknownUnknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
UnknownUnknown
Unknown
1914
:
N/AN/A
N/A
N/AN/A
N/A
N/A
N
C
N/AN/A
N/AR
Period
Right Façade
example
?
of construction?
a high degree
early
example of a
type
)
or
57 Henry Streetts of its design,
or
-
method
neighbourhood or area?
neighbourhood?
meri
unique
Left Façade
external features that
style
or
ic achievement?
unique
or
,
city or
rarerare
n,
,,
teworthy?
material
degree of importance
cular
notablenotable
al link to its surroundings?
Façade
le landscaping or
historic link to industry
visu
r character of the street,
Front
indicate
structure because of thecomposition, craftsmanship or details?Does this structure demonstrate of technical or scientifoIs the setting or orientation of the structureor landscaping noteworthy?Does
it provide a physical, historical, functionalwithin the regio(notabcomplete the site?
particular architectural Is this a particularly attractive or uniqueIs the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship Does this structure contribute to the continuityorIs this a particularly
important visual landmark Does this structure have other original outbuildings,
Is this a Is this a
of a partiand/or detail noparapet, cornice, frieze, fascia, date stone, porches, stained glass, some ori
193 Victoria Street South / 55
-
Italianate
:
187
:
Field Team:
City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form AddressDescriptionPhotographs:Design or Physical Value StyleConstruction Design
InteriorNotes Contextual Value ContinuitySetting Landmark Completeness
Notes Field Team:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
YesYes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE
N/AN/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
o be Wilmot Street
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
RECORDER
RECORDER
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Victoria Street used t
Unknown
Unknown
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
organization
t?
?
with and/or
s
place, an event,
over time?
e advantage of the corner lot with entrances on both streets
t of its original materials
within the City
aken place
the important contribution it
or unique
designed to tak
e definition of a significant built heritage
valued for
sign features?
if relocated, i.e. relocated on it
ignificant
:
is s
ote
Does the structure occupy its original site?original site, moved from another site, etc.
at
nderstanding of the history of a
Does this building retain mosIs this building in good condition?
Is this a notable structure due to sympatheticalterations that have t
N
and de
u
roperty or structure have strong associations
Committee: orientation Committee: early example of a low rise apartment; Wilmot Apartments
--
property or structure
Sub Integrity Site Alterations ConditionNotesField Team:Historical or Associative Value & Significance Does this pcontribute to the understanding
of a belief, person, activity, or institution thIs the original, previous or existing use significant?Does this property meet thresource or cultural heritage landscape, as identified
in the Provincial Policy Statement under the Ontario Planning AcAmakes to our or a people?Notes Sub
ees to mature to
ished by their tree-lined
Benton Street is also a
se boulevard widths were
of Kitchener's oldest
rful backdrop that makes
e of the 1896 Victoria
the traditional pattern of of the century). The
transitioning to the adjacent
st settlement took place on Queen
church and a converted factory.
3
ure of factories, factory owner's
worker's homes, and the factories in
erties, an apartment building and a
e historic Joseph Schneider House
t yards have allowed tr
neighbourhood, coniferous trees were
of small local residential streets with varying
residential areas distingu
lity of early Berlin society and is now distinct for
fracture the streetscape.
is the romantic landscap
planted in front yards becau
have matured into a wonde
The neighbourhood has some
ea of Kitchener reflecting
in the city), which is now a heavily trafficked primary
om the 1880s, 1890s and turn
Street forms the north boundary,
It is one that included
ter high-rise apartment buildings, a
in which they worshipped. The earlie
hbourhood character. With its mixt
along with Berlin vernacular style
This gives the neighbourhood a special quality that does not exist in
Like the Mount Hope/Breithaupt
ese boundaries are a number
ing citizens of the day (including th
gnificant history and architecture, diversity of use, scale and character, with
velopment sites including church prop
of the 19th Century. The generous fron
residential. Joseph
community and central location.
2
Central Business district. Within thlot sizes and building styles and types (primarily frneighbourhood landscape consists of large specimen trees intentionally left narrow and open.
planted in rear yards to increase privacy and these treesthe composition of mid-blocks very appealing visually. trees dating to the latter part
The Victoria Park Neighbourhood is a large, diverse arnineteenth century urban development. streets of large houses for the leadMuseum, Kitchener's oldest building), which they worked
and the churches Street South (one of the first two major thoroughfares arterial road. It is a street with siQueen Anne style houses, early and laHowever, large vacant lots, surface
parking and heavy traffic major arterial road with larger deformer factory converted to their maximum size and best form. newer communities. At the centre of the neighbourhoood,Park,
which further enhances the neighouses and worker's housing, the area reflects the unique quaits mixed use, diversity of
DESCRIPTION:
YES
Neighbourhood
HISTORIC THEMES:Early/Significant Residential Neighbourhood LANDSCAPE TYPE:ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL:
1
seph, Victoria, Benton and the Highland
14
14
Victoria Park Neighbourhood
d boundary, there are:
LOCATION:Located west of downtown and bound by JoRoad West.Within the Describe Designated HCDs:Designated Properties:Listed Properties:KEY MAP
L-NBR-7
sity of use, scale and
s oldest trees dating to
yles including Queen Anne,
e associated romantic
ilding styles and types
House with view of park.Specimen trees in front yard.Finely detailed Queen Anne style house.Industrial - residential edge.Decorative porches typical of area.Landscape trend towards removal
of lawns.
CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES:
LIST OF FIGURES:
Character defining features of this community include its residential streets with mature plantings and deep setbacks; its divercharacter; its small local residential streets with varying
lot sizes and bu(primarily from the 1880s, 1890s and turn of the century); landscaping of large specimen trees which include some of Kitchener'the latter part of the 19th Century; mature
coniferous trees planted in rear yards to increase privacy; and views to thlandscape of the 1896 Victoria Park. A range of residential architectural st
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
6
5
4
park contribute
COMMUNITY VALUE
COMMUNITY IMAGE IDENTIFIED WITH KITCHENER'S PROVINCIAL/NATIONAL REPUTATIONPLANNING - IDENTIFIED THROUGH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
COMMUNITY IDENTITY -TELLS STORY OF AREAPUBLIC STEWARDSHIP SUPPORTED BY VOLUNTEERISMTOURISM - PROMOTED AS TOURIST DESTINATIONLANDMARK - RECOGNIZED BY COMMUNITYCOMMEMORATION - SITE USED
FOR CELEBRATIONS PUBLIC SPACE - USED FOR FREQUENT PUBLIC EVENTSCULTURAL TRADITIONS -USED TO EXPRESS CULTURAL TRADITIONSQUALITY OF LIFE - VALUED FOR ITS DAY-TO-DAY IMPACT ON COMMUNITY
LIFELOCAL HISTORY - CONTRIBUTING TO LOCAL LOREVISUALLY SIGNIFICANT PHOTOGRAPHED OFTENGENUS LOCI - SENSE OF PLACE
Neighbourhood and significantly to Kitchener's civic identity; strong emotional ties to the park and the programmes it offers.
tells the story
CULTURAL VALUE
DESIGN VALUE - AESTHETIC/SCENIC REASONSHISTORIC VALUE - HISTORIC UNDERSTANDING OF AREACONTEXTUAL VALUE -LANDMARK VALUE
DESIGN VALUE - RARENESS OR UNIQUENESSDESIGN VALUE - HIGH DEGREE TECHNICAL / SCIENTIFIC INTERESTHISTORIC VALUE - DIRECT ASSOCIATION WITH A THEME, EVENT OR PERSONHISTORIC VALUE-WORK OF
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, ARCHITECT OR OTHER DESIGNERCONTEXTUAL VALUE -IMPORTANT IN DEFINING CHARACTER OF AREACONTEXTUAL VALUE -HISTORICALLY, PHYSICALLY, FUNCTIONALLY OR VISUALLY LINKED
TO SURROUNDINGS
This neighbourhood of the mid to late nineteenth Century development of the City of Kitchener both in terms of the factories that were established here, together with associated residences,
and in terms of the development of institutional buildings and a variety of small to imposing houses set in a treed landscape. At its core is Victoria Park, the embodiment of the Cities
Beautiful movement, and one of the most elegant parks in Canada.
HISTORICAL INTEGRITY
LAND USE - CONTINUITY OF USE OWNERSHIP - CONTINUITY OF OWNERSHIP BUILT ELEMENTS - ORIGINAL GROUPINGS AND ASSOCIATED SITES VEGETATION - ORIGINAL PATTERNS CULTURAL RELATIONSHIPS - SUPPORTING
DESIGNED ELEMENTS NATURAL FEATURES -PROMINENT NATURAL FEATURES NATURAL RELATIONSHIPS -FEATURES THAT DETERMINE USE VIEW THAT REFLECTS LANDSCAPE CHARACTER FROM HISTORIC PHOTOS RUIN -
HUMAN MADE REMNANTS DESIGNED LANDSCAPES THAT HAVE RESTORATION POTENTIAL
This area illustrates the evolution of the early development of Kitchener through to the 1890's and includes street patterns, houses and factory buildings with the whole area centred
on Victoria Park. However, more recent appearance of large vacant lots, surface parking and heavy traffics detract from the overall integrity of the district.
dustrial economy,
reets. Consistent
a very short time
y complexes shown
in centres such as
es in the city. Limited
e manufactured items
workers lived and who were
ies with locations across
The quality of these mostly
evolution from all brick
ph and the retail company's
the Lang Tanning Company,
trial cities arose from the
to the mid-20th. Of interest too
fire halls and commercial
eed, there was a river junction here
the Highland Park Ford Plant for
ger warehouses to store products for
3
in the Warehouse District, bordering
evelopment of the in
20th century and this caused, in turn, made from the extensive old growth
over 15,000 to over 19,000. The
il stores in major centres and were
ble from adjacent st
completed within ncentration of other typically multi-
seven of the factor
mmuters.
rd Motor Company and became known
es, such as Eaton's, Simpson's, Sears and
ia corridor including the former Dominion
of rail lines (Grand Trunk became
rn co
and work in grace and comfort.
ode
18th century, was typically the growth of industrial
e community, many of th
s by train as manufactured
that the factories were profitable and sources of high-
the houses in which the
the turn of the
and sometimes by the trainload. This mass production
transported in and fabricated materials to be
with access to the telegra
system connected the factor
these structures combine an
ominent of the cultural landscap
rm of houses, schools,
most of the world, indus
Kaufman Rubber Company,
of most m
produced the Model T car and perfected the concept of
example, and as a result of the d
1908, the same year he designed
sport. Kitchener was different. Ind
in most cases, went to giant retaeel dating from the late 19th century
pment fabricated for farming were included in the production. Coal to
at whole districts in the City were
rs. It should be noted that the Kaufman Rubber Company building was
manufacture of products and even lar
re than 1000 buildings for the Fo
centre of the community. At least
s between 1911 and 1913 from just
rehouse and factory buildings remain
oth and leather products. Furnishings
a. The Kaufman Building and the co
e farmland surrounding th
, in the form of the convergence ge-scale transport of good
track corridor makes this area highly visi
s of these structures were
the evolution of large department stor
economy where workers could live
itchener remain in the Breithaupt and Victor
2
Kitchener was a centre of industrial growth in Canada atsuch a rapid increase in population thframe between 1900 and 1920. As an the population grew in the two yearresult was an explosion
in support facilities in the foenterprises to support the increase in population. Inavailability of power and transportation and this, during the areas using water power and water
tranbut the rivers were made of ironoperational in 1856) which allowed raw materials to beexported. Using products from thincluded clothing in the form of clforests to the north and
west and equipower the industries was brought in by rail. The rail North America and products were made by the boxcar required both large buildings for the bulk train shipments. These
shipments,distributed across the continent to the order of anyone catalogue. In North America,others arose directly from the larKitchener. Many of the original wathe rail line as
it slices through the on the 1911 plan of KTire Company, Krug Furniture (still operational), the the Rumpel Felt Co. and several othedesigned by Albert Kahn (1869-1942) inHenry Ford.
It was in this plant that Henry Ford mass production. Kahn designed moas the architect of the industrial erstoried structures, is distinct and perhaps the most prtrees and long views
along the in overall design, with tall floors and large windows, construction through to concrete and stis that the immediate neighbourable to walk to work in a manner that is the envy
brick residential neighbourhoods also tells a strong story paying jobs that created an
DESCRIPTION:
YES
Industrial/Commercial
ortation
p
ment, Trans
p
o
l
HISTORIC THEMES:Industrial Commercial Development, Urban Deve LANDSCAPE TYPE:ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL:
1
upt, Francis, Victoria and Belmont.
05
16
Warehouse District
d boundary, there are:
LOCATION:Bound by Glasgow, Dominion, Breitha Within the Describe Designated HCDs:Designated Properties:Listed Properties:KEY MAP
L-COM-1
round.
g
ways Kitchener's reason for
hbourhood in fore
g
t nei
p
Dominion Tire factory designed by Albert Kahn c.1912Small factory in Warehouse District.Public art from industrial artifacts.Representative example of residential houses within Warehouse
District.Breithaupt factory, adaptively reused as office space.Aerial view of Warehouse District with treed Mt. Hope Breithau
CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES:
LIST OF FIGURES:
Contains industrial landmarks historically important to the City and in many developing as an urban industrial centre.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
6
5
4
COMMUNITY VALUE
COMMUNITY IMAGE IDENTIFIED WITH KITCHENER'S PROVINCIAL/NATIONAL REPUTATIONPLANNING - IDENTIFIED THROUGH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
COMMUNITY IDENTITY -TELLS STORY OF AREAPUBLIC STEWARDSHIP SUPPORTED BY VOLUNTEERISMTOURISM - PROMOTED AS TOURIST DESTINATIONLANDMARK - RECOGNIZED BY COMMUNITYCOMMEMORATION - SITE USED
FOR CELEBRATIONS PUBLIC SPACE - USED FOR FREQUENT PUBLIC EVENTSCULTURAL TRADITIONS -USED TO EXPRESS CULTURAL TRADITIONSQUALITY OF LIFE - VALUED FOR ITS DAY-TO-DAY IMPACT ON COMMUNITY
LIFELOCAL HISTORY - CONTRIBUTING TO LOCAL LOREVISUALLY SIGNIFICANT PHOTOGRAPHED OFTENGENUS LOCI - SENSE OF PLACE
A source of employment for many people living in Kitchener and the surrounding area.
CULTURAL VALUE
DESIGN VALUE - AESTHETIC/SCENIC REASONSHISTORIC VALUE - HISTORIC UNDERSTANDING OF AREACONTEXTUAL VALUE -LANDMARK VALUE
DESIGN VALUE - RARENESS OR UNIQUENESSDESIGN VALUE - HIGH DEGREE TECHNICAL / SCIENTIFIC INTERESTHISTORIC VALUE - DIRECT ASSOCIATION WITH A THEME, EVENT OR PERSONHISTORIC VALUE-WORK OF
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, ARCHITECT OR OTHER DESIGNERCONTEXTUAL VALUE -IMPORTANT IN DEFINING CHARACTER OF AREACONTEXTUAL VALUE -HISTORICALLY, PHYSICALLY, FUNCTIONALLY OR VISUALLY LINKED
TO SURROUNDINGS
Explains the development history of Kitchener and is contextually important to surrounding neighbourhoods. Contains industrial buildings of the famous architect, Albert Kahn, and architectural
design that will never be repeated again.
Kitchener was
HISTORICAL INTEGRITY
LAND USE - CONTINUITY OF USE OWNERSHIP - CONTINUITY OF OWNERSHIP BUILT ELEMENTS - ORIGINAL GROUPINGS AND ASSOCIATED SITES VEGETATION - ORIGINAL PATTERNS CULTURAL RELATIONSHIPS - SUPPORTING
DESIGNED ELEMENTS NATURAL FEATURES -PROMINENT NATURAL FEATURES NATURAL RELATIONSHIPS -FEATURES THAT DETERMINE USE VIEW THAT REFLECTS LANDSCAPE CHARACTER FROM HISTORIC PHOTOS RUIN -
HUMAN MADE REMNANTS DESIGNED LANDSCAPES THAT HAVE RESTORATION POTENTIAL
Has been used for the same purpose since the railway was originally established in 1856. Retains several factories and industrial buildings that date prior to 1912, when officially
incorporated as a city.
mcCallumSather
Appendices
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Appendices
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
Appendices
169-183 Victoria Street South & 59 Park Street, City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
mcCallumSather
mcCallumSather
Applicable Heritage Policies & Guidelines
1. Ontario Heritage Act (R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18) – Part V
2. City of Kitchener Heritage Permit Application Submission Requirements (2024)
3. Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Plan
4. Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in
Canada
5. City of Kitchener Official Plan – Cultural Heritage Policies
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8924
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: June 30, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-324
SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Applications HPA-2025-V-00 & HPA-2025-V-00
11 Roy Street & 68 Queen Street North
Demolition of Two Single-Detached Buildings
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2025-V-015 to permit the demolition of the single-detached building located on
the property municipally addressed as 11 Roy Street be refused; and further
THAT pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2025-V-016 to permit the demolition of the single-detached building located on
the property municipally addressed as 68 Queen Street North be refused.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to recommend refusal of the proposed demolition of two
designated heritage resources located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District, identified as Group A and Group B buildings. The two resources
are municipally addressed as 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North.
The key finding of this report is that while redevelopment could be feasible on the subject
land, from a heritage perspective there are issues with specifics of this development
proposal. The proposed demolition will result in harmful and permanent impacts to two
protected heritage resources, the surrounding streetscapes, and the overall Civic
Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District as a whole. There is no
demonstration within the submitted heritage permit application and supporting material
that the proposal is consistent with any heritage planning policy framework, including
the Heritage Ontario Act, Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement, Kitchener Official
Plan, or Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan. A
comprehensive breadth of appropriate mitigation measures is not identified within the
proposal to mitigate negative impacts.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Community engagement included consultation with the applicants and their retained
architect and heritage professionals, as well as consultation with the Heritage Kitchener
Committee.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-015 and HPA-2025-V-16 proposes the complete
demolition of two protected heritage structures municipally addressed as 11 Roy Street and
68 Queen Street North. Both buildings are designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act, being located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District and
identified within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan as a
Group B building and Group A building, respectively. The demolitions are being proposed
in advance of a conceptual future redevelopment that includes some supportive housing
units that has not received any planning or building approvals. The proposed demolition is
not consistent with provincial and municipal policies, including the Ontario Heritage Act,
Planning Act, Provincial Planning Statement, Kitchener Official Plan, and Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan, does not include full consideration of
the adverse impacts that may occur, and does not consider sufficient mitigation measures.
As such, Heritage Planning staff can not recommend approval of the submitted Heritage
Permit Applications.
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA-
2025-V-015 and HPA-2025-V-016requesting permission to demolish the single-detached
buildings located on a consolidated piece of land and municipally addressed as 11 Roy
Street and 68 Queen Street North, respectively.
The subject lands are part of a consolidated parcel of land that also includes the property
Presbyterian Church. The whole parcel of land is approximately 1.4 acres in size and is
bound by Weber Street West to the north, Queen Street North to the east, and Roy Street
to the south (Figure 1). The parcel of land contains three individual structures the three-
storey place of worship (original buildings with additions), and the two single-detached
former residential dwellings (one vacant and one used for office). The majority of the land is
covered by asphalt parking, with minimal landscaping (Figure 2 and Figure 3).
11 Roy Street is located on the south side of Roy Street, between Queen Street North and
Young Street. It has been in the ownership of St. Andrews Presbyterian Church since 1982,
when the estate was granted to its Trustees. 11 Roy Street has been vacant since 2018.
68 Queen Street North is a corner property located adjacent to 11 Roy Street, with frontage
onto the south side of Roy Street and west side of Queen Street North. The property was
Queen Street North currently functions as an office space, with two law firms Maple
Cameron Law and Harper Shelly Law
Church.
Figure 1: Location Map with Subject Parcel of Land Outlined in Red.
Figure 2: Aerial View of Subject Parcel of Land Showing Existing Conditions of Site.
Buildings Proposed for Demolition Identified by Dashed Line.
Figure 3: Asphalt Parking on the Parcel of Land
The parcel of land is designated as Strategic Growth Area A within the City of Kitchener
Official Plan and is located just outside the boundary of the Urban Growth Centre. It is within
a Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA). It is zoned as Strategic Growth Area 2
(SGA-2) under Zoning By-law 2019-051. Within the Civic Centre District Heritage
Conservation District Plan, it holds split designation, with the majority of the lands including
the portion the Church is on being designated Community Institutional and the portions that
11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street are on being designated Medium Density Commercial
Residential.
Heritage Value
Both 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North are designated under Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act, being located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District (CCNHCD).
The CCNHCD is an important historical residential neighbourhood with links to several key
periods in the development of the City of Kitchener. There is a significant concentration of
recognizable architectural styles and features within the buildings of the CCNHCD, and
many are associated with historically important industrialists and community leaders. As a
result of both the built environment and the landscape within the CCNHCD, it possesses a
distinct character. Per the CCNHCD Plan, key heritage attributes of the district include a
wealth of well maintained, finely detailed buildings from the late 1800s and early 1900s that
are largely intact; anumber of unique buildings, including churches and commercial
buildings, which provide distinctive landmarks within and at the edges of the District; and a
significant range of recognizable architectural styles and features including attic gable roofs,
decorative trim, brick construction, porches and other details, associated with the era in
which they were developed.
It should also be noted that, per the 2014 Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study
approved by Council in 2015, the Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD is also identified as a
cultural heritage landscape.
The CCNHCD Plan categorizes the building stock of the CCNHCD into four different groups
depending on their built form, physical condition, and heritage integrity. The Groups range
from A, being the highest group, to D, being those properties which are not recognizable or
distinct architectural styles, do not exhibit standards of construction prevalent during the
development era of the district, are in poor condition, and which may not contribute
significantly to the heritage environment of the CCNHCD overall. 11 Roy is identified as
being a Group B building, meaning it is a fine example of a defined architectural style. 68
Queen Street North is identified as being a Group A building, meaning it is a very fine
example of a defined architectural style.
The first subject property (11 Roy Street) is a one-and-a-half storey single detached
dwelling, constructed as a residential home in the berlin vernacular style with craftsman
influences. These influences can be seen in elements such as the medium-pitch side-gabled
roof with wide eave overhangs, full-width porch with doubled and tripled square porch
columns, brick piers and shingle-clad balustrade, the grouped windows, and the shingled
gable ends. In addition
Church, specifically the community outreach services which the Church provides. 11 Roy
Street had for several years operated as the SOLO House, used first for a Vietnamese
refuge family and th
the property possesses contextual value given that it is located in situ, maintains its
historical, physical, and visual links to its surroundings, and continues to support the
character of both the Roy Street streetscape and the Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD as
a whole.
Figure 4: Photograph of Front Façade of 11 Roy Street.
Figure 5: Photographs of East and West Side Façades of 11 Roy Street.
The second subject property (68 Queen Street North) is a two-and-a-half-storey single-
detached dwelling, constructed as a residential home in the Classic Revival architectural
style.This can be seen in proportioning and balanceof the massing of the building as well
as its front facing gable, repetitive fenestration with large windows, and the inclusion of
classical elements like the dentils around the roofline and the portico with doric columns
flanking the front entrance. The building may have been designed by W.H.E Schmalz, a
prolific local architect. 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.
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
Finally, the property possesses
contextual value given that it is located in situ, maintains its historical, physical, and visual
links to its surroundings, and continues to support the character of both the Queen Street
North and Roy Street streetscape and the Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD overall.
Section 6.7.1 of the CCNHCD Plan (Case Studies) identifies 68 Queen Street North as a
preferred example of a commercial building conversion, where the exterior has been
preserved and maintained or reasonable alterations and additions to the rear have been
completed so the building may largely retain its original appearance and continue to
contribute to the character of the street.
Figure 6: Photograph of Front Facade of 68 Queen Street North.
Figure 7: Photographs of North and South Side Façades of 68 Queen Street North.
Process
th
Heritage Planning staff were contacted on September 20, 2023 by Facet Design (Steve
Burrows Architect)
Roy Street. Heritage Planning staff indicated that the property was designated under Part V
of the Ontario Heritage Act and that they would not be in support of demolition. Retention
and integration of the existing structure into any potential redevelopment plans was strongly
encouraged. Further conversations with Heritage Planning staff and other City staff
regarding demolition occurred over the remainder of 2023 and into 2024.
On behalf of the Owners, MHBC Planning submitted the heritage permit applications to the
nd
City on May 2, 2025. The applications to demolish the heritage buildings were made under
Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, as they are Part V Designated. A Heritage Impact
nd
Assessment dated May 2, 2025, and prepared by MHBC Planning, formed part of the
submission. Heritage Planning staff reviewed the application and provided comments
related to concerns for the overall application and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) on
nd
June 2
rd
, 2025. A revised HIA was submitted on
th
June 24, 2025. A Notice of Receipt for both heritage permit applications was issued on
July 14, 2025.
REPORT:
Proposal
Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-015 and Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-
V-016 are proposing the complete demolition of the two protected heritage resources
located on the properties municipally addressed as 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North, respectively.
The intent of the proposed demolition is to facilitate a future redevelopment project for
supportive housing, although no planning approvals have been issued to date.
The conceptual plan for the potential redevelopment is a 6-storey mixed-use building with
some supportive housing units, intended to include units for multigeneration families with
adult children with disabilities, as well as some affordable housing units. The majority of the
conceptual building is proposed to front onto Roy Street, with some frontage along Queen
Street North. A design for the new building has not been proposed which incorporates the
existing heritage homes in this location through means such as enveloping or stilting or
adaptive reuse. Enveloping and stilting requires careful architectural designs which
accommodate existing structures. The first approach involves developing a new structure
around an existing one with limited setbacks, while the second involves a new structure over
an existing one using linear supporting elements such as columns, beams, or cantilevers.
Adaptive reuse would involve repurposing the two existing structures in a way that could be
complementary to the intended redevelopment for example, constructing dwelling units in
a new building behind and adjacent to the existing structures while using the spaces for the
proposed amenity and creative uses.
While the proposed site plan does not retain two of the three protected heritage resources
on the land, it does retain a significant portion of the existing asphalt parking lot running
along the west side. Access to the surface parking is proposed via Roy Street and Weber
Street. Access to an underground parking structure is proposed via Queen Street North.
Further detailed design of the new building, including exact massing, fenestration, and
materiality, would be determined during the Site Plan process and would need to be in
compliance with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.
Figure 8: Conceptual Site Plan of Possible Future Redevelopment.
Draft Heritage Impact Assessment
ndth
A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) dated May 2, 2025 and revised June 24, 2025, has
been prepared by retained heritage consultants from MHBC Planning. The purpose of this
HIA was to assess the proposed demolition against existing policy frameworks, determine
what impacts to known cultural heritage resources may occur as a result, identify the most
appropriate approach and make recommendations towards mitigative measures.
The HIA concludes that the proposed demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North will result in major impacts of destruction, minor impact of isolation of the heritage
structure municipally addressed as 54 Queen
adverse impacts to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes. Some
consideration was given to alternative development options, including retaining all existing
built features in-situ and integrating into the development, removing just 11 Roy Street and
integrating 68 Queen Street North into the development, and relocating 68 Queen Street
North. The HIA identifies that none of these approaches are feasible due to financial cost. It
does identify that all alternatives would result in better outcomes for cultural heritage
resources. To mitigate some of the adverse impacts, the HIA suggests that a Salvage and
Documentation Plan be prepared and that a Phase II HIA be completed to analyze the
design of the proposed new building for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and
conformity with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.
A Structural Assessment Report has not yet been completed for either of the buildings. The
HIA submitted as part of the heritage permit applications package identifies that an appraisal
about seven years ago by Musso Appraisals
& Consulting Inc for the first subject property, and that this report identified the building to
be in average or dated condition with a complete renovation estimated to be between
$78,000-$177,500. A copy of the assessment report has not been provided to City staff.
Staff understand that no assessment has yet to be completed for 68 Queen Street North.
Heritage Planning Policy Framework
Ontario Heritage Act
The Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) is the legislation within Ontario which provides the province
and municipalities tools and authority to identify, evaluate, and protect properties of cultural
heritage value or interest, recognizing the significance of such site to our communities.
Section 41.1 (5) of the OHA establishes the required contents of a Heritage Conservation
District Plan, identifying that it must include both a statement of the objectives to be achieved
in designating the area as an HCD and policy statements intended to achieve the stated
objectives and manage change within the HCD. Objectives of the CCNHCD Plan are
identified in the section of this staff report titled Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District Plan. Heritage Planning staff would note here however that said
objectives speak against demolition.
Section 41.2 (1) of the OHA states that
conservation district plan is in effect in a municipality, the council of the municipality shall
not, (a) carry out any public work in the district that is contrary to the objectives set out in
the plan; or (b) pass a by-law for any purpose that is contrary to the objectives set out in
It should also be noted that Section 41.2(2) states that, in the event of a conflict between a
heritage conservation district plan and a municipal by-law that affects the designated district,
the plan prevails to the extent of the conflict.
Section 42(1) of the OHA states that no owner of property situated within a heritage
conservation district that has been designated by a municipality shall demolish or remove
any building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of a building or
structure on the property.
The Planning Act
Section 2 of the Planning Act identifies matters of provincial interest to be considered by
authorities during the land use planning process. Section 2(d) specifically includes the
conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or
scientific interest as being one such matter of provincial interest.
Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that decisions of Council
made under subsection (6.1), shall be consistent with the policy statements issued under
and
provincial plans that are in effect on that date, or shall not conflict with them, as the case
may b
Provincial Planning Statement
The 2024 Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) provides policy direction within the province
of Ontario on land use planning and development, addressing issues including but not
limited to the efficient use and management of land and infrastructure, the provision of
sufficient housing to meet changing needs, and conserving cultural heritage and
archaeological resources. The PPS recognizes the complex inter-relationships among
environmental, economic, and social factors in land use planning and is intended to provide
a comprehensive, integrated, and long-term approach to planning which recognizes the links
among the different policy areas.
Policy 4.6.1 the Protected heritage property, which may contain built
heritage resources or cultural heritage landscapes, shall be conserved.. It defines protected
heritage property as follows:
Means property designated under Part IV or VI of the Ontario Heritage Act; property
included in an area designated as a heritage conservation district under Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act; property subject to a heritage conservation easement or covenant under Part
II or IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; property identified by a provincial ministry or a prescribed
public body as a property having cultural heritage value or interest under the Standards and
Guidelines for the Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties; property protected under
Under the definition of the PPS, 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North are considered
protected heritage property. The PPS also provides the following definition of conserved:
Means the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources,
cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their
cultural heritage value or interest is retained. This may be achieved by the implementation
of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment, and/or
heritage impact assessment that has been approved, accepted or adopted by the relevant
planning authority and/or decision-maker. Mitigative measures and/or alternative
Built heritage resources are defined as follows:
Means a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured or constructed
by a community, including an
11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North meet the definition of built heritage resources. Per
the first sentence of the definition of conserved, the cultural heritage value or interest of built
heritage resources is to be retained. Demolition would not allow for retention of the cultural
heritage value or interest of the two structures. It should also be noted that the HIA submitted
as part of these heritage permit applications is in its draft stage.
The PPS recognizes and acknowledges Official Plans as being the most important vehicle
for implementation of the Provincial Planning Statement and for achieving comprehensive,
integrated, and long-term planning.
Kitchener Official Plan
The Kitchener Official Plan (KOP) provides the long-term vision for land use planning and
development within the City. It includes policies for heritage conservation, identifying the
importance of cultural heritage resources to Kitchener. Some objectives within the KOP
which relate to heritage conservation are as follows:
11.1.3. To create a built environment of human scale that respects and enhances
cultural heritage resources, natural heritage features, community character and
streetscape.
resources through their identification,
protection, use and/or management in such a way that their heritage values,
attributes and integrity are retained.
12.1.2. To ensure that all development or redevelopment and site alteration is
sensitive to and respects cultural heritage resources and that cultural heritage
resources are conserved.
Section 11 of the KOP includes policies which require new developments to be designed in
a manner which conserves cultural heritage landscapes. As identified in the section of this
staff report titled Heritage Value, the subject land is located within the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Cultural Heritage Landscape.
11.C.1.35. New development or redevelopment in a cultural heritage landscape will:
a) Support, maintain and enhance the major characteristics and attributes of the
cultural heritage landscape further defined in the City's 2014 City of Kitchener Cultural
Heritage Landscapes; b) Support the adaptive reuse of existing buildings; c) Be
compatible with the existing neighbourhood, including but not limited to the
streetscape and the built form; and, d) Respond to the design, massing and materials
of the adjacent and surrounding buildings.
Section 12 of the KOP is concentrated on cultural heritage resources. The following cultural
heritage policies should be noted.
12.C.1.1. The City will ensure that cultural heritage resources are conserved using
the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Planning Act, the Environmental
Assessment Act, the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act and the Municipal
Act.
12.C.1.16. It is the intent that the features which give the area its distinctive character
conserved through the adoption by by-law of a Heritage Conservation District Plan.
12.C.1.20. The City will make decisions with respect to cultural heritage resources
that are consistent with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, which require
the conservation of significant cultural heritage resources. In addition, such decisions
will be consistent with the Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the
Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.
12.C.1.21. All development, redevelopment and site alteration permitted by the land
cultural heritage resources. The conservation of significant cultural heritage
resources will be a requirement and/or condition in the processing and approval of
applications submitted under the Planning Act.
Within the KOP, conserved is defined as the identification, protection, management and use
of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a
manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained under Ontario
Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a
heritage conservation plan, archeological assessment, and/or heritage impact assessment.
Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches can be included in these
plans and assessments. This definition does not include consideration of demolition.
As the subject land is within a Strategic Growth Area and a Protected Major Transit Station
Area, the objectives and policies of Section 15 of the KOP also apply. Of particular note is
the following.
15.2.6. To conserve our cultural heritage resources and ensure new development
and redevelopment is sensitive to, enhances and reflects our past.
15.D.2.8. In a Heritage Conservation District, where there is a conflict between the
policies in this land use designation and the Heritage Conservation District Plan, the
Heritage Conservation District Plan will prevail.
15.D.2.29. All development or redevelopment will embrace, celebrate and conserve
the Cultural Heritage Resources in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and
Protected Major Transit Station Areas, and will be subject to the Cultural Heritage
Resources Policies in Section 12 and subject to any other supporting documents,
adopted by Council, including Heritage Conservation District Plans.
Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan
The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (CCNHCD Plan) came
into effect in 2008 through By-law No. 2008-38. It contains policies and guidelines intended
to manage change within the CCNHCD, including demolitions.
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the CCNHCD Plan lay out the goals, objectives, and principals of
the CCNHCD as a whole. These are the foundational components which inform the policies
and guidelines within it, and which demonstrate that the value of the heritage conservation
district lies not just in its individual parts but in the sum of its entirety. Relevant goals and
principles are as follows:
cultural heritage resources, including buildings, landscapes and historical
attributes, as described in the Study and Plan, rather than their demolition and
replacement; providing guidance for change so that the essential architectural and
streetscape character of the District is maintained and, wherever possible, enhanced.
Avoid the destruction and/or inappropriate alteration of the existing building stock,
materials and details by trongly discouraging the demolition of heritage
buildings and the removal or alteration of distinctive architectural details.
Maintain and Repair - All buildings require some continuous methods of conservation
as they are exposed to the constant deteriorating effects of weather and wear from
use. Owners are encouraged to undertake appropriate repair and maintenance
activities of heritage properties. Plans for alterations and restoration should also
consider the amount and type of maintenance that will be required.
Find a Viable Social or Economic Use - Buildings that are vacant or under-utilized
come to be perceived as undeserving of care and maintenance regardless of
architectural or historic merit. City Council and staff should actively encourage and
support appropriate forms of adaptive reuse when necessary to preserve heritage
properties.
Section 3.3.4 of CCNHCD Plan speaks specifically to demolition within the HCD. It
acknowledges that there are certain situations where demolition may be necessary, such as
when partial destruction of a resource has occurred due to a catastrophic event, severe
structural instability, or occasionally redevelopment that is in keeping with appropriate City
policies. It also lays out the following policies.
(a) The demolition of heritage buildings in the District is strongly discouraged.
(b) Any proposal to demolish a heritage building or portion of a heritage building that
is visible from the street or other public space within the District shall require a
heritage permit from the municipality.
(c) Where demolition of a heritage building is proposed, the property owner shall
provide supporting documentation demonstrating appropriate reasons for the
demolition.
(d) In situations where demolition is approved by Council, written and / or
photographic documentation of any notable architectural features and construction
techniques may be required to create a record of the building and its components.
(e) Reclamation of suitable building materials such as windows, doors, moldings,
columns, bricks, etc. for potential reuse in a new building on the site or as
replacement components for other buildings in the neighbourhood which require
repair and restoration over time is strongly encouraged if demolition is approved for
any heritage buildings in the District.
Heritage Conservation and Affordable Housing
It is understood that the conceptual future development is intended to include supportive
dwelling units for families with adult-children with disabilities, and will include some
affordable housing. Heritage planning staff are not in objection to the proposed use of the
redevelopment, and heritage policies do not regulate use. Objection stems from the
conceptual design of the redevelopment, which has been created in a manner that proposes
demolition of protected heritage resources.
There are several examples of affordable housing developments that have been undertaken
while also appropriately conserving heritage resources within the City of Kitchener alone.
Photograph Address Details
307 Queen
Part IV
Street South,
Designated
Kitchener (Bread
66 affordable
and Roses Co-
units (21 in
Operative
retained
Homes)
heritage
building)
25 Joseph Street
Part IV
(Historic Victoria
Designated
Public School)
100 subsidized
units
35 & 40 Sheldon
Part IV
Avenue North
Designated
(oneROOF
44 affordable
Youth Services)
units
Approved 2021
825 King Street
Heritage
Kitchener
Place)
Inventory
43 affordable
units
Approved 2021
137 Queen
Part V
Street South / 15
Designated
Church Street
21 affordable
(Historic St.
units
Pauls)
Conditional
approval 2023
49 Queen Street
Listed on
North (St. Peters
Municipal
Church
Heritage
Magnolia
Register
Apartments)
41 affordable
units
Approved 2023
97 Victoria Street
Part IV
North
Designated
44 affordable
units
Approved 2024
There are further examples within the City of Kitchener where heritage resources have been
retained, incorporated, and adaptively re-used in new housing developments of various
scales, from additions which add a modest number of new units to large developments.
Heritage Planning Comments
Heritage Planning staff are not in support of Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-015
to demolish the designated structure on 11 Roy Street. Heritage Planning staff are not in
support of Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-016 to demolish the designated
heritage resource on 68 Queen Street North. In review the two applications, the following
should be noted.
All applicable provincial and municipal policies require the conservation of heritage
properties. This includes the Ontario Heritage Act, the Planning Act, the Provincial
Planning Statement, the Kitchener Official Plan, and the Civic Centre Neighbourhood
Heritage Conservation District Plan. This proposal to demolish 11 Roy Street and 68
Queen Street North will result in the irrevocable loss of designated heritage properties
and is not consistent with such policies.
express objectives of the CCNHCD Plan. The policies of the CCNHCD Plan aim to
achieve these objectives, which is a statutory requirement identified by the OHA. In
this case, Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed demolition
intended to facilitate a redevelopment directly contravenes stated objectives and
policies, does not treat conservation as a guiding and directive principle, and fails to
demonstrate an integrated approach to design and execution as required by the
heritage planning framework.
Supported demolition of contributing properties are limited by specific parameters set
out in the CCNHCD Plan. At the time of this report, Heritage Planning staff are of the
opinion that these parameters do not apply to the two subject properties.
Further, it is the opinion of Heritage Planning staff that supporting documentation
demonstrating appropriate reasoning for demolition has not been provided, as
required by Policy 3.3.4 (c) of the CCNHCD Plan. Further commentary outlining staffs
concerns with the supporting documentation is provided in additional points within
this section of the report.
Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that a balance of heritage conservation and
development interests can be achieved on the subject properties without the
complete demolition of two protected resources. The purpose of heritage
conservation is not to stall growth and development, but to manage it in such a way
that our existing and limited heritage resources are protected at the same time. This
means that, when developing with a heritage resource, more careful and creative
design may be required then what is demanded by properties within the City that do
not contain heritage resources.
The proposed redevelopment proposal is not under any planning application and has
not been approved. Staff have been working with the Applicant on the proposed
redevelopment. Staff are also concerned about the potential loss of the existing
heritage resources without a replacement building ever being constructed.
Approval of the demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North may set a
precedent for further demolitions of contributing properties within the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District, or of other designated heritage
buildings within the City. It may also set a precedent for demolition by neglect (11
Roy), where the intentional or unintentional deterioration of a building becomes a
justification for demolition of a heritage resource. This may weaken the express intent
and authority of the CCNHCD P
Heritage conservation can be achieved at the same time as affordable housing
development. Examples which balance both planning objectives are included in the
section of this staff report titled Heritage Conservation and Affordable Housing.
Staff are willing to explore alternatives, zoning amendments or minor variances, off-
site parking arrangement, and/or alternative design solutions to permit a
redevelopment of a similar scale while retaining the existing built cultural heritage
resources.
A large portion of the consolidated parcel of land is asphalt parking lot. The
conceptual plan proposes to locate a new 6-storey building where two of the three
existing designated structures already stand, while maintaining much of the surface
parking space.
No evidence has been provided to the City that either 11 Roy Street or 68 Queen
Street North are structurally unsound.
o A site visit conducted from the street by City staff identified no major cracking
or other notable damages on the exterior of 11 Roy Street. Some of the
shingles on the side gables may need to be replaced, and it is assumed that
interior renovations and potentially new fixtures would be needed for the
property to once again be habitable. The lower windows and the covered
porch were boarded up sometime between 2020 and 2021.
o 68 Queen Street North appears to be in good condition and is being actively
used as office space. A site visit conducted from the street by City staff
identified no obvious cracks in the exterior, or other areas of damage or
disrepair.
The draft Heritage Impact Assessment submitted as part of the application does not
explicitly recommend demolition. As such, no qualified heritage professional has
identified being in support of these proposals.
Heritage Planning staff are in agreement with the submitted draft Heritage Impact
Assessment conclusion that the proposed demolitions, if approved and proceed, will
result in major adverse impacts to 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North.
Heritage Planning staff are not in agreement with the submitted draft Heritage Impact
Assessment conclusion that the demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North will have only a minor adverse impact to Roy Street and Queen Street North
streetscapes. Given that the demolitions will result in irreversible and permanent
change and include the loss of original heritage fabric that composes part of the
streetscapes, the impact will be at a minimum moderate.
o The HIA states that the streetscape of Queen Street North is predominately
institutional and identifies several buildings including the Kitchener Public
Library and County of Waterloo Courthouse as examples. Both these buildings
are located on the east side of Queen Street North and outside the boundaries
of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. The east
side of Queen Street is not included as part of the CCNHCD until north of Ellen
Street East. Queen Street North, within the boundaries of the CCNHCD,
contains a mix of building typologies including low-rise single-detached
buildings originally constructed for residential purposes, a few modern high-
rise apartment buildings, and another Place of Worship (church).
o The HIA states that 11 Roy Street is sympathetic infill from 1923-1924, and as
it does not date to the original period of construction for the streetscape its
removal will result in only a minor impact. 48% of the buildings along Roy
constructed in the in or around the same time as 11 Roy Street.
In Heritage Planning staff opinion, the full extent of the adverse impact of destruction
is not appropriately considered within the Heritage Impact Assessment. The HIA does
not clearly provide commentary on the severity and irreversibility of the impact, the
length of time in which the impact would persist (indefinitely), the range and spatial
distribution of the impact (effecting both the immediate area and the CCNHCD
overall), and the rate of change.
o Further to this concern, Heritage Planning staff would also note that the HIA
does not include consideration of impacts to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood
Heritage Conservation District as a whole. The contextual value and the
significance of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North are not limited to only
adjacent properties and two streetscapes. Rather, the buildings within are part
of a collective whole which forms the Heritage Conservation District, and
consideration is required of the impact to the grouping overall in addition to the
singular components.
Heritage Planning staff would also note that very little information or explanation has
been provided in the HIA to justify why alternative development options would not be
feasible, beyond statements referencing financial constraints.
Our cultural heritage resources are a repres
and provides opportunities for understanding past events and trends, fostering a
holist identity, and creating a distinct sense of place. Heritage conservation can
further advance environmental objectives by conserving embodied carbon, reducing
material consumption, and diverting waste from landfills. Economically our heritage
resources are capable of stimulating commercial and tourism activities or creating
specialized industries. There are numerous, recognizable benefits to protecting
cultural heritage resources that go beyond the aesthetic value. As such, it should be
emphasised that heritage conservation within the City of Kitchener is an important
part of planning for both current and future generations.
Should Heritage Kitchener or Council wish to approve the demolition of either or both
properties, it should be noted that the approval of an application under the Ontario Heritage
Act is not a waiver of any of the provisions of any by-law of the City of Kitchener or legislation,
Zoning By-law. Redevelopment of the subject properties, including the design and
construction of a new building, will require an additional Heritage Permit Application and the
consent of Council under the Ontario Heritage Act. Heritage Planning staff are not opposed
to exploring intensification options on the subject lands and would be in support of the
proposed housing use. However, from a heritage perspective, intensification which
demands demolition cannot be supported. Intensification options should retain and
incorporate the buildings, with preference being first to maintaining them in-situ and second
to relocating them on site. Flexibility or compromise on other planning aspects, such as
height, parking, or built form, could be explored to achieve both retention and
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 of
the council / committee meeting.
