HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2025-436 - Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-020 - Victoria Park Picnic Shelter
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: November 4, 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 9
DATE OF REPORT: October 9, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD-2025-436
SUBJECT: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-020
92 David Street/135 Water Street South (35 Dill Street)
Demolition of Picnic Shelter in Victoria Park
RECOMMENDATION:
That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA-2025-V-020 to permit the demolition of the picnic shelter at the property
municipally addressed as 92 David Street/135 Water Street South (35 Dill Street) be
approved in accordance with the supplementary information submitted with this
application and subject to the following conditions:
1. That final building 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 the picnic shelter in
Victoria Park.
The key finding of this report is that the picnic shelter, constructed in 1952, is unfit for
public use and is slated for demolition and future replacement.
There are demolition costs to the municipality.
Community engagement included consultation with the Heritage Kitchener Committee
and through the Victoria Park Master Plan public engagements.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department is in receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA-
2025-V-020 for the property municipally addressed as 92 David Street/135 Water Street
South (35 Dill Street), commonly referred to as Victoria Park. The application is seeking
permission to demolish the picnic shelter located within the park.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
The location of the picnic shelter is at 35 Dill Street, which is in the southerly portion within
the broader Victoria Park. The park is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act,
being located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (VPAHCD). The
picnic shelter is identified in the VPAHCD Plan as a built feature within the park.
Figure 1: Location of subject property with the location of the picnic shelter circled
in red.
REPORT:
The picnic shelter in Victoria Park was constructed in 1952 and is an approximately 28 feet
by 76 feet (2,128 sq. ft) structure open on all sides. It consists of a corrugated metal roof
that is supported by steel posts.
Figure 2: Image of picnic shelter (image source: Structural Condition Assessment report prepared by
WitzelDyce Engineering Inc.)
The VPAHCD is comprised of two parts: the residential areas and Victoria Park. The goals
th
of the VPAHCD Plan with respect to the park is to conserve and enhance the 18 century
Romantic Landscape style of Victoria Park. The VPAHCD Plan goes on to note that:
th
e 18 century
Romantic Landscape style. Laid out in 1894, with the advice of landscape engineer
George Ricker, it exemplifies the key qualities of the Romantic Landscape style, namely:
Naturalistic character
Lake
Woods
Sweeps of grass
Meandering drives and paths
Vistas
The conservation and enhancement of these key landscape qualities is deemed essential
contemporary park elements.
The picnic shelter is referenced within the section of the VPAHCD Plan regarding
conservation policies for these built structures and monuments within the park.
Figure 3: Excerpt from VPAHCD Plan showing location of buildings, structures and
monuments. The picnic shelter is shown in the red circle.
The VPAHCD Plan identifies specific built features within Victoria Park that are
recommended to be removed or relocated over time as these features are considered
misplaced and inappropriately designed for the Romantic Landscape of Victoria Park. The
picnic shelter is identified as one of these specific built features recommended for
removal/relocation. 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 in the residential areas and
their associated heritage attributes.
Structural Condition Assessment
A Structural Condition Assessment was completed by WitzelDyce Engineering
Inc. on April 22, 2025. The purpose of this assessment was to provide an opinion on the
condition of the existing picnic shelter structure and to recommend any action items
required over the next 15 years, as necessary. The picnic shelter has been identified as
being in fair-to poor condition.
The SCA identified the structural posts as an area for priority repair as this presents a
potential safety concern for the public. The tarmac paving is recommended to be removed
and replaced due to it being a potential tripping hazard to the public, and the current
design/condition of the tarmac paving does not adequately shed water away from the base
of the posts. The SCA goes on to note that if the noted repairs are not completed the
structural components are susceptible to further deterioration and may worsen or result in
safety hazards. It is recommended that if the repairs are not completed by November
2025, that the shelter be closed to the public and temporary fencing be installed. The SCA
report is attached to this report as Attachment B.
