Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage Kitchener - 2005-05-03 HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES MAY 3 2005 CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:05 p.m. Present: Mr. Z. Janecki - Co-Chair, was in attendance for part of this meeting. Councillor M. Galloway, Ms. J. Armstrong, Ms. A. Moore, Ms. D. Kuehl, Ms. E. Gallaher and Messrs. K. Kirby, J. Countryman, G. Yeates, J. Law, and M. Stranz. Staff: Mr. L. Bensason, Heritage Planner Mr. S. Rice, Zoning Officer Mr. C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator 1. DTS-05-068 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2005-IV-002 - 120 DUKE STREET WEST - ALTERATION AND RESTORATION OF FORMER ST. JEROME'S COLLEGE/HIGH SCHOOL The Committee was in receipt of Development and Technical Services Department report DTS- 05-068, dated April 20, 2005 regarding Heritage Permit Application HPA 2005-IV-002 for 120 Duke Street West (St. Jerome's High School/College) to permit the work as shown on the plans and described in the specifications dated March 9, 2005, April 11, 2005 and April 13, 2005 submitted in support of the application. Mr. L. Bensason, advised that staff is recommending approval of the HPA subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. He stated when reviewing the application he made reference to both the Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Heritage Properties and the new Canadian Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. Mr. Bensason reviewed Condition 2 advising that masonry repair will be necessary due to the removal of the fire escape. He proposed an amendment to Condition 3 include the chimney on the northwest corner, and that both chimneys are to be lowered to a height not to exceed 6' and capped. Mr. Bensason advised that the Standards and Guidelines for provide for use of substitute materials if original materials are not technically or economically feasible. In this regard, he requested the architect to provide a quotation for the replacement windows comparing the cost of the proposed PVC (vinyl) units with the cost of new wooden units, both of which to match the original windows in design and detail. He advised that the cost for the PVC units are $126,000. and the cost of the wooden units are $572,317.; therefore staff are not opposed to the use of PVC window units. In response to questions, Mr. L. Bensason advised that the proposed second and third story windows are casement and the first story windows are double hung, which match the original style. He stated that he made it clear to the applicant that the condition reads that the windows must match the original style and that if due to the supplier being unable to comply the applicant must come back before the Committee to present alternatives for approval. Ms. A Moore requested that the Committee be provided with a detailed cost estimates for the wooden windows. Regarding Condition 1, Mr. L. Bensason advised that the applicant seeks Council's approval to remove the cross located on the peak of the central pavilion on the front elevation. He stated that staff is suggesting that this religious symbol is directly related with the cultural history of the property, considering St. Jerome's served as the foundation of Catholic education well beyond the County's border. The cross is believed to be original to the architecture of the building, is located in a prominent location on the main fa<;:ade, and is the one remaining feature on the property that is symbolic of the belief and faith that was a large part of this property's history. He commented that from a heritage conservation perspective, the removal of the cross does not appear to be required to meet a technical or structural need, nor is it related to significant capital expenditure. He advised that it is staff's recommendation that a condition be applied requiring the owner to restore and retain the cross in its current location. He added that staff acknowledges that St. Jerome's is being rehabilitated for a nondenominational use and it is the University's preference that the cross be removed and donated to the Father's of the Resurrection for their archives. He stated that given that retaining the cross touches upon issues that go beyond heritage conservation, staff have provided additional options for consideration outlined in the staff report. HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 -17- CITY OF KITCHENER 1. DTS-05-068 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2005-IV-002 - 120 DUKE STREET WEST - ALTERATION AND RESTORATION OF FORMER ST. JEROME'S COLLEGE/HIGH SCHOOL lCONT'D) Mr. Ron Dupuis, Assistant Vice-President of Physical Resources, Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU), advised that this project has a fixed budget, which specifies an amount of a $126,000. for vinyl windows. He stated that with respect to the concerns raised regarding the windows, prior to their production he will present a mock up of one to Mr. L. Bensason for approval. He advised that he is supportive of every condition outlined in the staff report, except for Condition 1. He stated that WLU is multicultural and the retention of the cross in its current location may infringe upon some students cultural beliefs. Mr. Dupuis then displayed an enlarged historic postcard of St. Jerome's with the title "St. Jerome's College, Berlin Canada" pointing out that the cross on top of the building in the postcard has curved features