Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2025-380 - Notice of Intention to Demolish 11 Irvin Street Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: October 7, 2025 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals 519-783-8922 PREPARED BY: Victoria Grohn, Heritage Planner, 519-783-8912 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: August 28, 2025 REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-380 SUBJECT: Notice of Intention to Demolish 11 Irvin Street RECOMMENDATION: That, in accordance with Section 27(9) of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Notice of Intention to Demolish received on August 28, 2025, regarding the property municipally addressed as 11 Irvin Street, be received as information and that the notice period run its course; and further, That the City arrange to have the property municipally addressed as 11 Irvin Street properly documented through photographs prior to any demolition activity. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to present the proposed demolition of the property municipally addressed as 11 Irvin Street, presently listed as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the CityÓs Municipal Heritage Register. The key finding of this report is that the property has suffered significant damage because of a fire in 2024 and the structural damage has rendered the building unsafe and beyond reasonable repair, with estimated reconstruction costs outweighing the value of the property. There are no financial implications associated with this report. Community engagement included consultation with Heritage Kitchener. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The Development Services Department is in receipt of a Notice of Intention to Demolish the existing building located on the property municipally addressed as 11 Irvin Street (Òsubject propertyÓ). The subject property is listed as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the CityÓs Municipal Heritage Register. The subject property *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 209 of 326 was listed by City Council on May 26, 2014, and a copy of the associated Statement of Significance for the property can be found as Attachment A. Figure 1: Location Map Î 11 Irvin Street The Notice of Intention to Demolish was received on August 28, 2025 and was submitted by the current owner of the property. Ontario Heritage Act Provisions Part IV, Section 27(9) of the Ontario Heritage Act provides certain protections to properties listed as non-designated property on the CityÓs Municipal Heritage Register: Restriction on demolition, etc. (9) If property included on the register under subsection (3) has not been designated under section 29, the owner of the property shall not demolish or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the ownerÓs intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure. In accordance with the Act, Council has 60 days as of and including August 28, 2025 (date of receipt of the Notice of Intention to Demolish), to act, if it so chooses, on the Notice of Intention to Demolish. The 60 days provides Council with the time it requires to issue a Notice of Intention to Designate as a means of preventing the demolition. Page 210 of 326 REPORT: The existing single detached dwelling located at 11 Irvin Street is a one-and-a-half storey th red brick house built in the late 19 century Tudor Revival architectural style. The dwelling also exhibits many Arts & Crafts features, especially in the interior. The house is situated on a 0.29 acre parcel of land located on the west side of Irvin Street between Frederick Street and Scott Street. The house was built in two stages, with the main building constructed c. 1907 and a rear addition and garage were built in the 1920s. At the time the property was listed on the Municipal Heritage Register, the house was in good condition and was constructed with a high degree of craftsmanship and artistic merit, evidenced through its well executed cast stone elements and meticulous brick coursing. The Tudor Revival architectural style is rare within the City and the dwelling at 11 Irvin Street is a particularly unique example. Photo 1: 11 Irvin Street (photo taken from 2013) The house and the garage are now in poor condition because of a fire in late 2024. While the exterior of the dwelling appears to be in generally sound condition, save and except for portions of the roof, the interior of the dwelling has been severely compromised. In addition to the fire, the property has also been subject to repeated vandalism and unauthorized occupancy. The windows of the house have been boarded up and the house has been secured to deter these activities. Prior to the recent sale of the property, it is unknown how long the building has been vacant. Page 211 of 326 Photo 2: 11 Irvin Street (Image source: CHC Limited, August 2025) A Structural Condition Assessment of the building was undertaken in May 2025 by WitzelDyce Engineering Inc. (a copy of the report is included as an appendix to the HIA in Attachment B). The report was reviewed by a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP) from MTE Consultants Inc., in July 2025, (a copy of the review letter is included as an appendix to the HIA in Attachment B). The Structural Condition Assessment was limited to a visual assessment as no destructive testing or removals was completed as part of the review. The report details that the interior of the building has been severely damaged because of a fire from 2024. The second floor at the front of the house and the rear single storey garage are charred and multiple floor joists were completely burned through. There is a large area of deteriorating plaster in the stairway leading to the second floor, adjacent to the front fire- damaged area. The report notes that this is potentially a sign of significant movement in the structure or deterioration/damage within the wall. In addition to fire damage, the report also notes that there are multiple areas throughout the house where mold is present in the ceilings and walls. Based on the current condition of the dwelling, the report concludes that the house is