Victoria Park Master Plan
The Parks and Cemeteries Division is currently in the process of developing a Master Plan
for Victoria Park. It has been identified through this work that the picnic shelter is slated to
be replaced in 2026. A decision has been made by Facilities Management staff and Parks
and Cemeteries Division staff to pursue demolition of the existing picnic shelter structure
rather than repair. It is noted that any replacement structure within Victoria Park will be
subject to the policies and guidelines of the VPAHCD Plan and that a heritage permit for
the construction or installation of a new building or structure within the park will be
required.
Heritage Planning Comments
In reviewing the merits of the application, Heritage Planning staff note the following:
The picnic shelter was constructed in 1952, has been identified as being in fair-poor
condition and portions of the shelter pose a risk to public safety.
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 in the residential areas and their
associated heritage attributes. The picnic shelter is not identified as a heritage
attribute of Victoria Park.
The picnic shelter is specifically identified within the VPAHCD Plan as a built
feature recommended for removal/replacement as it is considered misplaced and
inappropriately designed for the Romantic Landscape style of Victoria Park.
A heritage permit application is required for the proposed work not because it is
anticipated to have any negative impact on the heritage attributes of the VPAHCD
as a whole, but because the demolition or removal of any building or structure on a
designated property requires Council approval.
Any replacement structure will be subject to the policies and guidelines contained
within the VPAHCD Plan and a heritage permit application will be required.
The proposed demolition will not negatively impact the cultural heritage value or
significance of Victoria Park 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 picnic shelter.
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 an 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:
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O., 1990
Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District Plan
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-020
Attachment B Structural Condition Assessment completed by WitzelDyce
Engineering Inc. dated April 22, 2025
2025 Page 7 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
STAFF USE ONLY
Date Received: Accepted By:Application Number:
HPA-
PART B: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
1. NATURE OF APPLICATION
Exterior Interior Signage
DemolitionNew ConstructionAlterationRelocation
2. SUBJECT PROPERTY
35 Dill Street, Kitchener ON
Municipal Address:
Covered Picnic Shelter
Legal Description (if know):
Building/Structure Type: Residential Commercial Industrial Institutional
Heritage Designation: Part IV (Individual) Part V (Heritage Conservation District)
Yes No
Is the property subject to a Heritage Easement or Agreement?
3. PROPERTY OWNER
City of Kitchener - Parks - Jeffrey Silcox-Childs/Mark Parris
Name:
131 Goodrich Drive
Address:
Kitchener/Ontario/N2C 1J3
City/Province/Postal Code:
Phone:
Email:
4. AGENT (if applicable)
Peter Downar
Name:
City of Kitchener - Facilities Management
Company:
131 Goodrich Drive
Address:
Kitchener/Ontario/N2C 1J3
City/Province/Postal Code:
226-748-4950
Phone:
peter.downar@kitchener.ca
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.
Picnic shelter Built in 1952. Based on a structural assessment of the picnic shelter by Witzel Dyce,
it was recommended that structural repairs are necessary and if those repairs are not carried out by
november of 2025 that the structure be fenced off from public use. As part of the Victoria park master
plan, the picnic shelter was slated to be replaced in 2026. Therefore a decision has been made by FM
and Kitchener parks to demolish the existing structure.
6. REVIEW OF CITY OF KITCHENER HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
Describe why it is necessary to undertake the proposed work:
Public safety, future replacement
Describe how the proposal is consistent with the Part IV individual designating by-law or the Part V Heritage
Conservation District Plan:
Picnic shelter is unfit for use.
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
November 2025 November 2025
a) Expected start date: Expected completion date:
b) Have you discussed this work with Heritage Planning Staff?Yes No
- If yes, who did you speak to?
c) Have you discussed this work with Building Division Staff? Yes No
- If yes, who did you speak to?
d) Have you applied for a Building Permit for this work? Yes No
pplication number
e) Other related Building or Planning applications: A
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.
August 26 2025
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
9.AUTHORIZATION
If this application is being made by an agent on behalf of the property owner, the following authorization must
be completed:
I / We, , owner of the land that is subject of this application,
hereby authorize to act on my / our behalf in this regard.
Signature of Owner/Agent:Date:
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:
Page 1of 19
QSPKFDU!JOGPSNBUJPO;
QSPKFDU!OBNF;!WJDUPSJB!QBSL!TUSVDUVSBM!DPOEJUJPO!BTTFTTNFOUT!