whereas the cross at present does not. He then concluded that the existing cross is not the original as requested in Condition 1 of the staff report. Mr. Dupuis stated that since the inception of the agreement with the City to use St. Jerome's it has been WLU's position to remove the cross. Father Hayes, Father's of the Resurrection Congregation, advised that he was the administrator at St. Jerome's from 1967 to 1973 and he is the liaison for the congregation to this project. He stated that the church believes that to leave the cross in its current location would be a gross misrepresentation that the building is in someway connected to the Catholic Church. He stated that the initial proposal from WLU was for the cross to be removed and given to the congregation and placed in their archives. He advised that the church has no objection to the cross being taken down and incorporated into a historic display on the property. Father Hayes noted that to the church the historical marker of the building is its fa<;:ade and not the cross. In response to questions, Father Hayes advised that if given to the congregation's archives the cross would be periodically put on display. Mr. R. Dupuis advised that it is WLU's preference that the cross be taken off site; however, if that is not possible than he has no objection to it being included in a historical display on the property. He added that as far as being culturally sensitive to the catholic religion, the position of Father Hayes and the Father's of the Resurrection Congregation are in line with that of WLU. Father Hayes advised that prior to WLU acquiring St. Jerome's the congregation was unsure as to the future use of the building, accordingly, the cross was never removed. Mr. L. Bensason advised that even if the cross is not the original it still serves as a historical marker of what that building meant to this community and it remains staff's recommendation that the cross should be retained in its current location. Ms. A. Moore stated that understanding what the Committee's mandate is, in this instance it may be important to recognize there are extenuating circumstances and that by taking a firm stand on this issue, it might defer future investments in Kitchener's historic sites. Mr. Bensason advised that given the role of this Committee the history of this building should be preserved. He added that without the cross 30 years from now a person will not know what role St. Jerome's played as the centre for Catholic education in this community. He stated that a similar incident occurred when the Governor's House and Jail were being restored and it was decided that the bars on the windows be retained to preserve what that property meant to the community. Mr. J. Law advised that because WLU is nondenominational and given that the church wants the cross removed he is in support of alternative 3 as outlined in the staff report. Ms. J. Armstrong stated that she recognizes this is a culturally sensitive issue, however, the cross should be retained as an architectural and cultural feature of the building. Ms. A. Moore proposed that given the contentious nature of these issues that staff's recommendation be dealt with in two parts: part 1 to include conditions 2 - 4 and the second part dealing with condition 1, the issue of the cross. Ms. J. Armstrong proposed an amendment to the recommendations in the staff report to add three more conditions to be considered with Conditions 2,3, and 4, being: · that the missing corbels be replaced; and, · that shadow lines be added to the upper fascia to mimic the effect of the original design; and further, HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 - 18- CITY OF KITCHENER 1. DTS-05-068 - HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2005-IV-002 -120 DUKE STREET WEST - ALTERATION AND RESTORATION OF FORMER ST. JEROME'S COLLEGE/HIGH SCHOOL lCONT'D) · the applicant attend a future meeting of Heritage Kitchener to present and seek approval for the finalized design location of the roof's screening. Ms. A. Moore accepted Ms. Armstrong's amendments as friendly. Mr. R. Dupuis advised that he does not have any concerns with the additions of those conditions. On motion by Ms. A. Moore- it was resolved: "That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2005-IV-002 (120 Duke Street West), be approved to permit the work as shown on the plans and described in the specifications dated March 9, 2005, April 11, 2005 and April 13, 2005 submitted in support of the application, subject to the following conditions: a) That any openings or damage to the masonry resulting from the removal of the fire escape on the west elevation be repaired in accordance with the specifications submitted for masonry repair; and, b) That the existing brick chimneys located at the northeast and northwest corners of the building be lowered to a height no less than 6' and capped as shown on elevation drawings dated April 11, 2005 rather than be removed completely (as referenced in the specifications dated March 9, 2005); and, c) That the new PVC window units match the form and detailing (including the window proportion and divisions) of the corresponding original wood windows, all as depicted in elevation drawing numbers A07, A08 and A09 dated April 11, 2005 prepared by Cianfrone Architect Inc.; and that the owner submit measured drawings of each variation of the original wood windows to the City for its archives; and, d) That the missing corbels be