CONSULT Heritage Kitchener will be consulted regarding the Heritage Permit
Applications.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O 1990
Planning Act, R.S.O 1990
Provincial Planning Statement, 2024
City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014
Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan, 2007
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-015 (11 Roy Street)
Attachment B Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-016 (68 Queen Street North)
Attachment C Draft Heritage Impact Assessment, MHBC Planning, June 24, 2025
PREPARED FOR:
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
11 Roy Street, 54 & 68 Queen Street N
HERITAGE
Kitchener, Ontario
File no. 2028A
IMPACT
22, , MayMay20220255
ASSESSMENT
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
| |
MHBC -MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited
200-540 Bingemans Centre Drive Kitchener, ON N2B 3X9
T: 519 576 3650
F: 519 576 0121
www.mhbcplan.com
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Table of Contents
Project Personnel......................................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Glossary of Abbreviations..............................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................. 5
Acknowledgement of Indigenous Communities..............................................................................................................................................................
................................................. 6
Other Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................ 6 6 6
Client Information:....................................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................................... 6 6 6
Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................. 7 7 7
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................ 9 9 9
1.1 Project Overview and Purpose.......................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................... 9
1.2 Description of the Subject Lands...................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................10
1.4 Description of Surrounding Area....................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................12
1.4.1. General.........................................................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................12
1.4.2. Adjacent Properties.............................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................15
1.5 Heritage Status....................................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................19
1.5.1 Heritage Status of the Subject Lands1.5.1 Heritage Status of the Subject Lands1.5.1 Heritage Status of the Subject Lands.........................................................................
................................................................................................................................19
1.5.2. Description and Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties1.5.2. Description and Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties1.5.2. Description and Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties................
........................20
2.0 Policy Framework2.0 Policy Framework2.0 Policy Framework...........................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................................................23
2.1 The Ontario Planning Act2.1 The Ontario Planning Act2.1 The Ontario Planning Act...................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................23
2.2 Provincial Policy Statement (2024)2.2 Provincial Policy Statement (2024)2.2 Provincial Policy Statement (2024).....................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................23
2.3 Ontario Heritage Act2.3 Ontario Heritage Act2.3 Ontario Heritage Act...............................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................25
2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit...................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................25
2.5 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)2.5 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)2.5 Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)......................................................................
25
2.6 City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014)2.6 City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014)2.6 City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014).........................................................................
.26
2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan...............................................................2
8
2.8 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007)2.8 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007)2.8 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage
Conservation District Plan (2007)........................30
3.0 Historical Overview3.0 Historical Overview3.0 Historical Overview......................................................................................................31
3.1 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Historical Context3.1 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Historical Context3.1 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Historical Context....................................................
........31
3.2 Historical Evolution of the Subject Lands....................................................................31
3.2.1 General Overview...............................................................................................31
3.2.2 Detailed Overview of Subject Lands.....................................................................40
MHBC | i
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
3.2.2.1 11 Roy Street (The Zollner House/ SOLO House)...............................................40
3.2.2.2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).................................42
3.2.2.3 68 Queen Street North (The Knell/ Rockel House)..............................................49
4.0 Existing Conditions of the Subject Lands...........................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................53
4.1 Built Features.....................................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................53
4.1.1 11 Roy Street....................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................535353
4.1.2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)4.1.2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)4.1.2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).............
...............................................................................................555555
4.1.3 68 Queen Street North............................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................565656
4.2 Landscape Features.................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................585858
5.0 Evaluation and Identification of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest5.0 Evaluation and Identification of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest5.0 Evaluation and Identification of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest......................................................................................................606060
5.1 Evaluation of the Subject Lands....................................................................................................................................................................
...............................................................................60
T
5.1.1. 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)5.1.1. 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)5.1.1. 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian
Church).........................................................................................................60
5.1.2. 68 Queen Street North...........................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................61
5.1.3. 11 Roy Street...................................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................61
5.4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value of the CCNHCD5.4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value of the CCNHCD5.4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value of the CCNHCD.....................................
.................................................................................................................62
F
6.0 Description of Proposed Development6.0 Description of Proposed Development6.0 Description of Proposed Development..................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................................63
7.0 Impacts Analysis...................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................67
7.1 Classifications of Impacts7.1 Classifications of Impacts7.1 Classifications of Impacts.............................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................67
7.2 Impact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North (Proposed for Removal)7.2 Impact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North (Proposed for Removal)7.2 Impact
Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North (Proposed for Removal)..68
A
7.2.1. Adverse Impact of Destruction7.2.1. Adverse Impact of Destruction7.2.1. Adverse Impact of Destruction...........................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................69
7.3 Impact Analysis for 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)7.3 Impact Analysis for 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)7.3 Impact Analysis for
54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).............72
7.4 Impact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage Properties7.4 Impact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage Properties7.4 Impact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage Properties...........................................
.............73
7.5 Impact Analysis for CCNHCD Streetscapes7.5 Impact Analysis for CCNHCD Streetscapes7.5 Impact Analysis for CCNHCD Streetscapes..................................................................73
7.6 Summary7.6 Summary7.6 Summary......................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................................................74
R
8.0 Consideration of Alternatives Development Options8.0 Consideration of Alternatives Development Options8.0 Consideration of Alternatives Development Options........................................
................75
8.1 Alternative Development Options8.1 Alternative Development Options8.1 Alternative Development Options...............................................................................75
8.1.1 Do Nothing8.1.1 Do Nothing8.1.1 Do Nothing.......................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................75
8.1.2 Retain All Existing Built Features In8.1.2 Retain All Existing Built Features In8.1.2 Retain All Existing Built Features In-Situ and Integrate into Development................75
8.1.3 Remove 11 Roy Street but Retain and Integrate Portion of 68 Queen Street North 8.1.3 Remove 11 Roy Street but Retain and Integrate Portion of 68 Queen Street North 8.1.3 Remove
11 Roy Street but Retain and Integrate Portion of 68 Queen Street North
D
into New Construction or Relocate 68 Queen Street North..............................................75
8.1.4 Relocate 68 Queen Street North..........................................................................76
8.1.5 Summary...........................................................................................................76
MHBC | ii
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
9.0 Mitigation Measures.....................................................................................................77
10.0 Conclusions and Recommendations.............................................................................78
11.0 Sources....................................................................................................................79
Appendix A.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................83
Map Figures............................................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................................83
Appendix B.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................848484
Conceptual Site Plan and Elevations....................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................848484
Appendix C.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................858585
Chain of Title.........................................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................858585
Appendix D.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................868686
HIA Terms of Reference.................................................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................86
T
Appendix E.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................87
11 Roy Street Group B Evaluation.......................................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................87
Appendix F.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................88
Property Evaluation Sheets.............................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................88
F
Appendix G.............................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................89
A
R
D
MHBC | iii
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Tables:
Table 1.0- Description of Properties within Subject Lands
Table 2.0- Description of Adjacent Heritage Properties
Table 3.0- Streetscape Characters
Table 4.0- Inventory Summary of Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan (2007)Inventory Summary of Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan (2007)Inventory Summary of Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan (2007)
Table 5.0- Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties
Table 6.0- Building Chronology (Construction and Renovation of 54 Queen St N) Building Chronology (Construction and Renovation of 54 Queen St N) Building Chronology (Construction and
Renovation of 54 Queen St N)
Table 7.0-Building Morphology of 54 Queen Street North Building Morphology of 54 Queen Street North Building Morphology of 54 Queen Street North
Table 8.0- Building Morphology of 68 Queen Street North Building Morphology of 68 Queen Street North Building Morphology of 68 Queen Street North
T
Table 9.0- Photos of Exterior Elevations of 11 Roy StreetPhotos of Exterior Elevations of 11 Roy StreetPhotos of Exterior Elevations of 11 Roy Street
Table 10.0- Photos of exterior elevations of 54 Queen Street NPhotos of exterior elevations of 54 Queen Street NPhotos of exterior elevations of 54 Queen Street N
Table 11.0- Photos of Exterior Elevations of 68 Queen Street North Photos of Exterior Elevations of 68 Queen Street North Photos of Exterior Elevations of 68 Queen Street North
F
Table 12.0-Photos of Landscape Features on Subject LandsPhotos of Landscape Features on Subject LandsPhotos of Landscape Features on Subject Lands
Table 13.0- Grading of Impact for Built Heritage and Historic Landscapes (ICOMOS)Grading of Impact for Built Heritage and Historic Landscapes (ICOMOS)Grading of Impact for Built Heritage
and Historic Landscapes (ICOMOS)
Table 14.0- Impact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street NorthImpact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street NorthImpact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North
A
Table 15.0- - - Demolition Policies (CCNHCD Plan)Demolition Policies (CCNHCD Plan)Demolition Policies (CCNHCD Plan)
Table 16.0Table 16.0Table 16.0- - - Impact Analysis for 54 Queen Street NorthImpact Analysis for 54 Queen Street NorthImpact Analysis for 54 Queen Street North
R
D
MHBC | 4
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Project Personnel
Dan Currie, MA, MCIP, RPP, Senior Review
CAHP
Rachel Redshaw, MA, HE Author, Fieldwork, Research, Fieldwork, Research, Fieldwork, Research
Dipl., CAHP
Christy Kirwan, BA, Dipl. CoCoCo---AuthorAuthorAuthor
CAHP-Intern
Paul LeeMap FiguresMap FiguresMap Figures
Glossary of Abbreviations
T
CCNHCD
HIA
F
HCD
MCM
MHBC
A
OHA
OHTKOHTKOHTK
OOO---REG 9/06REG 9/06REG 9/06
R
PPS 20PPS 20PPS 20222444
TPPTPPTPP
D
MHBC | 5
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Acknowledgement of Indigenous Communities
This Heritage Impact Assessment acknowledges that the subjectlands located at 11 Roy
Street, 54& 68Queen Street North, Kitchener, Ontario which is situated within the traditional
territory of the Anishinaabek, Haudenosaunee, AttiwandaronkAttiwandaronk, Mississauga, , Mississauga,
Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation. These lands are part of the Dish with One Spoon These lands are part of the Dish with One Spoon
Treaty between the Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabe peoples, an agreement to share, , an agreement to share,
protect resources and avoid conflict. The lands are also associated with the Haldimand Treaty associated with the Haldimand Treaty
and the Simcoe Patent- Treat 4, 1793.
This document takes into consideration the cultural heritage of This document takes into consideration the cultural heritage of indigenous communities indigenous communities
including their oral traditions and history when available and related to the scope of work.including their oral traditions and history when available and related to the scope of work.
Other Acknowledgements
TTTTTTT
This Heritage Impact Assessment also acknowledges theThis Heritage Impact Assessment also acknowledges theThis Heritage Impact Assessment also acknowledges theGrace Schmidt Room, Kitchener
Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener
Public Library and archival information from St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church for providing Public Library and archival information from St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church for providing
Public Library and archival information from St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church for providing
relevant information. It also acknowledges the information provided by Robert It also acknowledges the information provided by Robert It also acknowledges the information provided by
Robert Fewster, a
long-time and dedicated member of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church congregation.time and dedicated member of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church congregation.time and dedicated
member of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church congregation.
FFFFFFF
Client Information:
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
54 Queen Street North, Kitchener, Ontario 54 Queen Street North, Kitchener, Ontario 54 Queen Street North, Kitchener, Ontario
AAAAAAA
RRRRRRR
DDDDDDD
MHBC | 6
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Executive Summary
MHBC Planning, Urban Design and Landscape Architecture was retained by St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Churchto undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment for the subject lands,
which arecomprised of the properties located at 11 Roy Street and 54 and 68 Queen Street 11 Roy Street and 54 and 68 Queen Street 11 Roy Street and 54 and 68 Queen Street
North, City of Kitchener. The subject lands consist of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
and two single detached dwellings.The dwellings located at 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen The dwellings located at 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen The dwellings located at 11 Roy Street and 68
Queen
Street North are proposed for removal for the future construction of a residence for the future construction of a residence for the future construction of a residence for
multigeneration families with adult children with disabilities.
The properties are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation The properties are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation The properties
are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
. . . As the proposal As the proposal As the proposal
District and therefore designated under Part V of the
includes the removal of buildings which are considered protected heritage properties, thisincludes the removal of buildings which are considered protected heritage properties, thisincludes
the removal of buildings which are considered protected heritage properties, this
HIAhasassessed the following:
1)Impact on 11 Roy Street
o Demolition of existing building located at 11 Roy Street; Demolition of existing building located at 11 Roy Street; Demolition of existing building located at 11 Roy Street;
2)Impact on 68 Queen Street North
o Demolition of existing building located at Demolition of existing building located at Demolition of existing building located at 686868Queen Street NorthQueen Street NorthQueen Street
North;
3)Impact on 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)Impact on 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)Impact on 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian
Church)
4)Impact on Surrounding Heritage Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:Impact on Surrounding Heritage Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:Impact on Surrounding Heritage
Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:
20 Weber Street East 7320 Weber Street East 7320 Weber Street East 73---77 Queen Street77 Queen Street77 Queen Street, , , North Waterloo County Gaol and North Waterloo County Gaol and
North Waterloo County Gaol and
Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Regionally
Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)
83-85 Queen Street North, Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)85 Queen Street North, Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)85 Queen Street North, Kitchener Public Library
Main Branch (Listed)
16 Roy Street16 Roy Street16 Roy Street(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
20 Roy Street20 Roy Street20 Roy Street(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
23 Roy Street23 Roy Street23 Roy Street(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
18 Weber Street West18 Weber Street West18 Weber Street West(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)
The following provides the impacts that were identified within The following provides the impacts that were identified within The following provides the impacts that were identified
within Section 7.0 of this report:
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy Street;Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy Street;Major impact of destruction as it relates
to removal of 11 Roy Street;
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction
as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;
Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of
isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was
used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years
for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the
community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact
is anticipated to be mitigated by the future
construction of construction of construction of the new proposed development which is intended to continue the
Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach
services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews
and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition of service to the community; and
Minor adverse impact to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within
the CCNHCD.
MHBC | 7
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Should the removal of these structures proceed as proposed, it is recommended that the
following documents be prepared in advance of demolition:
Complete a Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Complete a Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Complete a Salvage and Documentation
Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North as per Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable North as per Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable North as per
Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable
material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the
repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage
of material and documentation prior to demolition works (i.e. highof material and documentation prior to demolition works (i.e. highof material and documentation prior to demolition
works (i.e. high---resolution resolution resolution
photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural
drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;
This HIA is solely related to impacts resulting from the proposed removal of This HIA is solely related to impacts resulting from the proposed removal of This HIA is solely related to
impacts resulting from the proposed removal of 11 Roy 11 Roy 11 Roy
Street and 68 Queen Street North. It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be Street and 68 Queen Street North. It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be Street and 68 Queen Street North.
It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be
prepared prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the prepared prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the prepared prior to the
proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the
T
proposed new building for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity proposed new building for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity proposed new building
for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity
with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 8
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Project Overview and Purpose
MHBC was retained by St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church to undertake an HIAan HIAan HIAfor the for the for the
subject lands, which arecomprised of the properties located at 11 Roy Street and 54 and 11 Roy Street and 54 and 11 Roy Street and 54 and
68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener (see Figure 1).The properties are located within The properties are located within The properties are located within
the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (“CCNHCD”) and therefore the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (“CCNHCD”) and therefore the Civic
Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (“CCNHCD”) and therefore
(“OHA”(“OHA”(“OHA”))). . . ThThThisisisHIAHIAHIAis written to be is written to be is written to be
designated under Part V of the
consistent with the Terms of Reference provided by the City of Kitchener Heritage Planning consistent with the Terms of Reference provided by the City of Kitchener Heritage Planning
consistent with the Terms of Reference provided by the City of Kitchener Heritage Planning
Staff provided in Appendix ‘E’ of this report.
The proposal includes the removal of structures at 11 Roy Streetthe removal of structures at 11 Roy Streetthe removal of structures at 11 Roy Streetand and and 68 Queen Street 68 Queen
Street 68 Queen Street
Northfor the future construction of a residence for the future construction of a residence for the future construction of a residence building building building for multigeneration families
with for multigeneration families with for multigeneration families with
adult children with disabilitiesas an outreach program of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church as an outreach program of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church as an outreach program of St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church
(54 Queen Street North) and its missions missions mission w w which is described by the Roy Street Task Force hich is described by the Roy Street Task Force hich is described by the
Roy Street Task Force
Mission Statement to:
The purpose of thise purpose of thise purpose of thisHIA HIA HIA is to assess potential impact to the subject lands and surrounding is to assess potential impact to the subject lands
and surrounding is to assess potential impact to the subject lands and surrounding
area as a result of the removal of the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street as a result of the removal of the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street as a result of
the removal of the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North. The following provides an outline of the potential impacts that will be assessed as North. The following provides an outline of the potential impacts that will be assessed as
North. The following provides an outline of the potential impacts that will be assessed as
part of this assessment:part of this assessment:part of this assessment:
5)5)5)Impact on Impact on Impact on 11 Roy Street11 Roy Street11 Roy Street
ooo DemolitionDemolitionDemolitionof existing building located at of existing building located at of existing building located at 11 Roy Street;
6)6)6)Impact on Impact on Impact on 68 Queen Street North68 Queen Street North68 Queen Street North
ooo Demolition of existing building located at 68 Queen Street North; Demolition of existing building located at 68 Queen Street North; Demolition of existing building located at 68
Queen Street North;
7)7)7)Impact on Surrounding Heritage Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:Impact on Surrounding Heritage Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:Impact on Surrounding Heritage
Properties (Protected and Listed) as follows:
20 Weber Street East 7320 Weber Street East 7320 Weber Street East 73-77 Queen Street, North Waterloo County Gaol and
Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Regionally
Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)Significant Cultural Heritage Resource)
838383-85 Queen Street North, Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)
16 Roy Street(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
20 Roy Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA)
23 Roy Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA)
18 Weber Street West(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
MHBC | 9
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)
This HIA andassociated permits are solely related to the applications for demolitions. A
pre-consultation meeting occurred on December 21, 2023, to review comments provided by
City Heritage Planning Staff on December 14, 2023. This Heritage Impact Assessment is as City Heritage Planning Staff on December 14, 2023. This Heritage Impact Assessment is as City
Heritage Planning Staff on December 14, 2023. This Heritage Impact Assessment is as
per the request of City of Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff.
As per Section 42 (1) of the OHA, an owner of a property located within an HCD must As per Section 42 (1) of the OHA, an owner of a property located within an HCD must As per Section
42 (1) of the OHA, an owner of a property located within an HCD must
obtain a heritage permit from the municipality to alter a property, erect any building or obtain a heritage permit from the municipality to alter a property, erect any building or obtain
a heritage permit from the municipality to alter a property, erect any building or
structure, or demolish or remove a building or structure on the property. The purpose of structure, or demolish or remove a building or structure on the property. The purpose of structure,
or demolish or remove a building or structure on the property. The purpose of
this HIA isto supplement heritage permit applications as theytheytheyrelate to the proposed relate to the proposed relate to the proposed
demolitions. The details of the proposed buildingwill be assessed more thoroughly in a will be assessed more thoroughly in a will be assessed more thoroughly in a
second Heritage Impact Assessmentaccompanied by an additional Heritage Permit accompanied by an additional Heritage Permit accompanied by an additional Heritage Permit
Application for new construction as part of the planning application processApplication for new construction as part of the planning application processApplication for new construction
as part of the planning application processfor Site Plan for Site Plan for Site Plan
approval.
T
1.2 Description of the Subject LandsDescription of the Subject LandsDescription of the Subject Lands
The subject lands are bound by Queen Street North to the east, Roy Street to the north, subject lands are bound by Queen Street North to the east, Roy Street to the north, subject lands
are bound by Queen Street North to the east, Roy Street to the north,
Weber Street West to the south and residential properties to the westWeber Street West to the south and residential properties to the westWeber Street West to the south and residential
properties to the west(see(see(see Appendix A,
Figure 1 and Figure 3). The subject properties are located within the Civic Centre . The subject properties are located within the Civic Centre . The subject properties are located within
the Civic Centre
Neighbourhood within and to the north and west of the City Commercial Core.Neighbourhood within and to the north and west of the City Commercial Core.Neighbourhood within and to the
north and west of the City Commercial Core.Table 1.0
F
provides a brief description of the built and landscape features onprovides a brief description of the built and landscape features onprovides a brief description of the built and landscape
features on-site; a more detailed
review is provided in Section 4.0. provided in Section 4.0. provided in Section 4.0.
A
R
D
MHBC | 10
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Figure 1Figure 1Figure 1- - - Map of subject lands identified by red linesMap of subject lands identified by red linesMap of subject lands identified by red lines(MHBC, 2024).
Table 1.0Table 1.0Table 1.0- - - Description of Properties within Description of Properties within Description of Properties within the Subject Lands
AddressAddressAddressDescriptionDescriptionPhotograph
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
11 Roy Street11 Roy Street11 Roy StreetOOOne-and-a half storey brick dwelling
with front porch and medium-pitched
gabled roof with open gabled dormer
with returning eaves. Minimal
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
landscaped area along frontage and
surface parking.
MHBC | 11
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
54 Queen Street NorthSt.Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
which is a three-storey brick place of
worship with addition on the east,
west and north elevation. There is
limited landscaping on the property
including along Queen Street North.
The majority of the property includes
asphalt surface parking.
68 Queen Street North
Two-and-a-half storey brick dwelling brick dwelling brick dwelling
with boxed, medium-pitched gable pitched gable pitched gable
roofline and asymmetrical entryway. roofline and asymmetrical entryway. roofline and asymmetrical entryway.
The building includes multiple The building includes multiple The building includes multiple
TTTTTTTTTTTT
additions on the east elevation on the east elevation on the east elevation
including an attached garage. The including an attached garage. The including an attached garage. The
property includes a landscaped property includes a landscaped property includes a landscaped
frontage with mature coniferousfrontage with mature coniferousfrontage with mature coniferoustree tree tree
FFFFFFFFFFFF
andsurface parking.surface parking.surface parking.
1.4 Description of Description of Description of Surrounding Area Surrounding Area Surrounding Area
AAAAAAAAAAAA
1.4.1. General .1. General .1. General
The surrounding The surrounding The surrounding area isarea isarea ischaracterized by a range of uses and built form typical of an characterized by a range of uses and built form typical
of an characterized by a range of uses and built form typical of an
urbanized city centreurbanized city centreurbanized city centre(see (see (see Table 2.0Table 2.0Table 2.0))). The Roy Street streetscape primarily includes low. The Roy Street streetscape
primarily includes low. The Roy Street streetscape primarily includes low-
rise, rise, rise, househousehouse---formformformproperties ranging from 1 1/2 properties ranging from 1 1/2 properties ranging from 1 1/2 – 2 ½ storeys in height. The northern
portion of this streetscape includes a treed boulevard. The Queen Street North and Weber portion of this streetscape includes a treed boulevard. The Queen Street North and Weber portion
of this streetscape includes a treed boulevard. The Queen Street North and Weber
Street West streetscapes very considerably in use, scale, massing, architecture, setbacks Street West streetscapes very considerably in use, scale, massing, architecture, setbacks Street
West streetscapes very considerably in use, scale, massing, architecture, setbacks
RRRRRRRRRRRR
and orieand orieand orientation as they include institutional, commercial, residential uses and range from ntation as they include institutional, commercial, residential uses and range
from ntation as they include institutional, commercial, residential uses and range from
histohistohistoric to contemporary architectural built formsric to contemporary architectural built formsric to contemporary architectural built forms(see Figure 2).
To the east is the Kitchener Public Library, Waterloo County Gaol and Governor’s House To the east is the Kitchener Public Library, Waterloo County Gaol and Governor’s House To the east
is the Kitchener Public Library, Waterloo County Gaol and Governor’s House
which are public institutional properties. To the south are highwhich are public institutional properties. To the south are highwhich are public institutional properties. To the south
are high-rise commercial and
residential buildings including the 11residential buildings including the 11residential buildings including the 11-storey commercial office building at 50 QueenStreet
North and 18-storey residential building at 57 Queen Street North.storey residential building at 57 Queen Street North.storey residential building at 57 Queen Street North.
DDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 12
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Figure 2-Visual analysis of built form in surrounding area(MHBC, 2024).
MHBC | 13
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Table 2.0- Streetscape Characters
StreetPhotograph
Queen
Street
North
Looking southwards towards the subject Looking southwards towards the subject Looking southwards towards the subject Looking northwards towards subject Looking northwards towards subject
Looking northwards towards subject
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
lands.lands. lands. lands.
Weber
Street
West
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Looking westwards towards the subject Looking westwards towards the subject Looking westwards towards the subject Looking eastwards towards the subject
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
lands.
lands.lands.lands.
Roy Roy Roy
StreetStreetStreet
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Looking westwards along Roy Street Looking westwards along Roy Street Looking westwards along Roy Street Looking eastwards along Roy Street
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
(subject lands to the left)towards subject lands.
MHBC | 14
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
1.4.2. Adjacent Properties
The City of Kitchener Official Plan defines adjacent as, “
Figure 3Figure 3Figure 3 and the
following Table 3.0 identify and provide a brief description of the adjacent (nonidentify and provide a brief description of the adjacent (nonidentify and provide a brief description
of the adjacent (non---contiguous) contiguous) contiguous)
properties that are subject to the assessment within thisreport as per the City’s Terms of report as per the City’s Terms of report as per the City’s Terms of
Reference.
Table 3.0- Description ofAdjacentHeritage Properties
AddressDescriptionPhotographPhotograph
20 Weber Governor’s House is a brick
Street East institutional building with four storey institutional building with four storey institutional building with four storey
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
73-77 tower and a Mansard Roof
Queen described as mid-Victorian Italian Victorian Italian Victorian Italian
Street Village style. Waterloo County Gaol style. Waterloo County Gaol style. Waterloo County Gaol
North is a 2 ½ storey Classical Revival is a 2 ½ storey Classical Revival is a 2 ½ storey Classical Revival
building constructed of granite, building constructed of granite, building constructed of granite,
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Waterloo
stone and brick trim.stone and brick trim.stone and brick trim.Waterloo Waterloo Waterloo
County Gaol
County Courthouse is a midCounty Courthouse is a midCounty Courthouse is a mid---century century century
and
brutalist institutional building. brutalist institutional building. brutalist institutional building.
Governor’s
Limited landscaping onLimited landscaping onLimited landscaping on---site within site within site within
House
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
the vicinity of these historic the vicinity of these historic the vicinity of these historic
buildings including open green buildings including open green buildings including open green
space and lowspace and lowspace and low---lying plantings.lying plantings.lying plantings.
838383---85 85 85 Three storey institutional building Three storey institutional building Three storey institutional building
Queen Queen Queen with contemporary architectural with contemporary architectural with contemporary architectural
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Street Street Street stylestylestyleconstructed c. 1962constructed c. 1962constructed c. 1962including
NorthNorthNorth glazing and masonry veneer. glazing and masonry veneer. glazing and masonry veneer.
Property includes public surface Property includes public surface Property includes public surface
Kitchener Kitchener Kitchener
parking lot and landscaping along parking lot and landscaping along parking lot and landscaping along
Public Library Public Library Public Library
Queen Street North.Designed by
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Main Branch
architect Carl Reider.
MHBC | 15
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
16 Roy One-and-a-half storey dwelling with
Street a Colonial Revival influence.
Includes cross gable roofline with
gabled dormers. Low-lying
ornamental plantings.
20 Roy One-and-a-half storey Tudor Revival
Street cottage with asymmetrical roofline
and composed of a combination of
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
materials. Includes bay windowmaterials. Includes bay windowmaterials. Includes bay window, , ,
second storey overhang/jetty/jetty/jettyand and and
Gothic inspired stone door surround. Gothic inspired stone door surround. Gothic inspired stone door surround.
Designed front yard with lowDesigned front yard with lowDesigned front yard with low---lying lying lying
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
ornamental plantings and stone ornamental plantings and stone ornamental plantings and stone
pier.
23 Roy Two---andandand---aaa---half storey Queen Anne half storey Queen Anne half storey Queen Anne
Street Revival buff red brick dwelling with Revival buff red brick dwelling with Revival buff red brick dwelling with
projecting bay with boxedprojecting bay with boxedprojecting bay with boxedininingablegablegables s s
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
and hipped rooflineand hipped rooflineand hipped roofline. Decorative . Decorative . Decorative
brackets located on either side of brackets located on either side of brackets located on either side of
upper window opening. Lowupper window opening. Lowupper window opening. Low-lying
plantings along front façade.plantings along front façade.plantings along front façade.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 16
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
18 Weber Two-and-a-half storey Queen Anne
Street West Revival buff red brick dwelling with
projecting bay with boxed gableand
hipped roofline. Remaining land
includes surface parking.
74 Queen One and half storey mid-century,
Street ranch-stylebungalow constructed of
North buff yellow brick with the use of
TTTTTTTTTT
siding along the Queen Street North siding along the Queen Street North siding along the Queen Street North
façade. Building includes a stone façade. Building includes a stone façade. Building includes a stone
wall feature along the front façade. wall feature along the front façade. wall feature along the front façade.
Includes an irregular roofline. Includes an irregular roofline. Includes an irregular roofline.
FFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 17
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
Figure 3- Map identifying properties within the subject land and adjacent properties subject to impact
assessment (MHBC, 2024)
MHBC | 18
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
1.5 Heritage Status
In order to confirm the presence of cultural heritage resources which have been previously
identified, several databases were consulted including
(CRHP)and otherlocalheritage inventories(i.e. Historic Building Inventory Kitchener,. Historic Building Inventory Kitchener,. Historic Building Inventory Kitchener,
Heritage Inventory: Homes of Prominent Businessmen and ProfessionalsHeritage Inventory: Homes of Prominent Businessmen and ProfessionalsHeritage Inventory: Homes of Prominent Businessmen
and Professionals, An Architectural , An Architectural , An Architectural
Survey of Berlin the Centre Area). The subject lands, adjacent properties, adjacent properties, adjacent properties, , , and streetscapes and streetscapes and streetscapes
identified in sub-section 1.4 are not identified as being within a Heritage Corridor or section 1.4 are not identified as being within a Heritage Corridor or section 1.4 are not identified
as being within a Heritage Corridor or Canadian Canadian Canadian
River watershed as per Map 9 of the Official Planor identified as a scenic road and special or identified as a scenic road and special or identified as a scenic road and special
character streets by the Region of Waterloo.
1.5.1 Heritage Status of the Subject Lands
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
The subject lands are located within the CCNHCDThe subject lands are located within the CCNHCDThe subject lands are located within the CCNHCDand are designated under Part V of the and
are designated under Part V of the and are designated under Part V of the
OHA. The following Table 4.0 reviews the applicable categories attributed to each property reviews the applicable categories attributed to each property reviews the applicable categories
attributed to each property
within the subject lands.
Table 4.0- Inventory Summary for Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan (2007)Inventory Summary for Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan (2007)Inventory Summary for Subject Lands from CCNHCD Plan
(2007)
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AddressGroupGroupDescription Description
11 Roy StreetGroup B Group B Group B 1 ¾ storey brick vernacular building 1 ¾ storey brick vernacular building 1 ¾ storey brick vernacular building
constructed c. 1925. Not previously
(fine example of a specific (fine example of a specific (fine example of a specific
listed.
architectural style)architectural style)architectural style)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
54 Queen Street NorthQueen Street NorthQueen Street NorthGroup AGroup AGroup A3 storey, Gothic Brick Church and
Parish Hall constructed in 1906.
(very fine example of a specific (very fine example of a specific (very fine example of a specific
Previously listed.Known as Saint
architectural style)architectural style)architectural style)
Andrew’s Presbyterian Church.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
68 Queen Street North68 Queen Street North68 Queen Street NorthGroup AGroup AGroup A2 ½ storey, Georgian building
constructed c. 1930. Previously
(very fine example of a specific
Listed.
architectural style)
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 19
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
1.5.2. Description and Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties
The City has requested the assessment of the adjacent (non-contiguous) properties located
at 20 Weber Street East/ 73-77 Queen Street North and 83-85 Queen Street North. Table
5.0 reviews the adjacent properties’ heritage status and description.
Table 5.0- Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties
AddressDescription
20 Weber Street East/ The Waterloo County Jail and Governor's House, The Waterloo County Jail and Governor's House, The Waterloo County Jail and Governor's House,
73-77 Queen Street located at 73 Queen Street North, is situated on located at 73 Queen Street North, is situated on located at 73 Queen Street North, is situated on
Norththe south side of the street, north of Frederick the south side of the street, north of Frederick the south side of the street, north of Frederick
Street and east of Weber Street, in downtown Street and east of Weber Street, in downtown Street and east of Weber Street, in downtown
Waterloo County Goal
Kitchener. Built in 1852, the site consists of a jail Kitchener. Built in 1852, the site consists of a jail Kitchener. Built in 1852, the site consists of a jail
and Governor’s House
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
building, gobuilding, gobuilding, governor's house, four exercise vernor's house, four exercise vernor's house, four exercise
courtyards and stone walls (Canada’s Historic courtyards and stone walls (Canada’s Historic courtyards and stone walls (Canada’s Historic
Places, 2024). Places, 2024). Places, 2024).
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
83-85 Queen Street No description in the municipal heritage register. No description in the municipal heritage register. No description in the municipal heritage register.
North Added June 30, 2014 (City of Kitchener, 2024). Added June 30, 2014 (City of Kitchener, 2024). Added June 30, 2014 (City of Kitchener, 2024).
Kitchener Public Library Kitchener Public Library Kitchener Public Library
Main Branch
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
DescriptionDescription
Designated under Part V Designated under Part V
(CCNHCD)(CCNHCD)
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
16 Roy Street16 Roy Street16 Roy StreetTwo storey vernacular brick dwelling constructed
in c. 1940.
20 Roy Street20 Roy Street20 Roy StreetTwo storey Tudor dwelling constructed of stone in
c. 1938 built for Dr. Lackner.
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 20
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
23 Roy StreetTwo and half storey brick Queen Anne constructed Two and half storey brick Queen Anne constructed Two and half storey brick Queen Anne constructed
in 1896.
18 Weber Street WestTwo and half storey brick vernacular building Two and half storey brick vernacular building Two and half storey brick vernacular building
constructed in 1896 with decorative porch trim. constructed in 1896 with decorative porch trim. constructed in 1896 with decorative porch trim.
Built by H. J. Bowman, Civil Engineer.Built by H. J. Bowman, Civil Engineer.Built by H. J. Bowman, Civil Engineer.
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
74 Queen Street North One storey Ranch style brick dwelling constructed One storey Ranch style brick dwelling constructed One storey Ranch style brick dwelling constructed
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
c. 1950. c. 1950. c. 1950.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 21
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
Figure 4- Map identifying heritage status of subject lands and adjacent properties(MHBC, 2024).
MHBC | 22
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
2.0 Policy Framework
2.1 The Ontario Planning Act
The includes direction relating to a number of provisions respecting cultural includes direction relating to a number of provisions respecting cultural includes direction relating to
a number of provisions respecting cultural
heritage, either directly in Section 2 of the Act or Section 3 respecting policy statements heritage, either directly in Section 2 of the Act or Section 3 respecting policy statements
heritage, either directly in Section 2 of the Act or Section 3 respecting policy statements
and provincial plans. In Section 2, the outlines 18 spheres of provincial interest outlines 18 spheres of provincial interest outlines 18 spheres of provincial interest
that must be considered by appropriate authorities in the planning process. Regarding that must be considered by appropriate authorities in the planning process. Regarding that must
be considered by appropriate authorities in the planning process. Regarding
cultural heritage, Subsection 2(d) of the Act provides that:cultural heritage, Subsection 2(d) of the Act provides that:cultural heritage, Subsection 2(d) of the Act provides that:
T
The therefore provides for the overall broad consideration of cultural heritage therefore provides for the overall broad consideration of cultural heritage therefore provides for the
overall broad consideration of cultural heritage
F
resources through the land use planning process.resources through the land use planning process.resources through the land use planning process.
2.2 Provincial PlanningPlanningPlanningStatement (202Statement (202Statement (2024)4)4)
In support of the provincial interest identified in Subsection 2 (d) of the Planning Act, In support of the provincial interest identified in Subsection 2 (d) of the Planning Act, In
support of the provincial interest identified in Subsection 2 (d) of the Planning Act,
and as provided for in Section 3, the Province has refined policy guidance for land use and as provided for in Section 3, the Province has refined policy guidance for land use and as
provided for in Section 3, the Province has refined policy guidance for land use
planning and development matters in the Provincial Planningplanning and development matters in the Provincial Planningplanning and development matters in the Provincial PlanningStatement
(2024) (PPS).
A
The PPS is “intended to be read in its entirety and the relevant policy areas are to be The PPS is “intended to be read in its entirety and the relevant policy areas are to be The PPS
is “intended to be read in its entirety and the relevant policy areas are to be
applied in each situation”. This provides a weighting and balancing of issues within the applied in each situation”. This provides a weighting and balancing of issues within the applied
in each situation”. This provides a weighting and balancing of issues within the
planning process. When addressing cultural heritage planning, the PPS provides for the planning process. When addressing cultural heritage planning, the PPS provides for the planning
process. When addressing cultural heritage planning, the PPS provides for the
following:following:following:
R
D
MHBC | 23
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
The PPS defines the following terms:
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
As the subject lands are included in a Heritage Conservation District (designated under
Part V oft the OHA) they are considered Protected Heritage Properties; additionallythe
following adjacent properties, subject to assessment, are considered Protected Heritage
Properties: 20 Weber Street East 73-77 Queen Street, North Waterloo County Gaol and
MHBC | 24
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA), 16 Roy Street(Designated
under Part V of the OHA), 20 Roy Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA), 23 Roy
Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA), 18 Weber Street West(Designated under
Part V of the OHA), 74 Queen Street North(Designated under Part V of the OHA).(Designated under Part V of the OHA).(Designated under Part V of the OHA).
2.3 Ontario Heritage Act
The , R.S.O, 1990, c.0.18remains the guiding legislation for the remains the guiding legislation for the remains the guiding legislation for the
conservation of significant cultural heritage resources in Ontario. Preparation of this report conservation of significant cultural heritage resources in Ontario. Preparation of this
report conservation of significant cultural heritage resources in Ontario. Preparation of this report
has been guided by the criteria provided with of the of the of the , , ,
which outlines the criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest. The regulation for determining cultural heritage value or interest. The regulation for determining cultural
heritage value or interest. The regulation
sets forth nine criteria. Section 2.0 of the directs the directs the directs the Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of
Citizenship and Multiculturalism(“MCM”) to determine (“MCM”) to determine (“MCM”) to determine policies, priorities and programs for policies, priorities and programs for policies, priorities
and programs for
the conservation, protection and preservation of the heritage of Ontario. the conservation, protection and preservation of the heritage of Ontario. the conservation, protection and preservation
of the heritage of Ontario. Section Section Section 42 (1) 42 (1) 42 (1)
outlines the requirement for a Heritage Permit Application to outlines the requirement for a Heritage Permit Application to outlines the requirement for a Heritage Permit Application
to alter, or permit the alteration of alter, or permit the alteration of alter, or permit the alteration of
any part of the property, erect any building or structure on the property, demolish or remove any part of the property, erect any building or structure on the property, demolish or remove
any part of the property, erect any building or structure on the property, demolish or remove
or permit the demolition or removal of any attribute of the property that would affect a or permit the demolition or removal of any attribute of the property that would affect a or permit
the demolition or removal of any attribute of the property that would affect a
heritageattribute described in the heritage conservation district plan,attribute described in the heritage conservation district plan,attribute described in the heritage conservation
district plan,demolish or remove a demolish or remove a demolish or remove a
building orstructure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of a building or structure on
the property or permit the demolition or removal of a building or
structure on the property.
2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit2.4 Ontario Heritage Toolkit
The Province has published several resources containing information related to cultural The Province has published several resources containing information related to cultural The Province
has published several resources containing information related to cultural
heritage resources andresources andresources andcompiled the information into the compiled the information into the compiled the information into the . This
compilation is a collection of documents authored by thecompilation is a collection of documents authored by thecompilation is a collection of documents authored by theMCM, which provide
guidance
related to a variety of cultural heritage planning matters. The documents contained within related to a variety of cultural heritage planning matters. The documents contained within
related to a variety of cultural heritage planning matters. The documents contained within
the Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process compilation have specifically been the Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process compilation have specifically been
the Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process compilation have specifically been
referenced in the preparation of this report, toreferenced in the preparation of this report, toreferenced in the preparation of this report, toensure consistencywith best practices.This
document provides an outline of contents of an HIA as well as document provides an outline of contents of an HIA as well as document provides an outline of contents of an HIA as well
as adverse impacts and mitigation
measures.measures.measures.
2.5 2.5 2.5 Region of Waterloo Official Plan Region of Waterloo Official Plan Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2015)
Chapter 3, Section 3.G of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) provides policies regarding the Chapter 3, Section 3.G of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) provides policies regarding the
Chapter 3, Section 3.G of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) provides policies regarding the
conservation of cultural heritage resourcesconservation of cultural heritage resourcesconservation of cultural heritage resourcesas contributing to a unique sense of place,
providing a means of defining and confirming a regional identity. The Regional Official Plan providing a means of defining and confirming a regional identity. The Regional Official Plan
providing a means of defining and confirming a regional identity. The Regional Official Plan
includes policies regarding theincludes policies regarding theincludes policies regarding theidentification of cultural heritage resources, including both
built heritage and cultural heritage landscapes and the maintenance of such inventories. built heritage and cultural heritage landscapes and the maintenance of such inventories. built
heritage and cultural heritage landscapes and the maintenance of such inventories.
The policies also speak to the requirement of a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment to The policies also speak to the requirement of a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment to The policies
also speak to the requirement of a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment to
conserve municipal and regionally significant resources. This Heritage Impact Assessment
assesses impact for the property located at 73 Queen Street North, Kitchener (Waterloo
County Gaol & Governor’s House) which is a Regionally Significant Cultural Heritage
Resource.
MHBC | 25
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
2.6 City of KitchenerOfficial Plan(2014)
Section 12 of the Kitchener Official Plan provides the policies regarding the identification
and conservation of cultural heritage resources, including inventoried, listed, designated, or
otherwise protected properties, cultural heritage landscapes and heritage corridors. The otherwise protected properties, cultural heritage landscapes and heritage corridors. The otherwise
protected properties, cultural heritage landscapes and heritage corridors. The
conservation of the City’s cultural heritage resources is directed to be completed through conservation of the City’s cultural heritage resources is directed to be completed through
conservation of the City’s cultural heritage resources is directed to be completed through
“identification, protection,use and/ or management”. As part of these objectives, the use and/ or management”. As part of these objectives, the use and/ or management”. As part of these
objectives, the
following provides the following in relation to development:
T
These policies are directly relevant to this proposal as it proposes development These policies are directly relevant to this proposal as it proposes development These policies are directly
relevant to this proposal as it proposes development
F
within an area protected under the OHA. In order to meet these objectives, the City within an area protected under the OHA. In order to meet these objectives, the City within an area
protected under the OHA. In order to meet these objectives, the City
states the following:
A
R
D
This proposal includes the removal of buildingson subject lands which
Protected Heritage Properties (Part V), and areto Protected Heritage
Properties (Part V), to a non-designated property on the municipal heritage
MHBC | 26
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
register and to a Protected Heritage Property (Part IV). The subject lands
are not along an identified heritage corridor as per Map 9 of the Plan.
Section 12.C.1.13-12.C.1.16 of the Plan outlines policies related to Heritage
Conservation Districts. The intent is that the HCD will be conserved through the Conservation Districts. The intent is that the HCD will be conserved through the Conservation Districts.
The intent is that the HCD will be conserved through the
adoption of an HCD Plan. This report uses the CCNHCD Plan to assess the impacts HCD Plan. This report uses the CCNHCD Plan to assess the impacts HCD Plan. This report uses the CCNHCD
Plan to assess the impacts
of the proposed removal of structures. The following policy outlines the . The following policy outlines the . The following policy outlines the
requirements of the Heritage Impact Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan requirements of the Heritage Impact Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan requirements of the Heritage
Impact Assessment and Heritage Conservation Plan
used as a means to meet the objectives of this section, particularly as it relates to used as a means to meet the objectives of this section, particularly as it relates to used as a
means to meet the objectives of this section, particularly as it relates to
development:
T
The Terms of Reference for this report have been scoped by City Heritage Planning The Terms of Reference for this report have been scoped by City Heritage Planning The Terms of Reference
for this report have been scoped by City Heritage Planning
Staff and are included in Appendix ‘Appendix ‘Appendix ‘D’D’D’of this report.of this report.of this report.
Sections 12.C. 1.29-12.C.1.31 discusses heritage permit applications and the 12.C.1.31 discusses heritage permit applications and the 12.C.1.31 discusses heritage permit applications
and the
F
information required to make this application including: information required to make this application including: information required to make this application including:
A
The intention is that this HIA will include items a and c, while an HIA Addendum will The intention is that this HIA will include items a and c, while an HIA Addendum will The intention
is that this HIA will include items a and c, while an HIA Addendum will
be subsequently drafted to include item b when details of the proposed development be subsequently drafted to include item b when details of the proposed development be subsequently
drafted to include item b when details of the proposed development
are finalized. Tare finalized. Tare finalized. The abovehe abovehe above---mentioned information mentioned information mentioned information is intended tobe provided as
supplementary information for the heritage permit application related to the supplementary information for the heritage permit application related to the supplementary information for
the heritage permit application related to the proposed
demolitions. demolitions. demolitions.