QSPKFDU!$;!36.165
EBUF;!NBZ03403136
May 21, 2025
SFWJFX;NLW
NBSL.VQT!GPS!XEF
WDE File No.: 17428-100
DPPSEJOBUJPO!x!XEF
DpL!DPPSEJOBUJPO
Matt Vanderzee, M.Eng., P.Eng.
Project Manager, Facilities Capital Planning and Asset Management
City of Kitchener
200 King St W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
RE:Victoria Park Picnic ShelterStructural Condition Assessment
35 Dill St, Kitchener,ON N2G1L2
Dear Mr. Vanderzee:
Joe Figliomeni from Witzel Dyce Engineering (WDE)conducted a Structural Condition
Assessmenton April 22,2025,at the address above. The purpose of this assessmentwas to
provideour professional opinion on thecondition of theexistingpicnic shelter structure and to
recommend any action items required over the next 15 years,as necessary.
1.0Background
At the time of this report, no existing building drawings have been provided to WDE for review.
for the purpose of background information regarding the structure. Theapproximate 28
(2,128 sq.ft.)shelter is open on all sides and was constructed in 1952. It consists of a corrugated
metal roof that is supported by structural steel angles and channels. The structural angles and
channels are supported by round structuralsteelposts that bear on concrete footings. The typical The typical
approximate service life for a structure of this construction/make approximate service life for a structure of this construction/make is is 35 35 --50 years50 yearsif maintained if maintained
wellwell. .
2.0Observationsand Discussions
Refer to AppendixA for photos from the assessment. Refer to Appendix B for detailed
observations,discussions, and estimated costs. The following components were reviewed for this
assessment, as conditions allowed:
Concrete foundations
Corrugated metal roof decking
Structural angles
Structural channels
Structural posts
Tarmac paving
Wood roof sheathing
May 21, 2025
Page 2of 19
The structural posts were observed to be in the most severe condition due to section loss being
observed at the base of the posts, refer to photos 2to 5in Appendix A. The tarmac paving was
observedto be cracked, uneven, and crumbling in multiple locations, refer to photos 2to 7in
Appendix A. Themajority of the structural steel was observed to have paint flaking and surface
corrosion, refer to photos 9to 11in Appendix A.
3.0Recommendations
In our opinion, the In our opinion, the structural posts are the priority structural posts are the priority repairrepairthat should be addressed that should be addressed as soon as as
soon as
possiblepossiblebecause they presentbecause they presentaapotentialpotentialsafety safety concern for the concern for the public. public. We recommend repairing
the base of the posts in order to eliminate the safety concern,which would also prolong the
expected service life of the posts. Alternatively, the existing posts could be removed and replaced
with galvanized steel,which would require less maintenance long term, however, itmay cost more
initially.
The tarmac paving is recommended to be removed and replaced due to it being a potential The tarmac paving is recommended to be removed and replaced due to it being a potential
tripping hazard for the public. The tarmac paving can be replaced with a similar material, however, tripping hazard for the public. The tarmac paving can be replaced with a similar material,
however,
it may require maintenance within 15 years. Replacing the tarmac with a waterproofed concrete
surface may be a better option for longevity, however, it may cost more initially.The current The current
design/condition of the tarmac paving does not adequately shed water away from the base of the design/condition of the tarmac paving does not adequately shed water away from the base
of the
posts. Therefore, replacing the tarmac likeposts. Therefore, replacing the tarmac like-for-like may not solve the issue of water pooling unless
that detail is redesigned.
Itis our opinion thatthe estimated cost to repair the picnic structure is $48,000 (excluding soft
costs and HST, cost is subject to +/-25% of expected actual costs)over 15 years.Refer to
Appendix B for the estimated cost breakdown. The scope of the repairs would likely prolong the
service life of the structural elements for an additional 10 to 15 years before they may require
maintenance again. maintenance again. If the noted repairs are not completed, the structural components are If the noted repairs are not completed, the structural components are If the
noted repairs are not completed, the structural components are
susceptible to further deterioratsusceptible to further deteriorationionanand d may may worsenworsenor result in safety hazardsor result in safety hazardsor result in safety hazards.