replaced; and, e) That shadow lines be added to the upper fascia to mimic the effect of the original design; and further, f) That the applicant attend a future meeting of Heritage Kitchener to present and seek approval for the finalized design and location of the roof screening." Mr. K. Kirby put forward condition 1 of the staff report as a motion and it was defeated. Councillor M. Galloway put forward a motion that the cross be relocated somewhere on the property of St. Jerome's to be incorporated into a historic monument/display depicting the history of St. Jerome's. Mr. L. Bensason advised that he is supportive of Councillor Galloway's motion. Councillor Galloway commented that he has faith that WLU, the Father's of the Resurrection and City staff will work amicably together to develop a display that represents the significance of what St. Jerome's meant to this area. On motion by Councillor M. Galloway- It was resolved: "That the cross at 120 Duke Street West (St. Jerome's High School/College) situated on the peak of the pediment on top of the central pavilion on the south (front) elevation be relocated to another site on the grounds of the St. Jerome's property or within the building as part of a historical monument/display depicting the history of St. Jerome's." HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 - 19 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. DESIGNATION/EASEMENT AGREEMENT - 318 DUKE STREET WEST (FIRE HALL NO.2) The Committee was in receipt of a Heritage Buildings Inventory description of 318 Duke Street West (Fire Hall No.2), dated July 1989, which provides historical information and architectural description of the subject property. Mr. L. Bensason advised that the City has received a Zone Change Application for 318 Duke Street West, which was the City's second Fire Hall built in 1913 and is the oldest remaining Fire Hall in the City. He stated that the property is listed on the Heritage Inventory and qualifies as a candidate for Part IV designation. He added that the Zone Change Application requests a change in zoning from General Industrial (M2) to Industrial Residential Zone (M1), to allow for the rehabilitation of the building for use as an artist studio with an accessory office, retail space and 2 apartment units; previously, it was used for car sales and service. He advised that Planning Act applications provide an opportunity to apply conditions to the approval of the application that will serve in the public interest. As a result, the proposed Zone Change could be made conditional on the owners entering into a Heritage Conservation Easement Agreement with the City. He also identified an interest in initiating designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Mr. Bensason stated that the owners of 318 Duke Street West have expressed a strong desire to rehabilitate the former Fire Hall using good conservation practices and that while they understand the merits of what the City is trying to do, they are concerned that the requirements related to a Heritage Easement Agreement will cause them undo hardship. Mr. Bensason noted that designation by itself does not provide the same protection in perpetuity as a Heritage Easement Agreement. He advised that staff is seeking the Committee's direction as to whether they should pursue Part IV designation or an agreement for this property. Mr. Brian Bee, owner, advised that he is willing to accept designation, but believes an Easement Agreement would be an encumbrance on title of the property. He stated that an Easement Agreement would affect his mortgage rates because only certain companies will provide him with a mortgage and his insurance provider advised him that his insurance will go up by 150%. He added that he is aware of the Heritage Grants that the City provides, but unfortunately he would only qualified to receive between $70 - $350 a year, which would not subsidize the cost of his increased rates. He asserted that he wants to restore the building using good conservation practices. In response to questions, Mr. L. Bensason advised that at present the City only has 6 Heritage Conservation Easement Agreements in place and this would be the first one applied as a condition of a Zone Change application. He stated that typical provisions for an Easement Agreement would require an owner to acquire a certain type of insurance that has a higher premium. He advised that if the Committee believes that staff should pursue an Easement Agreement then this will go before the City's Development and Technical Services Department Committee (DTS) in June 2005 as part of the Zone Change application. He noted that if approved by DTS the Easement Agreement would then come before Heritage Kitchener to work out the details. He added that Heritage Kitchener does not have the jurisdiction to apply an Easement Agreement to a property. Several members of the Committee expressed concerns with the pursuit of an Easement Agreement stating that when a person applies for a Zone Change Application they do not expect to have significant costs attached to its approval. Accordingly, the Committee agreed to leave this matter to staff's discretion as to whether they wish to pursue designation or an Easement Agreement. Mr. Bensason advised that at the very least this matter will come back before the Committee on June 7, 2005 as a request for a Part IV Designation of the subject property. Mr. Z. Janecki left the meeting at this time and Councillor M. Galloway