R
Sections 12.C.1.32.Sections 12.C.1.32.Sections 12.C.1.32.---12.C.1.36 review the demolition and damage of cultural heritage 12.C.1.36 review the demolition and damage of cultural heritage
12.C.1.36 review the demolition and damage of cultural heritage
resources. This HIA assess the impact of the removal of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen resources. This HIA assess the impact of the removal of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen resources. This
HIA assess the impact of the removal of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen
Street North Street North Street North in advance of future redevelopmentin advance of future redevelopmentin advance of future redevelopment. The following policies are provided
in the context of removal: in the context of removal: in the context of removal:
D
MHBC | 27
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan2.7 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan
The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan and zoning is currently under review. The The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan and zoning is currently under review. The The Civic
Centre Neighbourhood Secondary Plan and zoning is currently under review. The
F
general policies of the Plan are included in Section 13.1.1. of the City’s Official Plan. general policies of the Plan are included in Section 13.1.1. of the City’s Official Plan. general
policies of the Plan are included in Section 13.1.1. of the City’s Official Plan. Based
on Map 9, Civic Centre Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use, the subject lands are located on Map 9, Civic Centre Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use, the subject lands are located on Map 9,
Civic Centre Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use, the subject lands are located
within an area identified as Community Institutional and Medium Density Commercial within an area identified as Community Institutional and Medium Density Commercial within an area identified
as Community Institutional and Medium Density Commercial
Residential (see Figure 5Figure 5Figure 5).).).
A
R
D
MHBC | 28
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
F
A
R
D
Figure 5-Map Figure 9 showing Civic Centre Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use; subject lands identified
approximately in black box (City of Kitchener’s Official Plan).
MHBC | 29
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
2.8 Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan
(2007)
The CCNHCD Plan(2007)includespolicies and guidelines that provide direction for the policies and guidelines that provide direction for the policies and guidelines that provide direction
for the
management of change in the CCNHCD. Thegoals of the HCD Plan are as follows: goals of the HCD Plan are as follows: goals of the HCD Plan are as follows:
T
F
The Plan is based on the principles of: Preserve the Historic Context, Maintain and Repair, The Plan is based on the principles of: Preserve the Historic Context, Maintain and Repair,
The Plan is based on the principles of: Preserve the Historic Context, Maintain and Repair,
Fina a Viable Social or Economic Use, Preserve Traditional Setting, Preserve Original Fina a Viable Social or Economic Use, Preserve Traditional Setting, Preserve Original Fina a Viable
Social or Economic Use, Preserve Traditional Setting, Preserve Original
Decoration and Fittings, Restore to Authentic Limits, Employ Traditional RepaiDecoration and Fittings, Restore to Authentic Limits, Employ Traditional RepaiDecoration and Fittings, Restore
to Authentic Limits, Employ Traditional Repair Methods,
Respect Historic Accumulations, Make New Replacements Distinguishable. Respect Historic Accumulations, Make New Replacements Distinguishable. Respect Historic Accumulations, Make New
Replacements Distinguishable.
The policies in the Plan that are relevant to the development proposal include: development The policies in the Plan that are relevant to the development proposal include: development
The policies in the Plan that are relevant to the development proposal include: development
A
pattern, additions and alterations to existing buildings, new buildings, demolition and public pattern, additions and alterations to existing buildings, new buildings, demolition and
public pattern, additions and alterations to existing buildings, new buildings, demolition and public
realm.
The Plan also outlines planning and implementation measures for the Plan including The Plan also outlines planning and implementation measures for the Plan including The Plan also outlines
planning and implementation measures for the Plan including
applicable sections related to Site Plan Control, Demolition and the Heritage Permit applicable sections related to Site Plan Control, Demolition and the Heritage Permit applicable sections
related to Site Plan Control, Demolition and the Heritage Permit
Approval process. Approval process. Approval process. DDDemolition is emolition is emolition is “““strongly discouragedstrongly discouragedstrongly discouraged”, however, in situations
where
R
demolition is permitted, the municipality may establish conditions for demolition, “demolition is permitted, the municipality may establish conditions for demolition, “demolition is
permitted, the municipality may establish conditions for demolition, “-such as
the requirement for an approved site plan or a specific time frame for construction of a new the requirement for an approved site plan or a specific time frame for construction of a
new the requirement for an approved site plan or a specific time frame for construction of a new
building onsite” (Section 4.4, CCNHCD Plan)building onsite” (Section 4.4, CCNHCD Plan)building onsite” (Section 4.4, CCNHCD Plan). The Plan does acknowledge that there are
times were demolition may be necessary such as, “times were demolition may be necessary such as, “times were demolition may be necessary such as, “-partial destruction due to fire or
other
catastrophic events, severe structural instability, and occasionally redevelopment that is in catastrophic events, severe structural instability, and occasionally redevelopment that
is in catastrophic events, severe structural instability, and occasionally redevelopment that is in
keeping withappropriate City policiesappropriate City policiesappropriate City policies”. Lastly, the policies review the Heritage Permit
D
Approval process. As the proposed redevelopment is proposing the demolition of Protected
Heritage Properties within the HCD, a Heritage Permit Application is required.
MHBC | 30
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
3.0 Historical Overview
3.1 Civic Centre NeighbourhoodHistorical Context
thth
The Civic Centre Neighbourhood was developed in the 19and 20centuries as a centuries as a centuries as a
residential area adjacent to Kitchener’s former industrial core located south of the railway, residential area adjacent to Kitchener’s former industrial core located south of the railway,
residential area adjacent to Kitchener’s former industrial core located south of the railway,
providing homes for those who owned or work for businesses/factories in the area. The providing homes for those who owned or work for businesses/factories in the area. The providing
homes for those who owned or work for businesses/factories in the area. The
earliest residential buildings date from the 1850s, with the majority constructed between earliest residential buildings date from the 1850s, with the majority constructed between earliest
residential buildings date from the 1850s, with the majority constructed between
1880 and 1915. The area developed slowly, experiencing significant infill in the late 1920s. 1880 and 1915. The area developed slowly, experiencing significant infill in the late 1920s.
1880 and 1915. The area developed slowly, experiencing significant infill in the late 1920s.
The construction of apartment buildings dotted the neighbourhood begiThe construction of apartment buildings dotted the neighbourhood begiThe construction of apartment buildings dotted
the neighbourhood beginning in the 1960s. nning in the 1960s. nning in the 1960s.
The neighbourhood reflects the long development of the area from the 1850s to the recent The neighbourhood reflects the long development of the area from the 1850s to the recent The
neighbourhood reflects the long development of the area from the 1850s to the recent
past with a variety of housing styles.Eagle Tannery was one of the largest industries, Eagle Tannery was one of the largest industries, Eagle Tannery was one of the largest industries,
T
established in 1850s by Louis Breithaupt at the north end of Margaret Avenue. A furniture established in 1850s by Louis Breithaupt at the north end of Margaret Avenue. A furniture established
in 1850s by Louis Breithaupt at the north end of Margaret Avenue. A furniture
factory was constructed by Jacob Baetz Sr. at 264 Victoria Street North occupied the factory was constructed by Jacob Baetz Sr. at 264 Victoria Street North occupied the factory was
constructed by Jacob Baetz Sr. at 264 Victoria Street North occupied the
majority of the block between Ellen Street and St. Leger Street. By WWI, approximately a llen Street and St. Leger Street. By WWI, approximately a llen Street and St. Leger Street. By
WWI, approximately a
dozen factories were constructed along the railway between Weber and Lancaster Streets. dozen factories were constructed along the railway between Weber and Lancaster Streets. dozen
factories were constructed along the railway between Weber and Lancaster Streets.
F
3.2 Historical Evolution of the Subject Lands ical Evolution of the Subject Lands ical Evolution of the Subject Lands
3.2.1 General Overview 3.2.1 General Overview 3.2.1 General Overview
The following subThe following subThe following sub-sections will provide a detailed review of each property within the subject sections will provide a detailed review of each property
within the subject sections will provide a detailed review of each property within the subject
lands. The subject lands have evolved significantly over time which is expected in an lands. The subject lands have evolved significantly over time which is expected in an lands. The
subject lands have evolved significantly over time which is expected in an
A
urbanized area such as the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. urbanized area such as the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. urbanized area such as the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Larger versions of
historical maps
and aerial photographs are included inand aerial photographs are included inand aerial photographs are included in Appendix ‘A’Appendix ‘A’Appendix ‘A’of this report. Mapping or aerial
photographs that provide substantial information related to each specific site will be photographs that provide substantial information related to each specific site will be photographs
that provide substantial information related to each specific site will be
provided in each relevant subprovided in each relevant subprovided in each relevant sub---section. section. section.
The subject lands were originally part of Block 2 which consisted of 94,012 acres that were The subject lands were originally part of Block 2 which consisted of 94,012 acres that were
The subject lands were originally part of Block 2 which consisted of 94,012 acres that were
patented from the Crown on February 5, patented from the Crown on February 5, patented from the Crown on February 5, 1798,to Richard Beasley, James Wilson and St.
R
John Baptiste Rosseau (LRO). On July 24, 1805, 60,000 acres of Block 2 (comprising the John Baptiste Rosseau (LRO). On July 24, 1805, 60,000 acres of Block 2 (comprising the John Baptiste
Rosseau (LRO). On July 24, 1805, 60,000 acres of Block 2 (comprising the
German Company Tract) was sold to Daniel and Jacob Erb (LRO). In 1805, 448 acres were German Company Tract) was sold to Daniel and Jacob Erb (LRO). In 1805, 448 acres were German Company
Tract) was sold to Daniel and Jacob Erb (LRO). In 1805, 448 acres were
(Lot 3, G.C.T. and other lands) were sold(Lot 3, G.C.T. and other lands) were sold(Lot 3, G.C.T. and other lands) were soldto Jacob Hershey who in turn sold 224 acres of
the land to Benjamin Eby in 1833. In 1840, 219 acres of this land were sthe land to Benjamin Eby in 1833. In 1840, 219 acres of this land were sthe land to Benjamin Eby in 1833. In 1840,
219 acres of this land were sold David Weber
(LRO). Weber commissionWeber commissionWeber commissionedPlan 401 which also shows Lots 1, 2 & 3 north of Weber Street
and West of Queen Street as originally laid out by the Town Plot of and West of Queen Street as originally laid out by the Town Plot of and West of Queen Street as originally laid out
by the Town Plot of Berlin (see Figure 6).
D
In 1841, C. H. Ahrens purchased the subject lands and additional landsand commissioned
the C.H. Ahren’s Surveywhich included Lots 1-6 (Plan 360, February 1858) (LRO). The
subject lands are part of Lots 1-4 of this survey (see Figure 7).Lot 1 was purchased by
MHBC | 31
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
George Davidson in 1858 who sold the land to the Trustees of St. Andrew’s Church in 1862
(LRO). Lot 2 was sold to Henry Huber in 1858; this lot remained in the Huber Family until
1912 (LRO). Lot 3 and 4 weresold to Simon Roy in 1858; Lot 3remained under his
ownership until 1896while 0.23 acres of 0.3675 acres of Lot 4 was sold to Jacob M. while 0.23 acres of 0.3675 acres of Lot 4 was sold to Jacob M. while 0.23 acres of 0.3675 acres of
Lot 4 was sold to Jacob M.
Staebler in 1879 (LRO).
In the 1853 , the lands were under the ownership of C.H. Ahrens; , the lands were under the ownership of C.H. Ahrens; , the lands were under the ownership of C.H. Ahrens;
the Courthouse and Jail appears directly to the east and the Town Hall is situated to the the Courthouse and Jail appears directly to the east and the Town Hall is situated to the the
Courthouse and Jail appears directly to the east and the Town Hall is situated to the
south (see Figure 8). In the 1861 , the subject , the subject , the subject
lands appear just north of the area that is identified as urban; at this time the subject lands lands appear just north of the area that is identified as urban; at this time the subject
lands lands appear just north of the area that is identified as urban; at this time the subject lands
had been purchased from C.H. Ahrens for three years(see (see (see Figure 9Figure 9Figure 9))). By 1875, . By 1875, . By 1875, within the within the within the
by Herman Brosius, there are five buildings that appear , there are five buildings that appear , there are five buildings that appear
within the subject lands; one of the buildingsis a church with a steeple at the corner of a church with a steeple at the corner of a church with a steeple at the corner of
Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s) and Weber Street and Weber Street and Weber Street WestWestWestand two buildings facing Queen and two buildings facing Queen and two buildings facing
Queen
T
Street North which appear to have rear additions and a building, likely a stable to the rear. Street North which appear to have rear additions and a building, likely a stable to the
rear. Street North which appear to have rear additions and a building, likely a stable to the rear.
At thetimeof the map, Roy Street is not depicted as part of this illustration (se, Roy Street is not depicted as part of this illustration (se, Roy Street is not depicted as part of
this illustration (seeee Figure
10).
The 1879 bbby y y GGG.M. Hopkins.M. Hopkins.M. Hopkinsshown in shown in shown in Figure 11Figure 11Figure 11 shows two
buildings located within Lot 1, one of which is identified as the buildings located within Lot 1, one of which is identified as the buildings located within Lot 1, one of which is identified
as the ‘‘‘Presbyterian ChurchPresbyterian ChurchPresbyterian Church’; Lot 2
F
includes a dwelling with rear addition located along Queen Street North as well as two includes a dwelling with rear addition located along Queen Street North as well as two includes
a dwelling with rear addition located along Queen Street North as well as two
buildings to the rear, one of which is a stable. Lot 3 includes a dwelling fronting Queen buildings to the rear, one of which is a stable. Lot 3 includes a dwelling fronting Queen buildings
to the rear, one of which is a stable. Lot 3 includes a dwelling fronting Queen
Street North with two buildings to the rear, one of which is a stable (this building is situated Street North with two buildings to the rear, one of which is a stable (this building
is situated Street North with two buildings to the rear, one of which is a stable (this building is situated
within the current Roy within the current Roy within the current Roy roadwayroadwayroadway) ) ) andandandLot 4 appears vacant.Lot 4 appears vacant.Lot 4 appears vacant.The 1879 Map of
Berlin
identifies St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and the identifies St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and the identifies St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and the Waterloo County Gaol (see
Waterloo County Gaol (see Waterloo County Gaol (see Figure 12).
A
After 1879, the block and surrounding area experienced an increase in development; , the block and surrounding area experienced an increase in development; , the block and surrounding
area experienced an increase in development; Roy
Street was established which evolved the nature of this part of the block as dwellings were Street was established which evolved the nature of this part of the block as dwellings were
Street was established which evolved the nature of this part of the block as dwellings were
th
constructed along this street within the late 19constructed along this street within the late 19constructed along this street within the late 19century.
By 1925, the Fire Insurance Plan of the City of Kitchener shows that the church was By 1925, the Fire Insurance Plan of the City of Kitchener shows that the church was By 1925, the Fire
Insurance Plan of the City of Kitchener shows that the church was
situated on Lot 1situated on Lot 1situated on Lot 1(see (see (see Figure Figure Figure 141414))). A one. A one. A one-and-half-storey, brick, semi-detached dwelling
with one storey rear addition and twowith one storey rear addition and twowith one storey rear addition and two-and-a-half storey brick dwelling with rear wood
R
addition and one storey brick auto garage were located on Lot 2. A twoaddition and one storey brick auto garage were located on Lot 2. A twoaddition and one storey brick auto garage
were located on Lot 2. A two-and-a-half storey
brick dwelling with one storey side brick addition (68 Queen Street North)brick dwelling with one storey side brick addition (68 Queen Street North)brick dwelling with one storey side
brick addition (68 Queen Street North), a two-storey
wood frame house with brick veneer on the first storey with front porch (11 Roy Street) wood frame house with brick veneer on the first storey with front porch (11 Roy Street) wood frame
house with brick veneer on the first storey with front porch (11 Roy Street)
and a twoand a twoand a two---andandand---half storey dwelling with wood frame rear additionhalf storey dwelling with wood frame rear additionhalf storey dwelling with wood frame rear
addition(formerly 15 Roy Street)
were located on Lowere located on Lowere located on Lot 3.Lot 4 included a two-storeybrick dwelling with front verandah with
on storey rear addition and detached auto garage (formerly 19 Roy Street).
D
Overall, the block of Lots 1-4 has evolved over time. The subject lands are now all under
the ownership of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church. Severalproperties in the block, over
time have been purchased by the church andbuildings have been removed including: 14
MHBC | 32
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Weber Street West, 15 Roy Street (Shoemaker and Hett Homestead), 19 Roy Street, 62-64
Queen Street North (semi-detached Westminster House/ Youth House and 66 Queen Street
Northto facilitate church expansions(KW Record, ‘Let’s Reminisce’, May 23, 1964).In
1962, the semi-detached buildingat 62-66 Queen Street North wasstill presentstill presentstill present(see
Figure 16and Figure 35).By 1980, thisbuilding had been removed (see building had been removed (see building had been removed (see Figure 17Figure 17Figure 17).
Since 1980, there have been limited changes to the subject lands including some minor Since 1980, there have been limited changes to the subject lands including some minor Since 1980,
there have been limited changes to the subject lands including some minor
removal landscaping to the rear of 11 Roy Street and along the northern frontage of 68 removal landscaping to the rear of 11 Roy Street and along the northern frontage of 68 removal
landscaping to the rear of 11 Roy Street and along the northern frontage of 68
Queen Street North(Figures 17 & 18).
The remaining buildings present in the 1925 FIPwithin the subject lands include St. within the subject lands include St. within the subject lands include St.
Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, 68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy Street.68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy Street.68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy Street. S S St.t.t.Andrew’s Andrew’s Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church has been consistently present at the corner of Queen Street North and present at the corner of Queen Street North and present at the corner of Queen Street North
and
Weber Street East since 1862 (albeit this has been anananevolution of built forms)evolution of built forms)evolution of built forms); its presence ; its presence ; its presence
predates the existing buildings on-site and in the surrounding area with the exceptsite and in the surrounding area with the exceptsite and in the surrounding area with the exceptionionionof
of of
T
the Waterloo County Gaol.
As mentioned previously, the subject lands have evolved As mentioned previously, the subject lands have evolved As mentioned previously, the subject lands have evolved continuously and
continuously and continuously and St. ASt. ASt. Andrews
Church has undergone several phases of expansion during which time existing dwellings undergone several phases of expansion during which time existing dwellings undergone several phases
of expansion during which time existing dwellings
were often removed and replaced. Depictions of the phases of expansion of the subject were often removed and replaced. Depictions of the phases of expansion of the subject were often
removed and replaced. Depictions of the phases of expansion of the subject
lands can be found in Section 3.2.2 Section 3.2.2 Section 3.2.2 below.below.below. T T Thushushus, , , the current the current the current proposal signifies a proposal signifies a proposal
signifies a
F
continuation in the long-standing standing standing tradition of phases of tradition of phases of tradition of phases of demolition and expansion to demolition and expansion to demolition
and expansion to
supportthe outreach efforts of the outreach efforts of the outreach efforts of St. Andrews St. Andrews St. Andrews as part of its mission statement and intangible as part of its mission
statement and intangible as part of its mission statement and intangible
heritage tradition.
A
R
D
MHBC | 33
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
AA
RR
Figure 6-Excerpt of the Excerpt of the Excerpt of the Town Plot of Berlin(Plan 401), County of Waterloo; circle identifying general
location of subject lands (LRO)location of subject lands (LRO)location of subject lands (LRO).
DD
MHBC | 34
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
Figure 7-Excerpt of the Map of the town of Berlin, County of Waterloo showing location of subject lands
(LRO).
MHBC | 35
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
F
A
R
Figure Figure Figure 888---131313(above left) Excerpt of the 1853(above left) Excerpt of the 1853(above left) Excerpt of the 1853Map of Berlin; (above right) Excerpt of the 1861
Tremaine Map ofTremaine Map ofTremaine Map ofWaterloo County; (middle left) Excerpt of the 1875 Bird’s Eye View of Berlin; (middle Waterloo County; (middle left) Excerpt of the 1875
Bird’s Eye View of Berlin; (middle Waterloo County; (middle left) Excerpt of the 1875 Bird’s Eye View of Berlin; (middle
right) Excerpt of the 1879Excerpt of the 1879Excerpt of the 1879mapof the Town of Berlin, Waterloo County, Ontario by G.M. Hopkins;
(below left)Excerpt of the 1879 map Excerpt of the 1879 map Excerpt of the 1879 map of Berlin identifying St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and
D
Waterloo County Gaol; (below right) Plan of Lot 3 of the GCT which includes Lots 1-4 of Plan 360
(Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre and LRO).
MHBC | 36
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTT
FFFF
AAAA
RRRR
FigureFigureFigures 14s 14s 14---161616(above left) E(above left) E(above left) Excerpt of 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of Kitchener showing St. Andrew’s xcerpt of 1925 Fire Insurance Plan
of Kitchener showing St. Andrew’s xcerpt of 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of Kitchener showing St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church and Presbyterian Church and Presbyterian Church and 14 Weber Street West (since removed) and adjacent 18 Weber Street West to 14 Weber Street West (since removed)
and adjacent 18 Weber Street West to 14 Weber Street West (since removed) and adjacent 18 Weber Street West to
the north; (the north; (the north; (above right) Excerpt of 1925 Fire above right) Excerpt of 1925 Fire above right) Excerpt of 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of Kitchener showing the remaining
buildings within the subject lands at the time including 15 Roy Street (Shoemaker and Hett buildings within the subject lands at the time including 15 Roy Street (Shoemaker and Hett
buildings within the subject lands at the time including 15 Roy Street (Shoemaker and Hett
Homestead), 19 Roy Street, 62Homestead), 19 Roy Street, 62Homestead), 19 Roy Street, 62-64 Queen Street North (semi-detached Westminster House/ Youth
House and 66 Queen StreHouse and 66 Queen StreHouse and 66 Queen Street North; (middle) Historical photograph ofthe former62-64 Queen Street
North (Westminster(Westminster(WestminsterHouse).
DDDD
MHBC | 37
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
Figures 17 &18(above) Aerial photograph from 1980 showing the subject lands in red box(Courtesy of
Grace Schmidt Room, KPL); (below) Aerial photograph from 2024 showing the subject lands in red box
(MHBC, 2024 & ESRI).
MHBC | 38
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
3.2.2 Phases of Expansion of the Subject Lands
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 39
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
3.2.3 Detailed Overview of Subject Lands
This section of the report is intended to provide a detailed history of the subject lands
including the chronological history of the buildings’ development, such as additions and
demolitions. The listing of owners of all properties within the subject lands compiled of all properties within the subject lands compiled of all properties within the subject lands
compiled from
the Land Registry Office, also known as the Chain of Title, is included in Appendix ‘Appendix ‘Appendix ‘C’ of
this report.
3.2.3.1 11 Roy Street(The Zollner House/ SOLO House)
Lot 3 of C.H. Ahren’s Survey (1858) was sold to Simon Roy in 1858 which included 0.49 Lot 3 of C.H. Ahren’s Survey (1858) was sold to Simon Roy in 1858 which included 0.49 Lot 3 of C.H.
Ahren’s Survey (1858) was sold to Simon Roy in 1858 which included 0.49
acres. In 1896, part of the lot was sold to Hannah Wilkinson who sold a portion of the acres. In 1896, part of the lot was sold to Hannah Wilkinson who sold a portion of the acres. In
1896, part of the lot was sold to Hannah Wilkinson who sold a portion of the
property to Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land was sold to property to Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land was sold to property to
Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land was sold to
George A. Bricker in 1902. Between 1902 and 1920, the property was owned by several George A. Bricker in 1902. Between 1902 and 1920, the property was owned by several George A. Bricker
in 1902. Between 1902 and 1920, the property was owned by several
owners with surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In 1922, owners with surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In 1922, owners with
surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In 1922,
Urias Shantz sold the property to Benjamin J. Zollner for $9,500 (LRO). The Urias Shantz sold the property to Benjamin J. Zollner for $9,500 (LRO). The Urias Shantz sold the property
to Benjamin J. Zollner for $9,500 (LRO). The
T
completed in 1979describes the property as, “describes the property as, “describes the property as, “A post war house of A post war house of A post war house of
brown brick, two stories in height. Windows are typical multi narrow paned over one brown brick, two stories in height. Windows are typical multi narrow paned over one brown brick, two
stories in height. Windows are typical multi narrow paned over one
variety. Porch is original. Built circa 1920variety. Porch is original. Built circa 1920variety. Porch is original. Built circa 1920---193019301930”. The Fire Insurance Plan of 1925
shows a ”. The Fire Insurance Plan of 1925 shows a ”. The Fire Insurance Plan of 1925 shows a
two-storeyframe dwelling with one storey brick veneer and front porch (see frame dwelling with one storey brick veneer and front porch (see frame dwelling with one storey brick veneer
and front porch (see Figure 19)
within the location of 11 Roy Street which is consistent with the existing building. Based on within the location of 11 Roy Street which is consistent with the existing building. Based
on within the location of 11 Roy Street which is consistent with the existing building. Based on
F
the purchase of the property in 1922 and the purchase of the property in 1922 and the purchase of the property in 1922 and itsitsitspresence presence presence ooon the 1925 Fire Insurance
Plan, the n the 1925 Fire Insurance Plan, the n the 1925 Fire Insurance Plan, the
dwellingwould have been constructed approximately between 1923 and 1924would have been constructed approximately between 1923 and 1924would have been constructed approximately between
1923 and 1924around the
time that the Zollner’s daughter, Mary Eleanor, was born. time that the Zollner’s daughter, Mary Eleanor, was born. time that the Zollner’s daughter, Mary Eleanor, was born.
Based on the land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the Zollner Family lived in Based on the land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the Zollner Family lived in
Based on the land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the Zollner Family lived in
the house until 1981. In the 1945 Voter’s List, several people are listed at the dwelling the house until 1981. In the 1945 Voter’s List, several people are listed at the dwelling the
house until 1981. In the 1945 Voter’s List, several people are listed at the dwelling
A
including Benjamin, his wife, including Benjamin, his wife, including Benjamin, his wife, daughterdaughterdaughterand housekeepand housekeepand housekeeper (see Figure 23). In 1946,
the
property was granted from Benjamin to Ida and Mary E. Zollner, the same year that property was granted from Benjamin to Ida and Mary E. Zollner, the same year that property was granted
from Benjamin to Ida and Mary E. Zollner, the same year that
Benjamin passed away. His death certificate identifies that he was born in Benjamin passed away. His death certificate identifies that he was born in Benjamin passed away. His death
certificate identifies that he was born in Carrolltown,
Pennsylvania, U.S.A and was an organist & music teacher at St. Mary’s Roman Catholic Pennsylvania, U.S.A and was an organist & music teacher at St. Mary’s Roman Catholic Pennsylvania,
U.S.A and was an organist & music teacher at St. Mary’s Roman Catholic
ChurchChurchChurch(Library and Archives Canada)(Library and Archives Canada)(Library and Archives Canada). In 1982, the estate of Mary Zollner was granted to
the Trustees of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (LRO). The Vernon Directories identify the the Trustees of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (LRO). The Vernon Directories identify the
the Trustees of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (LRO). The Vernon Directories identify the
R
property as “Solo Program Family and Children’s Services and Parking Lot” in 1982. At this property as “Solo Program Family and Children’s Services and Parking Lot” in 1982. At this
property as “Solo Program Family and Children’s Services and Parking Lot” in 1982. At this
time the church purchased the house which they dubbed “SOLO House”. It was originally time the church purchased the house which they dubbed “SOLO House”. It was originally time the church
purchased the house which they dubbed “SOLO House”. It was originally
used for a Vietnamese Refugee Family (Vernon Directoriesused for a Vietnamese Refugee Family (Vernon Directoriesused for a Vietnamese Refugee Family (Vernon DirectoriesidentifiedN. Pham,
a
Vietnamese familyVietnamese familyVietnamese family) ) ) (see (see (see Figure 24). In 1985, it was occupied by The Family & Children’s
Services of Waterloo Region. In 1996, the church waived the rental fee for the facility as Services of Waterloo Region. In 1996, the church waived the rental fee for the facility as
Services of Waterloo Region. In 1996, the church waived the rental fee for the facility as
part of the outreach program. The facility has also been used for special events through the part of the outreach program. The facility has also been used for special events through
the part of the outreach program. The facility has also been used for special events through the
D
years. The building had been leasedby the church until it was vacated in 2018.
The building footprint has not changed since its construction in c. 1924, although there
have been changes to its surrounding environment(see Figure 19 & 20).
MHBC | 40
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
20232023
1925
TTTTT
FFFFF
19791979
2024
AAAAA
Figures Figures Figures 191919---232323---(above left) Excerpt from 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of the City of Kitchener showing (above left) Excerpt from 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of the
City of Kitchener showing (above left) Excerpt from 1925 Fire Insurance Plan of the City of Kitchener showing
RRRRR
the dwelling on the propertythe dwelling on the propertythe dwelling on the property(Courtesy of the GSR, KPL); (above right) (Courtesy of the GSR, KPL); (above right) (Courtesy of the
GSR, KPL); (above right) Aerial photograph showing
current building footprint (Source: Google Earth Pro, 2023); (middle left) current building footprint (Source: Google Earth Pro, 2023); (middle left) current building footprint (Source:
Google Earth Pro, 2023); (middle left) Historical photograph from
the 1979 Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 11 Roy Street (Courtesy of the GSR, KPL); (middle right) the 1979 Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 11 Roy Street (Courtesy of the GSR,
KPL); (middle right) the 1979 Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 11 Roy Street (Courtesy of the GSR, KPL); (middle right)
Current photograph of front façade of 11 Roy Current photograph of front façade of 11 Roy Current photograph of front façade of 11 Roy Street (MHBC, 2024);(below) Excerpt from the 1945
Voter’s List for 11 Roy Street Voter’s List for 11 Roy Street Voter’s List for 11 Roy Street (Library and Archives Canada).
DDDDD
MHBC | 41
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Figure24-Historical photograph of Vietnamese refugee family Historical photograph of Vietnamese refugee family Historical photograph of Vietnamese refugee family (Pham Family) (Pham
Family) (Pham Family) housed by St. Andrew’s housed by St. Andrew’s housed by St. Andrew’s
T
Presbyterian Church in 11 Roy Street(Courtesy of the(Courtesy of the(Courtesy of theSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).).).
3.2.3.2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)2 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)
In 1854, the first Presbyterian services were held in the homes of residents of Kitchener, In 1854, the first Presbyterian services were held in the homes of residents of Kitchener,
In 1854, the first Presbyterian services were held in the homes of residents of Kitchener,
then Berlin, who were primarily of Scottish descent (then Berlin, who were primarily of Scottish descent (then Berlin, who were primarily of Scottish descent (3).
F
Eventually services were conducted at Eventually services were conducted at Eventually services were conducted at a a a schoolhouse by Reverend Pirie who was the schoolhouse by Reverend
Pirie who was the schoolhouse by Reverend Pirie who was the
minister of Doon Presbyterian Church (minister of Doon Presbyterian Church (minister of Doon Presbyterian Church (555). In 1885, the St. Andrew’s Berlin and Chalmers ). In 1885, the
St. Andrew’s Berlin and Chalmers ). In 1885, the St. Andrew’s Berlin and Chalmers
Presbyterian Winterbourne (of Woolwich Township) jointly established a congregation Presbyterian Winterbourne (of Woolwich Township) jointly established a congregation Presbyterian Winterbourne
(of Woolwich Township) jointly established a congregation
which was orchestrated by George Davidson, Waterloo County’s first Sheriff. In 1855, the which was orchestrated by George Davidson, Waterloo County’s first Sheriff. In 1855, the which
was orchestrated by George Davidson, Waterloo County’s first Sheriff. In 1855, the
first church building, consisting of brick seating 175 people, was erected on the present site first church building, consisting of brick seating 175 people, was erected on the present
site first church building, consisting of brick seating 175 people, was erected on the present site
for the cost of $4,500for the cost of $4,500for the cost of $4,500(4). T(4). T(4). The parcel he parcel he parcel of land was sold to the congregation by George of land was sold to the
congregation by George of land was sold to the congregation by George
A
Davidson although his Davidson although his Davidson although his purchase of this lot (Lot 1) as part of the C.H. Ahren’s Survey purchase of this lot (Lot 1) as part of the C.H. Ahren’s
Survey purchase of this lot (Lot 1) as part of the C.H. Ahren’s Survey was
not registered until 1858 for Lot 1. Tnot registered until 1858 for Lot 1. Tnot registered until 1858 for Lot 1. The official transaction between Davidson and the he official transaction
between Davidson and the he official transaction between Davidson and the
Trustees of St. Andrew’s Church was registered in 1862Trustees of St. Andrew’s Church was registered in 1862Trustees of St. Andrew’s Church was registered in 1862. In 1885, two transepts
were added
to the sanctuary due to overcrowding. In 1888, members departed joining a new to the sanctuary due to overcrowding. In 1888, members departed joining a new to the sanctuary due to overcrowding.
In 1888, members departed joining a new
congregation in Waterloo, Knox Waterloo. congregation in Waterloo, Knox Waterloo. congregation in Waterloo, Knox Waterloo.
R
D
MHBC | 42
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
Figures 25-27-(above left) Excerpt from (above left) Excerpt from (above left) Excerpt from the 1879 Bird’s Eye View of Berlin showing building form of the 1879 Bird’s Eye View of Berlin
showing building form of the 1879 Bird’s Eye View of Berlin showing building form of
the former St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church; (above right)the former St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church; (above right)the former St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church; (above right)Historical
postcard of Historical postcard of Historical postcard of former St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below) Historical photograph of Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below) Historical
photograph of Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below) Historical photograph of
AA
former St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).former St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).former St.
Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church).
In April 1906, due to rising membership, the construction of a new church building was In April 1906, due to rising membership, the construction of a new church building was In April
1906, due to rising membership, the construction of a new church building was
approved with a budget of $25,000 and $2000 for a pipe organapproved with a budget of $25,000 and $2000 for a pipe organapproved with a budget of $25,000 and $2000 for a pipe organ(see
Figures 28 & 29).
The cornerstone of the church was laid in October of 1906 by the oldest member of the The cornerstone of the church was laid in October of 1906 by the oldest member of the The cornerstone
of the church was laid in October of 1906 by the oldest member of the
congregation, Mrs. James Potter (congregation, Mrs. James Potter (congregation, Mrs. James Potter (555). On September 8, 1907, the church was officially
RR
dedicateddedicateddedicated(7)(7)(7). The new building included the circular stained glass Rose . The new building included the circular stained glass Rose . The new building included
the circular stained glass Rose Window dedicated
to the Davidson Family as well as Sheriff Davidson clock and other items from the original to the Davidson Family as well as Sheriff Davidson clock and other items from the original
to the Davidson Family as well as Sheriff Davidson clock and other items from the original
church. church. church. On January 21, 1925, the congregation voted to remain Presbyterian rather than On January 21, 1925, the congregation voted to remain Presbyterian rather than
On January 21, 1925, the congregation voted to remain Presbyterian rather than
joining the newly formed United Churchjoining the newly formed United Churchjoining the newly formed United Church; Figure 30 shows the footprint of the church at the
time(8). In 1939, the sanctuary was renovated which included new lighting, re(8). In 1939, the sanctuary was renovated which included new lighting, re(8). In 1939, the sanctuary was
renovated which included new lighting, re-seating in
the balcony, carpets and repainting of the interior (10). Nine years later, the sanctuary was the balcony, carpets and repainting of the interior (10). Nine years later, the sanctuary
was the balcony, carpets and repainting of the interior (10). Nine years later, the sanctuary was
DD
renovated with a new Cassavant organ which was a dedication to the soldiers from the
congregation who died during WWI and WWII; the organ has since had major revisions in
1963, 2001, 2004 and 2005 (12).
MHBC | 43
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTT
FFFF
Figures 28-30-(above left) (above left) (above left) Coloured postcard of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church Coloured postcard of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church Coloured postcard of
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church published in 1911
(Courtesy of the GSR, KPL PB4); (above right) Historical photograph of the interior of the church Courtesy of the GSR, KPL PB4); (above right) Historical photograph of the interior of
the church Courtesy of the GSR, KPL PB4); (above right) Historical photograph of the interior of the church
AAAA
including pipe organ (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); including pipe organ (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); including pipe organ (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church); Excerpt from 1925 Fire Insurance
Plan (Courtesy of theCourtesy of theCourtesy of theGSR, KPLGSR, KPLGSR, KPL).).).
In 1954, Iona Hall was In 1954, Iona Hall was In 1954, Iona Hall was built which replaced the Sunday School; the project was known as built which replaced the Sunday School; the project
was known as built which replaced the Sunday School; the project was known as
“Iona I Project” (13). The Hall included church offices, Christian Education facilities and “Iona I Project” (13). The Hall included church offices, Christian Education facilities and
“Iona I Project” (13). The Hall included church offices, Christian Education facilities and
completion of St. Andrew’s Chapel. In 1955, the church held the largest Presbyterian completion of St. Andrew’s Chapel. In 1955, the church held the largest Presbyterian completion of
St. Andrew’s Chapel. In 1955, the church held the largest Presbyterian
RRRR
congregation icongregation icongregation in Canada with 1900 members and 1061 children enrolled in Sunday School n Canada with 1900 members and 1061 children enrolled in Sunday School
n Canada with 1900 members and 1061 children enrolled in Sunday School
(14). In 1961, the worship services were aired on CKCO (CTV News) as St. Andrew’s (14). In 1961, the worship services were aired on CKCO (CTV News) as St. Andrew’s (14). In 1961, the
worship services were aired on CKCO (CTV News) as St. Andrew’s
Television Ministry (14). Television Ministry (14). Television Ministry (14). In 1967, the “Iona II Project” was initiated with the construction of
the Covenant Chapel, the Heather Room, library, offices and educational space; the the Covenant Chapel, the Heather Room, library, offices and educational space; the the Covenant Chapel,
the Heather Room, library, offices and educational space; the
dedication for these facilities occurred in 1969 (15). In 1968, the church opened St. dedication for these facilities occurred in 1969 (15). In 1968, the church opened St. dedication
for these facilities occurred in 1969 (15). In 1968, the church opened St.
Andrew’s Day Care which operated until 1992 (16). In the 1970s, the St. Andrew’sAndrew’s Day Care which operated until 1992 (16). In the 1970s, the St. Andrew’sAndrew’s Day Care which
operated until 1992 (16). In the 1970s, the St. Andrew’s‘Open
DDDD
Door’ philosophy resulted in more than 3000 people using the church’s facilities as a form
of local outreach (18). Beginning in the 1970s, the church sponsored several families from
around the world including Vietnam, Guatemala, San Salvador, Somalia and Afghanistan
(18). In 1971, the church’s Thrift Shop openedunder the Ladies’ Aid (Women’s
MHBC | 44
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
association).Beginning in 1975, Noon Hour Recitals began at the church which continue to
this day (20).
TT
FF
Figures 31-33-(above) (above) (above) Historical photograph of Iona I Project (Iona Hall) which is the existing west Historical photograph of Iona I Project (Iona Hall) which is the
existing west Historical photograph of Iona I Project (Iona Hall) which is the existing west
wing of the church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below left) wing of the church (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below left) wing of the church (Courtesy
of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church); (below left) Excerpt of news article
for the Iona II Project including Covenant Chapel (for the Iona II Project including Covenant Chapel (for the Iona II Project including Covenant Chapel (Source: KW Record, February 1968);
(below right) Source: KW Record, February 1968); (below right) Source: KW Record, February 1968); (below right)
AA
Historical photograph of the opening of Iona Phase II project (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Historical photograph of the opening of Iona Phase II project (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Historical photograph of the opening of Iona Phase II project (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian
Church).
RR
DD
MHBC | 45
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Basement Floor Basement Floor
TTTTTTT
GroundGroundFloor PlanFloor Plan
FFFFFFF
AAAAAAA
First Floor Plan
RRRRRRR
DDDDDDD
Figures 34-36-(above) Basement floor plan; (middle) Ground floor plan showing that semi-detached
dwelling at 62-64 Queen Street North is still present; (below) First floor plan (Courtesy of St. Andrew’s
Presbyterian Church).
MHBC | 46
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
In 1980, the Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario, the Honorable Pauline McGibbon, was in
attendance to commemorate the founding of the congregation.In 1982, the church
purchased 11 Roy Street which was used to house a refugee family and for FACS of
Waterloo Region as SOLO House. In 1988, the Covenant ’88 Campaign resulted in the In 1988, the Covenant ’88 Campaign resulted in the In 1988, the Covenant ’88 Campaign resulted in the
installation of an elevator, exterior ramp, climate-controlled sanctuary, renovated church controlled sanctuary, renovated church controlled sanctuary, renovated church
spire which were dedicated in October 1989 (24). In 1995, a day camp and outreach spire which were dedicated in October 1989 (24). In 1995, a day camp and outreach spire which were dedicated
in October 1989 (24). In 1995, a day camp and outreach
ministry called Camp Kummoniwannago debuted (27). Between 2000 and 2001, the roof of Between 2000 and 2001, the roof of Between 2000 and 2001, the roof of
the sanctuary, office and upper halls areas were replaced (30). In 2002, a stainedthe sanctuary, office and upper halls areas were replaced (30). In 2002, a stainedthe sanctuary, office
and upper halls areas were replaced (30). In 2002, a stained---glassglassglass
window dedicated to Douglas Haas’ music ministry and in memory of his mother, Marjorie window dedicated to Douglas Haas’ music ministry and in memory of his mother, Marjorie window dedicated
to Douglas Haas’ music ministry and in memory of his mother, Marjorie
Gosselin. In 2004, the church established an archive, started the ‘Out of the Cold’ program, , started the ‘Out of the Cold’ program, , started the ‘Out of the Cold’ program,
ththth
whichcontinued until 2014, and established the Garden of St. Andrew’s for the 150continued until 2014, and established the Garden of St. Andrew’s for the 150continued until 2014, and
established the Garden of St. Andrew’s for the 150
anniversary project (31). In 2005, flooring and additional lighting in the choir loftanniversary project (31). In 2005, flooring and additional lighting in the choir loftanniversary
project (31). In 2005, flooring and additional lighting in the choir loftwere were were
installed in Iona Hall (31).
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
The following Tables 6.0 and 7.0 provide a review of the major construction and provide a review of the major construction and provide a review of the major construction and
renovations on the property related to the existing building onrenovations on the property related to the existing building onrenovations on the property related to the existing building
on---sitesitesiteandandanda chronology of the a chronology of the a chronology of the
built form.
Table 6.0-Building Chronology Chronology ((ConstructionConstruction&&RenovationsRenovationsof 54 Queen St N)of 54 Queen St N)
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Year Construction/ RenovationConstruction/ Renovation
1906Original church building constructed replacing earlier Original church building constructed replacing earlier Original church building constructed replacing earlier
church church church constructed in 1855constructed in 1855constructed in 1855
1939Sanctuary renovations (new lighting, reSanctuary renovations (new lighting, reSanctuary renovations (new lighting, re-seating in balcony,
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
carpets and repainting)carpets and repainting)carpets and repainting)
1948New Cassavant organ added to sanctuary (later revisions New Cassavant organ added to sanctuary (later revisions New Cassavant organ added to sanctuary (later revisions
1963, 2001, 2004, 2005)1963, 2001, 2004, 2005)1963, 2001, 2004, 2005)
195419541954Iona Hall (Iona I Project) including church offices, Iona Hall (Iona I Project) including church offices, Iona Hall (Iona I Project) including church offices,
education facilities and St. Andrew’s Chapeleducation facilities and St. Andrew’s Chapeleducation facilities and St. Andrew’s Chapel
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
196719671967---196819681968Iona II Project including Covenant Chapel, Heather Room,
library, offices and educational space
1988Installation of elevator, exterior ramp, climate-controlled
sanctuary and renovated church spire
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
2000-2001Roof of sanctuary, office, upper halls were replaced
2005Flooring and additional lighting in the choir loft in Iona Hall
MHBC | 47
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Original Building Footprint Original Building Footprint
Current Building Current Building
in 1925
Footprint Footprint 2024
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Table 7.0-Building Morphology of 54 Queen Street NorthBuilding Morphology of 54 Queen Street North
Section ‘A’------------------Original Building Footprint
(1906)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Section ‘B’Section ‘B’Section ‘B’---------------------Iona I Project (Addition)
(1954)
Section ‘C’Section ‘C’Section ‘C’-------Iona II Project (Addition)
(1967)
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
It’s important to note that the Church has a history of expansion, including phases which It’s important to note that the Church has a history of expansion, including phases which It’s
important to note that the Church has a history of expansion, including phases which
required the demolition of nearby structures, in order to facilitate its outreach efforts with required the demolition of nearby structures, in order to facilitate its outreach efforts
with required the demolition of nearby structures, in order to facilitate its outreach efforts with
the community. Flexibility in size and configuration of Church facilitithe community. Flexibility in size and configuration of Church facilitithe community. Flexibility in size and configuration
of Church facilities has historically
supported the intangible heritage tradition of service to the community, and this proposal supported the intangible heritage tradition of service to the community, and this proposal
supported the intangible heritage tradition of service to the community, and this proposal
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
represents a continuation of that tradition.
MHBC | 48
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
3.2.3.3 68 Queen Street North (The Knell/ Rockel House)
Lot 3 of C.H. Ahren’s Survey (1858), Plan 360 was sold to Simon Roy in 1858 which
included 0.49 acres. In 1896, part of the lot was sold to Hannah Wilkinson who sold a
portion of the property to Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land portion of the property to Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land portion
of the property to Elizabeth Shoemaker (LRO). The remaining portion of the land
was sold to George A. Bricker in 1902. Between1902 and 1920, the property was owned by 1902 and 1920, the property was owned by 1902 and 1920, the property was owned by
several owners with surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In several owners with surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In several
owners with surnames including: Heller, Tracksell, Williams and Shantz (LRO). In
1921, the property was granted to Henry Knell who granted it to his sister Anni1921, the property was granted to Henry Knell who granted it to his sister Anni1921, the property was granted
to Henry Knell who granted it to his sister Annie M. Knell e M. Knell e M. Knell
shortly thereafter (LRO). Documents indicate that the building was constructed soon after shortly thereafter (LRO). Documents indicate that the building was constructed soon after shortly
thereafter (LRO). Documents indicate that the building was constructed soon after
the purchase of the land by the Knell familyand possibly designed by local architect W.H.E. possibly designed by local architect W.H.E. possibly designed by local architect W.H.E.