. If the structural If the structural
posts are not posts are not repaired repaired by November 2025, we recommend that by November 2025, we recommend that the shelter be closed to the public the shelter be closed to the
public
and temporary fencing be installed. and temporary fencing be installed. Based on the age and condition of the existing picnic
structure, it may be more feasible to replace it entirely and install a new structure with material
such as galvanized steel and waterproofed concrete that typically lastslonger than 15 years
before any maintenance is required. The cost to replace the new structure with the previously
mentioned materials would be approximately $190,000(excluding soft costs and HST, cost is
subject to +/-25% of expected actual costs).
XEF!DPOGJSNFE!WJB/!FNBJM!UIBU!JG!XF
XBOUFE!UP!HP!XJUI!B!DPODSFUF!TMBC
PO!HSBEF!XF!XPVME!CF!BO
BEEJUJPOBM!%28-111/11!)BQSPY/*/
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 3 of 19
We trust this meets your current requirements. Should you have any questions, comments, or
require repair design, please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc.
Nbz!32-!3136
Joe Figliomeni, Dennis Nadon, P.Eng.
Project Manager Structural Engineer
P:\\17428\\100\\COR\\17428-100 - 2025 05 21 - Victoria Park Picnic Shelter - Structural Condition Assessment.docx
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 4 of 19
Disclaimer and Limitations of Assessment
This report has been prepared by Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. (WDE) at the request of the City
of Kitchener. The material in it reflects the best judgment of WDE based on limited visual
observations and the information that was available at the time of its preparation. Any use of this
report by a third party or any reliance or decisions made based on this report is the responsibility
of that third party. WDE accepts no responsibility for damages, if any are incurred, suffered by
any third party as a result of decisions or actions made based upon this report.
This assessment does not wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for existing or
future costs, hazards, or losses in connection with a property. No physical or destructive testing
and no engineering calculations have been performed unless specifically mentioned in the report.
Existing conditions that have not been recorded may not have been apparent given the level of
study undertaken. Further investigation into any items of concern can be undertaken if required.
Only specific information that has been identified has been reviewed. The consultant is not
obligated to identify any mistakes or insufficiencies in the information obtained from various
sources, nor is it obligated to verify the accuracy of such information. The consultant is permitted
to use the information provided by various sources in performing its services and is entitled to rely
any pollutants, contaminants, or hazardous materials.
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 5 of 19
Appendix A
Photos
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 6 of 19
Photo 1 - General view of picnic shelter
Photo 2 - Deteriorated post base and tarmac
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 7 of 19
Photo 3 - Deteriorated post base and tarmac
Photo 4 - Deteriorated post base and tarmac
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 8 of 19
Photo 5 - Deteriorated post base and tarmac
Crack /
Settlement
Photo 6 - Deteriorated tarmac
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 9 of 19
Photo 7 - Settled tarmac and exposed concrete pier
Photo 8 - Aged and weathered corrugated metal roof decking
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 10 of 19
Photo 9 - Paint chipping on wood sheathing and corrosion on angle/fastener
Photo 10 - Corrosion on a perimeter angle
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 11 of 19
Photo 11 - Corrosion on a channel
Photo 12 - General view of the roof structure
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 12 of 19
Appendix B
Observations, Discussions, and Estimated Costs
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 15 of 19
Appendix C
Relevant Terminology and Definitions
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 16 of 19
As per the Structural Condition Assessments of Existing Buildings and Designated
Structures Guidelines, developed by Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO), the following is a
list of definitions and phrases for qualitative terms about the condition of a structure, structural
element, or part of a structural element:
Primary Structural System
-weight and applicable
live loads based on occupancy, use of the space, and environmental loads, such as wind, snow,
and seismic forces.
Structural Integrity
Defined in the Structural Commentary L of the 2010 edition of the NBC-Part 4 Division B, to mean
the ability of a structure to absorb local failure without widespread collapse.
Structurally Adequate
Buildings are deemed to be structurally adequate provided they satisfy the evaluation criteria
-NBC of the Structural Commentaries (Part 4
Division B).