assumed the Chair. HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 - 20- CITY OF KITCHENER 3. CSD-05-052 - DRAFT CUL TUREPLAN II The Committee was in receipt of Community Services Department report CSD-05-052, dated April 8, 2005 and an introduction to the Draft Culture Plan II, dated May 3, 2005 which provides an overview of the purpose and process of CulturePlan II and its relevance to Heritage Kitchener. Ms. E. Harris presented highlights of the Plan as it inter-relates to the mandate of Heritage Kitchener and advised that the Plan's focus is to identify and invest in culture / diversity, both corporately and City-wide, in order to sustain a healthy and vibrant City. CulturePlan II includes 58 recommendations and an integrated 5 year Strategic Plan for arts and culture based on public input and also identifies implementation strategies and a collaborative work plan involving residents and stakeholders. She stated that the draft document is the result of an extensive inclusion process which utilized stakeholder questionnaires and interviews, public forums and research. She noted that the plan recommendations follow 3 specific streams: community development; economic development; and, programming. Ms. Harris advised that she is interested in obtaining the Committee's feedback and would relay any comments to the Steering Committee. She referred to a listing of Community Values and Principles included in the draft plan which could be reviewed when consideration is given as to how to advocate on behalf of CulturePlan II. In closing, Ms. Harris requested that a Committee member be appointed to attend an upcoming public meeting to represent the views of the Committee. Ms. A. Moore volunteered to attend the upcoming public input sessions on May 27, 2005, and all members were urged to attend the June 27, 2005 presentation to Council. Ms. A. Moore left the meeting at this time. 4. 39 DOON VALLEY DRIVE - REPEAL/REPLACEMENT OF DESIGNATION BY-LAW The Committee was in receipt this date of correspondence from Mr. L. Bensason to Messrs. J. Taleski, J. Redmond, Eric Saulesleja and Steve Cameron regarding a new Designation By-law for 39 Doon Valley Drive and parts of the former Doon Valley Drive right-of-way (ROW) and the repeal of the original Designation By-law 91-142. The Committee was also in receipt of a copy of the proposed new Designation By-law; reasons for designation; a copy of the original Designation By-law 91-142; and, a site plan for the subject area, dated June 1992. Mr. L. Bensason advised that 39 Doon Valley Drive, originally designated in 1991, was one large parcel of land with a metes and bounds legal description, located at the southeast corner of Doon Valley Drive and Pinnacle Drive. He stated that the original Designation By-law made mention of trees located along the Doon Valley Drive right-of-way, which at that time was a public road. In 1992 Doon Valley Drive was closed and sold to the adjoining property owners. He noted that at that time no one realized that the designation covered lands that the City was selling to two different property owners. Since then a severance has occurred that separated the portions of land with the house (Parts 2, 3, & 4 of 58R-11396) from the remainder of 39 Doon Valley Drive (Parts 1 & 5 of 58R-11396). He advised that at the time of severance it was realized that the designation covered lands that were not legally part of 39 Doon Valley Drive and it was agreed that the original Designation By-law 91-142 would be amended; however, this amendment never occurred. Mr. L. Bensason stated that at present the owners of 39 Doon Valley Drive, James and Linda Taleski, wish to sell the severed parcel of land that does not include the house to Pieter Vas Limited; who in turn, as a condition of sale, wants the amendment enacted so that the designation only makes reference to the features that are a part of the legal description of Parts 2, 3, & 4 of 58R-11396. Mr. Bensason stated that the second issue surrounding this matter is the passing of a new Designation By-law to cover Parts 2, 3 & 4 of the 58R-11396 and parts of the former Doon Valley Drive right-of-way. He advised that the owners of the ROW, Freure Developments Limited, submitted a Plan of Subdivision for the area and through a land exchange the City acquired the right-of-way to be used as community trail. HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 - 21 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. 39 DOON VALLEY DRIVE - REPEAL/REPLACEMENT OF DESIGNATION BY-LAW (CONT'D) Mr. J. Countryman left the meeting at this time. In response to questions, Mr. L. Bensason advised that staff are requesting approval of 2 items. The first is an amendment to the original Designation By-law 91-142 so the designation applies only to Parts 2, 3, & 4 of 58R-11396. The second is a new Designation By-law for 39 Doon Valley Drive and parts of the former Doon Valley Drive right-of-way. He added that a by-law to repeal the original Designation By-law will not go forward to Council until the process for the new Designation By-law is complete and it has been registered on title. He noted that all of the property owners involved support this process and advised that he will make changes to the draft by-law to ensure that is reflects the wording in the 'Reasons for Designation'. On motion by Ms. J. Armstrong - it was resolved: "That By-law 91-142 designating 39 Doon Valley Drive as being of historic and architectural value, pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 357, be amended so that the legal description no longer makes reference to lands which are now legally described as Parts 1 and 5 of 58R-11396; and to revise the heritage attributes to add reference to the apple tree and delete reference to the birch, white spruce and elders along the fenceline beside the road, and the alignment and historic nature of the 18' right-of-way of the former Doon Village Road without curb and gutters for a distance of 400' from the intersection of Doon Valley Drive and Pinnacle Drive." On motion by Mr. J. Law- it was resolved: "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 known as 39 Doon Valley Drive and part of the former Doon Valley Drive right-of-way as being of cultural heritage value or interest, with the following heritage attributes: The house located at 39 Doon Valley Drive is a circa 1840 1 % storey structure, constructed with a combination of granite, limestone, fieldstone and lime mortar. The heritage attributes of the building include: the north, east and west elevations of the house, including wood soffit and V-frieze board, wood sash, sill and casing of all windows, single door with transom on the north (front) elevation, the roof and roofline, including the stone chimney above the east gable of the farmhouse. The building material, methods of construction, and the rural setting are also heritage attributes. Heritage attributes include the rural setting of this house and the historic alignment of the former Doon Valley Drive (previously Doon Village Road and Old Huron Road) right- of-way. Several trees of a significant age, both on 39 Doon Valley Drive and the former right-of-way, are situated immediately around the house, including one Apple, two Sugar Maples, one Norway Spruce, and one Ash. These trees have provided an historic context for the house for several decades, including the era when the former Doon Village Road (Old Huron Road) was an open and travelled road linking the former Village of Doon to Tow Town and Oregon (today known as Upper Doon), in the 19th century. This road also served as one of the post-1850 alignments of the Old Huron Road, commonly referred to as the 'Canada Company's Communication Road'. Historically, there have been three significant owners associated with the subject property. They are the Honourable Adam Ferry, founder of Doon, Samuel Snider, owner of the Blair Mill, and Thomas Slee, one of the first trustees of S.S. 327 Waterloo Township and postmaster in Doon from 1867 to 1893; and further, That once the Notice of Intention has been published, and the objection period has expired with no objections, or any objections which may be received are resolved, and a HERITAGE KITCHENER MAY 3 2005 - 22- CITY OF KITCHENER 4. 39 DOON VALLEY DRIVE - REPEAL/REPLACEMENT OF DESIGNATION BY-LAW (CONT'D) designating by-law has been adopted by Council, and registered on title, Council pass a by-law to repeal the previous designating by-law, as amended, in the manner prescribed in the Ontario Heritage Act." 5. 22 THERESA STREET The Committee was in receipt this date of Heritage Permit Application HPA-V-004 for 22 Theresa Street (Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District), dated April 18, 2005 regarding the proposed construction of a front porch. Mr. L. Bensason advised that this matter will be dealt with in-depth at the June 7, 2005 Heritage Kitchener meeting. He stated that the owners want to remove the existing steps and replace them with a wide porch that would resemble a deck. He expressed concerns with the materials that are proposed to be used and requested a volunteer from Heritage Kitchener to review this application and report back to the June meeting. Ms. J. Armstrong volunteered to examine the HPA as she is the Committee's representative for the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District. 6. 74 REX DRIVE - PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITION The Committee was in receipt of correspondence from Mr. L. Bensason to representatives of the owners of 74 Rex Drive (St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District), dated April 25, 2005, regarding a Heritage Permit Application for that property to allow for the construction of a proposed building addition. Mr. L. Bensason advised that this matter will be dealt with in-depth at the June 7, 2005 Heritage Kitchener meeting. He stated that a one storey addition is being proposed for 74 Rex Drive, which is almost the same size as the remainder of the house and will be located in the rear of the property. Mr. K. Kirby volunteered to review the HPA as he is the Committee's representative for the St. Mary's Heritage Conservation District. 7. HERITAGE INVENTORY REVIEW - UPDATE Mr. L. Bensason advised that the Heritage Inventory sub-committee has agreed to meet at 4:00 p.m. on the third Tuesday of every month. Ms. J. Armstrong volunteered to participate on the sub-committee. 8. DEFERRAL OF AGENDA ITEMS Due to time constraints, the following matters listed on the agenda this date were deferred and referred to the June 7,2005 Heritage Kitchener meeting. · DTS-05-040 - Tree Protection & Management Plan - Spadina Avenue & Windsor Crescent Reconstruction Project - Update · Heritage Permit Application HPA 2005-V-003 - 79 Joseph Street - KOR Gallery - Update · 691 Hidden Valley Road - Update 9. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Colin Goodeve Committee Administrator