Schmalz, who designed several public and private buildings within the area; depending on if who designed several public and private buildings within the area; depending on if who designed
several public and private buildings within the area; depending on if
it was constructed in 1921 or 1922, the design may have been under the partnership of it was constructed in 1921 or 1922, the design may have been under the partnership of it was constructed
in 1921 or 1922, the design may have been under the partnership of
111
Schmalz and Jones Architects which was established in 1922 with Bernal A. JonesSchmalz and Jones Architects which was established in 1922 with Bernal A. JonesSchmalz and Jones Architects
which was established in 1922 with Bernal A. Jones(28)(28)(28). . .
The Classical design of the building is reflective of Schmalz’ fascination with BeauxThe Classical design of the building is reflective of Schmalz’ fascination with BeauxThe Classical
design of the building is reflective of Schmalz’ fascination with Beaux---Arts Arts Arts
design. In the 1925 Fire Insurance Plan, a 2 ½ storey brick dwelling with one storey In the 1925 Fire Insurance Plan, a 2 ½ storey brick dwelling with one storey In the 1925 Fire Insurance
Plan, a 2 ½ storey brick dwelling with one storey
T
addition is shown on the plan. Based on the acquisition of the property in 1921 by the Knell addition is shown on the plan. Based on the acquisition of the property in 1921 by the Knell
addition is shown on the plan. Based on the acquisition of the property in 1921 by the Knell
Family and local directories, the building wasdirectories, the building wasdirectories, the building waslikelylikelylikelyconstructed c. 1921constructed c. 1921constructed c. 1921---192219221922in
the in the in the
Classical Revival Style for Henry and Annie Knell. The Classical Revival Style for Henry and Annie Knell. The Classical Revival Style for Henry and Annie Knell. The
originally identified the date of construction as 1870, however, documents originally identified the date of construction as 1870, however, documents originally identified the date of
construction as 1870, however, documents
indicate that there was a previous building located on the site which was replaced byindicate that there was a previous building located on the site which was replaced byindicate that
there was a previous building located on the site which was replaced bythe
F
existing 68 Queen StreetNorth.North.North.
The 1931 Federal Census identifies Henry The 1931 Federal Census identifies Henry The 1931 Federal Census identifies Henry Knell Knell Knell living at 68 Queen Street North who is living
at 68 Queen Street North who is living at 68 Queen Street North who is
identified as a real estate agent with a brick house with 8 rooms valued at $15,000; the identified as a real estate agent with a brick house with 8 rooms valued at $15,000; the identified
as a real estate agent with a brick house with 8 rooms valued at $15,000; the
census also indicates that he lived with his sister Annie who is identified as a ‘homemaker’ census also indicates that he lived with his sister Annie who is identified as a ‘homemaker’
census also indicates that he lived with his sister Annie who is identified as a ‘homemaker’
(Library and Archives Canada). Prio(Library and Archives Canada). Prio(Library and Archives Canada). Prior to moving to 68 Queen Street North, Henry lived at r to moving to 68 Queen
Street North, Henry lived at r to moving to 68 Queen Street North, Henry lived at
A
109 Queen Street North (1911 Census). The Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 1979, 109 Queen Street North (1911 Census). The Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 1979, 109 Queen Street
North (1911 Census). The Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 1979,
describes the describes the describes the buildingbuildingbuildingas follows:as follows:as follows:
R
Based on land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the building remained under the Based on land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the building remained under the
Based on land registry records and the Vernon Directories, the building remained under the
ownership of the Knell Family until 1950 when the property was willed to the Waterloo ownership of the Knell Family until 1950 when the property was willed to the Waterloo ownership
of the Knell Family until 1950 when the property was willed to the Waterloo
Trust & Savings Corporation. In 1953, the property was granted to Dr. Albert C.and Gladys
D
Rockel. Albert Conrad Rockel was born in Saskatchewan and graduated from the University
MHBC | 49
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
of Saskatchewan in 1934(see Figures 37 & 38). Gladys was born in 1913 in Winnipeg,
Manitoba and moved to Kitchener in 1944.
TT
Figures 37 & 38-(left) Photograph of Albert Conrad Rockel from the Greystone, University of (left) Photograph of Albert Conrad Rockel from the Greystone, University of (left) Photograph
of Albert Conrad Rockel from the Greystone, University of
FF
Saskatchewan Yearbook of 1934 (ancestry.ca); (right) Photograph of Albert Conrad Rockel taken in 1934 Saskatchewan Yearbook of 1934 (ancestry.ca); (right) Photograph of Albert Conrad
Rockel taken in 1934 Saskatchewan Yearbook of 1934 (ancestry.ca); (right) Photograph of Albert Conrad Rockel taken in 1934
(Source: Waterloo Region Generations).Generations).Generations).
AA
RR
Figures Figures Figures 39 & 4039 & 4039 & 40---(left) Photograph from 1978; (right) Historical photograph from the 1979 (left) Photograph from 1978; (right) Historical photograph from
the 1979 (left) Photograph from 1978; (right) Historical photograph from the 1979
Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 68 Queen Street North (Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 68 Queen Street North (Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt
Room, Architectural Survey of Kitchener of 68 Queen Street North (Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room,
Kitchener Public Library). Kitchener Public Library). Kitchener Public Library).
DD
MHBC | 50
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Photographs taken in 1978 and 1979 as part of the compilation of inventories of historical
buildings in Kitchener, show that there has been limited change to the building since then
(see Figures 39 & 40). The Vernon Directories associate the property withDr.A. Rockel
and his family practicefrom the early 1950s into the1980s. By a 1980 aerial photograph1980 aerial photograph1980 aerial photograph,
the addition and attached garage appearto the north of the building(see Figure 41Figure 41Figure 41).
TT
FF
Figure 41-Aerial photograph from 1980 of subject lands identifying the presence of attached garage Aerial photograph from 1980 of subject lands identifying the presence of attached garage
Aerial photograph from 1980 of subject lands identifying the presence of attached garage
AA
and addition (Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library).and addition (Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library).and addition (Courtesy of the
Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library).
In 1989, Dr.n 1989, Dr.n 1989, Dr.AlbertAlbertAlbertRockelRockelRockelpassed awaypassed awaypassed away(Library and Archives Canada(Library and Archives Canada(Library and Archives Canada).In
1997, Gladys
Rockel transferred the property to St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church by its Board and Rockel transferred the property to St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church by its Board and Rockel transferred
the property to St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church by its Board and
Trustees (LRO). Trustees (LRO). Trustees (LRO). Gladys passed away three years later (The Leader Post, September 6, Gladys passed away three years later (The Leader Post, September 6,
Gladys passed away three years later (The Leader Post, September 6,
2000, 29).2000, 29).2000, 29).In 2010, the house was renamed from the Rockel House to the Knell House in In 2010, the house was renamed from the Rockel House to the Knell House in In
2010, the house was renamed from the Rockel House to the Knell House in
RR
recognition of the original owner Henry Knell (28). recognition of the original owner Henry Knell (28). recognition of the original owner Henry Knell (28). Since then, the building has
been leased
to several businesses; the current business leasing the building is Harper Sheto several businesses; the current business leasing the building is Harper Sheto several businesses; the
current business leasing the building is Harper Shelly Law Office.
The original footprint of the building has been The original footprint of the building has been The original footprint of the building has been slightlyaltered with an addition on the
north
elevation towards the rear of the building and an attached garage which faces Roy Streetelevation towards the rear of the building and an attached garage which faces Roy Streetelevation
towards the rear of the building and an attached garage which faces Roy Street
(see Table 8.0Table 8.0Table 8.0 for review of building morphology). Based on observations, it appears that for review of building morphology). Based on observations, it appears that
for review of building morphology). Based on observations, it appears that
th
these additions were made in the late 20century.
DD
MHBC | 51
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Original Building Footprint Building Footprint Current Current Building Footprint Building Footprint
in 1925in in 20242024
Table 8.0-Building Morphology of 68 Queen Street NorthBuilding Morphology of 68 Queen Street North
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Section A------------------Original Building Footprint (c. Original Building Footprint (c. Original Building Footprint (c.
1921)
Section BSection BSection B---------------------North Addition (c. 1980)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Section CSection CSection C---------------------Attached Garage (c. 1980)
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 52
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
4.0 Existing Conditions of the Subject Lands
4.1 Built Features
4.1.1 11 Roy Street
The building is composed of a brick andwood frame structure withwithwithcedar shake cladding cedar shake cladding cedar shake cladding
nd
(2storey)with a gabled asphalt roofline with deep returning eaves/ eave roofline with deep returning eaves/ eave roofline with deep returning eaves/ eave overhangs and a overhangs and
a overhangs and a
frontgableddormer. The buildinghas a stone foundation and stone window headers and has a stone foundation and stone window headers and has a stone foundation and stone window headers
and
sills along the first storey and wood frames along the upper storey (see along the first storey and wood frames along the upper storey (see along the first storey and wood frames along
the upper storey (see Table Table Table 9.09.09.0 for for for
exterior elevations).
The north (front) elevation of the building includes a The north (front) elevation of the building includes a The north (front) elevation of the building includes a projectingprojectingprojectingmedi
ummediummedium---pitchedpitchedpitchedgabled gabled gabled
attic dormer centred on the western side of the roof with deep cornicing and returning attic dormer centred on the western side of the roof with deep cornicing and returning attic dormer
centred on the western side of the roof with deep cornicing and returning T
eaves. The gable is clad in cedar shakes within a window gallery composed of four window within a window gallery composed of four window within a window gallery composed of four window
openings and roundel window opening below the pitch of the gable. An extended gabled openings and roundel window opening below the pitch of the gable. An extended gabled openings and
roundel window opening below the pitch of the gable. An extended gabled
roof line dually acts as the roof to the porch which is supported by brick piers with concrete roof line dually acts as the roof to the porch which is supported by brick piers with concrete
roof line dually acts as the roof to the porch which is supported by brick piers with concrete
bases and caps and wood columns what support the porch roof structure. Clapboard bases and caps and wood columns what support the porch roof structure. Clapboard bases and caps and wood
columns what support the porch roof structure. Clapboard
sections intersect the brick piers along the porch with wood lattice along the underskirt of sections intersect the brick piers along the porch with wood lattice along the underskirt
of sections intersect the brick piers along the porch with wood lattice along the underskirt of
F
the porch.
The west and east elevations include painted The west and east elevations include painted The west and east elevations include painted wood clapboard wood clapboard wood clapboard within
the medium-pitched
half storey with deep returning eaves. The entry to the porch is located off of the east half storey with deep returning eaves. The entry to the porch is located off of the east half
storey with deep returning eaves. The entry to the porch is located off of the east
elevation. The east elevation includes four window openings within the upper storey and elevation. The east elevation includes four window openings within the upper storey and elevation.
The east elevation includes four window openings within the upper storey and
A
one door and two window openings on the first storey (with additional two sill windows). one door and two window openings on the first storey (with additional two sill windows). one
door and two window openings on the first storey (with additional two sill windows).
The west elevation includes four window openings in the upper storey including two small The west elevation includes four window openings in the upper storey including two small The
west elevation includes four window openings in the upper storey including two small
windows within the gable eaves, a window gallery composed of four windowindows within the gable eaves, a window gallery composed of four windowindows within the gable eaves, a window
gallery composed of four windows and the dual
window opening below the gable. The first storey includes two narrow window openings, a window opening below the gable. The first storey includes two narrow window openings, a window
opening below the gable. The first storey includes two narrow window openings, a
dual window opening towards the rear of the house; there are also two sill windows. dual window opening towards the rear of the house; there are also two sill windows. dual window opening
towards the rear of the house; there are also two sill windows.
The south (rear) elevationThe south (rear) elevationThe south (rear) elevationincludes a mediumincludes a mediumincludes a medium-pitched gabled dormer clad in wood
R
clapboarding with returning eaves. Below the gable is a small window opening, small clapboarding with returning eaves. Below the gable is a small window opening, small clapboarding with
returning eaves. Below the gable is a small window opening, small
window opening and gallery window opening with four windows. The first storey includes a window opening and gallery window opening with four windows. The first storey includes a window
opening and gallery window opening with four windows. The first storey includes a
small porch supported by a brick pier with stone cap and base and two window openings. small porch supported by a brick pier with stone cap and base and two window openings. small porch
supported by a brick pier with stone cap and base and two window openings.
An appraisal report An appraisal report An appraisal report entitled, “Hypothetical Short Narrative Appraisal of a Commercial
Residential for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener, Ontario” was completed in September of 2018 by Residential for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener, Ontario” was completed in September of 2018 by Residential
for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener, Ontario” was completed in September of 2018 by
D
Musso Appraisals & Consulting Inc. This report identified some ceiling repairs and peeling
paint, asbestos, some parging repair and masonry lintel painting and cedar siding painting,
minimal water deterioration along masonry. The report states, “This building is in average/
MHBC | 53
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
dated condition”. It also concludes that the estimated cost of complete renovationwould
range between $78,000-$177,500.00
Table 9.0-Photos of exterior elevations of 11 Roy Street
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 54
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
4.1.254 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church)
Theexterior of the building consists of brick and stone masonry; in addition to the rustic
limestone foundation, the building also includes a variety of stone accents including stone
banding, windowsillsandheaders,stone door surrounds with medallion motifs (Queen stone door surrounds with medallion motifs (Queen stone door surrounds with medallion motifs (Queen
Street North primary entry)foundation sill, cornicing and pilaster cappingand and and arches arches arches along
the arcade along the north elevation of the church. Covenant Chapel is solely constructed Covenant Chapel is solely constructed Covenant Chapel is solely constructed
of stone masonry and includes similar features such as stone window surrounds, pilasters of stone masonry and includes similar features such as stone window surrounds, pilasters of stone
masonry and includes similar features such as stone window surrounds, pilasters
with capping, and parapet. Decorative brick details include brick corbellingwith capping, and parapet. Decorative brick details include brick corbellingwith capping, and parapet. Decorative
brick details include brick corbellingand cornicing and cornicing and cornicing
anddecorative brick banding, including patterned crosses, andbrick window brick window brick window voussoirsvoussoirsvoussoirs, , ,
lancet hoodmouldings, pilasters,parapets, hexagonal turrets hexagonal turrets hexagonal turrets and and and square plan square plan square plan towers, towers, towers, and and and
church spire. Woodwork is used minimally, particularly the vestibule located within the Woodwork is used minimally, particularly the vestibule located within the Woodwork is used minimally,
particularly the vestibule located within the
central bay of the original church building along Queen Street North which includes a central bay of the original church building along Queen Street North which includes a central bay
of the original church building along Queen Street North which includes a
lychgate inspired overhang and wood frame window gallery. lychgate inspired overhang and wood frame window gallery. lychgate inspired overhang and wood frame window gallery.
T
The building reflects several Gothic architectural elements including ogee and lancet The building reflects several Gothic architectural elements including ogee and lancet The building
reflects several Gothic architectural elements including ogee and lancet
window openings, Gothic window tracery with stained glasstracery with stained glasstracery with stained glassand land land louvered ouvered ouvered third storey tower third storey tower
third storey tower
windows. Aside from the platform roofthe platform roofthe platform rooflineslineslinesofofofthe majority of the later additions, a the majority of the later additions, a the majority
of the later additions, a
combination of roof cladding is used. combination of roof cladding is used. combination of roof cladding is used. Asphalt shingling is used for the Asphalt shingling is used for the
Asphalt shingling is used for the Covenant CCovenant CCovenant Chapel
and front vestibule along Queen Street North. A standing seam metal roof is used for the and front vestibule along Queen Street North. A standing seam metal roof is used for the and
front vestibule along Queen Street North. A standing seam metal roof is used for the
F
main church roof except forthe roof of the church spire and tower roofs which includthe roof of the church spire and tower roofs which includthe roof of the church spire and tower roofs
which include an
octagonal metalshingling.shingling.shingling.The church spire and towers displayThe church spire and towers displayThe church spire and towers displayGothic inspired finials.Gothic inspired
finials.Gothic inspired finials. See
Table 10.0 for exterior elevations.xterior elevations.xterior elevations.
Based on a review of the condition of the building it appears that there are Based on a review of the condition of the building it appears that there are Based on a review of the condition
of the building it appears that there are limited
deficiencies:
A
Appearance of eAppearance of eAppearance of efflorescence along fflorescence along fflorescence along limestone foundation wallslimestone foundation wallslimestone foundation walls(Section
A);
Minor drainage issues along Minor drainage issues along Minor drainage issues along windowsillswindowsillswindowsillsalong south elevation (Section A)
Minor discolouration Minor discolouration Minor discolouration due to drainage/ efflorescencedue to drainage/ efflorescencedue to drainage/ efflorescencealong the east and north
elevation of the church spire bayelevation of the church spire bayelevation of the church spire bayparticularly below the louvered window openings
along the second storey and stone cornicing and below the stone cornicing along along the second storey and stone cornicing and below the stone cornicing along along the second storey
and stone cornicing and below the stone cornicing along
the first levelthe first levelthe first level(Section A)(Section A)(Section A)
R
Minor discolouration along northern tower along east elevation below roofline Minor discolouration along northern tower along east elevation below roofline Minor discolouration along
northern tower along east elevation below roofline
(Section A)(Section A)(Section A)
Minor discolouration along parapet of Chapel entry (particularly the northern side) Minor discolouration along parapet of Chapel entry (particularly the northern side) Minor discolouration
along parapet of Chapel entry (particularly the northern side)
(Section C)(Section C)(Section C)
Moderate discolouration along north side of chapel along parapet and pilasters Moderate discolouration along north side of chapel along parapet and pilasters Moderate discolouration
along north side of chapel along parapet and pilasters
(Section C).
D
The building appears to overall be in good conditionincluding the exterior walls, foundation
and roof cladding.
MHBC | 55
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Table 10.0-Photos of exterior elevations of 54 Queen Street North
TTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDD
4.1.3 68 Queen Street North
The building is constructed of red brick with stretcher brick coursing with the exception of
rowlock coursing below the first storey window openings. The building has alow-pitched
MHBC | 56
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
pedimentedboxed in gable roofline with intermittent brackets along the soffits. The gable
roof consists of asphalt shingles and includes a prominent brick chimney shaft along the
northern elevation. Above the second storey is deep cornicing which is lined by brackets
along the soffits. The buildingincludes a poured concrete foundationand window openings and window openings and window openings
with brick voussoirs and keystones. The building includes severaladditions along the north additions along the north additions along the north
elevation including an attached garage which faces Roy Street.
The east (front) elevation includes a symmetrical placement of window openings with The east (front) elevation includes a symmetrical placement of window openings with The east (front)
elevation includes a symmetrical placement of window openings with
keystones and wooden shutters. The pediment gable includesa semia semia semi---arched window arched window arched window
opening with keystone and wooden shutters. The asymmetrical primary entry includes aopening with keystone and wooden shutters. The asymmetrical primary entry includes aopening with keystone
and wooden shutters. The asymmetrical primary entry includes a
Classical aedicule withpedimented portico, Doric columnswith modest architrave, frieze with modest architrave, frieze with modest architrave, frieze
and cornice brandishingdentil mouldings. Thedoor opening door opening door opening hashashassidelights with asidelights with asidelights with asemisemisemi---
ellipticalfanlight transom and six-panel wood door. This elevation also includes an addThis elevation also includes an addThis elevation also includes an addition ition ition
with a low-pitched roof and deep cornicing. This elevation includes a door entry with pitched roof and deep cornicing. This elevation includes a door entry with pitched roof and deep
cornicing. This elevation includes a door entry with
sidelight and window opening.
T
The north elevation of the house includes three interconnected brick additions with The north elevation of the house includes three interconnected brick additions with The north elevation
of the house includes three interconnected brick additions with
concrete foundations. The addition to the west of the facade includes to gallery window concrete foundations. The addition to the west of the facade includes to gallery window concrete
foundations. The addition to the west of the facade includes to gallery window
openings including three windows facing Roy Street with a lowopenings including three windows facing Roy Street with a lowopenings including three windows facing Roy Street with a low---pitched
roof line and pitched roof line and pitched roof line and
extended eaves. The addition to the east extends keystone and extended eaves further extended eaves. The addition to the east extends keystone and extended eaves further extended eaves.
The addition to the east extends keystone and extended eaves further
north and includes a human door entryway with a keystone; this addition is connected to north and includes a human door entryway with a keystone; this addition is connected to north
and includes a human door entryway with a keystone; this addition is connected to
F
an attached garage.
The south elevation includes a gallery window with three windows, a human door entry The south elevation includes a gallery window with three windows, a human door entry The south elevation
includes a gallery window with three windows, a human door entry
with overhang and singular window opening. The upper storey includeswith overhang and singular window opening. The upper storey includeswith overhang and singular window opening. The
upper storey includesvariousthree
window openings with keystones. The west (rear) elevation of the building includes a window openings with keystones. The west (rear) elevation of the building includes a window openings
with keystones. The west (rear) elevation of the building includes a
reflection of the boxed pediment gable with brackets on the front façade with a semireflection of the boxed pediment gable with brackets on the front façade with a semireflection of
the boxed pediment gable with brackets on the front façade with a semi-
arched window opening with keystone within the gable. The first storey includes three arched window opening with keystone within the gable. The first storey includes three arched window
opening with keystone within the gable. The first storey includes three
A
various window openings,various window openings,various window openings,and the upper storey includes three window openings and door and the upper storey includes three window openings
and door and the upper storey includes three window openings and door
opening. There is also a brick chimney shaft along this elevation. ening. There is also a brick chimney shaft along this elevation. ening. There is also a brick chimney shaft along this
elevation.
The building appears to be in good condition except forThe building appears to be in good condition except forThe building appears to be in good condition except forsome masonry staining
below
windowsills likely due to drainagewindowsills likely due to drainagewindowsills likely due to drainageand and and some discolouration along the foundation sill.
R
D
MHBC | 57
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Table 11.0-Photos of exterior elevations of 68 Queen Street North
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDD
4.2 Landscape Features
Most ofthe subject lands consists of asphalt surface parking. There is a small strip of sod
along the frontage of 11 Roy Street and landscaped front yard along the frontage of 68
Queen Street North which consists of some coniferous plantings along the façade. There is
MHBC | 58
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
a large, mature coniferous tree along the front yard of 68 Queen Street North. There is a
community/ church garden(the Garden of St. Andrew’s established in 2004)located on the
north side of the church by the church hall which includes low-lying plantings, a few tree
plantings, pedestrian pathway and stone installation.
Table 12.0-Photos of Landscape Features on the Subject Landsof Landscape Features on the Subject Lands
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 59
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
5.0 Evaluation and Identification of Cultural Heritage Value
or Interest
5.1 Evaluation of the Subject Lands
The Terms of Reference included in Appendix D of this report requires a highof this report requires a highof this report requires a high---level level level
evaluation of the subject lands. All properties located on the subject lands were determined All properties located on the subject lands were determined All properties located on the
subject lands were determined
to exhibit Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI). The findings are summarized below, to exhibit Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI). The findings are summarized below, to
exhibit Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI). The findings are summarized below,
and the full evaluation charts can be viewed in Appendix FAppendix FAppendix F of this report.of this report.of this report.
5.1.1. 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church) ) )
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church was determined to meet at least 6 of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church was determined to meet at least 6 of the St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church was
determined to meet at least 6 of the Ontario Ontario Ontario
Regulation 9/06criteria for determining CHVI. It is a representative example of Gothic criteria for determining CHVI. It is a representative example of Gothic criteria for determining
CHVI. It is a representative example of Gothic
T
revival architecture, is displays a high degree of craftsmanship, it revival architecture, is displays a high degree of craftsmanship, it revival architecture, is displays a high degree
of craftsmanship, it is directly associated with is directly associated with is directly associated with
the theme and belief of the Presbyterian Churchthe theme and belief of the Presbyterian Churchthe theme and belief of the Presbyterian Church, it does can yield information that , it
does can yield information that , it does can yield information that
contributes to an understanding of a community or culturecontributes to an understanding of a community or culturecontributes to an understanding of a community or culturesuch assuch
assuch asvital statistics including vital statistics including vital statistics including
births/ baptisms, marriages, deaths and information onbirths/ baptisms, marriages, deaths and information onbirths/ baptisms, marriages, deaths and information onthe social, cthe social,
cthe social, cultural, economic ultural, economic ultural, economic
evolution of the community, it ievolution of the community, it ievolution of the community, it is functionally, visually and historically linked to its s functionally, visually and historically
linked to its s functionally, visually and historically linked to its
F
surroundings, and it is considered a landmark by the community.surroundings, and it is considered a landmark by the community.surroundings, and it is considered a landmark by the community.
More research would be required to determine whether the building More research would be required to determine whether the building More research would be required to determine whether
the building demonstrates or reflect
the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant
to a the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a
community, as this information is not currently confirmed, as this information is not currently confirmed, as this information is not currently confirmed.
A
Heritage Attributes:Heritage Attributes:Heritage Attributes:
Exterior Exterior Exterior
EEExisting footprint of the original church building and later additions, xisting footprint of the original church building and later additions, xisting footprint of the original church
building and later additions,
EEExterior elevations including decorative masonry, parapets, turrets, towers, spire and xterior elevations including decorative masonry, parapets, turrets, towers, spire and xterior
elevations including decorative masonry, parapets, turrets, towers, spire and
original openings and associated surroundsoriginal openings and associated surroundsoriginal openings and associated surrounds;
R
VVVoussoirs and hood mouldings; oussoirs and hood mouldings; oussoirs and hood mouldings;
SSStained glass windows and Gothic tracery;tained glass windows and Gothic tracery;tained glass windows and Gothic tracery;
OOOriginal rooflines;riginal rooflines;riginal rooflines;
DDDate stone ate stone ate stone
Interior (Part V designation does not apply to interior features)(Part V designation does not apply to interior features)(Part V designation does not apply to interior features)
D
Main sanctuary including Cassavant organ
Circular stained glass window in dedication of the Davison Family;
Vaulted ceilings
MHBC | 60
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Crown moulding and decorative millwork
Lighting
5.1.2. 68 Queen Street North
The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria for The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria for
The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the Ontario Regulation 9/06 criteria for
determining CHVI. It is a representative example of a Classical revival dwelling, it was likely determining CHVI. It is a representative example of a Classical revival dwelling, it was
likely determining CHVI. It is a representative example of a Classical revival dwelling, it was likely
designed by W.H.E. Schmalz,who is a locally renowned architectlocally renowned architectlocally renowned architect, and it supports the , and it supports the , and it supports the
character of the area.
More research would be required to determine whether has a direct association with a has a direct association with a has a direct association with a
theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to
a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a
community.
Heritage Attributes:
T
Original footprint of the dwelling including original northeast additionOriginal footprint of the dwelling including original northeast additionOriginal footprint of the dwelling including
original northeast addition
Low-pitched pedimented boxed in gable roofline and associated brackets and soffitspitched pedimented boxed in gable roofline and associated brackets and soffitspitched pedimented boxed
in gable roofline and associated brackets and soffits;
Decorative brick work including voussoirs and keystonesecorative brick work including voussoirs and keystonesecorative brick work including voussoirs and keystones; ; ;
Asymmetrical primary entry including Classical aedicule with pedimented porticosymmetrical primary entry including Classical aedicule with pedimented porticosymmetrical primary entry
including Classical aedicule with pedimented portico;
F
Doric columns and dentil mouldings;Doric columns and dentil mouldings;Doric columns and dentil mouldings;
Primary door opening with sidelights and semirimary door opening with sidelights and semirimary door opening with sidelights and semi---elliptical fanlight transom and sixelliptical
fanlight transom and sixelliptical fanlight transom and six-
panel door;
Existing window and door openings and remaining framesxisting window and door openings and remaining framesxisting window and door openings and remaining frames.
*The later addition on the northlater addition on the northlater addition on the north---west corner and attached garagewest corner and attached garagewest corner and attached garageare
not considered to
A
exhibit CHIV and are excluded from the heritage attributes.exhibit CHIV and are excluded from the heritage attributes.exhibit CHIV and are excluded from the heritage attributes.
5.1.3. . . 11 Roy Street11 Roy Street11 Roy Street
The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the The building was determined to meet at least 3 of the Ontario Regulation 9/06criteria
for
determining CHVI. It is a representative example of a bungalow with Arts & Crafts determining CHVI. It is a representative example of a bungalow with Arts & Crafts determining CHVI.
It is a representative example of a bungalow with Arts & Crafts
influences, it isinfluences, it isinfluences, it isassociated with St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and outreach services associated with St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and outreach
services associated with St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church and outreach services
R
from the time it was purchased in 1982 and used for several years as the SOLO House from the time it was purchased in 1982 and used for several years as the SOLO House from the time
it was purchased in 1982 and used for several years as the SOLO House
which served the communitywhich served the communitywhich served the community, and it supports the historic stock of buildings in the
surroundingsurroundingsurroundingarea.area.area.
Heritage Attributes:Heritage Attributes:Heritage Attributes:
Original footprint of the dwelling including front porch and supporting structureOriginal footprint of the dwelling including front porch and supporting structureOriginal footprint of
the dwelling including front porch and supporting structure;
D
Medium-pitched gabled roofline, including front dormer, with deep returning eaves;
Existing window and door openings and remaining frames.
MHBC | 61
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
5.4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value of theCCNHCD
Key heritage attributes of the CCNHCD are outlined in Section 2.4 of the CCNHCD Plan
(2007). These attributes are the defining factors of the heritage district. Key attributes are
described in the physical geography and configuration of similar original buildings and their described in the physical geography and configuration of similar original buildings and
their described in the physical geography and configuration of similar original buildings and their
direct relationship to the surrounding businesses and factories and original land direct relationship to the surrounding businesses and factories and original land direct relationship
to the surrounding businesses and factories and original land
development pattern of the City. It also describes the progression of architecture and development pattern of the City. It also describes the progression of architecture and development
pattern of the City. It also describes the progression of architecture and
building technology exhibited by houses and other buildings, in partibuilding technology exhibited by houses and other buildings, in partibuilding technology exhibited by houses and
other buildings, in particular the unique form cular the unique form cular the unique form
of Queen Anne Style specific to the City of Kitchener dubbed “Berlin Vernacular”. ‘Fine’ of Queen Anne Style specific to the City of Kitchener dubbed “Berlin Vernacular”. ‘Fine’ of Queen
Anne Style specific to the City of Kitchener dubbed “Berlin Vernacular”. ‘Fine’
examples of these are categorized by Group ‘A’ or ‘B’; three quarters of the properties (147 examples of these are categorized by Group ‘A’ or ‘B’; three quarters of the properties (147
examples of these are categorized by Group ‘A’ or ‘B’; three quarters of the properties (147
properties) are categorized as Group ‘C’ which exhibit the standard construction and are in it the standard construction and are in it the standard construction and are in
a condition of repair and potential restoration. The following is a list of the key attributes of a condition of repair and potential restoration. The following is a list of the key
attributes of a condition of repair and potential restoration. The following is a list of the key attributes of
the CCNHCD as defined in the District Plan (2007):
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 62
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
6.0 Description of Proposed Development
This initial phase of redevelopmentincludesthe removal of structures at 11 Roy Street and structures at 11 Roy Street and structures at 11 Roy Street and
68 Queen Street North for the future construction of a residence building for 68 Queen Street North for the future construction of a residence building for 68 Queen Street North for
the future construction of a residence building for
multigeneration families with adult children with disabilities as an outreach program of St. multigeneration families with adult children with disabilities as an outreach program of
St. multigeneration families with adult children with disabilities as an outreach program of St.
Andrew’s Presbyterian Church. The following providesan overall description of thean overall description of thean overall description of the
redevelopment:
11 Roy Street(Group B)
Removal of existing building.
68 Queen Street North (Group A)
Removal of existing building.
T
Future New Construction
The redevelopment proposal includes the future The redevelopment proposal includes the future The redevelopment proposal includes the future construction construction construction of
of of a residential building a residential building a residential building
intended as a residence for multigeneration families with adult children with intended as a residence for multigeneration families with adult children with intended as a residence for
multigeneration families with adult children with
disabilities.
F
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian ChurchSt. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
The St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church will continue its current use which includes he St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church will continue its current use which includes he St. Andrew’s Presbyterian
Church will continue its current use which includes
service, administration, worship and commercial spaceservice, administration, worship and commercial spaceservice, administration, worship and commercial space.
This HIA focuses on the impacts as a result of the proposed removal of structures. This HIA focuses on the impacts as a result of the proposed removal of structures. This HIA focuses
on the impacts as a result of the proposed removal of structures.
Impacts as a result of the redevelopment proposal will be assessed subsequently in a Impacts as a result of the redevelopment proposal will be assessed subsequently in a Impacts as a
result of the redevelopment proposal will be assessed subsequently in a
A
separate Phase 2 HIA Addendum.separate Phase 2 HIA Addendum.separate Phase 2 HIA Addendum.However, a preliminary site plan is provided below (see However, a preliminary site plan is
provided below (see However, a preliminary site plan is provided below (see
FigureFigureFigures s s 424242---454545 and and and Appendix GAppendix GAppendix G of this report).of this report).of this report).
R
D
MHBC | 63
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
TT
FF
Figure 42:Conceptual site plan for the proposed future development of the subject Conceptual site plan for the proposed future development of the subject Conceptual site plan for the
proposed future development of the subject
lands. (Facet Design Studio Ltd.Design Studio Ltd.Design Studio Ltd., 2025)., 2025)., 2025).
AA
RR
DD
MHBC | 64
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 65
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
F
A
nd
Figures 43-443-443-45:5:5:Proposed conceptual site plans for the basement, ground floor, and 2Proposed conceptual site plans for the basement, ground floor, and 2Proposed conceptual
site plans for the basement, ground floor, and 2
floor levels of the proposed development. It is oor levels of the proposed development. It is oor levels of the proposed development. It is important to note that the current proposal
is conceptual, and additional details of the proposed is conceptual, and additional details of the proposed is conceptual, and additional details of the proposed future development are
intended to
be determined through the approval process. be determined through the approval process. be determined through the approval process. (Source: Facet Design Studio Ltd.)
R
D
MHBC | 66
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
7.0 Impacts Analysis
7.1 Classifications of Impacts
The impacts of a proposed development or change to a cultural heritage resource may occur The impacts of a proposed development or change to a cultural heritage resource may occur The
impacts of a proposed development or change to a cultural heritage resource may occur
over a short or long-term duration, and may occur during a preterm duration, and may occur during a preterm duration, and may occur during a pre---construction phase, construction phase,
construction phase,
construction phase or post-construction phase. Impacts to a cultural heritage resource may construction phase. Impacts to a cultural heritage resource may construction phase. Impacts
to a cultural heritage resource may
also be site specific or widespread, and may have low, moderate or high levels of physical also be site specific or widespread, and may have low, moderate or high levels of physical
also be site specific or widespread, and may have low, moderate or high levels of physical
impactand may be beneficial or adverse. According to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, the and may be beneficial or adverse. According to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, the and may be beneficial
or adverse. According to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, the
following constitutes negative impacts which may result from a proposed development: following constitutes negative impacts which may result from a proposed development: following constitutes
negative impacts which may result from a proposed development:
Destruction:of any, or part of any or features;or features;or features;
TTTTTTTTT
Alteration:that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and that is not sympathetic,
or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and
appearance:
Shadows:created that alter the appearance of a created that alter the appearance of a created that alter the appearance of a or change the
viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;
Isolation:of a from its surrounding environment, context or a from its surrounding environment, context or a from its surrounding environment, context or a
FFFFFFFFF
significant relationship;significant relationship;significant relationship;
Direct or Indirect ObstructionDirect or Indirect ObstructionDirect or Indirect Obstruction: of significant views or vistas within, from, or of : of significant views or vistas within,
from, or of : of significant views or vistas within, from, or of
built and natural features;built and natural features;built and natural features;
A change in land useA change in land useA change in land use: such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to : such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to : such as rezoning
a battlefield from open space to
residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly residential
use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly
AAAAAAAAA
open spaces;open spaces;open spaces;
Land disturbances:Land disturbances:Land disturbances:such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage such as a change
in grade that alters soils, and drainage
patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource.patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource.patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource.
Furthermore, this report utilizes guides published by the Furthermore, this report utilizes guides published by the Furthermore, this report utilizes guides published by the
Council of UNESCO, from the World Heritage Convention of January of Council of UNESCO, from the World Heritage Convention of January of Council of UNESCO, from the World Heritage Convention
of January of
RRRRRRRRR
2011. The grading of impact is based on “Guide to Assessing Magnitude of Impact” as a 2011. The grading of impact is based on “Guide to Assessing Magnitude of Impact” as a 2011. The
grading of impact is based on “Guide to Assessing Magnitude of Impact” as a
framework for this report: framework for this report: framework for this report:
Table Table 1133.0.0--Grading of Impact for Grading of Impact for Built Heritage and Historic Landscapes
(ICOMOS)(ICOMOS)
Description
Major Change to key historic building elements that contribute to the
DDDDDDDDD
cultural heritage value or interest (CHVI) such that the resource is
totally altered. Comprehensive changes to the setting.
Moderate Change to many key historic building elements, such that the
resource is significantly modified.
MHBC | 67
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Changes to the setting of an historic building, such that it is
significantly modified.
Minor Change to key historic building elements, such that the asset is
slightly different. Change to setting of an historic building, such that slightly different. Change to setting of an historic building, such that slightly different. Change to setting
of an historic building, such that
is it noticeably changed.
Negligible/ Slight changes to historic building elements or setting that hardly Slight changes to historic building elements or setting that hardly Slight changes to historic building
elements or setting that hardly
Potential affect it.
No change No change to fabric or setting.
The followingsub-sections are intended to review the sections are intended to review the sections are intended to review the proposed removal of structuresproposed removal of structuresproposed
removal of structures
within the context of the CCNHCD Plan(2007)in addition to assessing in addition to assessing in addition to assessing the subject lands the subject lands the subject lands
and adjacent listed and protected heritage properties based on the Ontario Heritage Toolkit adjacent listed and protected heritage properties based on the Ontario Heritage Toolkit adjacent
listed and protected heritage properties based on the Ontario Heritage Toolkit
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
and ICOMOS severity graduationas reviewedas reviewedas reviewedabove. The policies in the CCNHCD above. The policies in the CCNHCD above. The policies in the CCNHCD Plan that
are particular to the assessment of compatibility withare particular to the assessment of compatibility withare particular to the assessment of compatibility withinininthe CCNHCD Plan
includethe CCNHCD Plan includethe CCNHCD Plan includepolicies
fordemolition(Section 3.3). Please note, the subject lands Please note, the subject lands Please note, the subject lands and adjacent properties and adjacent properties and adjacent
properties arenot
included in a site-specificareaidentified in the CCNHCD Plan, nor do they include properties identified in the CCNHCD Plan, nor do they include properties identified in the CCNHCD Plan,
nor do they include properties
designated under Part IV of the OHAdesignated under Part IV of the OHAdesignated under Part IV of the OHAand development is proposed within the HCD and development is proposed within
the HCD and development is proposed within the HCD
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
boundaries and not adjacent boundaries and not adjacent boundaries and not adjacent theretherethereto, therefore Policies 3.3.5, 3.3.7 and 3.3.8 are not to, therefore Policies 3.3.5,
3.3.7 and 3.3.8 are not to, therefore Policies 3.3.5, 3.3.7 and 3.3.8 are not
applicable.The following sube following sube following sub---section 7.5 will review the Streetscape Design Guidelines in section 7.5 will review the Streetscape Design Guidelines in
section 7.5 will review the Streetscape Design Guidelines in
Section 7.0 of the CCNHCD PlanSection 7.0 of the CCNHCD PlanSection 7.0 of the CCNHCD Plan. . .
7.2 Impact Impact Impact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and Analysis for 11 Roy Street and Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 68Queen Street North
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
(Proposed for Removal)(Proposed for Removal)(Proposed for Removal)
Table Table Table 141414.0.0.0- - - Impact Analysis for Impact Analysis for Impact Analysis for 11 Roy Street and 11 Roy Street and 11 Roy Street and 68Queen Street North
11 Roy Street11 Roy Street11 Roy Street68 Queen Street North
Destruction Destruction of any, or of any, or
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
part of any, heritage part of any, heritage
attributes or features;attributes or features;The proposed development will The proposed development will The proposed development will remove
remove the built heritage feature onremove the built heritage feature on-the built heritage feature on-site and
site and all associated heritage all associated heritage attributes will be
attributes will be removed. removed.
Alteration that is not that is not that is not
sympathetic, or is sympathetic, or is sympathetic, or is
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be removed.
incompatible, with the
removed.
historic fabric and
appearance of a building;
MHBC | 68
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Shadows created that
obscure heritage
attributes or change the The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be removed.
viability of the associated removed.
cultural heritage
landscape;
Isolation of a heritage
resource or part thereof
The heritage resource will be
from its surrounding The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.
removed.
environment, context or a
significant relationship;
Direct or Indirect
Obstruction of Views
of, within, or from The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.
individual cultural removed.
heritage resources;
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
A Change in Land Use
where the change affects
The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource
will be removed.
the property’s cultural
removed.
heritage value; and
Land Disturbances
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
such as a change in
The heritage resource will be The heritage resource will be
grade that alters soils, The heritage resource will be removed.The heritage resource will be removed.
removed.removed.
and drainage patterns
that adversely affect a
cultural heritage
resource.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
7.2.1. Adverse . Adverse . Adverse Impact of DestructionImpact of DestructionImpact of Destruction
The proposed removal of 11 Roy Street is considered a majorproposed removal of 11 Roy Street is considered a majorproposed removal of 11 Roy Street is considered a majoradverseimpact
of destruction
as as as the proposed redevelopmentthe proposed redevelopmentthe proposed redevelopmentwill remove all identified heritage attributes of thwill remove all identified heritage attributes
of thwill remove all identified heritage attributes of this built
heritage feature which heritage feature which heritage feature which is considered a supporting feature (Group B) in the CCNHCD Plan. is considered a supporting feature (Group B) in
the CCNHCD Plan. is considered a supporting feature (Group B) in the CCNHCD Plan.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
MHBC | 69
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
T
Figure 43-Photograph of 11 Roy Street looking southPhotograph of 11 Roy Street looking southPhotograph of 11 Roy Street looking south-west -west -west from south side offrom south side
offrom south side ofRoy Street (MHBC, 2024)Roy Street (MHBC, 2024)Roy Street (MHBC, 2024)
The proposed removal of 68 Queen Street North The proposed removal of 68 Queen Street North The proposed removal of 68 Queen Street North is considered a major adverse impact of is considered
a major adverse impact of is considered a major adverse impact of
destruction as the proposed redevelopment will remove all identified heritage attributes of destruction as the proposed redevelopment will remove all identified heritage attributes of
destruction as the proposed redevelopment will remove all identified heritage attributes of
F
this built heritage feature which is considered a very fine example of an architectural style this built heritage feature which is considered a very fine example of an architectural
style this built heritage feature which is considered a very fine example of an architectural style
(Group A) in the CCNHCD Plan. (Group A) in the CCNHCD Plan. (Group A) in the CCNHCD Plan.
A
R
Figure 44-Photograph of 68 Queen Street North looking south-west from west side of Queen Street
D
North.(MHBC, 2024)
The Plan does acknowledge that there are times when demolition may be necessary such
as, “-partial destruction due to fire or other catastrophic events, severe structural instability,
MHBC | 70
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
and occasionally redevelopment that is in keeping with appropriate City policies”(CCNHCD
Plan, 3.8). Section 3.3.4 of the Plan provide policies regarding demolition reviewed in the
following Table 15.0.
Table 15.0-Demolition Policies(CCNHCD Plan)
(a) The demolition of heritage buildings in Theredevelopment proposes to remove the redevelopment proposes to remove the redevelopment proposes to remove the
the District is strongly discouraged.existing building at 11 Roy Street which is existing building at 11 Roy Street which is existing building at 11 Roy Street which is
considered a Group B buildingconsidered a Group B buildingconsidered a Group B buildingand 68 and 68 and 68
Queen Street North which is considered a Queen Street North which is considered a Queen Street North which is considered a
Group A buildingGroup A buildingGroup A building. The proposed . The proposed . The proposed
redevelopment is not feasible without this redevelopment is not feasible without this redevelopment is not feasible without this
removal. removal. removal.
(b) Any proposal to demolish a heritage This Heritage Impact Assessment is the This Heritage Impact Assessment is the This Heritage Impact Assessment is the
building or portion of a heritage building supplementary information for a Heritage supplementary information for a Heritage supplementary information for a Heritage
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
that is visible from the street or other Permit Application intended to be submitted Permit Application intended to be submitted Permit Application intended to be submitted
public space within the District shall require public space within the District shall require to the municipality for the proposed to the municipality for the proposed to the municipality
for the proposed
a heritage permit from the municipality.a heritage permit from the municipality.demolition of 11 Roy Streetdemolition of 11 Roy Streetdemolition of 11 Roy Streetand 68 Queen and 68 Queen
and 68 Queen
Street North. Street North. Street North.
(c) Where demolition of a heritage building (c) Where demolition of a heritage building ThThThe removals are required to enable the e removals are required to enable the e removals are
required to enable the
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
is proposed, the property owner shall is proposed, the property owner shall construction of affordable housing construction of affordable housing construction of affordable housing
provide supporting documentation provide supporting documentation associated with the Church.associated with the Church.associated with the Church.
demonstrating appropriate reasons for the demonstrating appropriate reasons for the
demolition.