not safe for occupancy and any repairs required are likely not feasible for a reasonable budget. Page 212 of 326 Photo 3: Damage to Floor Joists (Source: WitzelDyce, May 2025) Photo 4: Stairway Wall Deterioration/Damage (Source: WitzelDyce, May 2025) The property owner obtained an opinion from Menno S. Martin Contractor Ltd. in August 2025 for a cost estimate to reconstruct the dwelling. This opinion concluded that it could cost $1.5 million or more to bring the house to a habitable condition. There was also question as to whether the house in its current state would even be safe to work in. A copy of this email correspondence is included in this report as Attachment C. Heritage Impact Assessment A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), prepared by CHC Limited and dated August 25, 2025, was submitted as part of the Notice of Intention to Demolish. A copy of the HIA is included as Attachment B. The HIA provides a full site history, a detailed description of the Page 213 of 326 building, structure, and landscape features, an updated list of heritage attributes, and an assessment of the property against Ontario Regulation 9/06, criteria used to determine cultural heritage value or significance. The HIA concludes that the property municipally addressed a 11 Irvin Street meets three of the nine criteria under Regulation 9/06. These criteria are summarized in the table below. Criterion Met? (Y/N) Rationale 1. The property has design value Y The property is rare in the city, with or physical value because it is a few of the Tudor Revival style of rare, unique, representative or which this is representative. It also early example of a style, type, possesses Arts & Crafts details in its expression, material or addition and interior. construction method. 2. The property has design value Y The house is well-built of quality or physical value because it materials, exhibiting both displays a high degree of craftsmanship and artistic merit. The craftmanship or artistic merit. cast stone elements are particularly well executed; the brick coursing has been meticulously done, especially matching the c. 1907 and 1920s parts of the house. 8. The property has contextual Y The property has contextual value as value because it is physically, the adjacent properties are of a functionally, visually, or similar era, although not of a similar historically linked to its architectural style. Its neighbour to surroundings. the north is a contextual anomaly, however. Based on the evaluation, the HIA concludes that the property meets the minimum two criteria for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. While many of the heritage attributes are still intact, some are in poor condition because of smoke, fire, and previous water damage. The report goes on to note that while technically possible to restore the building, given the severe fire damage and current condition of the building, designation is questionable. The HIA concludes that selective demolition is the most reasonable option despite the significance of the property. CouncilÓs Options Under the Ontario Heritage Act, Council does not approve or refuse an ownerÓs Notice of Intention to Demolish. Rather, CouncilÓs options include the following: 1. Request further information; 2. Receive the Notice of Intention to Demolish, allowing the notice period to run its course, at the end of which the Building Division may issue a demolition permit as early as October 27, 2025; or 3. Council may issue a Notice of Intention to Designate, at which point Council would have the authority to deny demolition. Page 214 of 326 Heritage Planning Staff Comments In this case, Heritage Planning staff recommend Option #2 above as the appropriate course of action (i.e. receive for information the Notice of Intention to Demolish and allow the notice period to run its course). Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that no action should be taken to designate 11 Irvin Street. The heritage attributes identified in the Statement of Significance and the HIA are still intact, though many are now in poor condition because of the water, smoke, and fire damage that has occurred to the building, particularly the interior attributes. However, it is the interior of the dwelling that compromises the integrity of the building, and in its current condition the building is unsafe for occupancy. The current owner does not wish to undertake repairs, nor would this be a reasonable requirement given the condition of the building and estimated rebuilding costs. The City could choose to apply the provisions of the Property Standards By-law for vacant heritage buildings, should the property be designated, by undertaking repairs at the ownerÓs expense (added to the tax roll). However, the work needed to make the building habitable, which is key to longer term conservation, is well beyond the scope to make base level repairs. Approximately half of the second floor of the house, most of the roof, and the entire rear garage would need to be removed and reconstructed to make the house safe. These costs are estimated at $1.5 million or higher, versus approximately $25,000 to demolish and $875,000 to build new. Given the current condition of the building and the estimated economic commitments, demolition is the most reasonable option, despite the cultural heritage significance of the property. It is recommended that selective demolition occur, rather than use of heavy machinery. This would allow for the salvage and reuse of exterior features, such as the bricks. While opting to designate 11 Irvin Street could prevent demolition in the short term, the building would likely remain unoccupied and under continued threat of unlawful occupation, vandalism, and deterioration. As such, Heritage Planning staff do not recommend designation. However, staff do recommend that arrangements be made to properly photograph and document the building prior to any demolition activity. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget Î The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget Î The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 215 of 326 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM Î This report has been posted to the CityÓs website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage Kitchener committee meeting. CONSULT Î Heritage Kitchener has been consulted regarding the subject Notice of Intention to Demolish. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: Ontario Heritage Act Planning Act REVIEWED BY: Sandro Bassanese, Manager of Site Plan APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A Î Statement of Significance, 11 Irvin Street Attachment B Î Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by CHC Limited - Structural Condition Assessment prepared by WitzelDyce Engineering Inc. - Structural Condition Assessment Review prepared by MTE Consultants Inc. Attachment C Î Cost Estimate from Menno S. Martin Contractor Ltd. Page 216 of 326 Statement of Significance 11 Irvin Street Municipal Address: 11 Irvin Street Legal Description: Plan 32 Lot 3 & Part Lot 4 Year Built: c. 1890 Architectural Style: Tudor Original Owner: Alexander Chapman (A.C.) Renshaw Original Use: Residential Condition: Good Description of Historic Place th 11 Irvin Street is a one storey late 19 century brick house built in the Tudor architectural style. The house is situated on a 0.29 acre parcel of land located on the west 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 is the house. Page 217 of 326 Heritage Value 11 Irvin Street is recognized for its design and contextual values. The design value relates to the architecture of the house. The house is a unique example of the Tudor architectural style. The house is in good condition. The house is one storey in height and features: front gable roof; decorative half timbering with stucco; red brick; tall narrow multi pane windows; chimneys; square turret; front porch; and, stone foundation. The contextual values relate to the contribution that the house makes to the continuity and character of the Irvin Street streetscape. Heritage Attributes The heritage value of 11 Irvin Street resides in the following heritage attributes: All elements related to the Tudor architectural style of the house, including: o one-storey height of the house; o front gable roof; o decorative half timbering with stucco; o red brick; o tall narrow multi pane windows; o chimneys; o square turret; o front porch; 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. References Berliner Journal. (1896). New Buildings in Berlin for 1896. Berlin, Ontario. Page 218 of 326 Photos 11 Irvin Street 11 Irvin Street Page 219 of 326 11 Irvin Street 11 Irvin Street Page 220 of 326 City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form Address: 11 Irvin Street Period: c. 1890 Field Team Initials: ML/LB/CM Description: Date: April 18, 2013 EVALUATION FIELD TEAM SUBCOMMITTEE DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Style Is this a notable, rare or unique example of a particular architectural style or type? Construction Is this a notable, rare, unique or early example of a particular material or method of construction? Design Is this a particularly attractive or unique structure because of the merits of its design, composition, craftsmanship or details? Does this structure demonstrate a high degree of technical or scientific achievement? Interior Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship and/or detail noteworthy? Notes Field Team: turret and windows unique and attractive EVALUATION FIELD TEAM SUBCOMMITTEE CONTEXTUAL VALUE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Continuity Does this structure contribute to the community or character of the street, neighbourhood or area? Setting Is the setting or orientation of the structure or landscaping noteworthy? Does it provide a physical, historical, functional or visual link to its surroundings? Landmark Is this a particularly important visual landmark within the region , city or neighbourhood ? Completeness Does this structure have other original outbuildings, notable landscaping or external features that complete the site? Page 221 of 326 EVALUATION FIELD TEAM SUBCOMMITTEE CONTEXTUAL VALUE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Notes EVALUATION FIELD TEAM SUBCOMMITTEE INTEGRITY N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Site Does the structure occupy its original site? Alterations Does this building retain most of its original materials and design features? Is this a notable structure due to sympathetic alterations that have taken place over time? Condition Is this building in good condition? Notes EVALUATION FIELD TEAM SUBCOMMITTEE HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE & SIGNIFICANCE N/A Unknown No Yes N/A Unknown No Yes Does this property or structure have strong associations with and/or contribute to the understanding of a belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant or unique within the City? Is the original, previous or existing use significant? Does this property meet the definition of a significant built heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape, as identified in the Provincial Policy Statement under the Ontario Planning Act? A property or structure valued for the important contribution it makes to an understanding of the history of a place, an event or a people? Notes Page 222 of 326 Page 223 of 326 Page 224 of 326 Page 225 of 326 Page 226 of 326 Page 227 of 326 Page 228 of 326 Page 229 of 326 Page 230 of 326 Page 231 of 326 Page 232 of 326 Page 233 of 326 Page 234 of 326 Page 235 of 326 Page 236 of 326 Page 237 of 326 Page 238 of 326 Page 239 of 326 Page 240 of 326 Page 241 of 326 Page 242 of 326 Page 243 of 326 Page 244 of 326 Page 245 of 326 Page 246 of 326 Page 247 of 326 Page 248 of 326 Page 249 of 326 Page 250 of 326 Page 251 of 326 Page 252 of 326 Page 253 of 326 Page 254 of 326 Page 255 of 326 Page 256 of 326 Page 257 of 326 Page 258 of 326 Page 259 of 326 Page 260 of 326 Page 261 of 326 Page 262 of 326 Page 263 of 326 Page 264 of 326 Page 265 of 326 Page 266 of 326 Page 267 of 326 Page 268 of 326 Page 269 of 326 Page 270 of 326 Page 271 of 326 Page 272 of 326 Page 273 of 326 Page 274 of 326 Page 275 of 326 Page 276 of 326 Page 277 of 326 Page 278 of 326 Page 279 of 326 Page 280 of 326 ϶ Page 281 of 326