Structurally Sufficient
Buildings and other designated structures that are designed and built to the minimum structural
requirements of the current Building Code, in compliance with a valid building permit and where
applicable, with the design and general review requirements of the Building Code are deemed to
Structurally Sound
A building or other structure exhibiting no evidence of defects, damage, deterioration, or distress
that might impair its structural function or its present occupancy and use. Sound is not the same
as adequate. Sound simply means undamaged.
Structurally Unsafe
a) Structurally inadequate or faulty for the purpose for which it is used; or
b) In a condition that could be hazardous to the health or safety of persons in the normal use
of the building, persons outside the building, or persons whose access to the building has
Ministry of Transportation and dated October 2000 (revised November 2003 and April 2008):
i) Excellent
condition.
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 17 of 19
No visible deterioration type defects are present and remedial action is not
required.
Minor construction defects do not count as visible deterioration type defects.
ii) Good
(minor) defects are visible. This usually occurs after the structure has been in
service for a number of years. These types of defects would not normally trigger
any remedial action since the overall performance of the element is not affected.
iii) Fair
This refers to an element (or part of an element) where medium defects are visible.
action where it is economical to do so.
iv) Poor
This refers to an element (or part of an element) where severe and very severe
defects are visible. In concrete, any type of spalling or delamination would be
problems in the material. These types of defects would normally trigger
rehabilitation or replacement if the extent and location affect the overall
performance of that element.
The following is a list of definitions and phrases from the Ontario Structure Inspection Manual
(OSIM) developed by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation:
Defect
An identifiable, unwanted condition that was not part of the original intent of design.
Deterioration
A defect that has occurred over a period of time.
Distress
A defect produced by loading.
Rehabilitation
Any modification, alteration, retrofitting, or improvement to a component of the structure which is
aimed at correcting existing defects or deficiencies.
Repair
Any modification, alteration, retrofitting, or improvement to a component of the structure which is
aimed at correcting existing defects or deficiencies.
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 18 of 19
Delamination
A discontinuity of the surface concrete which is substantially separated but not completely
detached from concrete below or above it.
Severity
Light Delaminated area measuring less than 150 mm in any direction.
Medium Delaminated area measuring 150 mm to 300 mm in any direction.
Severe Delaminated area measuring 300 mm to 600 mm in any direction.
Very Severe Delaminated area measuring more than 600 mm in any direction.
Spalling
A fragment that has been detached from a larger concrete mass. Spalling is a continuation of the
delamination process where pressure exerted by the corrosion of reinforcement or by the
formation of ice in the delaminated area results in the breaking off of the delaminated concrete.
Severity
Light Spalled area measuring less than 150 mm in any direction or less than 25 mm in
depth.
Medium Spalled area measuring between 150 mm to 300 mm in any direction or
between 25 mm and 50 mm in depth.
Severe Spalled area measuring between 300 mm to 600 mm in any direction or between
50 mm and 100 mm in depth.
Very Severe Spalled area measuring more than 600 mm in any direction or greater than
100 mm in depth.
Cracking
A linear fracture in concrete which extends partly or completely through the member.
Severity
Hairline cracks less than 0.1 mm wide.
Narrow cracks 0.1 mmm to 0.3 mm wide.
Medium cracks 0.3 mm to 1.0 mm wide.
Wide cracks greater than 1.0 mm wide.
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com
May 21, 2025
Page 19 of 19
Corrosion of Steel
The deterioration of steel by chemical or electro-chemical reactions resulting from exposure to
air, moisture, deicing salts, indicate fumes, and other chemicals and contaminants in the
environment in which it is placed.
Severity
Light Loose rust formation and pitting in the paint surface. No noticeable section loss.
Medium Loose rust formation with scales or flakes forming. Definite areas of rust are
noticeable. Up to 10% section loss.
Severe Stratified rust with pitting of the metal surface. Between 10% to 20% section
loss.
Very Severe Extensive rusting with local perforation or rusting through. In excess of 20%
section loss.
Witzel Dyce Engineering Inc. www.witzeldyce.com