(d) In situations where demolition is (d) In situations where demolition is A Salvage and Documentation Plan will be A Salvage and Documentation Plan will be A Salvage and Documentation
Plan will be
approved by Council, written and / or approved by Council, written and / or recommended for the existing buildingrecommended for the existing buildingrecommended for the existing buildings
at
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
photographic documentation of any notable photographic documentation of any notable 11 Roy Street11 Roy Street11 Roy Streetand68 Queen Street North
architectural features and construction architectural features and construction to document the structuresand identify
techniques may be required to create a techniques may be required to create a any salvageable material that could be
record of the building and its components.record of the building and its components.repurposed.
(e) Reclamation of suitable building (e) Reclamation of suitable building As noted above, a Salvage Plan will identify
materials such as windows, doors, materials such as windows, doors, potential reclaimed material to be reuse on-
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
moldings, columns, bricks, etc. for potential moldings, columns, bricks, etc. for potential site or sold/ donated.
reuse in reuse in a new building on the site or as a new building on the site or as
replacement components for other replacement components for other
buildings in the neighbourhood which buildings in the neighbourhood which
require repair and restoration over time is require repair and restoration over time is
strongly encouraged if demolition is strongly encouraged if demolition is
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
approved for any heritage buildings in the
District.
MHBC | 71
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
7.3 Impact Analysis for 54 Queen Street North (St. Andrew’s Presbyterian
Church)
The following Table 16.0 evaluates the impact the proposed demolition of the existing demolition of the existing demolition of the existing
buildings at 11 Roy Street and of 68 Queen Street North will have on the existing cultural buildings at 11 Roy Street and of 68 Queen Street North will have on the existing cultural
buildings at 11 Roy Street and of 68 Queen Street North will have on the existing cultural
heritage resources located at 54 Queen Street North, which is proposed to be retained in located at 54 Queen Street North, which is proposed to be retained in located at 54 Queen Street
North, which is proposed to be retained in
situ.
Table 16.0- Impact Analysis for 54 Queen Street North
54 Queen Street North
Destruction of any, or part of
any, heritage attributes or
features;St. Andrew’s Church and its heritage attributes are not proposed for St. Andrew’s Church and its heritage attributes are not proposed for
destruction or removal. Demolition activities will be confined to 11 Roy destruction or removal. Demolition activities will be confined to 11 Roy
Street and 68 Queen Street North.Street and 68 Queen Street North.
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Alteration that is not
sympathetic, or is incompatible,
Alterations to the Church are not proposed as part of the proposed Alterations to the Church are not proposed as part of the proposed Alterations to the Church are not proposed as part
of the proposed
with the historic fabric and
demolition activities on the subject lands.demolition activities on the subject lands.demolition activities on the subject lands.
appearance of a building;
Shadows created that obscure ..
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
heritage attributes or change
the viability of the associated the viability of the associated The removal of buildings on the subject lands will not create additional The removal of buildings on the subject lands
will not create additional
cultural heritage landscape;cultural heritage landscape;shadows which were not previously present.shadows which were not previously present.
Isolation of a heritage of a heritage of a heritage
resource or part thereof from its resource or part thereof from its resource or part thereof from its
The Church has direct associations with 11 Roy Street, which is proposed The Church has direct associations with 11 Roy Street, which is proposed The Church has direct associations with
11 Roy Street, which is proposed
surrounding environment, surrounding environment, surrounding environment,
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
for demolition. Itfor demolition. Itfor demolition. Itwas purchased was purchased was purchased by the Church in 1982 and used for
context or a significant context or a significant context or a significant
several yearsseveral yearsseveral yearsfor outreach servicesfor outreach servicesfor outreach servicesas the SOLO Housewhich served the
relationship;relationship;relationship;
communitycommunitycommunity. . . TTThe new proposed development is intended to continue the he new proposed development is intended to continue the he new proposed development is intended
to continue the
Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Church’s outreach services and will
also have direct associations with St.
Andrews and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition ofAndrews and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition ofAndrews and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition
ofservice to the
community. Therefore, the impacts of isolation are considered to be minor community. Therefore, the impacts of isolation are considered to be minor community. Therefore, the impacts
of isolation are considered to be minor
in nature.in nature.in nature.
Direct or Indirect Direct or Indirect
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Obstruction of ViewsObstruction of Views of, of,
within, or from individual within, or from individual The built feature was designed for the intersection of Queen Street North
cultural heritage resources;cultural heritage resources;cultural heritage resources;and Weber Street which is reflected by historic photography and other
ephemera. While the CCNHCD Plan (2007) does not identify views or vistas
specific to the church, the iconic view of the church from the intersection
will not bealtered.
A Change in Land Use A Change in Land Use A Change in Land Use where
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
the change affects the
The property will continue to function as an institutional property. The
property’s cultural heritage
additional residential use will not negatively impact the value of the
value; and
property and may be beneficial to the associative value of the place of
worship.
MHBC | 72
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Land Disturbances such as a
change in grade that alters soils,
The Church is located approximately 8 metres from the area where
and drainage patterns that
demolition activities are proposed to take place. Provided normal
adversely affect a cultural
construction best practices are followed, impacts from land disturbances construction best practices are followed, impacts from land disturbances
heritage resource.
are not anticipated as a result of the proposed demolition.are not anticipated as a result of the proposed demolition.
7.4 Impact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage PropertiesImpact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage PropertiesImpact Analysis for Adjacent Heritage Properties
No adverse impacts are anticipated to the following adjacent designated and listed No adverse impacts are anticipated to the following adjacent designated and listed No adverse impacts
are anticipated to the following adjacent designated and listed
properties:
20 Weber Street East 73-77 Queen Street77 Queen Street77 Queen Street, , , North Waterloo County Gaol and North Waterloo County Gaol and North Waterloo County Gaol and
Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Governor’s House (Designated under Part IV o the OHA,Regionally Significant
Regionally Significant Regionally Significant
TTTTT
Cultural Heritage Resource)
83-85 Queen Street North, Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)Kitchener Public Library Main Branch (Listed)
16 Roy Street(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
20 Roy Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
23 Roy Street (Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
FFFFF
18 Weber Street West18 Weber Street West18 Weber Street West(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)(Designated under Part V of the OHA)
74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)74 Queen Street North (Designated under Part V of the OHA)
No alterations, additions, or construction activities are proposed to take place on these No alterations, additions, or construction activities are proposed to take place on these No
alterations, additions, or construction activities are proposed to take place on these
properties. The proposed demolitions will be confined to solely the subject lands. All adjacent properties. The proposed demolitions will be confined to solely the subject lands. All
adjacent properties. The proposed demolitions will be confined to solely the subject lands. All adjacent
properties are located a sufficient distance from demolition activitieproperties are located a sufficient distance from demolition activitieproperties are located a sufficient distance
from demolition activities that impacts as a result
AAAAA
of land disturbances and/or vibrations are not anticipated cause any potential adverse of land disturbances and/or vibrations are not anticipated cause any potential adverse of land
disturbances and/or vibrations are not anticipated cause any potential adverse
impacts. impacts. impacts.
7.7.7.555 Impact Analysis for Impact Analysis for Impact Analysis for CCNHCD StreetscapeCCNHCD StreetscapeCCNHCD Streetscapes
As described in As described in As described in Section 1.4.3Section 1.4.3Section 1.4.3of this report,of this report,of this report,the characteristics of Queen Street North
includeincludeincludes s s a variety of built forms, setbacks, orientations and location. The proposed a variety of built forms, setbacks, orientations and location. The proposed a variety
of built forms, setbacks, orientations and location. The proposed
RRRRR
demolitiondemolitiondemolitionis primarily located along Roy Street and is primarily located along Roy Street and is primarily located along Roy Street and Queen StreetNorth. The removal
of 11
Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North are anticipated to have a minor adverse impact on Roy Street and 68 Queen Street North are anticipated to have a minor adverse impact on Roy Street
and 68 Queen Street North are anticipated to have a minor adverse impact on
the identified heritage attributes of the CCNHCD which include:the identified heritage attributes of the CCNHCD which include:the identified heritage attributes of the CCNHCD which include:
DDDDD
MHBC | 73
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
However, as the streetscape of Queen Street North includes predominantly institutional
buildings, many of which date from a later construction period such as the Kitchener Public
Library and the County of Waterloo Courthouse, the removal of the structure at 68 Queen
Street for future construction is considered to be minor, provided the CCNHCD policies are Street for future construction is considered to be minor, provided the CCNHCD policies are
Street for future construction is considered to be minor, provided the CCNHCD policies are
followed during new construction. Additionally, the property located at 11 Roy Street isfollowed during new construction. Additionally, the property located at 11 Roy Street isfollowed
during new construction. Additionally, the property located at 11 Roy Street is
sympatheticinfill from 1923-1924and does not date to the original period of construction and does not date to the original period of construction and does not date to the original period
of construction
for the streetscape. Therefore, its removal and later replacement with a sympathetic for the streetscape. Therefore, its removal and later replacement with a sympathetic for the streetscape.
Therefore, its removal and later replacement with a sympathetic
structure which adheres to the CCNHCD policies is considered a minor impact.structure which adheres to the CCNHCD policies is considered a minor impact.structure which adheres to the
CCNHCD policies is considered a minor impact.
Additionally, much of the existing property of the subject lands is currently comprised of Additionally, much of the existing property of the subject lands is currently comprised of
Additionally, much of the existing property of the subject lands is currently comprised of
surface parking. The future redevelopment of the site will provide an opportunity for the surface parking. The future redevelopment of the site will provide an opportunity for the surface
parking. The future redevelopment of the site will provide an opportunity for the
enhancement of the streetscape through the removal of surface parking and aenhancement of the streetscape through the removal of surface parking and aenhancement of the streetscape through
the removal of surface parking and addition of ddition of ddition of
trees and other landscaping elements which better suit the character of the area.trees and other landscaping elements which better suit the character of the area.trees and other landscaping
elements which better suit the character of the area.
T
7.6 Summary
In summary, the following adverse impacts have been identified: In summary, the following adverse impacts have been identified: In summary, the following adverse impacts have been identified:
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy StreetMajor impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy StreetMajor impact of destruction as it relates to
removal of 11 Roy Street;
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction
as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;
Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of
isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was
F
used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years
for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the
community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact
is anticipated to be mitigated by the future
construction of construction of construction of the new proposed development the new proposed development the new proposed development which which which is intended to continue the
Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach
services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews
and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition of service to the communityand contribute to its intangible heritage tradition of service to the communityand contribute to its intangible
heritage tradition of service to the community; and
Minor adverse impact to the Minor adverse impact to the Minor adverse impact to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes
within Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within
A
the CCNHCDthe CCNHCDthe CCNHCD. . .
R
D
MHBC | 74
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
8.0 Consideration of Alternatives Development Options
8.1 Alternative Development Options
The following have been identified as a range of development alternatives that may be The following have been identified as a range of development alternatives that may be The following
have been identified as a range of development alternatives that may be
considered as part of the heritage planning process. These options have been assessed in considered as part of the heritage planning process. These options have been assessed in considered
as part of the heritage planning process. These options have been assessed in
terms of impacts to cultural heritage resources as well as balancing other planning policies terms of impacts to cultural heritage resources as well as balancing other planning policies
terms of impacts to cultural heritage resources as well as balancing other planning policies
within the planning framework. These options could be selected individuallwithin the planning framework. These options could be selected individuallwithin the planning framework. These
options could be selected individually or combinedy or combinedy or combinedas as as
a hybrid. The following are alternative development options . The following are alternative development options . The following are alternative development options which have been considered
in which have been considered in which have been considered in
an attempt tominimize impacts to the subject landsminimize impacts to the subject landsminimize impacts to the subject landsand streetscapes of the CCNHCDand streetscapes of the CCNHCDand
streetscapes of the CCNHCD. . .
8.1.1 Do Nothing
T
This optionresults in no redevelopment of the site and retention of all existing buildings onresults in no redevelopment of the site and retention of all existing buildings onresults
in no redevelopment of the site and retention of all existing buildings on-
site in-situ. Currently, the building at 11 Roy Street is vacant and a large portion of the site situ. Currently, the building at 11 Roy Street is vacant and a large portion of the site
situ. Currently, the building at 11 Roy Street is vacant and a large portion of the site
consists of surface parking. If redevelopment does not proceed, it may impact the financial . If redevelopment does not proceed, it may impact the financial . If redevelopment does not
proceed, it may impact the financial
support needed to continue to protect and conserve St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church support needed to continue to protect and conserve St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church support needed
to continue to protect and conserve St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
which is akey contributor to the CCNHCD. Although all built heritage featureskey contributor to the CCNHCD. Although all built heritage featureskey contributor to the CCNHCD. Although
all built heritage featureswhich are
F
tangible cultural heritage assetstangible cultural heritage assetstangible cultural heritage assetsof the Churchof the Churchof the Church, will be maintaine, will be maintaine, will
be maintained, the continued d, the continued d, the continued mission of
outreach will be impacted, which will subsequently outreach will be impacted, which will subsequently outreach will be impacted, which will subsequently impactimpactimpactthe intangible
cultural heritage of the intangible cultural heritage of the intangible cultural heritage of
the Church which has supported the community for over 115 years. hurch which has supported the community for over 115 years. hurch which has supported the community for over 115 years.
8.1.2 Retain All Existing Built Features Intain All Existing Built Features Intain All Existing Built Features In---Situ and Integrate into DevelopmentSitu and Integrate into DevelopmentSitu
and Integrate into Development
A
This option results in the retention of existing buildings (in whole) inThis option results in the retention of existing buildings (in whole) inThis option results in the retention of
existing buildings (in whole) in-situ and would retain
the heritage value and attributes associated with the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68 the heritage value and attributes associated with the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68 the heritage
value and attributes associated with the buildings at 11 Roy Street and 68
Queen Street NorthQueen Street NorthQueen Street North. . . The Church has advised thatThe Church has advised thatThe Church has advised thatthe retention of all buildings and
integration within the redevelopment will not be economically feasible which will result in integration within the redevelopment will not be economically feasible which will result in
integration within the redevelopment will not be economically feasible which will result in
the ‘Do Nothing’ optionthe ‘Do Nothing’ optionthe ‘Do Nothing’ option...
888.1.3 .1.3 .1.3 Remove 11 Roy Street but Remove 11 Roy Street but Remove 11 Roy Street but Retain and Integrate Portion of 68 Queen Street Northinto
R
New Construction or Relocate 68 Queen StreetNew Construction or Relocate 68 Queen StreetNew Construction or Relocate 68 Queen StreetNorth
This option results in the integratThis option results in the integratThis option results in the integrationof a portion of 68 Queen Street Northwithinthe new
constructionconstructionconstruction. T. T. This option was exploredhis option was exploredhis option was exploredby the Church andit was ultimately deemed not
feasible due to the cost involved, which would result in the inability of the Church to offer feasible due to the cost involved, which would result in the inability of the Church to
offer feasible due to the cost involved, which would result in the inability of the Church to offer
the proposed housing at an affordable cost.the proposed housing at an affordable cost.the proposed housing at an affordable cost.
D
The integration of a portion of the existing building at 68 Queen Street North was deemed
challenging as it is setback further from the street than the proposed new buildingand its
compositionof 2.5 storeybrick posesa challenge for its integration into a new built form.
Additionally,in order to avoid entry along Roy Street, which is consistent with the guidance
MHBC | 75
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
in the CCNHCD Plan, the vehicle accessmust be onQueen Street North, which limits the
ability to integrate the existing house.
8.1.4Relocate 68 Queen StreetNorth
The relocation of 68 Queen Street North on-site has also been explored, including the site has also been explored, including the site has also been explored, including the
relocation northeast to the corner of Roy Street and Queen Street North, and the relocation relocation northeast to the corner of Roy Street and Queen Street North, and the relocation
relocation northeast to the corner of Roy Street and Queen Street North, and the relocation
adjacent to 23 Roy Street. However, the Church has concluded that thisthe Church has concluded that thisthe Church has concluded that thishas a significant has a significant has a significant
economic impact on the redevelopment and challenges its feasibility.economic impact on the redevelopment and challenges its feasibility.economic impact on the redevelopment and challenges
its feasibility.
8.1.5 Summary
All of the alternatives would result in better outcomes for cultural heritage resources. All of the alternatives would result in better outcomes for cultural heritage resources. All
of the alternatives would result in better outcomes for cultural heritage resources.
However, due to the cost of integrating or moving either of the buildings at 11 Roy Street However, due to the cost of integrating or moving either of the buildings at 11 Roy Street
However, due to the cost of integrating or moving either of the buildings at 11 Roy Street
and 68 Queen Street North, the proposed development is not financially viabland 68 Queen Street North, the proposed development is not financially viabland 68 Queen Street North, the
proposed development is not financially viable for the e for the e for the
Church. Therefore, all of the described alternatives result in the Do Nothing alternative.Church. Therefore, all of the described alternatives result in the Do Nothing alternative.Church.
Therefore, all of the described alternatives result in the Do Nothing alternative.
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 76
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
9.0 Mitigation Measures
To address theidentified adverse impacts, the followingrecommendations are provided: recommendations are provided: recommendations are provided:
Complete a Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11
Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North as per Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable North as per Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable North as per
Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable
material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the
repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage
of material and documentation prior to demolition works of material and documentation prior to demolition works of material and documentation prior to demolition works (i.e. high(i.e.
high(i.e. high---resolution resolution resolution
photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural
drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;
This HIA is solely related to impacts resulting fromsolely related to impacts resulting fromsolely related to impacts resulting fromthe proposed removal of the proposed removal of the
proposed removal of 11 Roy 11 Roy 11 Roy
Street and 68 Queen Street North. It is recommended that . It is recommended that . It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be a Phase II HIA be a Phase II HIA be
T
preparedprior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the
design of the design of the design of the
proposed new buildingfor impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and
conformity
with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Planthe policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Planthe policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan. . .
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 77
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
10.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
This HIA has concluded that the proposed demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street This HIA has concluded that the proposed demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street This
HIA has concluded that the proposed demolition of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North will result in the following impacts:
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy Street;Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 11 Roy Street;Major impact of destruction as it relates
to removal of 11 Roy Street;
Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;Major impact of destruction
as it relates to removal of 68 Queen Street North;
Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was Minor impact of
isolation of St. Andrew’s Church from its 11 Roy Street, which was
used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the used for several years
for outreach services as the SOLO House which served the
community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact is anticipated to be mitigated by the future community. However, this impact
is anticipated to be mitigated by the future
construction of the new proposed development which which which is intended to continue the is intended to continue the is intended to continue the
Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews Church’s outreach
services and will also have direct associations with St. Andrews
and contribute to its intangible heritage tradition of service to the communityand contribute to its intangible heritage tradition of service to the communityand contribute to its intangible
heritage tradition of service to the community; ; ; andandand
Minor adverse impact to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within Minor adverse impact to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within Minor adverse impact
to the Roy Street and Queen Street North streetscapes within
the CCNHCD.
Should the removal of these structures proceed as proposed, it is recommended that the Should the removal of these structures proceed as proposed, it is recommended that the Should the
removal of these structures proceed as proposed, it is recommended that the
following documents be prepared in advance of demolition:following documents be prepared in advance of demolition:following documents be prepared in advance of demolition:
Complete a Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Complete a Salvage and Documentation Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street Complete a Salvage and Documentation
Plan of 11 Roy Street and 68 Queen Street
North as per Official Plan policies which North as per Official Plan policies which North as per Official Plan policies which includes the identification of salvageable includes the
identification of salvageable includes the identification of salvageable
material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage material, the
repurposing of this material where feasible, or otherwise safe storage
of material and documentation prior to demolition works (i.e. highof material and documentation prior to demolition works (i.e. highof material and documentation prior to demolition
works (i.e. high-resolution
photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;photographs, architectural
drawings); this should be completed prior to demolition;
This HIA is solely related to impacts resulting from the proposed removal of This HIA is solely related to impacts resulting from the proposed removal of This HIA is solely related to
impacts resulting from the proposed removal of 11 Roy
Street and 68 Queen Street North. It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be Street and 68 Queen Street North. It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be Street and 68 Queen Street North.
It is recommended that a Phase II HIA be
prepared prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the prepared prior to the proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the prepared prior to the
proposed future redevelopment to analyze the design of the
proposed new building for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity proposed new building for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity proposed new building
for impacts to adjacent heritage resources and conformity
with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.with the policies and guidelines of the CCNHCD Plan.
MHBC | 78
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
11.0 Sources
, 1906.
1875. (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of
Waterloo Geospatial Centre.
Bloomfield, Elizabeth and Linda Foster. Waterloo County Councillors: A Collective Biography. Caribout Bloomfield, Elizabeth and Linda Foster. Waterloo County Councillors: A Collective
Biography. Caribout Bloomfield, Elizabeth and Linda Foster. Waterloo County Councillors: A Collective Biography. Caribout
Imprints, 1995.
Bloomfield and Foster. . Caribou Imprints, 1995.. Caribou Imprints, 1995.. Caribou Imprints, 1995.
Blumenson, John. .
T
Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 1990.
City of Kitchener. , 2006.
City of Kitchener, By-law No. 81-105,
F
(((January 1981).January 1981).January 1981).
Collishaw, Wendy. 197819781978---1979. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt 1979. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt 1979. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt
Room, Kitchener Public Library (720.9713459). Room, Kitchener Public Library (720.9713459). Room, Kitchener Public Library (720.9713459).
Cornish, C.R. 1979. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt
A
Room, Kitchener Public Library (728.0971345 Corni).Room, Kitchener Public Library (728.0971345 Corni).Room, Kitchener Public Library (728.0971345 Corni).
1930, 1945-47, 1955, 1963, 1966.
Geospatial Centre | Library | University of Waterloo (uwaterloo.ca)Geospatial Centre | Library | University of Waterloo (uwaterloo.ca)Geospatial Centre | Library | University of Waterloo
(uwaterloo.ca)Accessed April 10, 2024.
.
Eby, Ezra. Eby, Ezra. Eby, Ezra.
Kitchener, ON: Eldon D. Weber, 1971.Kitchener, ON: Eldon D. Weber, 1971.Kitchener, ON: Eldon D. Weber, 1971.
R
English, John and Kenneth McLaughlin. English, John and Kenneth McLaughlin. English, John and Kenneth McLaughlin. . Robin Brass Studio, 1996.
Facet Design Studios. Facet Design Studios. Facet Design Studios. . (PDF) May 1, 2022.
D
Google Maps & Google Earth Pro. 11 Roy Street and 54 and 68 Queen Street North, Kitchener,
Ontario.2023-2024.
Government of Canada. Parks Canada.
. 2010.
MHBC | 79
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Hayes, Geoffrey. Waterloo Historical Society, 1997.
Heritage Resources Centre. . University of Waterloo, 2009.. University of Waterloo, 2009.. University of Waterloo, 2009.
(P009731 KPL, P005082 (P009731 KPL, P005082 (P009731 KPL, P005082
WHS, P000341, MC60 P000747 KPL,) Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public WHS, P000341, MC60 P000747 KPL,) Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public WHS, P000341,
MC60 P000747 KPL,) Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public
Library.
Hopkins, G.M.
1879. Scale 4 chains per inch. (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of Waterloo (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of Waterloo (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Geospatial
Geospatial
Centre.
Kitchener LACAC. 1990. 1990. 1990. Courtesy of Courtesy of Courtesy of
T
the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library (728.370.971.345 Local).the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library (728.370.971.345 Local).the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public
Library (728.370.971.345 Local).
KW Record. “$240,000 Parish Hall Approved: Congregation of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church Oks KW Record. “$240,000 Parish Hall Approved: Congregation of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church
Oks KW Record. “$240,000 Parish Hall Approved: Congregation of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church Oks
Drive”. March 23, 1953.March 23, 1953.March 23, 1953.
F
KW Record. “Additions to St. Andrew’s is Under Way”. KW Record. “Additions to St. Andrew’s is Under Way”. KW Record. “Additions to St. Andrew’s is Under Way”. October 1967.October 1967.October
1967.
KW Record. “Church Wing Opens”. KW Record. “Church Wing Opens”. KW Record. “Church Wing Opens”. September 14, 1968. September 14, 1968. September 14, 1968.
ththth
KW Record. “St. Andrew’s celebrates 25KW Record. “St. Andrew’s celebrates 25KW Record. “St. Andrew’s celebrates 25anniversary of televised services”. anniversary of televised services”.
anniversary of televised services”. November
15, 1986.
A
KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Mark Century of Progress”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Mark Century of Progress”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Mark Century of Progress”. November, 1954.
KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Adds”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Adds”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Adds”. February 1968.
KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Now Largest in Canada”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Now Largest in Canada”. KW Record. “St. Andrew’s Now Largest in Canada”. January 1956.
R
Land Registry of Ontario (LRO #58). Land Registry of Ontario (LRO #58). Land Registry of Ontario (LRO #58).
Library and Archives Canada.. Ottawa, Ontario,
D
Canada.
Library and Archives Canada.. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
MHBC | 80
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
1879. Scale 15 chains to 1 inch. (KMZ). Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial
Centre.
May 1859. Courtesy of the Land May 1859. Courtesy of the Land May 1859. Courtesy of the Land
Registry Office No. 58.
Mills, Rych. Arcadia Publishing, 2002.
Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries.
. . .
Queens Printer for Ontario, 2006.
Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries.
, 2006
T
Moyer, Bill. . Windsor Publications (Canada) . Windsor Publications (Canada) . Windsor Publications (Canada)
Ltd., 1979.
Musso Appraisals & Consulting Inc. “Hypothetical Short Narrative Appraisal of a Commercial Musso Appraisals & Consulting Inc. “Hypothetical Short Narrative Appraisal of a Commercial
Musso Appraisals & Consulting Inc. “Hypothetical Short Narrative Appraisal of a Commercial
F
Residential for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener, Ontario”. September 2018 (PDF).Residential for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener, Ontario”. September 2018 (PDF).Residential for 11 Roy Street, Kitchener,
Ontario”. September 2018 (PDF).
n/a. , Jubilee Souvenir. 1897., Jubilee Souvenir. 1897., Jubilee Souvenir. 1897.
Parks Canada. “Waterloo County Jail and Governor’s House”. Parks Canada. “Waterloo County Jail and Governor’s House”. Parks Canada. “Waterloo County Jail and Governor’s House”. Accessed
May, 2024.HistoricPlaces.ca HistoricPlaces.ca HistoricPlaces.ca - - - HistoricPlaces.caHistoricPlaces.caHistoricPlaces.ca
A
Scale 3 chains to 1 inch. Courtesy of
the Land Registry Office No. 58.the Land Registry Office No. 58.the Land Registry Office No. 58.
Region of Waterloo. Region of Waterloo. Region of Waterloo. . (PDF) Heritage Conservation
R
Toolbox Toolbox Toolbox - - - Region of Region of Region of WaterlooWaterlooWaterloo Accessed MarchAccessed MarchAccessed March12, 2024.
Schofield, M.C. Schofield, M.C. Schofield, M.C.
1853-1854. Scale 8 chains to the inch. (KMZ).
Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre.Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre.Courtesy of the University of Waterloo Geospatial Centre.
Schofield & Hobson.
D
(certified in 1858).
Scale 80 links to 1 inch. Courtesy of the Land Registry Office No. 58.
MHBC | 81
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt
Room, Kitchener Public Library
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church.
1974, 1979-1980, 1987-1988,1993, 2001).Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room,
Kitchener Public Library
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church.
“St. Andrew’s History Part (2): The Day Our Church Came Tumbling Down”. “St. Andrew’s History Part (2): The Day Our Church Came Tumbling Down”. “St. Andrew’s History Part (2): The Day
Our Church Came Tumbling Down”. December 1, December 1, December 1,
1969.
Stantec Inc.
TT
(PDF).August 2007.
The Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Courtesy of the
Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public LibraryGrace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public LibraryGrace Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library
FF
Tremaine, George. . 1861. Courtesy of the Ontario . 1861. Courtesy of the Ontario . 1861. Courtesy of the Ontario
Historical County Maps Project. Ontario Historical County Maps (arcgis.com)Historical County Maps Project. Ontario Historical County Maps (arcgis.com)Historical County Maps Project.
Ontario Historical County Maps (arcgis.com). Accessed April
25, 2024.
Underwriter’s Survey Bureau. Underwriter’s Survey Bureau. Underwriter’s Survey Bureau. March 1925. Courtesy of the Grace
Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library. Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library. Schmidt Room, Kitchener Public Library.
AA
Uttley, W.V. (Ben), Uttley, W.V. (Ben), Uttley, W.V. (Ben), . The Chronicle Press: Kitchener, 1937.. The Chronicle Press: Kitchener, 1937.. The Chronicle Press: Kitchener, 1937.
W. V. Uttley and Gerald Noonan. W. V. Uttley and Gerald Noonan. W. V. Uttley and Gerald Noonan. ., Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1975.
. 1911. 1911. 1911---1912, 1920, 19241912, 1920, 19241912, 1920, 1924-1925, 1930, 1936, 1940, 1945, 1950, 1956, 1960, 1965,
1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener 1970,
1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000. Courtesy of the Grace Schmidt Room, Kitchener RR
Public Library including digital copies. Historical Vernon City Directories Mapped | Geospatial Public Library including digital copies. Historical Vernon City Directories Mapped | Geospatial
Public Library including digital copies. Historical Vernon City Directories Mapped | Geospatial
Centre | University of Waterloo (uwaterloo.ca)Centre | University of Waterloo (uwaterloo.ca)Centre | University of Waterloo (uwaterloo.ca). Accessed April 2024.
Waterloo Region Generations. Waterloo Region Generations. Waterloo Region Generations. Waterloo Region Generations (regionofwaterloo.ca)
Accessed April 20, 2024.Accessed April 20, 2024.Accessed April 20, 2024.
DD
MHBC | 82
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix A
MapMapMap Figures Figures Figures
MHBC | 83
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix G
CVs
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 89
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix B
Conceptual Site Plan and ElevationsConceptual Site Plan and ElevationsConceptual Site Plan and Elevations
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 84
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix C
Chain of TitleChain of TitleChain of Title
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 85
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix D
HIA Terms of ReferenceTerms of ReferenceTerms of Reference
MHBC | 86
City of Kitchener
Development Services Department - Planning Division
54-68 Queen Street North & 11 Roy Street
Heritage Impact Assessment - Terms of Reference
1.0Background
A Heritage Impact Assessment is a study to determine the impacts to known and potential cultural A Heritage Impact Assessment is a study to determine the impacts to known and potential
cultural A Heritage Impact Assessment is a study to determine the impacts to known and potential cultural
heritage resources within a defined area proposed for future repair, alteration or development. heritage resources within a defined area proposed for future repair, alteration or development.
heritage resources within a defined area proposed for future repair, alteration or development.
The study shall include an inventory of all cultural heritage resources within the planning The study shall include an inventory of all cultural heritage resources within the planning
The study shall include an inventory of all cultural heritage resources within the planning
application area. The study results in a report which identifies all known cultural heritage application area. The study results in a report which identifies all known cultural heritage
application area. The study results in a report which identifies all known cultural heritage
resources, evaluates the significance of the resources, and makes recommendations toward resources, evaluates the significance of the resources, and makes recommendations toward resources,
evaluates the significance of the resources, and makes recommendations toward
mitigative measures that would minimize negative impacts to those resources. A Heritage Impact ive impacts to those resources. A Heritage Impact ive impacts to those resources. A Heritage
Impact
Assessment may be required on a property which is listed on the City’s Heritage Advisory Assessment may be required on a property which is listed on the City’s Heritage Advisory Assessment
may be required on a property which is listed on the City’s Heritage Advisory
Committee Inventory; listed on the City’s Municipal Heritage Register; designated under the Committee Inventory; listed on the City’s Municipal Heritage Register; designated under the
Committee Inventory; listed on the City’s Municipal Heritage Register; designated under the
Ontario Heritage Act;or where development is proposed adjacent to a protected heritage property or where development is proposed adjacent to a protected heritage property or where development
is proposed adjacent to a protected heritage property
(i.e. designated property). The requirement may also apply to unknown or recorded cultural (i.e. designated property). The requirement may also apply to unknown or recorded cultural
(i.e. designated property). The requirement may also apply to unknown or recorded cultural
T
heritage resources which are discovered during the development application stage or heritage resources which are discovered during the development application stage or heritage resources
which are discovered during the development application stage or
construction.
The subject lands are municipally addressed as 54The subject lands are municipally addressed as 54The subject lands are municipally addressed as 54---68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy
Street. 68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy Street. 68 Queen Street North and 11 Roy Street. All
the propertiesare designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and are located within the are designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and are located within the are
designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and are located within the
Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation DistrictCivic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation DistrictCivic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District(CCNHCD) as
well as the Civic (CCNHCD) as well as the Civic (CCNHCD) as well as the Civic
F
Centre Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHLCentre Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHLCentre Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL))). . . 54 Queen Street
North and 68 Queen 54 Queen Street North and 68 Queen 54 Queen Street North and 68 Queen
Street North are both properties classified as being District Significance A, meaning they are very Street North are both properties classified as being District Significance A, meaning
they are very Street North are both properties classified as being District Significance A, meaning they are very
fine examples of a specific architectural style. 11 Roy Street is classified as being District fine examples of a specific architectural style. 11 Roy Street is classified as being District
fine examples of a specific architectural style. 11 Roy Street is classified as being District
Significance B, meaning itSignificance B, meaning itSignificance B, meaning itis a fine example of a specific architectural style. In addition to being is a fine example of a specific
architectural style. In addition to being is a fine example of a specific architectural style. In addition to being
adjacent to other Part V designated heritage resources including 16 Roy Street, 20 Roy Street, adjacent to other Part V designated heritage resources including 16 Roy Street, 20 Roy
Street, adjacent to other Part V designated heritage resources including 16 Roy Street, 20 Roy Street,
23 Roy Street ,18 Weber Street West, and 74 Queen Street North, 18 Weber Street West, and 74 Queen Street North, 18 Weber Street West, and 74 Queen Street North, the subject lands arealso
located adjacent tolocated adjacent tolocated adjacent to: : :
A
20 Weber Street East20 Weber Street East20 Weber Street East///737373---77 Queen Street North, known as the Waterloo County Gaol 77 Queen Street North, known as the Waterloo County Gaol
77 Queen Street North, known as the Waterloo County Gaol
and Governors House and designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; andand Governors House and designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; andand Governors House
and designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; and
838383---85 Queen Street North, known as the Kitchener Public Library Main Branch and listed 85 Queen Street North, known as the Kitchener Public Library Main Branch and listed 85 Queen
Street North, known as the Kitchener Public Library Main Branch and listed
as a nonas a nonas a non---designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal designated
property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal
Heritage RegisterHeritage RegisterHeritage Register
Please note that this Terms of Reference has been prepared Please note that this Terms of Reference has been prepared Please note that this Terms of Reference has been prepared R specifically
for a site plan application.
It is heritage planning staffs understanding that a heritage permit application for the demolition of It is heritage planning staffs understanding that a heritage permit application
for the demolition of It is heritage planning staffs understanding that a heritage permit application for the demolition of
11 Roy Street may be submitted prior to the submission of a site plan application. Heritage 11 Roy Street may be submitted prior to the submission of a site plan application. Heritage
11 Roy Street may be submitted prior to the submission of a site plan application. Heritage
planning staff would be open to discussion with the retained heritage consultant regarding dividing planning staff would be open to discussion with the retained heritage consultant regarding
dividing planning staff would be open to discussion with the retained heritage consultant regarding dividing
the Heritagethe Heritagethe HeritageImpact Assessment into two phases, with the first phase focused on the demolition Impact Assessment into two phases, with the first phase focused
on the demolition Impact Assessment into two phases, with the first phase focused on the demolition
and the second phase fand the second phase fand the second phase focused on the proposed new development. It should also be noted that
heritage planning staff are not supportive of the demolition of 11 Roy Street and would not heritage planning staff are not supportive of the demolition of 11 Roy Street and would not
heritage planning staff are not supportive of the demolition of 11 Roy Street and would not
recommend demolishing the structure prior to the submission of a site plan application as, shourecommend demolishing the structure prior to the submission of a site plan application
as, shourecommend demolishing the structure prior to the submission of a site plan application as, should
D
unforeseeable circumstances arise and the proposed development fall through, a valuable
heritage resource will have been lost for no reason.
2.0Heritage Impact Assessment Requirements
It is important to recognize the need for Heritage Impact Assessments at the earliest possible
stage of development, alteration or proposed repair. Notice will be given to the property owner
and/or their representative as early as possible. When the property is the subject of a Plan of and/or their representative as early as possible. When the property is the subject of
a Plan of and/or their representative as early as possible. When the property is the subject of a Plan of
Subdivision or Site Plan application, notice of a Heritage Impact Assessment requirement will Subdivision or Site Plan application, notice of a Heritage Impact Assessment requirement
will Subdivision or Site Plan application, notice of a Heritage Impact Assessment requirement will
typically be given at the pre-application meeting, followed by written notification. The notice will application meeting, followed by written notification. The notice will application
meeting, followed by written notification. The notice will
inform the property owner of any known heritage resources specific to the subject property and inform the property owner of any known heritage resources specific to the subject property
and inform the property owner of any known heritage resources specific to the subject property and
provide guidelines to completing the Heritage Impact Assessment.
The following minimum requirements will be required in a Heritage Impact Assessment:The following minimum requirements will be required in a Heritage Impact Assessment:The following
minimum requirements will be required in a Heritage Impact Assessment:
2.1 Present owner contact information for properties proposed for development and/or site Present owner contact information for properties proposed for development and/or site Present
owner contact information for properties proposed for development and/or site
alteration.
2.2A detailed site history to include a listing of owners from the Land Registry Office, and a A detailed site history to include a listing of owners from the Land Registry Office, and
a A detailed site history to include a listing of owners from the Land Registry Office, and a
history of the site use(s).
T
2.3A written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject A written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject A
written description of the buildings, structures and landscape features on the subject
properties including: building elements, building materials, architectural and interior properties including: building elements, building materials, architectural and interior properties
including: building elements, building materials, architectural and interior
finishes, natural heritage elements, and landscaping. The description will alsofinishes, natural heritage elements, and landscaping. The description will alsofinishes, natural heritage
elements, and landscaping. The description will alsoinclude a
chronological history of the buildings’ development, such as additions and demolitions. chronological history of the buildings’ development, such as additions and demolitions. chronological
history of the buildings’ development, such as additions and demolitions.
Thestatement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritagestatement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritagestatement
shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritagestatement shall also address the value and significance of adjacent protected heritage
propertiesincluding 16 Roy Street, 20 Roy Street, 23 Roy Street , 18 Weber Street West, including 16 Roy Street, 20 Roy Street, 23 Roy Street , 18 Weber Street West, including 16 Roy
Street, 20 Roy Street, 23 Roy Street , 18 Weber Street West,
F
and 74 Queen Street North, and adjacent listed properties including and 74 Queen Street North, and adjacent listed properties including and 74 Queen Street North, and adjacent listed
properties including 20 Weber Street
East/73-77 Queen Street North and 8377 Queen Street North and 8377 Queen Street North and 83---85 Queen Street North85 Queen Street North85 Queen Street North.
2.4Documentation of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation Documentation of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation
Documentation of the subject properties to include: current photographs of each elevation
of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an
of the buildings, photographs of identified heritage attributes and a site plan drawn at an
appropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site detaappropriate scale to understand the context of the buildings and site detaappropriate scale to understand the
context of the buildings and site details.
Documentation shall also include where available, current floor plansDocumentation shall also include where available, current floor plansDocumentation shall also include where available,
current floor plans, andhistorical
A
photos, photos, photos, drawings or other availabledrawings or other availabledrawings or other availableand relevant archival material. and relevant archival material. and relevant
archival material.
2.5A summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must A summary of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must A summary
of applicable heritage conservation principles and how they will be used must
be included. Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the be included. Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the be included.
Conservation principles may be found in online publications such as: the
Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Standards and Guidelines
for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks
Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario
Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Heritage Properties (Ontario
Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism); and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism); and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario Ministry
of Citizenship and Multiculturalism); and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ontario
Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturlaism).Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturlaism).Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturlaism).
R
2.5.12.5.12.5.1A summary of applicable policy frameworks is also required. This included the A summary of applicable policy frameworks is also required. This included the A summary of
applicable policy frameworks is also required. This included the
Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Regional Official Plan, and Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Regional Official Plan, and Planning Act, the Provincial
Policy Statement, the Regional Official Plan, and
Kitchener Official Plan, and the CCNHCD Plan. Kitchener Official Plan, and the CCNHCD Plan. Kitchener Official Plan, and the CCNHCD Plan.
2.6An outline of the proposed demolition and development, its context, and how it will impact An outline of the proposed demolition and development, its context, and how it will impact
An outline of the proposed demolition and development, its context, and how it will impact
D
the properties (subject property and adjacent heritage propertiespreviously identified) and
surrounding streetscape including buildings, structures, and site details including
landscaping. In particular, the potential visual and physical impact of the proposed work
on the identified heritage attributes of the properties,and the setting and character of Roy
Street, Queen StreetNorth, and Weber StreetWest, shall be assessedand the overall
impact of the integrity of the CCNHCD shall be evaluated.
The Heritage Impact Assessment must consider potential negative impacts as identified
in the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism’sOntario Heritage Tool Kit. Negative Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. Negative Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. Negative
impacts may include but are not limited to: repair/alterations that are not sympathetic or impacts may include but are not limited to: repair/alterations that are not sympathetic or
impacts may include but are not limited to: repair/alterations that are not sympathetic or
compatible with the cultural heritage resource; demolition of all or part of a cultural heritage compatible with the cultural heritage resource; demolition of all or part of a cultural
heritage compatible with the cultural heritage resource; demolition of all or part of a cultural heritage
resource; etc. The outline should also address the influence and potential impact of the resource; etc. The outline should also address the influence and potential impact of the resource;
etc. The outline should also address the influence and potential impact of the
development on the setting and character of the subject properties and adjacent protected development on the setting and character of the subject properties and adjacent protected development
on the setting and character of the subject properties and adjacent protected
heritage property. Additional negative impacts informed by new research, understanding, new research, understanding, new research, understanding,
and best practices should also be considered.
2.6.1Proposed demolitions must be justified and explained including discussion on any Proposed demolitions must be justified and explained including discussion on any Proposed demolitions
must be justified and explained including discussion on any
loss of cultural heritage value and impact on the property, streetscape, and loss of cultural heritage value and impact on the property, streetscape, and loss of cultural heritage value
and impact on the property, streetscape, and
neighbourhood.Conclusions or statements regarding structural or general Conclusions or statements regarding structural or general Conclusions or statements regarding structural or general
condition shall be supported by reports and cost estimates prepared by qualified condition shall be supported by reports and cost estimates prepared by qualified condition shall be supported
by reports and cost estimates prepared by qualified
individuals.
2.6.2A Shadow Impact Analysis shallhallhallbe conducted and used to help inform building be conducted and used to help inform building be conducted and used to help inform building
design and articulation.
2.6.3A discussion and assessment of the proposed building materials, proposedA discussion and assessment of the proposed building materials, proposedA discussion and assessment of the
proposed building materials, proposed
setbacks and step backs with respect to the surrounding neighbourhood is required. setbacks and step backs with respect to the surrounding neighbourhood is required. setbacks and step
backs with respect to the surrounding neighbourhood is required.
A discussion and assessment of functional considerations such as the location of A discussion and assessment of functional considerations such as the location of A discussion and assessment
of functional considerations such as the location of
landscape features amenity space, pedestrian and vehicle movements, fire access landscape features amenity space, pedestrian and vehicle movements, fire access landscape features amenity
space, pedestrian and vehicle movements, fire access
and garbagecollection should be provided.collection should be provided.collection should be provided.
2.7Development alternativesDevelopment alternativesDevelopment alternativesshall be providedshall be providedshall be providedand shall include an explanation onand shall include an
explanation onand shall include an explanation onhow
different options may allowdifferent options may allowdifferent options may allowthe significant cultural heritage resources to be betterthe significant cultural heritage resources to
be betterthe significant cultural heritage resources to be better
conservedconservedconservedor mitigate impacts. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited to, or mitigate impacts. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited
to, or mitigate impacts. Methods of mitigation may include, but are not limited to,
preservation/conservation in situ, adaptive represervation/conservation in situ, adaptive represervation/conservation in situ, adaptive re---use, integration of all or part of the heritage
use, integration of all or part of the heritage use, integration of all or part of the heritage
resource, relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the resource, relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the resource,
relocation. Each mitigative measure should create a sympathetic context for the
heritage rheritage rheritage resource. esource. esource.
2.8The HIA should include a recommendation identifying the preferred development The HIA should include a recommendation identifying the preferred development The HIA should include
a recommendation identifying the preferred development
alternative. A full justification for the identified option shall be included. Recommendations alternative. A full justification for the identified option shall be included. Recommendations
alternative. A full justification for the identified option shall be included. Recommendations
for mitigation measures to identified impacts shall also be provided. for mitigation measures to identified impacts shall also be provided. for mitigation measures to identified impacts
shall also be provided.
2.8.12.8.12.8.1Recommendations shall be consistent with Recommendations shall be consistent with Recommendations shall be consistent with applicable CCNHCD Plan policies,
goals,goals,goals,and guidelinesand guidelinesand guidelines, including but not limited to Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.3.5.2, 6.6,
and 6.9.4and 6.9.4and 6.9.4and with recognized heritage conservation principles and practices, and with recognized heritage conservation principles and practices, and with recognized
heritage conservation principles and practices,
including the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in including the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in including the Standards
and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in
Canada (Parks Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Canada (Parks Canada); Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built Canada (Parks Canada); Eight
Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Built
Heritage Properties (MinistrHeritage Properties (MinistrHeritage Properties (Ministry of Heritage, Tourism, Sport, and Culture Industries);
and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ministry of Heritage, Tourism, Sport, and Culture and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit (Ministry of Heritage, Tourism, Sport, and Culture and the Ontario
Heritage Tool Kit (Ministry of Heritage, Tourism, Sport, and Culture
Industries).Industries).Industries).
2.8.2Recommendations shall be as specific as possible, describing and illustrating
locations, elevations, materials, landscaping, etc.
2.9The qualifications and background of the person(s) completing the Heritage Impact
Assessment shall be included in the report. The author(s) must demonstrate a level of
professional understanding and competence in the heritage conservation field of study.
The professional should be registered with the Canadian Association of Heritage
Professionals (CAHP) and in good standing. The report will also include a reference for Professionals (CAHP) and in good standing. The report will also include a reference for Professionals
(CAHP) and in good standing. The report will also include a reference for
any literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in tany literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in tany
literature cited, and a list of people contacted during the study and referenced in the
report.
3.0Summary Statement and Conservation RecommendationsSummary Statement and Conservation RecommendationsSummary Statement and Conservation Recommendations
The summary statement should provide a full description of:The summary statement should provide a full description of:The summary statement should provide a full description of:
The significance and heritage attributes of the subject propertiesThe significance and heritage attributes of the subject properties. A. An evaluation n evaluation
under Ontario Regulation 9/06 is not required for the subject properties as they are under Ontario Regulation 9/06 is not required for the subject properties as they are under Ontario
Regulation 9/06 is not required for the subject properties as they are under Ontario Regulation 9/06 is not required for the subject properties as they are
already designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, but profile sheets already designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, but profile sheets
which include the identification of specific heritage attributes should be prowhich include the identification of specific heritage attributes should be prowhich include the identification
of specific heritage attributes should be prowhich include the identification of specific heritage attributes should be provided. vided.
The identification of any impact the proposed demolition andThe identification of any impact the proposed demolition andThe identification of any impact the proposed demolition anddevelopment
will development will development will
TTTTTTTTT
have on the heritage attributes of the subject properties,have on the heritage attributes of the subject properties,have on the heritage attributes of the subject properties,have on
the heritage attributes of the subject properties,adjacent heritage adjacent heritage
propertiesidentified in 2.3, the Roy Street, Queen Street North, and Weber Street identified in 2.3, the Roy Street, Queen Street North, and Weber Street identified in 2.3, the Roy Street,
Queen Street North, and Weber Street identified in 2.3, the Roy Street, Queen Street North, and Weber Street
West streetscapes, and the integrity of the CCNHCDWest streetscapes, and the integrity of the CCNHCD; ; andandand
An explanationand justificationand justificationand justificationof what conservation or mitigative measures, or of what conservation or mitigative measures, or of what conservation
or mitigative measures, or
alternative development, or site alteration approaches are recommendedalternative development, or site alteration approaches are recommendedalternative development, or site alteration
approaches are recommended.
FFFFFFFFF
4.0 Approval Process
One (1) digital pdf copy shall be provided to Heritage Planning staff. The digital copy shall One (1) digital pdf copy shall be provided to Heritage Planning staff. The digital copy
shall One (1) digital pdf copy shall be provided to Heritage Planning staff. The digital copy shall
be marked with a “DRAFT” watermark background. The Heritage Impact Assessment will be marked with a “DRAFT” watermark background. The Heritage Impact Assessment will be marked with a
“DRAFT” watermark background. The Heritage Impact Assessment will
be reviewed by City staff to determine whether all requirements have been met abe reviewed by City staff to determine whether all requirements have been met abe reviewed by City staff
to determine whether all requirements have been met and to
review the preferred option(s). Following the review of the Heritage Impact Assessment review the preferred option(s). Following the review of the Heritage Impact Assessment review the
preferred option(s). Following the review of the Heritage Impact Assessment
by City staff, one (1) digital copy of the final Heritage Impact Assessment (“DRAFT” by City staff, one (1) digital copy of the final Heritage Impact Assessment (“DRAFT” by City staff,
one (1) digital copy of the final Heritage Impact Assessment (“DRAFT”
AAAAAAAAA
watermark removed) will be required. The final Heritage Impact Assessment willwatermark removed) will be required. The final Heritage Impact Assessment willwatermark removed) will be
required. The final Heritage Impact Assessment willbe
considered by the Director of Planning. Note that Heritage Impact Assessments considered by the Director of Planning. Note that Heritage Impact Assessments considered by the Director
of Planning. Note that Heritage Impact Assessments willbe
circulated to the City’s Heritage Kitchener Committee for information and discussion. circulated to the City’s Heritage Kitchener Committee for information and discussion. circulated
to the City’s Heritage Kitchener Committee for information and discussion.
Heritage Impact Assessments may be subject to a peer review to be conducted by Heritage Impact Assessments may be subject to a peer review to be conducted by Heritage Impact Assessments
may be subject to a peer review to be conducted by
a qualified heritage consultant at the expense of the City of Kitchener. The applicant a qualified heritage consultant at the expense of the City of Kitchener. The applicant a qualified
heritage consultant at the expense of the City of Kitchener. The applicant
will be notified of Staff’s comments and acceptance, or rejection of the report. An will be notified of Staff’s comments and acceptance, or rejection of the report. An will be notified
of Staff’s comments and acceptance, or rejection of the report. An
acceptacceptaccepted Heritage Impact Assessment will become part of the further processing ed Heritage Impact Assessment will become part of the further processing ed Heritage Impact
Assessment will become part of the further processing
RRRRRRRRR
of a development application under the direction of the Planning Division. The of a development application under the direction of the Planning Division. The of a development application
under the direction of the Planning Division. The
recommendations within the final approved version of the Heritage Impact recommendations within the final approved version of the Heritage Impact recommendations within the final approved
version of the Heritage Impact
Assessment may be incorporated Assessment may be incorporated Assessment may be incorporated into development related legal agreements
between the City and the proponent at the discretion of the municipalitybetween the City and the proponent at the discretion of the municipalitybetween the City and the proponent at
the discretion of the municipality.
DDDDDDDDD
Appendix ‘E’- Evaluation of 11 Roy Street
Application of Group B Criteria for 11 Roy Street
The property has previously The property was not previously designated prior The property was not previously designated prior The property was not previously designated prior
been designated under the to the Plan.
Ontario Heritage Act
The property is a particularly The building is identified as ‘vernacular’ in the The building is identified as ‘vernacular’ in the The building is identified as ‘vernacular’ in the
fine example of an CCNHCD Study which is not demonstrative of a CCNHCD Study which is not demonstrative of a CCNHCD Study which is not demonstrative of a
architectural style, whether particularly fine example of an architect style. particularly fine example of an architect style. particularly fine example of an architect style.
well restored, aged and
weary, or partially concealed
by reversible alterations;
The property exhibits unique The property does not exhibit unique qualities or The property does not exhibit unique qualities or The property does not exhibit unique qualities or
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
qualities or details that make details that make it a landmark. It is currently details that make it a landmark. It is currently details that make it a landmark. It is currently
it a landmark; placed between a laneway and surface parking placed between a laneway and surface parking placed between a laneway and surface parking
area.area.area.
The property is a particularly The property is a particularly wellThe property is a particularly wellThe property is a particularly well-maintained
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
well-maintainedexample of a example of a example of a modest architectural style.example of a modest architectural style.example of a modest architectural style.
modest architectural style; modest architectural style;
The age of the building The age of the building The building was constructed c. 1921 which is The building was constructed c. 1921 which is The building was constructed c. 1921 which
is
contributes to its heritage contributes to its heritage considered infill as the majority of the considered infill as the majority of the considered infill as the majority of the
values but is not the principal values but is not the principal concentration of development in the CCNHCD concentration of development in the CCNHCD concentration of development in
the CCNHCD
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
determinant;determinant;was between was between was between 1880 and 1915. A building should
not be considered to have cultural heritage value not be considered to have cultural heritage value not be considered to have cultural heritage value
simply due to its age.simply due to its age.simply due to its age.
There is a significant known There is a significant known There is no significant known event or person
event or person associated event or person associated associated with the house. The church had
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
with the house;with the house;operated out of the buildingas part of their
outreach ministry which is the purpose of this
proposal.
The property contributes to The property contributes to The property does not contribute to the Roy
the streetscape because it is the streetscape because it is streetscape as it is not part of a sequence,
part of an unusual sequence part of an unusual sequence grouping or unique location that was designed.
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
of grouping or is in a unique The former removal of the buildings located at
location.15 and 19 Roy Street, the removal of the
building at 76 Queen Street North and
Appendix ‘E’- Evaluation of 11 Roy Street
replacement with a circa1960s built form
(currently at 74 Queen Street North) and later
mid-century infill development immediate
adjacent (non-contiguous)at 16 and 20 Roy at 16 and 20 Roy at 16 and 20 Roy
Street, disjoints this property from the built form this property from the built form this property from the built form
and fluid streetscape that formerly would have and fluid streetscape that formerly would have and fluid streetscape that formerly would have
been present.
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix F
Property Evaluation SheetsProperty Evaluation SheetsProperty Evaluation Sheets
T
F
A
R
D
MHBC | 88
TT
FF
AA
RR
DD
TTT
FFF
AAA
RRR
DDD
TTTT
FFFF
AAAA
RRRR
DDDD
11 Roy Street & 54 and 68 Queen StreetNorth, City of Kitchener, ON
Appendix E
11 Roy Street Group B 11 Roy Street Group B 11 Roy Street Group B EvaluationEvaluationEvaluation
MHBC | 87
Education
University of Waterloo
Dan
Masters of Arts (Planning)
University of Waterloo
Bachelor of Environmental Studies
Currie
University of Saskatchewan
BA, BES, MA, MCIP, RPP, CAHP, CAHP, CAHP
Bachelor of Arts (Art History)
Dan Currie, a Partner and Managing Director of MHBC’s Cultural Heritage Dan Currie, a Partner and Managing Director of MHBC’s Cultural Heritage Dan Currie, a Partner and Managing Director
of MHBC’s Cultural Heritage
Division, joined MHBC Planning in 2009, after having worked in various Division, joined MHBC Planning in 2009, after having worked in various Division, joined MHBC Planning in 2009,
after having worked in various
positions in the public sector since 1997. Dan provides a variety of positions in the public sector since 1997. Dan provides a variety of positions in the public sector since 1997. Dan
provides a variety of
Professional Associations
planning services for public and private sector clients including a wide planning services for public and private sector clients including a wide planning services for public and private
sector clients including a wide
range of cultural heritage policy and planning work including strategic range of cultural heritage policy and planning work including strategic range of cultural heritage policy and
planning work including strategic
Registered Professional Planner
planning, heritage policy, heritage conservation district studies and plans, planning, heritage policy, heritage conservation district studies and plans, planning, heritage policy, heritage
conservation district studies and plans,
heritage master plans, cultural heritage evaluations, heritage impact heritage master plans, cultural heritage evaluations, heritage impact heritage master plans, cultural heritage evaluations,
heritage impact
Full Member, Canadian Institute of
assessments and cultural heritage landscape studies. nts and cultural heritage landscape studies. nts and cultural heritage landscape studies.
TTT
Planners (CIP)
Selected Project ExperienceSelected Project ExperienceSelected Project Experience
Full Member, Ontario Professional
Planners Institute (OPPI)
Heritage Conservation District Studies and Plans Heritage Conservation District Studies and Plans Heritage Conservation District Studies and Plans
Professional Member, Canadian
Streetsville Heritage Conservation District Streetsville Heritage Conservation District Streetsville Heritage Conservation District Plan (underway)
Association of Heritage Professionals
FFF
Amherstburg Heritage Conservation District Amherstburg Heritage Conservation District Amherstburg Heritage Conservation District Plan (underway)
Melville Street Heritage Conservation District Melville Street Heritage Conservation District Melville Street Heritage Conservation District Plan(underway)
Stouffville Heritage Conservation District Stouffville Heritage Conservation District Stouffville Heritage Conservation District Plan (2022)
Alton Heritage Conservation District Study, Caledon (2021)Alton Heritage Conservation District Study, Caledon (2021)Alton Heritage Conservation District Study, Caledon (2021)
Contact
Port Stanley Heritage Conservation District Plan (2021)Port Stanley Heritage Conservation District Plan (2021)Port Stanley Heritage Conservation District Plan (2021)
Port Credit Heritage Conservation District Plan, Mississauga (2018)Port Credit Heritage Conservation District Plan, Mississauga (2018)Port Credit Heritage Conservation District Plan,
Mississauga (2018)
200-540 Bingemans Centre Drive540 Bingemans Centre Drive
Town of Cobourg Heritage Conservation District Plan updates Town of Cobourg Heritage Conservation District Plan updates Town of Cobourg Heritage Conservation District Plan updates
Kitchener, ON
AAA
N2B 3X9
(2016)(2016)(2016)
Rondeau Heritage Conservation District Plan, Chatham Kent (2016)Rondeau Heritage Conservation District Plan, Chatham Kent (2016)Rondeau Heritage Conservation District Plan, Chatham Kent
(2016)
T: 519 576 3650 x519 576 3650 x744744
Barriefield Heritage Conservation District Plan Update, Kingston Barriefield Heritage Conservation District Plan Update, Kingston Barriefield Heritage Conservation District Plan Update,
Kingston
C: 519 40468946894
(2015)
dcurrie@mhbcplan.com@mhbcplan.com
Victoria Square Heritage Conservation District Study, Markham
www.mhbcplan.comwww.mhbcplan.com
(2015)
RRR
Bala Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan, Township of
Muskoka Lakes (2015)
Brooklyn and College Hill Heritage Conservation District Plan,
Guelph (2014)
Garden District Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan,
Toronto (2014)
Downtown Meaford Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan
DDD
(2013)
Heritage Master Plans and Management Plans
City of Guelph Cultural Heritage Action Plan (2020)
Town of Cobourg Heritage Master Plan (2016)
Burlington Heights Heritage Lands Management Plan (2016)
City of London Western Counties Cultural Heritage Plan (2014)
2
Cultural Heritage Evaluations
Township of Tiny Heritage Register Review (on going)
City of Barrie Heritage Register Review (2024)
Aurora Heritage Register Review (2022)
MacDonald Mowatt House, University of Toronto (2020)
Designation of Main Street Presbyterian Church, Town of Erin (2019)
Designation of St. Johns Anglican Church, Norwich (2019)
Cultural Heritage Landscape evaluation, former Burlingham Farmstead, Prince Edward County (2018)Cultural Heritage Landscape evaluation, former Burlingham Farmstead, Prince Edward County
(2018)Cultural Heritage Landscape evaluation, former Burlingham Farmstead, Prince Edward County (2018)
City of Kitchener Heritage Property Inventory Update (2016)
Niagara Parks Commission Queen Victoria Park Cultural Heritage Evaluation (2016)Niagara Parks Commission Queen Victoria Park Cultural Heritage Evaluation (2016)Niagara Parks Commission
Queen Victoria Park Cultural Heritage Evaluation (2016)
Heritage Impact Assessments
Redevelopment of former amusement park, Boblo Island (2022)
Mount Pleasant Islamic Centre, Brampton (2020)
Demolition of former farmhouse at 10536 McCowan Road, Markham (2020)Demolition of former farmhouse at 10536 McCowan Road, Markham (2020)Demolition of former farmhouse at 10536 McCowan
Road, Markham (2020)
Redevelopment of former Goldie and McCullough factory, Cambridge (2019)Redevelopment of former Goldie and McCullough factory, Cambridge (2019)Redevelopment of former Goldie and McCullough
factory, Cambridge (2019)
Redevelopment of historic Waterloo Post Office (2019)Redevelopment of historic Waterloo Post Office (2019)Redevelopment of historic Waterloo Post Office (2019)T
Redevelopment of former industrial facility, 57 Lakeport Road, Port Dalhousie (2018)Redevelopment of former industrial facility, 57 Lakeport Road, Port Dalhousie (2018)Redevelopment
of former industrial facility, 57 Lakeport Road, Port Dalhousie (2018)
Redevelopment of former Brick Brewery, Waterloo (2016)Redevelopment of former Brick Brewery, Waterloo (2016)Redevelopment of former Brick Brewery, Waterloo (2016)
Homer Watson House Heritage Impact Assessment, Kitchener (2016)Homer Watson House Heritage Impact Assessment, Kitchener (2016)Homer Watson House Heritage Impact Assessment, Kitchener
(2016)
Expansion of Schneider Haus National Historic Site, Kitchener (2016)Expansion of Schneider Haus National Historic Site, Kitchener (2016)Expansion of Schneider Haus National Historic
Site, Kitchener (2016)
Heritage Impact Assessment for Pier 8, Hamilton (2015)Heritage Impact Assessment for Pier 8, Hamilton (2015)Heritage Impact Assessment for Pier 8, Hamilton (2015)
F
Redevelopment of former American Standard factory, Cambridge (2014)Redevelopment of former American Standard factory, Cambridge (2014)Redevelopment of former American Standard factory,
Cambridge (2014)
Heritage Assessments for Infrastructure Projects and Environmental AssessmentsHeritage Assessments for Infrastructure Projects and Environmental AssessmentsHeritage Assessments for Infrastructure
Projects and Environmental Assessments
Edgerton Bridge Assessment, Scugog (2024)on Bridge Assessment, Scugog (2024)on Bridge Assessment, Scugog (2024)
Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment of Twenty Mile Creek Arch Bridge, Town of Lincoln (2021)Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment of Twenty Mile Creek Arch
Bridge, Town of Lincoln (2021)Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment of Twenty Mile Creek Arch Bridge, Town of Lincoln (2021)
Heritage Evaluation of Deer River, Burnt Dam and MacIntosh Bridges, Peterborough County (2021)Heritage Evaluation of Deer River, Burnt Dam and MacIntosh Bridges, Peterborough County
(2021)Heritage Evaluation of Deer River, Burnt Dam and MacIntosh Bridges, Peterborough County (2021)
A
Heritage Assessment of 10 Bridges within Rockcliffe Special Policy Area, Toronto (2019)Heritage Assessment of 10 Bridges within Rockcliffe Special Policy Area, Toronto (2019)Heritage
Assessment of 10 Bridges within Rockcliffe Special Policy Area, Toronto (2019)
Blenheim Road Realignment Collector Road EA, Cambridge (2014)Blenheim Road Realignment Collector Road EA, Cambridge (2014)Blenheim Road Realignment Collector Road EA, Cambridge (2014)
Badley Bridge EA, Elora (2014)Badley Bridge EA, Elora (2014)Badley Bridge EA, Elora (2014)
Black Bridge Road EA, Cambridge (2013)Black Bridge Road EA, Cambridge (2013)Black Bridge Road EA, Cambridge (2013)
Conservation Plans Conservation Plans Conservation Plans
Conservation Plan for Log house, Burgetz Ave., Kitchener (2020)Conservation Plan for Log house, Burgetz Ave., Kitchener (2020)Conservation Plan for Log house, Burgetz Ave., Kitchener
(2020)
R
Conservation and Construction Protection Plan Conservation and Construction Protection Plan Conservation and Construction Protection Plan - 54 Margaret Avenue, Kitchener (2019)
Black Bridge Strategic Conservation Plan, Cambridge (2013)Black Bridge Strategic Conservation Plan, Cambridge (2013)Black Bridge Strategic Conservation Plan, Cambridge (2013)
Tribunal Hearings: Tribunal Hearings: Tribunal Hearings:
Redevelopment 18 Portland Street, Tlopment 18 Portland Street, Tlopment 18 Portland Street, Toronto(OLT)(2023)
Redevelopment 292 Main Street, Grimbsy (OLT) (2023)Redevelopment 292 Main Street, Grimbsy (OLT) (2023)Redevelopment 292 Main Street, Grimbsy (OLT) (2023)
D
Redevelopment 1919 to 1949 Devonshire Court, Windsor (OLT) (2023)
Redevelopment 9 Dee Road, Queenston (OLT) (2023)
Redevelopment 18314 Hurontario Street, Caledon Village (OLT) (2023)
Redevelopment 217 King Street S, Waterloo (OLT) (2022)
Redevelopment 147 Main Street, Grimsby (OLT) (2022)
Redevelopment of 12 Pearl Street, Burlington (OLT) (2021)
3
Designation of 30 Ontario Street, St. Catharines (CRB) (2021)
Designation of 27 Prideaux Street, Niagara on the Lake (CRB) (2021)
Redevelopment of Langmaids Island, Lake of Bays (LPAT) (2021)
Redevelopment of property at 64 Grand Ave., Cambridge (LPAT) (2019)
Youngblood subdivision, Elora (LPAT) (2019)
Demolition 174 St. Paul Street (Collingwood Heritage District) (LPAT) (2019)
Port Credit Heritage Conservation District (LPAT) (2018)
Brooklyn and College Hill HCD Plan (OMB) (2015)
Rondeau HCD Plan (OMB) (2015)
Designation of 108 Moore Street, Bradford (CRB) (2015)
Downtown Meaford HCD Plan (OMB) (2014)
Master Plans, Growth Management Strategies and Policy Studies
Township of West Lincoln East Smithville Secondary Plan (2022)
Town of Frontenac Islands Maryville Secondary Plan (2021)
Niagara-on-the-Lake Corridor Design Guidelines (2016)
Cambridge West Master Environmental Servicing Plan (2013)Cambridge West Master Environmental Servicing Plan (2013)Cambridge West Master Environmental Servicing Plan (2013)
Meadowlands Conservation Area Management Plan (2013)Meadowlands Conservation Area Management Plan (2013)Meadowlands Conservation Area Management Plan (2013)
T
Township of Tiny Residential Land Use Study (2012)Township of Tiny Residential Land Use Study (2012)Township of Tiny Residential Land Use Study (2012)
Port Severn Settlement Area Boundary Review (2012)Port Severn Settlement Area Boundary Review (2012)Port Severn Settlement Area Boundary Review (2012)
Ministry of the Environment Review of the D-Series Land UseSeries Land UseSeries Land UseGuidelines (2012)Guidelines (2012)Guidelines (2012)
Ministry of Infrastructure Review of Performance Indicators for theMinistry of Infrastructure Review of Performance Indicators for theMinistry of Infrastructure Review of Performance
Indicators for theGrowth Plan (2011)Growth Plan (2011)Growth Plan (2011)
Township of West Lincoln Intensification Study and Employment ownship of West Lincoln Intensification Study and Employment ownship of West Lincoln Intensification Study and Employment
Land Strategy (2011)Land Strategy (2011)Land Strategy (2011)
City of Kawartha Lakes Growth Management Strategy (2010)ity of Kawartha Lakes Growth Management Strategy (2010)ity of Kawartha Lakes Growth Management Strategy (2010)
F
Development Planning
Provide consulting services for municipal and private sector clients for: Provide consulting services for municipal and private sector clients for: Provide consulting services for municipal
and private sector clients for:
Secondary Plans
Draft plans of subdivisionDraft plans of subdivisionDraft plans of subdivision
Consent
A
Official Plan AmendmentOfficial Plan AmendmentOfficial Plan Amendment
Zoning ByZoning ByZoning By-law law law AmendmentAmendmentAmendment
Minor VarianceMinor VarianceMinor Variance
Site PlanSite PlanSite Plan
R
D
Education
University of Turin, The
Rachel
International Training Centre of
the ILO, UNESCO
Master of Arts
World Heritage and Cultural Projects
RedshawRedshawRedshaw
for Development
2014
BA. MA,H.E. DIPL., CAHP
Saint Francis Xavier University
RachelRedshaw,a HeritagePlannerPlannerPlannerandandandAssociateAssociateAssociatewithwithwithMHBC,MHBC,MHBC,joinedjoinedjoined
Bachelor of Arts
thefirmin2018.Ms.RedshawRedshawRedshawhashashasaaaBachelorBachelorBachelorofofofArtsArtsArtsinininAnthropologyAnthropologyAnthropology
Joint Advanced Major in Celtic
and Celtic Studies and a Master of Artand a Master of Artand a Master of Arts s s in in in WorldWorldWorldHeritageHeritageHeritageandandandCulturalCulturalCultural
Studies and Anthropology
ProjectsforDevelopment.Development.Development.Ms.Ms.Ms.RedshawRedshawRedshawcompletedcompletedcompletedherherherMaster’sMaster’sMaster’sinininTurin,Turin,Turin,
2012
Italy; the Master’s program waprogram waprogram was s s established by UNESCO in conjunction established by UNESCO in conjunction established by UNESCO in conjunction
Sabhal Mór Ostaig, University of
withtheUniversityUniversityUniversityofofofTurinTurinTurinandandandthethetheInternationalInternationalInternationalTrainingTrainingTrainingCentreCentreCentreofthe
the Highlands and Islands
ILO.Ms.RedshRedshRedshaw aw aw is is is a professionaa professionaa professional l l member of the Canadian Association member of the Canadian Association member of the Canadian Association
Higher Education Diploma Cultural
ofHeritageHeritageHeritageProfessionals.Professionals.Professionals.
Development/ Gaelic Studies
TTT
2011
Ms. Redshaw provideMs. Redshaw provideMs. Redshaw provides s s a variety of heritage planning servicea variety of heritage planning servicea variety of heritage planning services for
public
and private sector clients. Ms. Redshaw haand private sector clients. Ms. Redshaw haand private sector clients. Ms. Redshaw has s s worked for yearworked for yearworked for years completing
Professional Associations
culturalculturalculturalheritageheritageheritageplanningplanningplanninginininaaamunicipalmunicipalmunicipalsetting.setting.setting.Shehasworkedin
municipalmunicipalmunicipalbuildingbuildingbuildingandandandplanningplanningplanningdepartmentsdepartmentsdepartmentsand also completed
Member, International Council on
contractcontractcontractworkworkworkforforforthethetheprivateprivateprivatesectorsectorsectorttto o o gainadiverseknowledgeof
Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)
FFF
buildingbuildingbuildingandandandplanningplanningplanninginininrespectrespectrespecttototohowtheyapplytoculturalheritage.
Professional Member, Canadian
ProfessionalProfessionalProfessional H H Historyistoryistory
Association of Heritage Professionals Association of Heritage Professionals
(CAHP)
Associate/Associate/Associate/ S S Seniorenioreniorenioreniorenior H H Heritageeritageeritage Planner,MacNaughtonHermsenBritton
Clarkson Planning Limited Clarkson Planning Limited Clarkson Planning Limited
(20(20(20242424– – – PresentPresentPresent) ) )
AAA
Contact
SeniorSeniorSeniorSeniorSeniorSenior H H Heritageeritageeritage Planner,MacNaughtonHermsenBrittonClarkson
Planning Limited (20Planning Limited (20Planning Limited (2022– 2023)
540 Bingemans Centre Drive, 540 Bingemans Centre Drive,
Unit #200
HeritageHeritageHeritage Planner,MacNaughtonHermsenBrittonClarksonPlanning
Kitchener, ON, ON
LimitedLimitedLimited(2018– 2022)
N2B 3X9
BuildingBuildingBuilding Permit Coordinator, Township of Wellesley, Regional
T: (519) 576(519) 576--36503650Municipality of Waterloo (2018)
RRR
C: 226C: 226--868868--34433443
Building Permit Coordinator,RSMBuildingConsultants(20)
rredshawrredshaw@mhbcplan.com@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.comwww.mhbcplan.com
Deputy Clerk, TownshipofNorthDumfries,Regional Municipality of
Waterloo(2017-2018)
Building and Planning Clerk, Development Services,Townshipof
North Dumfries, Regional Municipality of Waterloo (2015-2017)
DDD
2
Professional Experience
Experience in all facets of cultural heritage studies including cultural heritage evaluation reports, heritage impact
assessments, conservation plans, salvage and documentation plans, cultural heritage screenings and heritage
conservation districts and general consultation services.
Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports
Completion of fieldwork to determine property conditions and context
Historical research to determine previous ownership and historical associations
Documentation and review of architectural design of built features and landscape featuresarchitectural design of built features and landscape featuresarchitectural design of built features
and landscape features
Determine cultural heritage value or interest by evaluating the property under the prescribed Determine cultural heritage value or interest by evaluating the property under the prescribed
Determine cultural heritage value or interest by evaluating the property under the prescribed
Prepare a Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest and heritage attributes;heritage attributes;heritage attributes;
Provide further recommendations for cultural heritage studies as neededrovide further recommendations for cultural heritage studies as neededrovide further recommendations for cultural
heritage studies as needed;;;
Assist with designation processes including the drafting of designation bydesignation bydesignation by-laws.-laws.-laws.
Heritage Impact Assessmentsand Heritage Permit Applicationsand Heritage Permit Applicationsand Heritage Permit Applications
Review proposed development plansand provide a preliminary review of potential impacts;and provide a preliminary review of potential impacts;and provide a preliminary review of potential
impacts;
Assess impacts to identified heritageattributes;
T
Provide mitigation and conservation measures as necessary;Provide mitigation and conservation measures as necessary;Provide mitigation and conservation measures as necessary;
Assist in the completion of heritage permit applif heritage permit applif heritage permit applications and notice of intention to demolications and notice of intention to demolications
and notice of intention to demolishshsh.
Conservation Plans (including Temporary Protection Plans)Conservation Plans (including Temporary Protection Plans)Conservation Plans (including Temporary Protection Plans)
Review proposed alterations within the context of the Standards and Review proposed alterations within the context of the Standards and Review proposed alterations within the context
of the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of HistoricGuidelines for the Conservation of HistoricGuidelines for the Conservation of Historic
Places in Canada and other guiding conservation principles;and other guiding conservation principles;and other guiding conservation principles;
F
Coordinate with the project team appropriate apthe project team appropriate apthe project team appropriate approaches to conservationproaches to conservationproaches to conservation
Prepare temporary protection plans which may include coordination of demolition, stabilization and vibrationon plans which may include coordination of demolition, stabilization and vibrationon
plans which may include coordination of demolition, stabilization and vibration
monitoring plans;
Prepare risk management plans;Prepare risk management plans;Prepare risk management plans;
Facilitate the overseeing of conservation works and provide consultation as needed.Facilitate the overseeing of conservation works and provide consultation as needed.Facilitate the overseeing
of conservation works and provide consultation as needed.
A
Salvage and Documentation Plans Salvage and Documentation Plans Salvage and Documentation Plans
Complete Complete Complete necessary necessary necessary fieldwork to document and identify salvageable items;fieldwork to document and identify salvageable items;fieldwork to document
and identify salvageable items;
Coordinate arCoordinate arCoordinate archichichitectural drawings as necessarytectural drawings as necessarytectural drawings as necessary;;;
Develop plan Develop plan Develop plan for the for the for the extraction, stoextraction, stoextraction, storage and rerage and rerage and re-use of salvageable material.
Cultural Heritage Cultural Heritage Cultural Heritage Screenings, Assessment Screenings, Assessment Screenings, Assessment and Baseline Condition Reportsand Baseline Condition Reportsand
Baseline Condition Reports
CompleteCompleteComplete screening screening screening based on the based on the based on the MCM’s CriteriaMCM’s CriteriaMCM’s Criteria
R
...
Prepare a dPrepare a dPrepare a description of the existing baseline cultural heritage conditionsescription of the existing baseline cultural heritage conditionsescription of the existing
baseline cultural heritage conditions;
Identification of potential projectdentification of potential projectdentification of potential project-specific impacts and recommendations of preliminary mitigation measures.
Heritage Conservation DistrictHeritage Conservation DistrictHeritage Conservation DistrictStudies and Plans
Undertaking preliminary review of Undertaking preliminary review of Undertaking preliminary review of historic contextand completing historical research;
D
Conduct and inventory of existing resources within the Study Area;
Classifying the inventory of existing contributing resources within the Study Areaand proposed HCD boundary;
Prepare policies and guidelines appropriate for the proposed HCD;
Facilitate public consultation including consultation with the municipal heritage committeefor the Study and Plan.
3
Interpretation Plans
Prepare commemorative text to commemorate the cultural heritage value of the site (s);
Design the layout of the interpretative panel;
Design the integration of interpretative panels and other interpretativefeatures (i.e. art installation, landscaping).
Selected Project Experience
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessments
386 Wilcox Street, Hamilton (Former Stelco Site)
Promenade at Clifton Hill, Niagara Falls (Niagara Parks Commission)
16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener (Former Economical Insurance Building)
Peterborough Lift Lock and Trent-Severn Waterway (TSW), National Historic Sites, Development for 380 ArmourSevern Waterway (TSW), National Historic Sites, Development for 380 ArmourSevern
Waterway (TSW), National Historic Sites, Development for 380 Armour
Road, City of Peterborough
47 and 67 Village Drive, Kingston
Middlesex County Court House, National Historic Site, for development at 50 King StreetMiddlesex County Court House, National Historic Site, for development at 50 King StreetMiddlesex
County Court House, National Historic Site, for development at 50 King Street
McDougall Cottage and National Historic Site, for development at 93 Grand Avenue South, City of KitchenerMcDougall Cottage and National Historic Site, for development at 93 Grand Avenue
South, City of KitchenerMcDougall Cottage and National Historic Site, for development at 93 Grand Avenue South, City of Kitchener
City of Waterloo Former Post Office, Development for 35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo, Phase II41 King Street North, City of Waterloo, Phase II41 King Street North, City of
Waterloo, Phase II
Consumers’ Gas Station B, Development for 450 Eastern Avenue, City of TorontoConsumers’ Gas Station B, Development for 450 Eastern Avenue, City of TorontoConsumers’ Gas Station B, Development
for 450 Eastern Avenue, City of Toronto
290 MacPherson Avenue, Hydro Station, Toronto, Ontario, Hydro Station, Toronto, Ontario, Hydro Station, Toronto, Ontario
82 Weber Street and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener82 Weber Street and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener82 Weber Street and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener
T
39 Wellington Street West, City of Brampton
543 Ridout Street North, City of London
34 Manley Street, Village of Ayr, Township of North Dumfries34 Manley Street, Village of Ayr, Township of North Dumfries34 Manley Street, Village of Ayr, Township of North Dumfries
Quinte’s Isle Campark, 558 Welbanks Road, Prince Edward County (OLT)Quinte’s Isle Campark, 558 Welbanks Road, Prince Edward County (OLT)Quinte’s Isle Campark, 558 Welbanks Road, Prince
Edward County (OLT)
174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (OLT)Collingwood (OLT)Collingwood (OLT)
45 Duke Street, City of Kitchener
383-385 Pearl Street, City of Burlington385 Pearl Street, City of Burlington385 Pearl Street, City of Burlington
F
St. Patrick’s Catholic Elementary School, (SPCES), 20 East Avenue South, City of HamiltonSt. Patrick’s Catholic Elementary School, (SPCES), 20 East Avenue South, City of HamiltonSt.
Patrick’s Catholic Elementary School, (SPCES), 20 East Avenue South, City of Hamilton
250 Allendale Road, City of Cambridge250 Allendale Road, City of Cambridge250 Allendale Road, City of Cambridge
249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan
1395 Main Street, City of1395 Main Street, City of1395 Main Street, City ofCambridgeCambridgeCambridge
10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham
10159 McCowan Road, Markham (OLTan Road, Markham (OLTan Road, Markham (OLT)))
A
Cultural Heritage Screenings and Cultural Heritage Study: Existing Conditions and Preliminary Impact ltural Heritage Screenings and Cultural Heritage Study: Existing Conditions and Preliminary
Impact ltural Heritage Screenings and Cultural Heritage Study: Existing Conditions and Preliminary Impact
Assessment
Kelso Conservation Area, Halton CountyKelso Conservation Area, Halton CountyKelso Conservation Area, Halton County
5th Side Road, County Road 53, Simcoe County5th Side Road, County Road 53, Simcoe County5th Side Road, County Road 53, Simcoe County
Waterdown Trunk Watermain Twinning Project, City of HamiltonWaterdown Trunk Watermain Twinning Project, City of HamiltonWaterdown Trunk Watermain Twinning Project, City of Hamilton
West Caledon TraWest Caledon TraWest Caledon Transmission Main and Storage Facilitnsmission Main and Storage Facilitnsmission Main and Storage Facility Class EA Screening Report
R
Napanee Napanee Napanee Battery Battery Battery Energy Storage Energy Storage Energy Storage SystemSystemSystem(BESS)Project Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Cultural Heritage Evaluation ReportsCultural Heritage Evaluation ReportsCultural Heritage Evaluation Reports
200 Collip200 Collip200 Collip Circle, Circle, Circle, Western University, London, OntarioWestern University, London, OntarioWestern University, London, Ontario
52 King Street North, City of Kitchener52 King Street North, City of Kitchener52 King Street North, City of Kitchener
Sarnia Collegiate Institute and Technical School (SCITS), 275 Wellington, City of Sarnia (Municipal contingencySarnia Collegiate Institute and Technical School (SCITS), 275 Wellington,
City of Sarnia (Municipal contingencySarnia Collegiate Institute and Technical School (SCITS), 275 Wellington, City of Sarnia (Municipal contingency
D
study)
10536 McCowan Road, City of Markham
Former Burns Presbyterian Church, 155 Main Street, Town of Erin (Designation Report)
Former St. Paul’s Anglican Church, 23 Dover Street, Town of Otterville, Norwich Township (OLT)
6170 Fallsview Boulevard, City of Niagara Falls
4
Conservation Plans and Temporary Protection Plans
37-43 Mill StreetWest, Elora, Ontario
City of Waterloo Former Post Office, 35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo
82 Weber Street East, City of Kitchener
87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener(Awarded a municipal award)
107 Young Street, City of Kitchener
1395 Main Street, City of Kitchener
10379 & 10411 Kennedy Road, City of Markham
16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener
12 & 54 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener
45 Duke Street, City of Kitchener
82 Weber Street West and 87 Scott Street, City of Kitchener
660 Sunningdale Road, London
Documentation and Salvage Reports
Gaslight District, 64 Grand Avenue South, City of Cambridge
16-20 Queen Street North, City of Kitchener
57 Lakeport Road City of St. Catharines
242-262 Queen Street South, City of Kitchener
721 Franklin Boulevard, City of Cambridge
T
Heritage Permit Applications
16-20 Queen Street North, Kitchener
43 Mill Street West, Elora
35-41 King Street North, City of Waterloo (Old Post Office), Phase II (alteration to building with a municipal41 King Street North, City of Waterloo (Old Post Office), Phase II (alteration
to building with a municipal41 King Street North, City of Waterloo (Old Post Office), Phase II (alteration to building with a municipal
heritage easement, Section 37, OHA)heritage easement, Section 37, OHA)heritage easement, Section 37, OHA)
F
50-56 Weber Street West & 107 Young 56 Weber Street West & 107 Young 56 Weber Street West & 107 Young Street, City of Kitchener (demolition and new construction within HCD)Street, City
of Kitchener (demolition and new construction within HCD)Street, City of Kitchener (demolition and new construction within HCD)
30-40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener (new construction within HCD)40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener (new construction within HCD)40 Margaret Avenue, City of Kitchener (new construction
within HCD)
249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan (alteration within HCD)249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan (alteration within HCD)249 Clarence Street, City of Vaughan (alteration within HCD)
174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (demolition within HCD)174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (demolition within HCD)174 St. Paul Street, Town of Collingwood (demolition within
HCD)
Heritage Conservation District/ Heritage Character Studyritage Conservation District/ Heritage Character Studyritage Conservation District/ Heritage Character Study
A
Melville StreetStreetStreetHeritage Conservation District StudyHeritage Conservation District StudyHeritage Conservation District Study
Stouffville Heritage Conservation District StudyStouffville Heritage Conservation District StudyStouffville Heritage Conservation District Study
Elgin, Central and Memorial Neighbourhoods, Municipality of ClaringtonElgin, Central and Memorial Neighbourhoods, Municipality of ClaringtonElgin, Central and Memorial Neighbourhoods,
Municipality of Clarington
Town of Aurora Heritage Register UpdateTown of Aurora Heritage Register UpdateTown of Aurora Heritage Register Update
R
D
Education
Willowbank School of
Christy
Restoration Arts
Diploma in Heritage Conservation
2024
Messors Field School
Kirwan
Art Conservation and Cultural
Heritage Landscapes Workshop
BA, Dipl., CAHP-Intern
Completed
2023
Christy is a Heritage Planner with MHBC Christy is a Heritage Planner with MHBC Christy is a Heritage Planner with MHBC whowhowhojoined the firm in 2023.joined the firm in 2023.joined
the firm in 2023.She
holds a Diploma in Heritage Conservation from the Willowbank School of holds a Diploma in Heritage Conservation from the Willowbank School of holds a Diploma in Heritage Conservation
from the Willowbank School of
University of California: Santa
Restoration Arts and a Bachelor’s Degree in History from the University of Restoration Arts and a Bachelor’s Degree in History from the University of Restoration Arts and a Bachelor’s
Degree in History from the University of
Cruz
with Department with Department with Department
California: Santa Cruz where she graduated California: Santa Cruz where she graduated California: Santa Cruz where she graduated
Bachelor of Arts in History
2010
Honours and College Honours. Christy has experience in research and Honours and College Honours. Christy has experience in research and Honours and College Honours. Christy has experience
in research and
report writing for both public and private sector clients. She has completed report writing for both public and private sector clients. She has completed report writing for both public
and private sector clients. She has completed
historical research, inventory work, and evaluation on a variety of projects, historical research, inventory work, and evaluation on a variety of projects, historical research, inventory
work, and evaluation on a variety of projects,
Professional Associations
including culturincluding culturincluding cultural heritage al heritage al heritage landscapes, landscapes, landscapes, cultural heritage cultural heritage cultural heritage evaluation
evaluation evaluation reports,
TTTTT
andheritageheritageheritageimpact assessments. impact assessments. impact assessments. She currently serves on the Provincial She currently serves on the Provincial She currently serves
on the Provincial
InternMember,
Board of Directors of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario.Board of Directors of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario.Board of Directors of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario.
CanadianAssociation of
Heritage Professionals (CAHP)
Prior to joining MHBC, Christy gained experience as a Heritage Intern for Prior to joining MHBC, Christy gained experience as a Heritage Intern for Prior to joining MHBC, Christy gained
experience as a Heritage Intern for
the Town of Grimsby. She has also received handsthe Town of Grimsby. She has also received handsthe Town of Grimsby. She has also received hands-on training from the
Provincial Board Directorat Large
Messors Field School in art and monument restoration and previously Messors Field School in art and monument restoration and previously Messors Field School in art and monument restoration
and previously
and Education Committee Member, FFFFF
worked in the skilled trades restoring heritworked in the skilled trades restoring heritworked in the skilled trades restoring heritage buildings and fine furniture.
Architectural Conservancy of
Ontario (ACO)
Professional HistoryProfessional HistoryProfessional History
Emerging Professional Member,
Heritage PlannerHeritage PlannerHeritage Planner, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning , MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning , MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson
Planning
International Council on
Limited Limited Limited
Monuments and Sites (ICOMOSICOMOS) )
(20(20(20232323 – – – PresentPresentPresent) ) )
AAAAA
Member,
Heritage Carpentry ApprenticeHeritage Carpentry ApprenticeHeritage Carpentry Apprentice, Bruce Chambers Period Furniture
Canadian Association for Canadian Association for
Ltd.Ltd.Ltd.
Conservation of Cultural Conservation of Cultural
(2023)(2023)(2023)
Property(CAC)(CAC)
Heritage Heritage Heritage Intern, Town of Grimsby
(2023)(2023)(2023)
Heritage Contractor, DJ McRae Heritage Restoration
RRRRR
(2022)
Contact
540 Bingemans Centre Dr540 Bingemans Centre Driveive
Kitchener, ONN2B 3X9N2B 3X9
DDDDD
T: 519 5763650
ckirwan@mhbcplan.com
www.mhbcplan.com
2
Project Experience
Cultural Heritage Landscapes
Doctor’s Lane, King City and Old King Road, Nobleton, Township of King
Municipal Heritage Inventories
Township of Tiny, 31 properties
City of Barrie, 13 properties
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessments
43 Mill Street West, Elora
7631 Creditview Road, Brampton
473 Ontario Street, Cobourg
230 North Centre Road, London
3563 Bostwick Road, London
1930-1934 Sideroad 5, Bradford West Gwillimbury
260 Main Street West, Grimsby
T
185 Third Street, Collingwood
228 McNeilly Road, Hamilton
1069 Highway 8, Hamilton
119 Sideroad 19, Fergus
Mount Zion United Church, 473 Ridgewood Crescent, LondonMount Zion United Church, 473 Ridgewood Crescent, LondonMount Zion United Church, 473 Ridgewood Crescent, London
F
66 Banfield Street, Paris
1940 Fischer-Hallman Road, KitchenerHallman Road, KitchenerHallman Road, Kitchener
141 Laurel Street, Cambridge141 Laurel Street, Cambridge141 Laurel Street, Cambridge
5480 Major Mackenzie Drive, Markham5480 Major Mackenzie Drive, Markham5480 Major Mackenzie Drive, Markham
193, 195, 197 & 199 College AvenueCollege AvenueCollege Avenue, London, London, London
63 Courtland Avenue East, Kitchener63 Courtland Avenue East, Kitchener63 Courtland Avenue East, Kitchener
300-306 King Street West, Hamilton306 King Street West, Hamilton306 King Street West, Hamilton
A
35 Elgin Street, Collingwood35 Elgin Street, Collingwood35 Elgin Street, Collingwood
743 Richmond Street, London743 Richmond Street, London743 Richmond Street, London
11 Roy Street & 68 Queen Street North, Kitchener11 Roy Street & 68 Queen Street North, Kitchener11 Roy Street & 68 Queen Street North, Kitchener
145145145---152 Central Avenue, London152 Central Avenue, London152 Central Avenue, London
96 Main Street East, Hamilton96 Main Street East, Hamilton96 Main Street East, Hamilton
273 Main Street North, Brampton273 Main Street North, Brampton273 Main Street North, Brampton
R
The London Children’s Museum, 21 Wharncliffe Road South, LondonThe London Children’s Museum, 21 Wharncliffe Road South, LondonThe London Children’s Museum, 21 Wharncliffe Road South,
London
531531531Talbot Street, 535Talbot Street, 535Talbot Street, 535---537 Talbot Street/105 Kent Street, 101 Kent Street, London537 Talbot Street/105 Kent Street, 101 Kent Street, London537
Talbot Street/105 Kent Street, 101 Kent Street, London
Cultural Heritage Evaluation ReportsCultural Heritage Evaluation ReportsCultural Heritage Evaluation Reports
8 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby8 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby8 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby
12 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby12 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby12 St Andrews Avenue, Grimsby
D
934322 Airport Road, Mono
986 Powerline Road, Brant
53 St. Laurent Drive, Richmond Hill
Conservation Plans
3
18 Portland Street, Toronto
19 East Mill Street, Elora
Documentation & Salvage Plans
3078 Regional Road 56, Binbrook, Hamilton
5515 Garrard Road, Whitby
Heritage Assessments for Infrastructure Projects and Environmental AssessmentsHeritage Assessments for Infrastructure Projects and Environmental AssessmentsHeritage Assessments for Infrastructure
Projects and Environmental Assessments
Edgerton Road Municipal Bridge No. 11, Blackstock, Township of Scugog
Warminster Sideroad, Township of Oro-Medonte
Shoreline Drive, Township of Oro-Medonte
Heritage Permit Applications
43 Mill Street West, Elora
7631 Creditview Road, Brampton
2051 Davis Drive, Whitchurch-Stouffville
T
Heritage By-law Peer Reviews
St. Mary's Ukrainian Catholic Church, 3625 Cawthra R3625 Cawthra R3625 Cawthra Roaoaoad, Mississaugad, Mississaugad, Mississauga
Trinity Anglican Church, 26 Stavebank Road, MississaugaTrinity Anglican Church, 26 Stavebank Road, MississaugaTrinity Anglican Church, 26 Stavebank Road, Mississauga
New Apostolic Church, 160 Margaret Avenue, KitchenerNew Apostolic Church, 160 Margaret Avenue, KitchenerNew Apostolic Church, 160 Margaret Avenue, Kitchener
2 Guelph Street, Georgetown, Halton Hills2 Guelph Street, Georgetown, Halton Hills2 Guelph Street, Georgetown, Halton Hills
Hands-On Conservation Projects
F
St. Paul's Anglican Church, Coulson’s Hill, Bradford West Gwillimbury, OntarioSt. Paul's Anglican Church, Coulson’s Hill, Bradford West Gwillimbury, OntarioSt. Paul's Anglican Church,
Coulson’s Hill, Bradford West Gwillimbury, Ontario
o Restoration and painting of 1887 Gothic doorsRestoration and painting of 1887 Gothic doorsRestoration and painting of 1887 Gothic doors
Byzantine Rupestrian Cave Frescoes, Alta Murgia, ItalyRupestrian Cave Frescoes, Alta Murgia, ItalyRupestrian Cave Frescoes, Alta Murgia, Italy
o Mechanical frescoe cleaningMechanical frescoe cleaningMechanical frescoe cleaning
o Cellulose poultice frescoe cleaningCellulose poultice frescoe cleaningCellulose poultice frescoe cleaning
A
o Plaster infilling and consolidationPlaster infilling and consolidationPlaster infilling and consolidation
Burwash Hall, University of Toronto, Toronto, OntarioBurwash Hall, University of Toronto, Toronto, OntarioBurwash Hall, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
o Stone masonry conservationStone masonry conservationStone masonry conservation
ooo Window installationWindow installationWindow installation
Cathedral of St. Alban the Martyr, Toronto, OntarioCathedral of St. Alban the Martyr, Toronto, OntarioCathedral of St. Alban the Martyr, Toronto, Ontario
ooo Cathedral window woodwork restorationCathedral window woodwork restorationCathedral window woodwork restoration
16 Elm Avenue, Branksome Hall, Toronto, Ontario16 Elm Avenue, Branksome Hall, Toronto, Ontario16 Elm Avenue, Branksome Hall, Toronto, Ontario
R
ooo Brick masonry restorationBrick masonry restorationBrick masonry restoration
Bishop Strachan School, Toronto, OntarioBishop Strachan School, Toronto, OntarioBishop Strachan School, Toronto, Ontario
ooo Window restoration and reglazingWindow restoration and reglazingWindow restoration and reglazing
St. Mark's Cemetery, NiagaraSt. Mark's Cemetery, NiagaraSt. Mark's Cemetery, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario
o Headstone monument conservationHeadstone monument conservationHeadstone monument conservation
Willowbank National Historic Site, Queenston, OntarioWillowbank National Historic Site, Queenston, OntarioWillowbank National Historic Site, Queenston, Ontario
o Decorative plaster repairDecorative plaster repairDecorative plaster repair
D
o Wood window restoration
o Historic flooring restoration
o Stonework crack repair
o Historic painting
Education
Fanshawe College
Paul Jae
GIS and Urban Planning
2020
University of Seoul, South Korea
Bachelor of Urban Planning
Woong Leeong Leeong Lee
2005
BE
Contact
Paul Jae Woong Lee, a Technician with MHBC, joined the firm in 2022 and Paul Jae Woong Lee, a Technician with MHBC, joined the firm in 2022 and Paul Jae Woong Lee, a Technician with
MHBC, joined the firm in 2022 and
540 Bingemans Centre Drive,
provides a variety of technical design and drafting services for public and provides a variety of technical design and drafting services for public and provides a variety of technical
design and drafting services for public and
Unit #200
private sector clients.
Kitchener, ON
N2B 3X9
Prior to working for MHBC, for MHBC, for MHBC, Paul Paul Paul receivedreceivedreceivedhis GIShis GIShis GIS& Urban Planning & Urban Planning & Urban Planning
Diploma from Fanshawe Diploma from Fanshawe Diploma from Fanshawe College in 2020 and worked as a draft technician College in 2020 and worked as a draft technician College in 2020 and
worked as a draft technician
T: (519) 576-3650
at a consulting firm.at a consulting firm.at a consulting firm.
C: 226-868-3443
pjwlee@mhbcplan.com
TTT
Before Paul came to Canada, he also Before Paul came to Canada, he also Before Paul came to Canada, he also receivedreceivedreceiveda bachelora bachelora bachelor’s degree in urban
www.mhbcplan.com
planning from planning from planning from the University of Seoul and worked as an urban planner in the University of Seoul and worked as an urban planner in the University of Seoul
and worked as an urban planner in
Korea. He is in the process of becoming a member of the Canadian Korea. He is in the process of becoming a member of the Canadian Korea. He is in the process of becoming a member of
the Canadian
Association of Certified Planning Technicians.Association of Certified Planning Technicians.Association of Certified Planning Technicians.
FFF
Professional HistoryProfessional HistoryProfessional History
Planning Planning Planning & Design Technician& Design Technician& Design Technician, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton
Clarkson Planning Limited Clarkson Planning Limited Clarkson Planning Limited (((2022 – Present)
Drafting TechnicianDrafting TechnicianDrafting Technician, GeoPro Consulting Limited (2020 – 2021)
GIS Technician (CoGIS Technician (CoGIS Technician (Co-Op Student), Aamjiwnaang First Nation (2019)
AAA
PlannerPlannerPlanner, , , Dongbu Engineering Co.Dongbu Engineering Co.Dongbu Engineering Co., Ltd. (South Korea) (2016-2017)
PlannerPlannerPlanner, JU Engineering Co., Ltd. (South Korea) (2014-2016)
PlannerPlannerPlanner, DOHWA Engineering Co., Ltd. (South Korea) (2005-2014)
RRR
DDD
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8924
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: June 9, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-279
SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 14 Irvin Street under Part IV of the
Ontario Heritage Act
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to
publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 14
Irvin Street as being of cultural heritage value or interest.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice
of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 14 Irvin Street under
Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
An updated Statement of Significance on the pr
taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on April 1, 2025. On this meeting date, the
Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the
cultural heritage value or interest of 14 Irvin Street be recognized, and designation
pursued.
The key finding of this report is that the property municipally addressed as 14 Irvin
Street 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
rdth
correspondence to the property owners dated May 23, 2023, February 27, 2025,
nd
and April 2, 2025. No response from the property owner was received. In addition,
engagement includes consulting with Heritage Kitchener and, 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.
BACKGROUND:
Figure 1: Location Map of Subject Property
th
14 Irvin Street is a two-and-a-half storey late 19 century brick house, currently used as a
multi-unit dwelling. The house is situated on a 0.14 acre parcel of land located on the east
side of Irvin Street between Frederick Street and Scott Street in the Central Frederick
Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal
resource that contributes to the heritage value of the property is the house.
A full assessment of 14 Irvin Street has been completed and included a field evaluation and
detailed archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets the
st
heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on April 1, 2025. On this
meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario
Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 14 Irvin Street 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
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. An update letter reminding property owners of the
th
ongoing work was circulated on February 27, 2025. After designation was recommended
by the Heritage Kitchener Committee in April 2025 the owner of 14 Irvin Street was
nd
contacted a third time via a letter dated April 2, 2025. This letter invited the property owner
response from the property owners was received by City staff.
Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate,
Owners will be contacted a fourth 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
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
value and interest.
14 Irvin Street is recognized for its design/physical and contextual values. It satisfies three
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.
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 No
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
The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example
of the Queen Anne architectural style and is in good condition. The house exemplifies
several distinctive elements of the Queen Anne style, including two-and-a-half storey height,
multi-pitched roof life with dormer and gables, asymmetrical façade, the use of varied
materials and decorative elements, and a front verandah. The curved corner and curved
glass window are unique features not typical of the Queen Anne style which contribute to
the design value of the house.
The house is two-and-a-half storeys in height and is made of buff brick with a stone
foundation. The roof is a modified hip, with a gable at the front, a five-sided dormer to the
left, and a smaller gable to the right. It has a plain fascia and soffit, but the frieze has a dentil
row along the top and is moulded along the bottom. The front gable is faced with scalloped
shingles.
The windows on the house are a mix of single-hung and casement with flat tops, brick soldier
course heading and stone sills. Some windows feature rounded tops, including one on the
five-sided dormer on the northwest façade and a couple on the ground and second floors
on the southeast façade. Those on the southeast façade have brick voussoirs capped with
simple decorative masonry elements. There is a two-storey bay window under the five-sided
dormer on the northwest side façade.
To the left of the front façade, the brick wall of the house curves to become the side wall,
creating a curved corner. On each storey of the curved wall is a large, curved glass window,
another unique feature. The main roof line and the verandah also follow this curve. Many
Queen Anne style homes feature corner turrets or towers, but the continuation of a straight
wall into a curved corner is unusual and contributes significantly to the design value of the
house.
The unique building footprint and architectural features are also present at the neighbouring
18 Irvin Street. It is likely that they were built at the same time and by the same builder. The
two homes have a relationship with each other which will be further discussed in the
contextual value section.
Figure 2: Front and Southeast Side Facade of Subject Property
Figure 3: Northwest Side Facade of Subject Property with Unique Curved Side and
Window
Contextual Value
The contextual value relates to the contribution that the house makes to defining,
maintaining and supporting the Irvin Street streetscape and the Central Frederick
Neighbourhood. It also has a unique relationship with the neighbouring 18 Irvin Street.
The Central Frederick Neighbourhood is largely comprised of late-nineteenth century low-
density residences. There is a limited range of architectural styles present, including Queen
Anne, Arts and Crafts, and Berlin Vernacular. Distinctive architectural features of the
residences in this neighbourhood include attic gabled roofs, decorative trim, brick
construction, porches, and other details associated with the era in which they were
developed. The houses in the Central Frederick neighbourhood are notable for the
consistency of their scale, materials, features, massing and surrounding landscapes. The
features unique to each dwelling, however, allow for an orderly sense of individuality among
the houses. The house at 14 Irvin Street exemplifies these characteristics. The height,
massing, materiality, and setback of the house are consistent with others on the street,
contributing to the uniformity. However, its distinctive curved wall and window are unique
features which contribute to a sense of individuality from the majority of the surrounding
architecture.
The subject property is physically, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. It is
located in situ and, although it is now containing multiple dwelling unit, the exterior of the
house has undergone little alteration as a result of this change of use and continues to
contribute to the residential character of Irvin Street and of the Central Frederick
Neighbourhood.
Figure 4: View of Subject Property Looking North Down Irvin Street
14 Irvin Street also has a unique contextual relationship to the neighbouring 18 Irvin Street.
The two houses have the same footprint, including the distinctive curved wall. They share
many of the heritage attributes listed below. From the archival research conducted, it is very
likely that the two houses were built at the same time and by the same family (the Roos
family). The unique relationship between these two houses contributes significantly to the
overall contextual value of 14 Irvin Street.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 14 Irvin Street resides in the following attributes:
All elements related to the Queen Anne architectural style of the house, including:
o Two-and-a-half height of the house;
o irregular hip roof;
o Massing including the two-storey bay with five-sided hip roof dormer and
curved corner;
o Buff brick construction;
o Front verandah;
o Second-storey balcony;
o Plain fascia and soffit;
o Moulded frieze with dentils;
o Gables with scalloped shingles;
o Window openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; and
o 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 Irvin Street streetscape.
o Contextual value in association with 18 Irvin Street
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM
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
rdth
invited to consult via three separate letters dated May 23, 2023, February 27, 2025, and
nd
April 2, 2025. As discussed in the Background section of this report, no response from
the Owner was received.
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
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 April 2025 Update (DSD-2025-108)
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Statement of Significance for 14 Irvin Street.
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
14 IRVIN STREET
Summary of Significance
Design/Physical Value Social Value
Historical Value
Economic Value
Contextual Value Environmental Value
Municipal Address: 14 Irvin Street
Legal Description: PLAN 32 LOT 9
Year Built: c. 1894
Architectural Style: Queen Anne
Original Owner: Unknown
Original Use: Residential
Condition: Good
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
th
14 Irvin Street is a two-and-a-half storey late 19 century brick house built in the Queen Anne
architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.14 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Irvin
Street between Frederick Street and Scott Street in the Central Frederick Planning Community of the
City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage
value of the property is the house.
Heritage Value
14 Irvin Street is recognized for its design/physical and contextual value.
Design/Physical Value
The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example of the Queen
Anne architectural style and is in good condition. The house exemplifies several distinctive elements of
the Queen Anne style, including two-and-a-half storey height, multi-pitched roof life with dormer and
gables, asymmetrical façade, the use of varied materials and decorative elements, and a front
verandah. The curved corner and curved glass window are unique features not typical of the Queen
Anne style which contribute to the design value of the house.
The house is two-and-a-half storeys in height and is made of buff brick with a stone foundation. The
roof is a modified hip, with a gable at the front, a five-sided dormer to the left, and a smaller gable to
the right. It has a plain fascia and soffit, but the frieze has a dentil row along the top and is moulded
along the bottom. The front gable is faced with scalloped shingles.
The windows on the house are a mix of single-hung and casement with flat tops, brick soldier course
heading and stone sills. Some windows feature rounded tops, including one on the five-sided dormer
on the northwest façade and a couple on the ground and second floors on the southeast façade. Those
on the southeast façade have brick voussoirs capped with simple decorative masonry elements. There
is a two-storey bay window under the five-sided dormer on the northwest side façade.
To the left of the front façade, the brick wall of the house curves to become the side wall, creating a
curved corner. On each storey of the curved wall is a large, curved glass window, another unique
feature. The main roof line and the verandah also follow this curve. Many Queen Anne style homes
feature corner turrets or towers, but the continuation of a straight wall into a curved corner is unusual
and contributes significantly to the design value of the house.
The unique building footprint and architectural features are also present at the neighbouring 18 Irvin
Street. It is likely that they were built at the same time and by the same builder. The two homes have
a relationship with each other which will be further discussed in the contextual value section.
Contextual Value
The contextual value relates to the contribution that the house makes to defining, maintaining and
supporting the Irvin Street streetscape and the Central Frederick Neighbourhood. It also has a unique
relationship with the neighbouring 18 Irvin Street.
The Central Frederick Neighbourhood is largely comprised of late-nineteenth century low-density residences. There is a
limited range of architectural styles present, including Queen Anne, Arts and Crafts, and Berlin Vernacular. Distinctive
architectural features of the residences in this neighbourhood include attic gabled roofs, decorative trim, brick construction,
porches, and other details associated with the era in which they were developed. The houses in the Central Frederick
neighbourhood are notable for the consistency of their scale, materials, features, massing and surrounding landscapes.
The features unique to each dwelling, however, allow for an orderly sense of individuality among the houses. The house at
14 Irvin Street exemplifies these characteristics. The height, massing, materiality, and setback of the house are consistent
with others on the street, contributing to the uniformity. However, its distinctive curved wall and window are unique features
which contribute to a sense of individuality from the majority of the surrounding architecture.
The subject property is physically, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. It is located in situ
and, although it is now containing multiple dwelling unit, the exterior of the house has undergone little
alteration as a result of this change of use and continues to contribute to the residential character of
Irvin Street and of the Central Frederick Neighbourhood.
14 Irvin Street also has a unique contextual relationship to the neighbouring 18 Irvin Street. The two
houses have the same footprint, including the distinctive curved wall. They share many of the heritage
attributes listed below. From the archival research conducted, it is very likely that the two houses were
built at the same time and by the same family (the Roos family). The unique relationship between these
two houses contributes significantly to the overall contextual value of 14 Irvin Street.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 14 Irvin Street resides in the following attributes:
All elements related to the Queen Anne architectural style of the house, including:
o Two-and-a-half height of the house;
o irregular hip roof;
o Massing including the two-storey bay with five-sided hip roof dormer and curved corner;
o B uff brick construction;
o F ront verandah;
o Second-storey balcony;
o P lain fascia and soffit;
o M oulded frieze with dentils;
o G ables with scalloped shingles;
o W indow openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; and
o S tone 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
Irvin Street streetscape.
o Contextual value in association with 18 Irvin Street
Photographs
Front Elevation (West Façade)
Front & Side Elevation (Northwest Façade)
Fron Elevations of 14 and 14 Irvin Street (West Façades)
Side Elevations of 14 and 14 Irvin Street (Southeast Façades)
Side Elevations of 14 and 14 Irvin Street (Northwest Façades)
CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION
FORM
Address: 14 Irvin Street Recorder: Ella Francis
Description: Date: March 17, 2025
(date of construction, architectural style, etc)
Photographs Attached:
Front Facade Left Façade Right Façade Rear Facade Details Setting
Recorder Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff
Designation Criteria
Committee
Њ͵ ŷźƭ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ ğ ƩğƩĻͲ ǒƓźƨǒĻͲ
ƩĻƦƩĻƭĻƓƷğƷźǝĻ ƚƩ ĻğƩƌǤ
ĻǣğƒƦƌĻ ƚŅ ğ ƭƷǤƌĻͲ ƷǤƦĻͲ
ĻǣƦƩĻƭƭźƚƓͲ ƒğƷĻƩźğƌ ƚƩ
ĭƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ ƒĻƷŷƚķ͵
Ћ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķźƭƦƌğǤƭ ğ ŷźŭŷ
ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ ĭƩğŅƷƭƒğƓƭŷźƦ ƚƩ
ğƩƷźƭƷźĭ ƒĻƩźƷ͵
Ќ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ğ
ŷźŭŷ ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ ƷĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ ƚƩ
ƭĭźĻƓƷźŅźĭ ğĭŷźĻǝĻƒĻƓƷ͵
* E.g. - constructed with a unique
material combination or use,
incorporates challenging
geometric designs etc.
Ѝ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ŷğƭ ķźƩĻĭƷ
ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźƚƓƭ ǞźƷŷ ğ ƷŷĻƒĻͲ
ĻǝĻƓƷͲ ĬĻƌźĻŅͲ ƦĻƩƭƚƓͲ
ğĭƷźǝźƷǤͲ ƚƩŭğƓźǩğƷźƚƓ ƚƩ
źƓƭƷźƷǒƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ źƭ ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ
Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
Ў͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ǤźĻƌķƭͲ ƚƩ ŷğƭ ƷŷĻ
ƦƚƷĻƓƷźğƌ Ʒƚ ǤźĻƌķͲ
źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ
ĭƚƓƷƩźĬǒƷĻƭ Ʒƚ ğƓ
ǒƓķĻƩƭƷğƓķźƓŭ ƚŅ ğ
ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ ƚƩ ĭǒƌƷǒƩĻ͵
* E.g - A commercial building
may provide an understanding of
how the economic development of
the City occured. Additional
archival work may be required.
Џ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ƚƩ
ƩĻŅƌĻĭƷƭ ƷŷĻ ǞƚƩƉ ƚƩ źķĻğƭ ƚŅ
ğƓ ğƩĭŷźƷĻĭƷͲ ğƩƷźƭƷͲ ĬǒźƌķĻƩͲ
ķĻƭźŭƓĻƩ ƚƩ ƷŷĻƚƩźƭƷ Ǟŷƚ źƭ
ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
А͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ źƒƦƚƩƷğƓƷ źƓ ķĻŅźƓźƓŭͲ
ƒğźƓƷğźƓźƓŭ ƚƩ ƭǒƦƦƚƩƷźƓŭ
ƷŷĻ ĭŷğƩğĭƷĻƩ ƚŅ ğƓ ğƩĻğ͵
* E.g. - It helps to define an
entrance point to a neighbourhood
or helps establish the (historic)
rural character of an area.
Б͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌƌǤͲ ŅǒƓĭƷźƚƓğƌƌǤͲ
ǝźƭǒğƌƌǤ ƚƩ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌƌǤ ƌźƓƉĻķ
Ʒƚ źƷƭ ƭǒƩƩƚǒƓķźƓŭƭ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
В͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ ğ ƌğƓķƒğƩƉ͵
*within the region, city or
neighborhood.
Notes Very similar to 18 Irvin Street
Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener
Committee
Interior: Is the interior
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
arrangement, finish, craftsmanship
and/or detail noteworthy?
Yes Yes
Completeness: Does this structure
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
have other original outbuildings,
notable landscaping or external
Yes Yes
features that complete the site?
Site Integrity: Does the structure
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
occupy its original site?
Yes Yes
* If relocated, is it relocated on its
original site, moved from another site,
etc.
Alterations: Does this building
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
retain most of its original
materials and design features?
Yes 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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
elements or features that should be
added to the heritage attribute list?
Yes Yes
Condition: Is the building in good
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
condition?
Yes Yes
*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 Yes N/A Unknown No Ye
Indigenous heritage and history?
Additional Research Required s
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 with
Additional Research Required
the property?
N/AUnknownNoYe
* Additional archival work may be
s
required.
Additional Research Required
Function: What is the present
Unknown Residential Unknown Residential C
function of the subject property?
Commercial ommercial
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 Yes N/A Unknown No Ye
the subject property contribute to
Additional Research Required s
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
Additional Research Required N/A Unknown No Ye
community of people?
s
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
If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up
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:
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8924
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: June 3, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-284
SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 18 Irvin Street under Part IV of the
Ontario Heritage Act
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to
publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 18
Irvin Street as being of cultural heritage value or interest.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice
of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 18 Irvin Street under
Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
An updated Statement of Significance on the proper
taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on April 1, 2025. On this meeting date, the
Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the
cultural heritage value or interest of 18 Irvin Street be recognized, and designation
pursued.
The key finding of this report is that the property municipally addressed as 18 Irvin
Street 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
rdth
correspondence to the property owners dated May 23, 2023, February 27, 2025,
nd
and April 2, 2025, 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 information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
th
Heritage Planning staff were contacted by the property owner on May 5, 2025
regarding the proposed designation. After discussion with staff and some further
th
consideration, the property owner indicated their support for designation on May 28,
2025. Heritage Planning staff confirmed again that the property owner was in support
nd
on June 2, 2025.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
Figure 1: Location Map of Subject Property
th
18 Irvin Street is a single-detached two-and-a-half storey late 19 century brick house,
currently used as a multiple-unit commercial building. The house is situated on a 0.14 acre
parcel of land located on the east side of Irvin Street between Frederick Street and Scott
Street in the Central Frederick Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the
Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value of the
property is the house.
A full assessment of 18 Irvin Street has been completed and included a field evaluation and
detailed archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property meets the
st
heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on April 1, 2025. On this
meeting date, the Committee recommended that pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario
Heritage Act, the cultural heritage value or interest of 18 Irvin Street be recognized, and
designationpursued. 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
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. An update
th
letter reminding property owners of the ongoing work was circulated on February 27, 2025.
After designation was recommended by the Heritage Kitchener Committee in April 2025 the
nd
owner of 18 Irvin Street was contacted a third time via a letter dated April 2, 2025. This
questions, or concerns.
th
A voicemail response from the Owner was received on May 5, 2025 inquiring about the
implications of designation and the impact it may have to planned work on the property.
Heritage Planning staff responded that same day, and after discussion the Owner indicated
that they would appreciate some time to further consider the proposal and identify any
th
potential further questions. On May 28, 2025, the Owner contacted Heritage Planning staff
again and indicated their support of the designation. This was confirmed through another
nd
phone call by Heritage Staff with the Owner on June 2, 2025.
Per standard procedure, should Council support the Notice of Intention to Designate,
Owners will be contacted a fourth 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
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 thes
value and interest.
18 Irvin Street is recognized for its design/physical and contextual values. It satisfies three
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.
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 No
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
The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example
of the Queen Anne architectural style and is in good condition. The house exemplifies
several distinctive elements of the Queen Anne style, including two-and-a-half storey height,
multi-pitched roof life with dormer and gables, asymmetrical façade, the use of varied
materials and decorative elements, and a front verandah. The curved corner and curved
glass window are unique features not typical of the Queen Anne style which contribute to
the design value of the house.
The house is two-and-a-half storeys in height and is made of buff brick with a stone
foundation. The roof is a modified hip, with a gable at the front, a five-sided dormer to the
left, and a smaller gable to the right. It has a plain fascia and soffit, but the frieze has a dentil
row along the top and is moulded along the bottom. The dormer and gables are faced with
scalloped shingles.
The windows are primarily single hung with flat tops, brick soldier-course headings and
stone sills. Some windows feature semi-arched tops, such as those on the five-sided dormer
on the northwest side façade and some on the first and second floor of the southeast façade.
Those on the southeast façade have brick voussoirs capped with simple decorative masonry
elements. There is a two-storey bay window under the five-sided dormer on the northwest
side façade.
To the left of the front façade, the brick wall of the house curves to become the side wall,
creating a distinctive corner. On each storey of the curved wall is a large, curved glass
window, another unique feature. The main roof line and the verandah also follow this curve.
Many Queen Anne style homes feature corner turrets or towers, but the continuation of a
straight wall into a curved corner is unusual and contributes significantly to the design value
of the house.
The unique building footprint and architectural features are also present at the neighbouring
14 Irvin Street. It is likely that they were built at the same time and by the same builder. The
two homes have a relationship with each other which will be further discussed in the
contextual value section.
Figure 2: Front Facade of Subject Property
Figure 4: Southeast Side Facade of Subject Property
Figure 3: Northwest Side Facade of Subject Property with Unique Curved Side
and Window
Contextual Value
The contextual value relates to the contribution that the house makes to defining,
maintaining and supporting the Irvin Street streetscapeas well as the surrounding Central
Frederick Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape. It also has a unique contextual
relationship with the neighbouring 14 Irvin Street.
The Central Frederick Neighbourhood is largely comprised of late-nineteenth century low-
density residences. There is a limited range of architectural styles present, including Queen
Anne, Arts and Crafts, and Berlin Vernacular. Distinctive architectural features of the
residences in this neighbourhood include attic gabled roofs, decorative trim, brick
construction, porches, and other details associated with the era in which they were
developed. The houses in the Central Frederick neighbourhood are notable for the
consistency of their scale, materials, features, massing and surrounding landscapes. The
features unique to each dwelling, however, allow for an orderly sense of individuality among
the houses. The house at 18 Irvin Street exemplifies these characteristics. The height,
massing, materiality, and setback of the house are consistent with others on the street,
contributing to the uniformity. However, its distinctive curved wall and window are unique
features which contribute to a sense of individuality from the majority of the surrounding
architecture.
The subject property is physically, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. It is
located in situ and, although it is now used as a multiple-unit commercial building, the
exterior of the house has undergone few alterations as a result of the change of use and
continues to contribute visually to the residential character of Irvin Street and of the Central
Frederick Neighbourhood.
Figure 5: View of Subject Property Looking North Down Irvin Street
18 Irvin Street also has a unique contextual relationship to the neighbouring 14 Irvin Street.
The two houses have the same footprint, including the distinctive curved wall. They share
almost all the heritage attributes listed below, with the exception of a front balcony, some
windows and the scalloped shingles on the side dormers which have been replaced with
different siding at 14 Irvin Street. From the archival research conducted, it is very likely that
the two houses were built at the same time and by the same family (the Roos family). The
unique relationship between these two houses contributes to the overall contextual value of
18 Irvin Street.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 18 Irvin Street resides in the following attributes:
All elements related to the Queen Anne architectural style of the house, including:
o Two-and-a-half height of the house;
o Irregular hip roof;
o Massing including the two-storey bay with five-sided hip roof dormer and
curved corner;
o Buff brick construction;
o Front verandah;
o Plain fascia and soffit;
o Moulded frieze with dentils;
o Gables with scalloped shingles;
o Window openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; and
o 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 Irvin Street streetscape; and
o Proximity to 14 Irvin Street.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM 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
rdth
invited to consult via three separate letters dated May 23, 2023, February 27, 2025, and
nd
April 2, 2025. As discussed in the Background section of this report, a response from the
thth
Owner was received on May 5, 2025, with further correspondence on May 28, 2025,
nd
and June 2, 2025. City Heritage Staff were able to answer the questions of the Owner
who later indicated their support of 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 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
nicipal
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 April 2025 Update (DSD-2025-108)
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Statement of Significance for 18 Irvin Street.
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
18 IRVIN STREET
Summary of Significance
Design/Physical Value Social Value
Historical Value
Economic Value
Contextual Value Environmental Value
Municipal Address: 18 Irvin Street
Legal Description: PLAN 32 LOT 10
Year Built: c. 1894
Architectural Style: Queen Anne
Original Owner: Unknown
Original Use: Residential
Condition: Good
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
th
18 Irvin Street is a two-and-a-half storey late 19 century brick house built in the Queen Anne
architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.14 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Irvin
Street between Frederick Street and Scott Street in the Central Frederick Planning Community of the
City of Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage
value of the property is the house.
Heritage Value
18 Irvin Street is recognized for its design/physical and contextual value.
Design/Physical Value
The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example of the Queen
Anne architectural style and is in good condition. The house exemplifies several distinctive elements of
the Queen Anne style, including two-and-a-half storey height, multi-pitched roof life with dormer and
gables, asymmetrical façade, the use of varied materials and decorative elements, and a front
verandah. The curved corner and curved glass window are unique features not typical of the Queen
Anne style which contribute to the design value of the house.
The house is two-and-a-half storeys in height and is made of buff brick with a stone foundation. The
roof is a modified hip, with a gable at the front, a five-sided dormer to the left, and a smaller gable to
the right. It has a plain fascia and soffit, but the frieze has a dentil row along the top and is moulded
along the bottom. The dormer and gables are faced with scalloped shingles.
The windows are primarily single hung with flat tops, brick soldier-course headings and stone sills.
Some windows feature semi-arched tops, such as those on the five-sided dormer on the northwest side
façade and some on the first and second floor of the southeast façade. Those on the southeast façade
have brick voussoirs capped with simple decorative masonry elements. There is a two-storey bay
window under the five-sided dormer on the northwest side façade.
To the left of the front façade, the brick wall of the house curves to become the side wall, creating a
distinctive corner. On each storey of the curved wall is a large, curved glass window, another unique
feature. The main roof line and the verandah also follow this curve. Many Queen Anne style homes
feature corner turrets or towers, but the continuation of a straight wall into a curved corner is unusual
and contributes significantly to the design value of the house.
The unique building footprint and architectural features are also present at the neighbouring 14 Irvin
Street. It is likely that they were built at the same time and by the same builder. The two homes have
a relationship with each other which will be further discussed in the contextual value section.
Contextual Value
The contextual value relates to the contribution that the house makes to defining, maintaining and
supporting the Irvin Street streetscape as well as the surrounding Central Frederick Neighbourhood
Cultural Heritage Landscape. It also has a unique contextual relationship with the neighbouring 14 Irvin
Street.
The Central Frederick Neighbourhood is largely comprised of late-nineteenth century low-density
residences. There is a limited range of architectural styles present, including Queen Anne, Arts and
Crafts, and Berlin Vernacular. Distinctive architectural features of the residences in this neighbourhood
include attic gabled roofs, decorative trim, brick construction, porches, and other details associated
with the era in which they were developed. The houses in the Central Frederick neighbourhood are
notable for the consistency of their scale, materials, features, massing and surrounding landscapes.
The features unique to each dwelling, however, allow for an orderly sense of individuality among the
houses. The house at 18 Irvin Street exemplifies these characteristics. The height, massing, materiality,
and setback of the house are consistent with others on the street, contributing to the uniformity.
However, its distinctive curved wall and window are unique features which contribute to a sense of
individuality.
The subject property is physically, visually and historically linked to its surroundings. It is located in situ
and has undergone little alteration. Although it is now used as a multiple-unit commercial building, the
exterior of the house has undergone few alterations as a result of the change of use and continues to
contribute visually to the residential character of Irvin Street and of the Central Frederick
Neighbourhood.
18 Irvin Street also has a unique contextual relationship to the neighbouring 14 Irvin Street. The two
houses have the same footprint, including the distinctive curved wall. They share almost all the heritage
attributes listed below, with the exception of a front balcony, some windows and the scalloped shingles
on the side dormers which have been replaced with different siding at 14 Irvin Street. From the archival
research conducted, it is very likely that the two houses were built at the same time and by the same
family (the Roos family). The unique relationship between these two houses contributes to the overall
contextual value of 18 Irvin Street.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 18 Irvin Street resides in the following attributes:
All elements related to the Queen Anne architectural style of the house, including:
o Two-and-a-half height of the house;
o Irregular hip roof;
o Massing including the two-storey bay with five-sided hip roof dormer and curved corner;
o Buff brick construction;
o Front verandah;
o Plain fascia and soffit;
o Moulded frieze with dentils;
o Gables with scalloped shingles;
o Window openings with brick voussoirs and stone sills; and
o 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
Irvin Street streetscape; and
o Proximity to 14 Irvin Street.
Photographs
Front Elevation (West Façade)
Front & Side Elevation (Northwest Façade)
Fron Elevations of 14 and 18 Irvin Street (West Façades)
Side Elevations of 14 and 18 Irvin Street (Southeast Façades)
Side Elevations of 14 and 18 Irvin Street (Northwest Façades)
CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION
FORM
Address: 18 Irvin Street Recorder: Ella Francis
Description: Queen Anne style single detached house c. 1894 Date: March 17, 2025
(date of construction, architectural style, etc)
Photographs Attached:
Front Facade Left Façade Right Façade Rear Facade Details Setting
Recorder Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff
Designation Criteria
Committee
Њ͵ ŷźƭ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ ğ ƩğƩĻͲ ǒƓźƨǒĻͲ
ƩĻƦƩĻƭĻƓƷğƷźǝĻ ƚƩ ĻğƩƌǤ
ĻǣğƒƦƌĻ ƚŅ ğ ƭƷǤƌĻͲ ƷǤƦĻͲ
ĻǣƦƩĻƭƭźƚƓͲ ƒğƷĻƩźğƌ ƚƩ
ĭƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ ƒĻƷŷƚķ͵
Ћ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķźƭƦƌğǤƭ ğ ŷźŭŷ
ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ ĭƩğŅƷƭƒğƓƭŷźƦ ƚƩ
ğƩƷźƭƷźĭ ƒĻƩźƷ͵
Ќ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ğ
ŷźŭŷ ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ ƷĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ ƚƩ
ƭĭźĻƓƷźŅźĭ ğĭŷźĻǝĻƒĻƓƷ͵
* E.g. - constructed with a unique
material combination or use,
incorporates challenging
geometric designs etc.
Ѝ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ŷğƭ ķźƩĻĭƷ
ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźƚƓƭ ǞźƷŷ ğ ƷŷĻƒĻͲ
ĻǝĻƓƷͲ ĬĻƌźĻŅͲ ƦĻƩƭƚƓͲ
ğĭƷźǝźƷǤͲ ƚƩŭğƓźǩğƷźƚƓ ƚƩ
źƓƭƷźƷǒƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ źƭ ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ
Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
Ў͵ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ǤźĻƌķƭͲ ƚƩ ŷğƭ ƷŷĻ
ƦƚƷĻƓƷźğƌ Ʒƚ ǤźĻƌķͲ
źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ
ĭƚƓƷƩźĬǒƷĻƭ Ʒƚ ğƓ
ǒƓķĻƩƭƷğƓķźƓŭ ƚŅ ğ
ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ ƚƩ ĭǒƌƷǒƩĻ͵
* E.g - A commercial building
may provide an understanding of
how the economic development of
the City occured. Additional
archival work may be required.
Џ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ
Yes Yes
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ƚƩ
ƩĻŅƌĻĭƷƭ ƷŷĻ ǞƚƩƉ ƚƩ źķĻğƭ ƚŅ
ğƓ ğƩĭŷźƷĻĭƷͲ ğƩƷźƭƷͲ ĬǒźƌķĻƩͲ
ķĻƭźŭƓĻƩ ƚƩ ƷŷĻƚƩźƭƷ Ǟŷƚ źƭ
ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
А͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ źƒƦƚƩƷğƓƷ źƓ ķĻŅźƓźƓŭͲ
ƒğźƓƷğźƓźƓŭ ƚƩ ƭǒƦƦƚƩƷźƓŭ
ƷŷĻ ĭŷğƩğĭƷĻƩ ƚŅ ğƓ ğƩĻğ͵
* E.g. - It helps to define an
entrance point to a neighbourhood
or helps establish the (historic)
rural character of an area.
Б͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌƌǤͲ ŅǒƓĭƷźƚƓğƌƌǤͲ
ǝźƭǒğƌƌǤ ƚƩ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌƌǤ ƌźƓƉĻķ
Ʒƚ źƷƭ ƭǒƩƩƚǒƓķźƓŭƭ͵
* Additional archival work may be
required.
В͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
źƭ ğ ƌğƓķƒğƩƉ͵
*within the region, city or
neighborhood.
Notes Very similar to 14 Irvin Street.
Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener
Committee
Interior: Is the interior
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
arrangement, finish, craftsmanship
and/or detail noteworthy?
Yes Yes
Completeness: Does this structure
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
have other original outbuildings,
notable landscaping or external
Yes Yes
features that complete the site?
Site Integrity: Does the structure
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
occupy its original site?
Yes Yes
* If relocated, is it relocated on its
original site, moved from another site,
etc.
Alterations: Does this building
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
retain most of its original
materials and design features?
Yes 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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
elements or features that should be
added to the heritage attribute list?
Yes Yes
Condition: Is the building in good
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
condition?
Yes Yes
*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 Yes N/A Unknown No Ye
Indigenous heritage and history?
Additional Research Required s
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 with
Additional Research Required N/A Unknown No Ye
the property?
s
Additional Research Required
* Additional archival work may be
required.
Function: What is the present
Unknown Residential Unknown Residential C
function of the subject property?
Commercial ommercial
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 Yes N/A Unknown No Ye
the subject property contribute to
Additional Research Required s
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
Additional Research Required N/A Unknown No Ye
community of people?
s
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
If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up
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:
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Jessica Vieira, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8924
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5
DATE OF REPORT: May 13, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-243
SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808
Bleams 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 property described as Part 1 of Lot 129
German Company Tract within a submitted draft Reference Plan, and currently
municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road 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 a portion of the property municipally addressed as 2219
Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road and described as Part 1 of Lot 129 German
Company Tract within a submitted draft Reference Plan under Part IV of the Ontario
Heritage Act.
The key finding of this report is that the subject property meets 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 associated with this recommendation.
Community engagement included informing residents by posting this report with the
agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener meeting, consulting, and collaborating
with the owner regarding the recommendations of the Heritage Impact Assessment
(HIA) and Conservation Plan, 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 Ontario 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.
BACKGROUND:
The property municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road (the
subject property) is located on the east side of Trussler Road and south side of Ottawa
Street South. The property is approximately 26.26 acres in size, within the Laurentian West
planning community of the City of Kitchener, Region of Waterloo. At present the property
contains a mid-century modern residential building, now used for office purposes. It is
identified on the Kitchener Historic Building Inventory.
A combined Official Plan Amendment (OPA22/009/O/AP), Zoning By-law Amendment
(ZBA22/016/O/AP), and Plan of Subdivision (30T-22201) has been approved for the subject
property by the Ontario Land Tribunal. Due to it being identified on the Kitchener Historic
Building Inventory, heritage studies have been requested as part of the submitted
applications. This includes a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), which was prepared by
CHC Limited and last revised on July 21, 2022. The draft HIA was presented to the Heritage
Kitchener Committee on November 1, 2022.
The draft HIA included an assessment of the subject property against Ontario Regulation
9/06 and determined that seven of the nine criteria were met. As such, the study
recommended that the house, including the attached garage, be designated under Part IV
of the Ontario Heritage Act and a Conservation Plan developed. Designation of the heritage
resource and the completion of a number of other heritage studies were made conditions of
approval for the submitted planning applications. A draft Reference Plan has been provided
by the applicants as part of the designation, so that it may be tied only to the future heritage
block within the future subdivision.
Figure 1: Map Identifying Subject Property
Figure 2: Draft Reference Plan of Subject Property Identifying Future Heritage Block
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
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
value and interest.
Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within the submitted draft Reference Plan
(currently municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road) is
recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies
seven 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.
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 demonstrates Yes
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 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 No
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
Design / Physical Value
The subject property possesses design and physical value as a notable, rare, and unique
local example of a mid-.
It further displays a high degree of craftmanship and technical achievement. The prairie
architectural characteristics of the building can be seen in its long horizontal lines,
emphasized by a flat roof and horizontal trim, overhanging eaves, the use of natural
materials and integration with the landscape. The building is panoramically cantilevered
from a hillside, and its orientation, massing, and other design elements establish a close
relationship between the built structure and the surrounding environment. This trend of
integration is continued on the interior, with stone and wood being brought inside for built in
cabinetry and other interior detailing.
The exterior of the home is clad in a mix of deep brown cedar fascia board around the roof
and deck edges and dark brown vertical board and batten siding. The wood elements are
stained instead of painted. Fieldstone form the foundation and chimney tower. Both the
cedar and granite fieldstone were locally sourced, and their use as primary building material
can be considered unusual. Largely devoid of decorative detailing, the building instead
provides pure, simple geometric lines and an emphasis on the intrinsic beauty of the natural
material used.
The main structural members of the building are unique polystyrene blocks filled with
reinforced concrete, which provides both strength and insulating properties. This
construction method was inspired by the business of the original owner, Keith Shantz. He
was the proprietor of Morval-Durofoam Ltd., which manufactured polystyrene picnic coolers.
Figure 3: South Façade of Subject Property Facing Trussler Road
Historical / Associative Value
The historical and associative value of the subject property lies with its original owners, Keith
and Winnifred Shantz. As stated previously, Keith was a local industrialist and the proprietor
of Morval-Durofoam Ltd. In addition to this, he was an active member of the community,
filling the role at different times as chairman for the Parks & Recreation Board of the City of
Kitchener, chairman for Centre in the Square, director of the K-W Community Foundation,
Winnifred Shantz was a potter, and the couple together were renowned for their support of
the arts. Winnifred and Keith were founders of the Canadian Clay and Glass Gallery. Her
patronage of the performing arts was wide-ranged and included support for the Kitchener-
Waterloo Symphony, the Grand River Baroque Festival, and the Kitchener-Waterloo Art
Gallery. In addition, she established the Winnifred Shantz Award for Ceramics, and the Keith
and Winifred Shantz International Research Scholarship. The Winnifred Shantz Award for
Ceramics is the only national award for emerging ceramic artists in Canada, and its
bestowment is considered a prestigious honour within the arts community. The Keith and
Winifred Shantz International Research Scholarship provides opportunities for Fine Art
students from the University of Waterloo to work with established artists globally. Both
awards are still being provided at the date of this report, supporting the development of
young and emerging artist careers.
The building on the property is also a demonstration of the work of a prominent local
th
architect, John Lingwood. A prolific local architect in the mid-20century, Lingwoods
architectural firm completed more than 700 projects in its lifetime, with a large portion of the
work being within the Waterloo Region. The body of work produced by his firm is a
comprehensive cross-section of the mid-century modern architectural style and represents
a break from earlier, more traditional styles. Projects completed by Lingwood ranged in
function and scale, and included homes, university buildings, civic buildings, and churches.
Some of his most recognizable work which remain standing at the time this Statement of
Significance was written includes the Carmel New Church located at 40 Chapel Hill, TD
Bank at the intersection of King Street West and Francis Street, and the former provincial
courthouse at the intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street now operating as the
Waterloo Regional Police Central Division. As such, it can be reasonable summarized that
John Lingwood contributed to the existing appearance of Kitchener and the larger Regions
built landscape.
Contextual Value
The contextual value of the heritage resource relates to its physical and visual links to its
surroundings. Located in-situ, built-into and cantilevered from the natural topography of the
site, the building maintains its relationship to and natural harmony with the natural
landscape. Further, being located at a high point within the area, visible from two major
roads, and of a unique and notable design, the heritage resource could be classified as a
local landmark.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within the submitted draft
Reference Plan (currently municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams
Road) resides in the following attributes.
Contextual
Topography of the immediate environs of the house providing the setting into and
cantilevering over the hillside;
Style of the immediate environs walks and gardens which respond to the topography
of the land, but not including the plant or walkway materials; and
Views to and from Trussler Road;
Exterior
Scale and irregular massing of the mid-century modern residence, including the
garage;
Load-bearing, reinforced concrete filled polystyrene block foundation;
G
interior;
Stained wood board and batten siding;
Flat roofs with stained cedar fascia board;
Aluminum-framed windows and window openings;
Expansive wood deck on west and south sides.
Interior
Stained birch doors;
Suspended tread staircase to upper floor;
Sunken living room;
South facing skylight;
Gon both the exterior and
interior;
Exposed cedar rafters in the original bedroom ceiling.
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
the council / committee meeting.
CONSULT and COLLABORATE Heritage Planning staff have consulted and collaborated
with the applicant and owner regarding designation under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Designation was made a condition of approval for the planning act applications which have
been submitted for the property, subject to consideration by the Heritage Kitchener
Committee and Council.
Section 29(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires Council to consult with the Municipal
Heritage Committee (Heritage Kitchener) before giving notice of its intention to designate a
property. Heritage Kitchener will be consulted via circulation and consideration of this
report (see INFORM above). Members of the community will be informed via circulation of
this report to Heritage Kitchener and via formal consideration by Council. In addition,
should Council choose to give notice of its intention to designate, such notice will be
served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local
newspaper (The Record). Once notice has been served, the owner has the right of appeal
to the Ontario Land Tribunal. It should be noted that should Council decide not to proceed
Heritage Register until January 1, 2027, after which it will be removed according to the
changes enacted by Bill 23. Once removed, it cannot re-listed on the Register again for
five (5) years, i.e. January 1, 2030.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O 1990
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Draft Statement of Significance
Attachment B Draft Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment, July 21, 2022, CHC Limited
Attachment C Draft Reference Plan
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
2219 OTTAWA STREET SOUTH / 808 BLEAMS ROAD
Summary of Significance
Design/Physical Value Social Value
Historical Value Economic Value
Contextual Value
Environmental Value
Municipal Address: Part of 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road
Legal Description: Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within a submitted draft Reference Plan
Year Built: c. 1968-1969
Architectural Style: Mid-century Modern Prairie
Original Owner: Keith Shantz and Winnifred Shantz
Original Use: Residential
Condition: Fair-Good
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within the submitted draft Reference Plan (currently
municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road) is a mid-century modern
prairie style building constructed c. 1968-1969. The building is situated on a parcel of land
approximately 26.26 acres in size, located on the east side of Trussler Road and south side of Ottawa
Street South within the Laurentian West planning community of the City of Kitchener, Region of
Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value of the property is the building.
Heritage Value
Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within the submitted draft Reference Plan (currently
municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road) is recognized for its
design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values. It satisfies seven of the nine criteria for
designation under Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22)..
Design / Physical Value
The subject property possesses design and physical value as a notable, rare, and unique local example
of a mid-
degree of craftmanship and technical achievement. The prairie architectural characteristics of the
building can be seen in its long horizontal lines, emphasized by a flat roof and horizontal trim,
overhanging eaves, the use of natural materials and integration with the landscape. The building is
panoramically cantilevered from a hillside, and its orientation, massing, and other design elements
establish a close relationship between the built structure and the surrounding environment. This trend
of integration is continued on the interior, with stone and wood being brought inside for built in cabinetry
and other interior detailing.
The exterior of the home is clad in a mix of deep brown cedar fascia board around the roof and deck
edges and dark brown vertical board and batten siding. The wood elements are stained instead of
painted. Fieldstone form the foundation and chimney tower. Both the cedar and granite fieldstone were
locally sourced, and their use as primary building material can be considered unusual. Largely devoid
of decorative detailing, the building instead provides pure, simple geometric lines and an emphasis on
the intrinsic beauty of the natural material used.
The main structural members of the building are unique polystyrene blocks filled with reinforced
concrete, which provides both strength and insulating properties. This construction method was inspired
by the business of the original owner, Keith Shantz. He was the proprietor of Morval-Durofoam Ltd.,
which manufactured polystyrene picnic coolers.
Historical / Associative Value
The historical and associative value of the subject property lies with its original owners, Keith and
Winnifred Shantz. As stated previously, Keith was a local industrialist and the proprietor of Morval-
Durofoam Ltd. In addition to this, he was an active member of the community, filling the role at different
times as chairman for the Parks & Recreation Board of the City of Kitchener, chairman for Centre in the
Square, director of the K-W Community Foundation, and a life member of the University of Waterloo
Pr
Winnifred Shantz was a potter, and the couple together were renowned for their support of the arts.
Winnifred and Keith were founders of the Canadian Clay and Glass Gallery. Her patronage of the
performing arts was wide-ranged and included support for the Kitchener-Waterloo Symphony, the
Grand River Baroque Festival, and the Kitchener-Waterloo Art Gallery. In addition, she established the
Winnifred Shantz Award for Ceramics, and the Keith and Winifred Shantz International Research
Scholarship. The Winnifred Shantz Award for Ceramics is the only national award for emerging ceramic
artists in Canada, and its bestowment is considered a prestigious honour within the arts community.
The Keith and Winifred Shantz International Research Scholarship provides opportunities for Fine Art
students from the University of Waterloo to work with established artists globally. Both awards are still
being provided at the date of this report, supporting the development of young and emerging artist
careers.
The building on the property is also a demonstration of the work of a prominent local architect, John
th
Lingwood. A prolific local architect in the mid-20
than 700 projects in its lifetime, with a large portion of the work being within the Waterloo Region. The
body of work produced by his firm is a comprehensive cross-section of the mid-century modern
architectural style and represents a break from earlier, more traditional styles. Projects completed by
Lingwood ranged in function and scale, and included homes, university buildings, civic buildings, and
churches. Some of his most recognizable work which remain standing at the time this Statement of
Significance was written includes the Carmel New Church located at 40 Chapel Hill, TD Bank at the
intersection of King Street West and Francis Street, and the former provincial courthouse at the
intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street now operating as the Waterloo Regional Police Central
Division. As such, it can be reasonable summarized that John Lingwood contributed to the existing
appearance of Kitchener and the larger Regions built landscape.
Contextual Value
The contextual value of the heritage resource relates to its physical and visual links to its surroundings.
Located in-situ, built-into and cantilevered from the natural topography of the site, the building maintains
its relationship to and natural harmony with the natural landscape. Further, being located at a high point
within the area, visible from two major roads, and of a unique and notable design, the heritage resource
could be classified as a local landmark.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of Part 1 of Lot 129 German Company Tract within the submitted draft Reference
Plan (currently municipally addressed as 2219 Ottawa Street South / 808 Bleams Road) resides in the
following attributes.
Contextual
Topography of the immediate environs of the house providing the setting into and cantilevering
over the hillside;
Style of the immediate environs walks and gardens which respond to the topography of the land,
but not including the plant or walkway materials; and
Views to and from Trussler Road;
Exterior
Scale and irregular massing of the mid-century modern residence, including the garage;
Load-bearing, reinforced concrete filled polystyrene block foundation;
Stained wood board and batten siding;
Flat roofs with stained cedar fascia board;
Aluminum-framed windows and window openings;
Expansive wood deck on west and south sides.
Interior
Stained birch doors;
Suspended tread staircase to upper floor;
Sunken living room;
South facing skylight;
Exposed cedar rafters in the original bedroom ceiling.
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8906
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 4
DATE OF REPORT: July 4, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-302
SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Designate 35 Roos Street under Part IV of the
Ontario Heritage Act
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be directed to
publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 35
Roos Street as being of cultural heritage value or interest.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to request that Council direct the Clerk to publish a Notice
of Intention to Designate the property municipally addressed as 35 Roos Street under
Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Ontario Heritage Act by Bill 23,
taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on November 5, 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 35 Roos Street be recognized and designation
pursued.
The key finding of this report is that the property municipally addressed as 35 Roos
Street, also known as the Doon Presbyterian Church, 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 values.
There are no financial implications associated 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 information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
th
35 Roos Street, also known as the Doon Presbyterian Church, is a one-storey mid 19
century building with a central projecting tower constructed in the Gothic architectural style.
The building is situated on a 0.50 acre parcel of land located on the north side of Chalmers
Street at the end of Roos Street in the Lower Doon Planning Community of the City of
Kitchener within the Region of Waterloo (Fig 1). The principal resource that contributes to
the heritage value is the church.
Figure 1. Location Map of Doon Presbyterian Church
A full assessment of the Doon Presbyterian Church as been completed and included a field
evaluation and detailed archival research. The findings concluded that the subject property
cultural heritage value was taken to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on November 5,
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 the Church 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
esponse to amendments of the Ontario Heritage Act introduced in January of
2023 through Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act. The City contacted owners of the
listed properties through an initial letter dated May 23, 2023, to inform them of this
undertaking. The property owners were contacted via a second letter dated November 6,
2024, , questions,
or concerns. Staff met with the owners and members of the community in April 2025 to
discuss the designation process and its implications. After this meeting, staff were informed
by the property owners that they are in support of designation.
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
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
and interest.
Figure 2. Front Façade of the Church.
The Doon Presbyterian Church is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative,
and contextual values (Fig.2) It satisfies five (5) of the nine (9) criteria for designation under
Ontario Regulation 9/06 (amended by Ontario Regulation 569/22). A summary of criteria
that is met or not met is provided in the table below.
CriteriaCriteria 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 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
Design/Physical Value
The church has design value because it is early representative example of Gothic
architectural style. The church is in good condition and retains many of its original elements,
including stained glass windows on the front and side facades, masonry construction, stone
foundation, a central projecting tower, and many elements of brick detailing including brick
buttresses and soldier coursing.
first service held in December of that year. The original portion of the church is one-storey
in height, has a hipped-roof, and a central projecting tower. It is of red brick construction
with a stone foundation. There have been three additions to the church; 1 small addition to
the front right bay, one addition at the rear of the church, and a big, two-storey addition with
a recessed faux gable roof on the front and western side of the church. The construction
dates of the two small additions are unknown, but the bigger addition was built in 1992.
Despite these additions, the original portion of the church still retains many of its original
gothic architectural details, contributing to the design value of the church and to the overall
cultural heritage value. Thus, only the original 1853 portion of the church is being
recommended for designation (Fig. 3).
Figure 3. Original portion of the church highlighted by red box. The 1992 addition is visible
to the left of the original portion of the church.
Historical/Associative Value
The church has significant historical and associative value because it has direct associations
with the Presbyterian church, Adam Ferrie, and the Village of Doon. The church is perhaps
one of the oldest buildings in the Region. It was built and operational even before Canada
was declared an independent country. The first Presbyterian worship service in Doon was
conducted on July 7, 1853, by Dr. John Bayne of Galt. Two days later it was a decided that
a church should be built during an organizational meeting. The Doon Presbyterian Church
was constructed the same year 1853 on land donated by Adam Ferrie. Construction was
completed in 1854 and the church held its first service in December of that year with Dr.
Bayne and Reverend D. McRuer presiding over the services.
The Doon Presbyterian Church holds associative value due to its direct associations with
Adam Ferrie, a prominent businessman in the early settlement of Doon. Born in Glasgow,
Scotland, on December 11, 1813, Adam Ferrie arrived in the area which would eventually
be known as the Village of Doon circa 1830, and acquired a 300-acre property in which, he
would build a grist mill, sawmill, and distillery. In 1837, in Preston (present-day Cambridge),
Adam Ferrie was appointed as the postmaster. He later became the commonly named
founder of Doon as, he established the Doon Mill, from which the village derived its name.
The church also associative value because it has direct associations with the theme of early
who was of Scottish descent, after he arrived and settled in the region. The area was initially
settled by German Mennonites from Pennsylvania, and later by English and Scottish
settlers. These settlers established an array of businesses along the Preston and Berlin
(present day Kitchener) railway that passed through the town. The Ferrie family also
established several businesses which included but is not limited to a distillery, a tavern, a
general store, and a mill. These industries were crucial to the success and growth of Doon.
Doon is also the lifetime home of Homer Watson, one of the most prominent and successful
landscape painters of the country, and a Person of National Historic Significance.
Contextual Value
The church has contextual value because it is physically, functionally and historically
linked to its surroundings. The church is in its original location and has always been used
as a church. The location of the church is significant due to its strategic position atop a hill
within the Village of Doon. Additionally, it was situated within proximity to the former Adam
establishment. At the time of its construction, there would not been a lot of development in
have been easily visible.
Other Values
Social Values
Doon Presbyterian Church has a significant social value as a place of worship that has
been in the Region for over 170 years. This building has been supporting these services
for all these years within the community and has become a prominent place of importance
within the Doon neighborhood serving as a notable institutional building. Places of worship
often provide intangible community value as a place where people gather and are often a
central piece of a community.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of the Doon Presbyterian Church resides in the following heritage
attributes:
All elements related to the design/physical value of the original portion of the 1854 church
in the Gothic architectural style include:
- The location, orientation, and massing of the original 1854 portion of the church;
- All four (4) exterior facades of the original 1854 church;
- Red brick construction, including brick banding, and all decorative details;
- Style of hipped roof;
- Rectangular plan of the original portion of the church;
- Projecting tall central tower with quatrefoil window;
- Pointed arch window openings with stained glass windows, brick detailing and
stone sills, and all other pointed arch window openings;
- Segmentally arched double door opening with soldier coursing;
- Square window openings on the lower level with soldier coursing on top of these
windows at the foundation and,
- Stone foundation.
All elements related to the contextual value of the property, including:
- Original strategic location of the Church atop elevated topography ;
- Proximity of the Church near the banks of the Grand River
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
the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
Municipal Heritage Register Review November 2024 Update DSD-2024-444
Ontario Heritage Act, 2022
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A Statement of Significance 35 Roos Street
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
35 Roos Street
Summary of Significance
Social Value
Design/Physical Value
Historical Value Economic Value
Contextual Value
Environmental Value
Municipal Address: 35 Roos Street
Legal Description: Plan 117 Lot 106 and 107, Part Lot 108
Year Built:1853
Architectural Style: Gothic
Original Owner: Doon Presbyterian Church
Original Use: Institutional
Condition: Good
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
th
35 Roos Street is a mid-19 century brick church built in the Gothic architectural style. The building is
situated on a 0.50-acre parcel of land located on the north side of Chalmers Street at the end of Roos
Street in the Lower Doon 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
35 Roos Street is recognized for its design/physical, historical/associative, and contextual values.
Design/Physical Value
The church has design value as it is an early representative example of the Gothic architectural style.
The church is in good condition and retains many of its original elements. It is one-storey in height,
has a hipped roof, is of red brick construction with a stone foundation and is located on elevated
topography.
Front (South) Façade
The original portion of the front façade of the building includes a central projecting tower with
symmetrical bays on each side. The tower includes the entrance to the building with large pointed
arched windows with stained glass windows and decorative brick moulding with stone sills. Above
with the gothic windows is brick soldier coursing with a quatrefoil window. There are brick buttresses
on each corner of the tower. The bays on each side of the central tower feature arched gothic
windows with stained glass windows and decorative brick moulding and stone sills, and brick
buttresses on each end. Infront of the double doors of the original portion of the church, is a staircase
that does not appear to be original to the church.
There have been three additions to the church with two of the construction dates unknown. One small
addition to the church is located on the lower level of the right bay on the front facade. There is also a
portion of a modern 1992 portion which is visible. This addition is a two-storey addition in height and
was built in 1992 towards the side and front. The addition is constructed of yellow brick and features
square windows. The addition projects forwards and is flush with the original front façade of the
building and is lower in height than the original portion of the church.
Side (East) Façade
This façade has three sets of two (2) pointed arch long windows with stained glass with decorative
brick detailing above the arches of each set and with stone sills. Above the windows there is a brick
stringcourse that extends from one end of the façade to the other end with brick buttresses on each
end of the façade. The stone foundation contains three (3) sets of double 2x3 square pane windows
with soldier coursing on top. These windows do not appear to be original.
Rear (North) Façade
The rear portion of the church has been altered. There is a storage section clad with clapboard, and a
portion of the 1992 addition extends to this façade with square windows on each storey. The original
portion of the church includes a central projecting brick buttress with two long pointed gothic arched
windows on each side. These windows have decorative brick detailing above the arch and are
currently boarded up. Only a small portion of the stone foundation is visible on this façade, and has
one set of double 2x3 square pane windows.
Side (West) Façade
with a recessed gable roof. There are square windows on each storey of the addition with a central
entrance.
Historical/Associative Value
The church has significant historical value because it has direct associations with the Presbyterian
Church, Adam Ferrie, and the Village of Doon. The church is perhaps one of the oldest buildings in
the Region. It was built and operational even before Canada was became an independent country.
The first Presbyterian worship service in Doon was conducted on July 7, 1853, by Dr. John Bayne of
Galt. Two days later it was a decided that a church should be built during an organizational meeting.
The Doon Presbyterian Church was constructed the same year 1853 on land donated by Adam
Ferrie. Construction was completed in 1854 and the church held its first service in December of that
year with Dr. Bayne and Reverend D. McRuer presiding over the services. The church has been
attended by many local families of the Village of Doon including: Robert Ferrie (miller), James
Goodfellow, John Chapman, Mrs. Joseph Perine, Mrs. M.B. Perine (wife of the cordage
manufacturer), William Linton (teacher), Homer Watson (famous Canadian artist), the Tilts
(brickmakers of Oregon), the Weavers, the Wildfongs and the Wolfes (Simpson, 1981).
The church was originally part of a dual parish with the Presbyterian Church of New Hope (Hespeler)
until 1892. Then, the church linked with the Knox Presbyterian Church is Preston, and continues to be
linked to that church.
The church also associative value because it has direct associations with the theme of early
settlement within the Region of Waterloo.
Scottish descent, after he arrived and settled in the region. The area was initially settled by German
Mennonites from Pennsylvania, and later by English and Scottish settlers. These settlers established
an array of businesses along the Preston and Berlin (present day Kitchener) railway that passed
through the town. The Ferrie family also established a number of businesses which included but is not
limited to included a distillery, a tavern, a general store, and a mill. These industries were crucial to
the success and growth of Doon. Doon is also the lifetime home of Homer Watson, one of the most
prominent and successful landscape painters of the country, and a Person of National Historic
Significance. The church is located immediately behind the home of Homer Watson, which was
designated as a National Historic Site of Canada in 1980. In 1968, the Village of Doon was
amalgamated into the City of Kitchener.
Adam Ferrie
The Doon Presbyterian Church holds associative value due to its direct associations with Adam
Ferrie, a prominent businessman in the early settlement of Doon. Born in Glasgow, Scotland, on
December 11, 1813, Adam Ferrie arrived in the area which would eventually be known as the Village
of Doon circa 1830, and acquired a 300-acre property in which, he would build a grist mill, sawmill,
and distillery. In 1837, in Preston (present-day Cambridge), Adam Ferrie was appointed as the
postmaster. He later became the commonly named founder of Doon as, he established the Doon Mill,
from which the village derived its name. It is also noted that he built the house that would eventually
by bought by Homer Watson. With the influx of economic activity, prior to 1853, the Ferrie family
donated a portion of the land they acquired to facilitate the construction of the Presbyterian Church
within the Village of Doon.
Today, Doon still serves as a church and as a place for community activities. With a history of over
170 years, this building is one of the oldest in the City of Kitchener, and perhaps the Region of
Waterloo.
Contextual Value
The church has contextual value because it is physically, functionally and historically linked to its
surroundings. The church is located in its original location and has always been used as a church.
The location of the church was significant due to its strategic position atop a hill within the Village of
Doon. Additionally, it was situated within close proximity
an important business in Doon during its early years of establishment.
The church also has contextual value because it helps maintaining and supporting the character of
the area of Doon. Doon remains a low-rise residential area with mix of housing style and construction
eras. The church contributes to the continuity and character of the low-rise residential character of
Lower Doon. The mature trees and it being situated on the banks of the Grand River all contributes
towards maintaining the existing setting of the property.
Other Values
Social Values
Doon Presbyterian Church has a significant social value as a place of worship that has been in the
Region for over 170 years. This building has been supporting these services for all these years within
the community and has become a prominent place of importance within the Doon neighborhood
serving as a notable institutional building. Places of worship often provide intangible community value
as a place where people gather and are often a central piece of a community.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of the Doon Presbyterian Church resides in the following heritage attributes:
All elements related to the design/physical value of the original portion of the 1854 church in the
Gothic architectural style include:
- The location, orientation, and massing of the original 1854 portion of the church;
- Red brick construction, including brick banding, and all decorative details;
- Hipped roof;
- Rectangular plan of the original portion of the church;
- Projecting tall central tower with quatrefoil window;
- Pointed arch window openings with stained glass windows, brick detailing and stone sills, and
all other pointed arch window openings;
- Segmentally arched double door opening with soldier coursing;
- Square window openings on the lower level with soldier coursing on top of these windows at
the foundation and,
- Stone foundation.
All elements related to the contextual value of the property, including:
- Original location of the Church atop elevated topography;
- Proximity of the Church near the banks of the Grand River.
Photographs
Front Elevation (South Façade)
Side Elevation (East Façade)
Rear Elevation (North Façade)
Side Elevation and Front Façade (including the 1992 addition)
CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE
EVALUATION FORM
35 Roos Stree
Ben Suchomel
Address: Recorder Name:
Gothic
August 19, 2024
Description: Date:
(additional details of the date of Construction, architectural style, etc)
Photographs Attached:
Front Facade Left Façade Right Façade Rear Facade Details Setting
Recorder Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff
Designation Criteria
Committee
Њ͵ ŷźƭ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ ğ ƩğƩĻͲ
Yes Yes
ǒƓźƨǒĻͲ ƩĻƦƩĻƭĻƓƷğƷźǝĻ ƚƩ ĻğƩƌǤ
ĻǣğƒƦƌĻ ƚŅ ğ ƭƷǤƌĻͲ ƷǤƦĻͲ ĻǣƦƩĻƭƭźƚƓͲ
ƒğƷĻƩźğƌ ƚƩ ĭƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ ƒĻƷŷƚķ͵
Ћ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ķźƭƦƌğǤƭ ğ
Yes Yes
ŷźŭŷ ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ ĭƩğŅƷƭƒğƓƭŷźƦ ƚƩ
ğƩƷźƭƷźĭ ƒĻƩźƷ͵
Ќ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ķĻƭźŭƓ ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ğ ŷźŭŷ ķĻŭƩĻĻ ƚŅ
ƷĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ ƚƩ ƭĭźĻƓƷźŅźĭ ğĭŷźĻǝĻƒĻƓƷ͵
* E.g. - constructed with a unique material
combination or use, incorporates challenging
geometric designs etc.
Ѝ͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ŷğƭ
Yes Yes
ķźƩĻĭƷ ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźƚƓƭ ǞźƷŷ ğ ƷŷĻƒĻͲ
ĻǝĻƓƷͲ ĬĻƌźĻŅͲ ƦĻƩƭƚƓͲ ğĭƷźǝźƷǤͲ
ƚƩŭğƓźǩğƷźƚƓ ƚƩ źƓƭƷźƷǒƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ źƭ
ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be required.
Ў͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ ǤźĻƌķƭͲ
Yes Yes
ƚƩ ŷğƭ ƷŷĻ ƦƚƷĻƓƷźğƌ Ʒƚ ǤźĻƌķͲ
źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ƷŷğƷ ĭƚƓƷƩźĬǒƷĻƭ Ʒƚ ğƓ
ǒƓķĻƩƭƷğƓķźƓŭ ƚŅ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ ƚƩ
ĭǒƌƷǒƩĻ͵
* E.g - A commercial building may provide an
understanding of how the economic development of
the City occured. Additional archival work may be
required.
Џ͵ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ ƚƩ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ğƭƭƚĭźğƷźǝĻ ǝğƌǒĻ ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ
Yes Yes
ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğƷĻƭ ƚƩ ƩĻŅƌĻĭƷƭ ƷŷĻ ǞƚƩƉ
ƚƩ źķĻğƭ ƚŅ ğƓ ğƩĭŷźƷĻĭƷͲ ğƩƷźƭƷͲ
ĬǒźƌķĻƩͲ ķĻƭźŭƓĻƩ ƚƩ ƷŷĻƚƩźƭƷ Ǟŷƚ źƭ
ƭźŭƓźŅźĭğƓƷ Ʒƚ ğ ĭƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ͵
* Additional archival work may be required.
А͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ źƒƦƚƩƷğƓƷ źƓ ķĻŅźƓźƓŭͲ
Yes Yes
ƒğźƓƷğźƓźƓŭ ƚƩ ƭǒƦƦƚƩƷźƓŭ ƷŷĻ
ĭŷğƩğĭƷĻƩ ƚŅ ğƓ ğƩĻğ͵
* E.g. - It helps to define an entrance point to a
neighbourhood or helps establish the (historic) rural
character of an area.
Б͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌƌǤͲ ŅǒƓĭƷźƚƓğƌƌǤͲ
Yes Yes
ǝźƭǒğƌƌǤ ƚƩ ŷźƭƷƚƩźĭğƌƌǤ ƌźƓƉĻķ Ʒƚ źƷƭ
ƭǒƩƩƚǒƓķźƓŭƭ͵
* Additional archival work may be required.
В͵ ŷĻ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ ŷğƭ ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷǒğƌ ǝğƌǒĻ
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
ĬĻĭğǒƭĻ źƷ źƭ ğ ƌğƓķƒğƩƉ͵
Yes Yes
*within the region, city or neighborhood.
Notes
Additional Recorder Heritage Kitchener Committee
Criteria
Interior: Is the interior
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
arrangement, finish,
craftsmanship and/or
detail noteworthy?
Completeness: Does
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
this structure have
other original
outbuildings, notable
landscaping or external
features that complete
the site?
Site Integrity: Does
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
the structure 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 Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
building retain 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 Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
additional elements or
features that should be
added to the heritage
attribute list?
Condition: Is the
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
building in good
condition?
*E.g. - Could be a good
candidate for adaptive re-
use if possible and
contribute towards equity-
building and climate
change action.
Indigenous History:
Could this site be of
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
importance to
Additional Research Required Additional Research Required
Indigenous heritage and
history?
*E.g. - Site within 300m of
water sources, near
distinct topographical
land, or near cemeteries
might have
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
archaeological potential
and indigenous heritage
Additional Research Required Additional Research Required
potential.
Could there be any
urban Indigenous
history associated with
the property?
* Additional archival
work may be required.
Function: What is the
Unknown Residential Commercial Unknown Residential Commercial
present function of the
Office Other Institutional Office Other
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
Inclusion: Does the
Additional Research Required Additional Research Required
subject property
contribute to the
cultural heritage of a
community of people?
N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes
Additional Research Required Additional Research Required
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
Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, as identified in the
Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act?
N/A Unknown No Yes
Recommendation
Should this property be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act?
N/A Unknown No Yes
If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up
Remove from the Municipal Heritage Register
Additional Research Required
Other:
Other General Comments
TO BE FILLED BY HERITAGE PLANNING STAFF:
Date of Property Owner Notification:
References
Cleghorn, H. G. A History of Doon Presbyterian Church- Doon, Ontario, accessed from The Kitchener Public
Library Archives, (pp. 1518).
Hodgson, S. (2003). Doon Presbyterian Church: Celebrating 150 years, 1853-2003. The Church.
Moyer, B. (1978, June 16). Yesterday Revisited. K-W Real Estate News.
Shantz, C. (1980). Historic Property Report: 1784 Old Mill Road. LACAC: Kitchener, Ontario.
Simpson, S. (1981). Historic Property Report: 1784 Old Mill Road. LACAC: Kitchener, Ontario.
WHS Annual Volumes 1941, pg. 63, accessed from The Kitchener Public Library Archives.
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: August 5, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals,
519-783-8922
PREPARED BY: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner,519-783-8906
DATE OF REPORT: July 10, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-317
SUBJECT: Municipal Heritage Register Review August 2025 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:
99 Strange Street
40 Bridge Street West
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to recommend pursuing designation under Part IV of the
Ontario Heritage Act for two 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:
st
On January 1, 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
Municipal
Heritage Register to be evaluated to determine if they meet the criteria for heritage
st
designation before January 1, 2025. Bill 200, the Homeowners Protection Act, 2024,
extended the time municipalities must 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
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
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
th
with consultation from the Heritage Kitchener Committee on February 7, 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 completed for 93 properties. 2
properties are before the Committee as of the date of this report to be considered for
designation. 41 properties have fully undergone the designation process. 37 properties are
currently undergoing the designation process and are at various stages of completion. 14
properties have been reviewed and determined that no action should be taken at this time,
and 1 NOID has been withdrawn by Council.
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 an 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.
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:
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 two properties were evaluated to determine their cultural heritage value:
99 Strange Street
The subject property municipally addressed as 99 Strange Street 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 has direct
associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution
that is significant to a community.
The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or
historically linked to its surroundings.
The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or
supporting the character of an area.
40 Bridge Street West
The subject property municipally addressed as 40 Bridge Street West meets seven (7) 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 or associative value because it yields, or has the
potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community
or culture.
The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or
reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is
significant to a community.
The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining or
supporting the character of an area.
The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or
historically linked to its surroundings.
The property has contextual value because it is a landmark.
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
r 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
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.
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
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 2023 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
Municipal Heritage Register Review August 2024 Update DSD-2024-333
Municipal Heritage Register Review September 2024 Update DSD-2024-361
Municipal Heritage Register October 2024 Update DSD-2024-426
Municipal Heritage Register- November 2024 Update DSD-2024-444
Municipal Heritage Register Review March 2025 Update DSD-2025-031
Municipal Heritage Register Review April 2025 Update DSD-2025-108
Ontario Heritage Act, 2022
REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A- Updated Statement of Significance 99 Strange Street
Attachment B- Updated Statement of Significance 40 Bridge Street West
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
99 Strange Street
Summary of Significance
Social Value
Design/Physical Value
Economic Value
Historical Value
Contextual Value
Environmental Value
Municipal Address: 99 Strange Street
Legal Description: Plan 375 Part Lot 493 & 494
Year Built: 1929
Architectural Styles: Collegiate Tudor
Original Owner:
Original Use: Institutional
Condition: Good
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
th
99 Strange Street is a 20 century building built in the Collegiate Tudor architectural style. The building
is situated on a 3.07 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Strange Street between Dominion
Street and Waverly Road in the Cherry Hill Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the
Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the institutional
building.
Heritage Value
99 Strange Street is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values.
Design/Physical Value
The design and physical values relate to the Collegiate Tudor architectural style that is in good condition
with many intact original elements. The building features: red brick construction; flat roof, cast concrete
decorative details such as school sign, banding, floral motifs and cross; window openings with concrete
sills; and, front entrance door opening with multi light transom and decorative door surround. There
have been many additions to the original building since its construction in 1929. All of these additions
are located towards the rear of the original building.
Front Façade (East Elevation)
-storeys in height.
Each end of this façade includes brick cast concrete detailing, including square motifs and concrete
banding on the upper and lower level. The central portion of this façade has a symmetrical design and
fenestration pattern, including fenestration pattern of multi-pane windows arranged grouping pattern of
one-three-one pattern on each storey with concrete sills. The central door includes a projecting
decorative brick detailing with concrete door surround, and concrete floral motifs. Above the concrete
building has a concrete foundation with windows on the basement levels.
Side Façade (South Elevation)
The façade continues the fenestration pattern of the front façade with two multi-pane window
groupings of one-three-one on each storey. The concrete banding extends onto this façade on the
upper and lower levels, with the concrete foundation and basement level windows.
Rear Façade (North Elevation)
The original portion of the school is not visible on this façade. This façade includes one of the modern
additions that was added on to the school. This façade mostly includes blank brick walls, with one
portion of the addition with windows and a rear doorway.
Side Façade (West Elevation)
The façade continues the fenestration pattern of the front façade with two multi-pane window
groupings of one-three-one on each storey. The concrete banding extends onto this façade on the
upper and lower levels, with the concrete foundation and basement level windows.
Historical Value
The historic and associative values relate to the original and continued use of the building as a separate
increased birth rates following World War I. The original building was an eight-room school that was
constructed at a cost of $60,000. The building was the fourth catholic school in the area.
of the City in 1937. The parish of approximately 220 families living within the boundaries of Highland
Road, Victoria park, and Waterloo, and King Street was formed in May 1937, by the late Most Rev. J.
T. NcNally. Magistrate W. F. Gleason (who was Father Gleason at the time) was the first pastor of thie
church, and he held that position until he died in 1965.
was being constructed. Even though the superstructure of the church was unfinished, it was dedicated
by Reverend Joseph Ryan on February 20, 1938, with the cornerstone was laid on August 15, 1937.
The school has associative value due to its direct associations with the theme of educational
development in Kitchener. The school was established in response to the growing population of
Kitchener in the 1920s, and it was the fourth school to be established in the City. The school has
continued to operate as such since its establishment.
Contextual Value
99 Strange Street has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually and historically
linked to its surroundings.
since it was built.
These buildings were built around the same time, and have served the same communities since their
construction. Due to this, the buildings maintain a relationship to each other.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 99 Strange Street resides in the following heritage attributes:
All elements related to the construction and Collegiate Tudor architectural style of the original
building, including:
o
o red brick construction;
o roof and roofline;
o cast concrete decorative details such as school sign, banding, floral motifs and cross;
o window openings with concrete sills; and,
o front entrance door opening with multi light transom and decorative door surround.
All elements related to the contextual value of the building, including:
o
o
Photos
99 Strange Street
99 Strange Street
99 Strange Street
99 Strange Street
CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM
Deeksha Choudhry
99 Strange Street
Address: Recorder:
Institutional
July 1, 2025
Description: Date:
Photographs Attached:
Front Facade Left Façade Right Façade Rear Facade Details Setting
Recorder Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff
Designation Criteria
Committee
1. This property has
N/A Unknown No
N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes
Yes
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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes Yes
physical value
because it displays a
high degree of
craftsmanship or
artistic merit.
3. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes Yes
physical value
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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical value or
Yes Yes
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.
5. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical or
Yes
Yes
associative value
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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical value or
Yes
Yes
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.
* Additional archival work
may be required.
7. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is
important in defining,
maintaining or
supporting the
character of an area.
* E.g. - It helps to define
an entrance point to a
neighbourhood or helps
establish the (historic)
rural character of an area.
8. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is
physically,
functionally, visually
or historically linked
to its surroundings.
* Additional archival work
may be required.
9. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is a
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 No
arrangement, finish,
Yes
Yes
craftsmanship and/or detail
noteworthy?
Completeness: Does this
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
structure have other original
Yes
Yes
outbuildings, notable
landscaping or external
features that complete the
site?
Site Integrity: Does the
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
structure occupy its original
Yes
Yes
site?
* If relocated, is it relocated on its
original site, moved from another site,
etc.
Alterations: Does this building
N/A Unknown No
N/A Unknown No
retain most of its original
Yes
Yes
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
additional elements or
Yes Yes
features that should be added
to the heritage attribute list?
Condition: Is the building in
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
good condition?
Yes
Yes
*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 YN/A Unknown No Yes
Indigenous heritage and
Additional Research Required
es
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
Additional Research Required
with the property?
N/A Unknown No Y
es
* Additional archival work may be
Additional Research
required.
Required
Function: What is the present
Unknown Residential Unknown Residential Com
function of the subject
Commercial
mercial
property?
Office Other Church
Office Other - 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 No YN/A Unknown No Yes
the subject property
es
contribute to the cultural
Additional Research Required
Additional Research
heritage of a community of
Required
people?
Does the subject property
N/A Unknown No Yes
have intangible value to a
N/A Unknown No Y
specific community of people?
Additional Research Required
es
Additional Research
* E.g.- Waterloo Masjid (Muslim
Required
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
If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up
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:
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Statement of Significance
40 BRIDGE STREET WEST
Summary of Significance
Design/Physical Value Social Value
Historical Value Economic Value
Contextual Value Environmental Value
Municipal Address: 40 Bridge Street West
Legal Description: German Company Tract Part Lot 59
Year Built: 1933
Architectural Style: Gothic
Original Owner: Emmanuel Evangelical Church
Original Use: Church
Condition: Good
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Description of Cultural Heritage Resource
th
40 Bridge Street West is an early-20 century brick church built in the Gothic architectural style.
The building is situated on a 0.72 acre parcel of land located on the corner of Bridge Street West
and Woolwich Street in the Bridgeport West Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within
the Region of Waterloo. The principal resource that contributes to the heritage value is the
institutional building, known as the Bridgeport United Church.
Heritage Value
40 Bridge Street West is recognized for its design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual
values.
Design/Physical Value
The design and physical value of 40 Bridge Street West resides in its Gothic architecture, being
a representative example of the Gothic style laid out in a rectangular shape with a side gable roof
and offset front projecting gable entrance. The building is constructed of multi-coloured red-brown
brick with brick buttresses with concrete details, and ogee shaped stained glass windows featured
in groups of three per bay with brick voussoirs and concrete sills. There are 1/1 windows at the
basement level. The foundation is concrete but appears to have been re-finished at some point
as chipping reveals another material at the eastern corner of the church. There is a brick chimney
on the rear façade of the church.
The front entrance of the church features a decorative stone door surround with a pointed arch
opening, original wood doors that have been re-painted, with original metal hardware and
decorative strap hinges. There is a stone above the front entrance that reads
and a stone cross at the top of the front projecting gable. Flanking the main
entrance are two former window openings with concrete sills, now infilled with brick of a similar
red-brown brick colour. At the eastern-most corner of the front façade, a date stone just above
In the front yard to the left of the main entrance, a newer stone sign
. In addition, three large mature trees are located in the front
and exterior side yard.
The western-most section of the building is comprised of an addition built in 1958, creating an
education wing that expanded the capacity of the Sunday School. It is one storey in height with a
flat roof and has a rectangular floor plan that matches the width of the existing church. The
addition features vertical pillars clad in similar brick to match the church. The pillars flank a
concrete base and large windows composed of multiple framed vertical panes topped with
geometric diamond shaped tracery. A metal fascia runs horizontally along the top edge of the
roof. There is a cement walkway connecting a side entrance on the front façade to the street, and
there is another entrance on the rear façade with steps leading down to the lower parking lot.
Historical/Associative Value
The historic and associative values of 40 Bridge Street West relate to the use as a place of
worship along with the buildings architect and contractor. The Emmanuel Evangelical Church
congregation in Bridgeport (now Kitchener) dates back to as early as 1876 (Bridgeport United,
2014). The congregation bought the property in 1878 to hold Sunday school. A white brick church
was built in 1889 and the current church was built in 1933. The congregation changed their name
to Bridgeport United in 1987 to stop the confusion with Emmanuel United in Waterloo (Bridgeport
United, 2014).
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The church was designed by W.H.E. Schmalz (Kolarisch & Horne, 1984-85). W.H.E. Schmalz
was a native of Berlin (now Kitchener) and son of former Mayor W.H. Schmalz (Waterloo Region
Generations, 2014). W.H.E. Schmalz graduated from the University of Toronto and was known
ions, 2014). He, along with B.A.
Jones, designed the 1922 Kitchener City Hall (Hill, 2009). The firm of Schmalz & Jones maintained
an office until 1926 (Hill, 2009). W.H.E. served with the Royal Canadian Horse Artillery in 1916;
served with distinction on the Waterloo Historical Society, the Ontario Historical Society, the
Ontario Pioneer Community Foundation and the Waterloo County Hall of Fame; and, held office
in, or was a long-time member of, the Chamber of Commerce, the Kitchener Parks Board, the K-
W H
Club, the Kitchener Racing Canoe Club and the Lutheran Church (Waterloo Region Generations,
2014).
The church was built by Oscar Wiles (Bridgeport United, 2014; Kolarisch & Horne, 1984-85).
Oscar Wiles founded Oscar Wiles General Contractor in 1927, which later became Oscar Wiles
ur, Donald, Peter,
Bill and Richard assisted with the family business, which built houses, churches, schools and
factories.
Contextual Value
The contextual value of 40 Bridge Street West relates to its historical, physical, functional and
visual importance to the surrounding area. The church is located in-situ and retains its original
use. It has operated as a longstanding place of worship and community gathering. The Bridgeport
West Community history dates back to the early nineteenth century and is now an established,
stable neighbourhood characterized by older dwellings, new subdivisions, and low-rise infill
development. Additionally, across the street from the church to the southwest is Bridgeport Public
School, further enhancing the stability of the area.
The church may also be classified as a local landmark. Situated near the top of a hill sloping up
from the Grand River, the Bridgeport United Church has a strong visual presence on Bridge Street
West and Woolwich Street. The church also has views of Bridgeport Bridge that spans the Grand
River and connects to Bridgeport East.
Other Values
Social Values
The Bridgeport United Church has significant social value as a place of worship and education.
This building has been providing these services since its construction in 1933, and the
congregation dates back even further to 1876. It remains a prominent place of importance within
the Bridgeport West community. Places of worship often provide intangible community value,
serving as places where people gather and socialize in addition to providing comfort or support
to those who need it and creating community connections. Schools also contribute social value
for a community, acting as a source of socialization and learning for children.
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 40 Bridge Street West resides in the following heritage attributes:
All elements related to the Gothic architectural style of the church, including:
o rectangular plan;
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
o side gable roof with offset front projecting gable entrance;
o multi-coloured brick;
o brick buttressing with concrete details;
o ogee shaped stained glass windows in groups of three per bay with brick
voussoirs and concrete sills;
o 1/1 windows in basement;
o front entrance decorative door surround;
o front doors with metal hardware and decorative strap hinges;
o
o cross in gable end;
o ; and
o chimney;
All elements related to the contextual value, including:
o Location of the church and contribution that it makes to the character of the
neighbourhood.
References
Bridgeport United. (2014). History: A short history of Bridgeport United. Retrieved from
http://www.bridgeportunited.org/history on November 26, 2014.
Kolarisch, D. & M. Horne. (1984-85). Historic Property Report: Bridgeport Emmanuel United
Church.
https://lf.kitchener.ca/WebLinkExt/DocView.aspx?id=1211043&dbid=0&repo=CityofKitche
ner
Photos
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
40 Bridge Street West
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
40 Bridge Street West
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
40 Bridge Street West
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
40 Bridge Street West
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
40 Bridge Street West
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION FORM
Jade McGowan
40 Bridge Street West
Address: Recorder:
Institutional
Description: Date:
Photographs Attached:
Front Facade Left Façade Right Façade Rear Facade Details Setting
Recorder Heritage Kitchener Heritage Planning Staff
Designation Criteria
Committee
1. This property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes
Yes
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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes Yes
physical value
because it displays a
high degree of
craftsmanship or
artistic merit.
3. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
design value or
Yes Yes
physical value
because it
demonstrates a high
degree of technical or
scientific
achievement.
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
* E.g. - constructed with a
unique material
combination or use,
incorporates challenging
geometric designs etc.
4. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical value or
Yes
Yes
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.
5. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical or
Yes Yes
associative value
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
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
historical value or
Yes
Yes
associative value
because it
demonstrates or
reflects the work or
ideas of an architect,
artist, builder,
designer or theorist
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
who is significant to a
community.
* Additional archival work
may be required.
7. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is
important in defining,
maintaining or
supporting the
character of an area.
* E.g. - It helps to define
an entrance point to a
neighbourhood or helps
establish the (historic)
rural character of an area.
8. The property has
N/A Unknown No
N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is
physically,
functionally, visually
or historically linked
to its surroundings.
* Additional archival work
may be required.
9. The property has
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No
contextual value
Yes
Yes
because it is a
landmark.
*within the region, city or
neighborhood.
Notes
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Additional Criteria Recorder Heritage Kitchener
Committee
Interior: Is the interior
N/A Unknown No
arrangement, finish,
N/A Unknown No
Yes
craftsmanship and/or
detail noteworthy?
Yes
Completeness: Does this
N/A Unknown No
structure have other
N/A Unknown No
Yes
original outbuildings,
notable landscaping or
Yes
external features that
complete the site?
Site Integrity: Does the
N/A Unknown No
structure occupy its
N/A Unknown No
Yes
original site?
Yes
* If relocated, is it relocated on
its original site, moved from
another site, etc.
Alterations: Does this
N/A Unknown No
building retain most of its
N/A Unknown No
Yes
original materials and
design features? Please
Yes
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
additional elements or
N/A Unknown No
Yes
features that should be
added to the heritage
Yes
attribute list?
Condition: Is the building
N/A Unknown No
in good condition?
N/A Unknown No
Yes
*E.g. - Could be a good
candidate for adaptive re-use if
Yes
possible and contribute towards
equity-building and climate
change action.
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Indigenous History: Could
this site be of importance
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No Y
to Indigenous heritage
es
Yes
and 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.
Could there be any urban
Indigenous history
N/A Unknown No Y
N/A Unknown No
associated with the
es
Yes
property?
Additional Research
Additional Research
Required
Required
* Additional archival work may
be required.
Function: What is the
Unknown Residential
Unknown Residential
present function of the
Commercial
subject property?
Commercial
Office Other -
Industrial
Office Other -
* Other may include vacant,
Church
social, institutional, etc. and
important for the community
from an equity building
perspective.
Diversity and Inclusion:
N/A Unknown No N/A Unknown No Y
Does the subject property
Yes
es
contribute to the cultural
Additional Research Additional Research
heritage of a community
Required
Required
of people?
Does the subject property
have intangible value to a
N/A Unknown No
N/A Unknown No Y
specific community of
Yes
es
people?
Additional Research
Additional Research
Required
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.
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Notes about Additional Criteria Examined
Recommendation
Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource, and should it
be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act? (Does it meet two or more of the
designation criteria?)
N/A Unknown No Yes
If not, please select the appropriate action for follow-up
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:
APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE