Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage Kitchener - 2001-09-07HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES SEPTEMBER 7, 2001CITY OF KITCHENER Heritage Kitchener met this date, chaired by Ms. P. Wagner, commencing at 11:50 a.m., with the following members present: Ms. G. Engel, Ms. C. Martindale and Messrs. P. Bufe, E. Lucy, R. Green and J. Clinckett. Regrets: Councillor M. Galloway and Mr. W. Stauch Others Present:Ms. D. Gilchrist and Messrs. L. Bensason and P. Hicks. 1 .INTRODUCTION Mr. L. Bensason introduced Mr. Paul Hicks, Heritage Kitchener student, who will be working for the City until December 2001, undertaking heritage projects. Mr. Hicks is a third year student at the University of Waterloo. 2. RESULTS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE RESTRUCTURING Ms. D. Gilchrist provided the Committee members with a brief outline of the changes made to Heritage Kitchener by City Council at its meeting of August 27, 2001, as part of the overall review of advisory committees. The Committee’s membership will total 12 and includes a category called “ Sector-Specific Members”. A co-chair system will be implemented once the new committee is appointed, one chair being a member of Council and the other being a lay member. It was also noted that all advisory committee meetings will commence at 4:00 p.m. 3. BPS-01-112 – FREEPORT BRIDGE – PROPOSED DESIGNATION The Committee was in receipt of Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-01- 112, dated 2001-08-22, recommending the designation of the Freeport Bridge. The report also recommends that the designating by-law include a provision that any alteration in the nature of routine maintenance and repair, emergency repair, work or alteration required in order to comply with all applicable requirements at law, do not affect the reasons for designation and consequently will not require the owner to obtain Council approval under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act. The staff report also recommends the reasons for designation and specific features of the designation. Mr. D. Arnold and Mr. J. Hammer of the Region of Waterloo were in attendance to answer any questions the Committee may have. Mr. Bensason advised that the Region is in support of the designation provided they are able to undertake the repair, maintenance, emergency work and repairs required in order to comply with all applicable requirements at law as outlined in the staff report. The Committee then discussed the exemption requested by the Region and Ms. D. Arnold pointed out the wording of the draft by-law which anticipates routine maintenance and repair to be in the nature of pothole patching, deck washing, bridge joint maintenance and graffiti removal. The Committee identified their main concern to be with the term “alteration required in order to comply with all applicable requirements at law”, which the Committee felt would not necessarily be limited to minor maintenance and repairs. Following discussion between the Region’s representatives and the Committee, it was agreed that a further clause be added to the recommendation that Regional staff will be requested to submit specifications for all major repairs required for the bridge to meet all requirements at law, except for emergency repairs, to City staff and Heritage Kitchener for review and comment. Ms. P. Wagner referred to a structural report for the Freeport Bridge obtained from the Heritage Planning Advisory Committee, and offered her concerns about this bridge being twinned. She requested that should twinning become necessary, it not be twinned on the west side. Mr. Hammer noted that should twinning ever be considered, an environmental assessment would be required. On motion by Mr. J. Clinckett – 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 real property known as the Freeport Bridge as being HERITAGE KITCHENER SEPTEMBER 7, 2001- 37 -CITY OF KITCHENER 3. BPS-01-112 – FREEPORT BRIDGE – PROPOSED DESIGNATION (CONT’D) of historic and architectural significance; and, That the designation include the following specific features: all molded concrete trusses (chords), all concrete bowstrings (or hangers), decorative concrete handrails, decorative concrete balustrades, six-foot wide sidewalk, concrete piers, and concrete beams; and, That the designating by-law provide that any alteration in the nature of routine maintenance and repair work, emergency repair work, or alteration required in order to comply with all applicable requirements at law do not affect the reasons for designation, and accordingly will not require the owner to obtain Council approval under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act in respect of such work; and further, That other than emergency repairs, the Region of Waterloo be requested to submit the specifications for all major repairs, required for the bridge to meet all applicable requirements at law, to City staff and in turn Heritage Kitchener for review and comment, prior to undertaking such work.” 4. RESURFACING OF DOON VILLAGE ROAD – UPPER DOON HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT The Committee was in receipt of a memorandum from Mr. L. Bensason, dated 2001-08-28, advising that Doon Village Road is scheduled for routine maintenance at the end of September and, although the Heritage Conservation District Plan includes a policy recommending the maintenance of Doon Village Road with tar and chip, the City no longer has the equipment to maintain and repair tar and chip. The City proposes a surface treatment called “slurry seal” which establishes a semi-rural appearance and can be maintained by the City. Mr. Bensason then displayed slides of tar and chip surface, a slurry seal surface and a slurry seal surface that contains “trapped rock” which gives a closer appearance to tar and chip. Mr. Bensason noted that the tender for slurry seal, for all roads in Kitchener requiring this surface, will be considered by Council on September 17, 2001. Mr. E. Lucy stated that he was satisfied with Mr. Bensason’s opinion that slurry seal is a reasonable alternative to, and compatible with tar and chip. On motion by Mr. E. Lucy – it was resolved: “That Engineering Rehabilitation staff be requested to use trap rock as part of the slurry seal resurfacing of roads within the Upper Doon Heritage Conservation District, in an effort to match the existing tar and chip surface as closely as possible.” 5. 1531 BLEAMS ROAD – HERITAGE INVENTORY – PROPOSED DEMOLITION The Committee was in receipt of a memorandum from Mr. L. Bensason, dated 2001-08-22, advising that the City has received a demolition control application for the property municipally known as 1531 Bleams Road, which is on the Heritage Inventory. Mr. Bensason displayed slides of the interior and exterior of this building, noting that over the last ten years the condition of the building has deteriorated, accessory structures have been demolished, and the interior has been vandalized. Mr. Bensason advised that ultimately this property will be used for new residential development. Ms. Wagner noted this property had been built in 1842 and questioned whether there is any archaeological significance for this property. Mr. Bensason noted that an archaeological assessment is the responsibility of the Region and at the time of redevelopment they may require an archaeological assessment. Heritage Kitchener members expressed their concerns that Heritage buildings are being left to deteriorate, without the Property Standards By-law being enforced. Mr. Bensason suggested HERITAGE KITCHENER SEPTEMBER 7, 2001- 38 -CITY OF KITCHENER 5. 1531 BLEAMS ROAD – HERITAGE INVENTORY – PROPOSED DEMOLITION (CONT’D) that the student’s work program could include visiting each designated property to make a visual inspection and take photographs. Any deteriorating properties could then be brought to the attention of the Property Standards Officers. 6. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATIONS The Committee was in receipt of a memorandum from Mr. L. Bensason, dated 2001-08-22, advising of Heritage properties for which recent applications have been made to the Committee of Adjustment. The first property, was 19 Clarence Place, which is listed on the City’s Heritage Inventory. The owners propose to construct a new carport and stairway at the rear of the bulding. Slides of the site plan attached to the Committee of Adjustment Application were shown. Mr. Bensason advised that he has no heritage concerns respecting this application. The second application discussed was an Application for Minor Variance for 184 David Street, requesting permission for a reduced rear yard to allow for a kitchen expansion at the rear of the house. Slides of the subject property were shown. This property is located in the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District, and Mr. Bensason advised that an Alteration Application has been provided to the owner, which will ultimately come to this Committee for a recommendation to City Council. Mr. Bensason stated that the addition will be contained in the rear yard and will not be visible from the street. Mr. Clinckett noted that based on the submitted site plan, the addition will be equal to the width of the building and will be visible from the side elevation. He recommended that the District Guidelines be forwarded to the property owner before he prepares plans for the addition. Mr. Bensason advised that he could provide these guidelines to the owner; however, pointed out that people living in the District have been advised that those alterations visible from the street are the only ones of interest to the City. He emphasized that the whole intent of the Heritage Conservation District Plan is the street appearance of these properties and that information has already been provided to the property owner month’s ago. He stated that the proposed addition would not be visible from the street or from the community trail. The third property for which applications have been made to the Committee of Adjustment is located on Pinnacle Drive, the area of interest for a possible Heritage Conservation District in Lower Doon. The existing development in the immediate vicinity is a mixture of old and new housing and the current proposal is to create three new lots for semi-detached development, which complies with the current zoning. With respect to a proposed Heritage Conservation District in Lower Doon, the issue is heritage significance of the area, which generally relates to features associated with the former Village of Doon. 7. CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD – AREA OF INTEREST FOR POSSIBLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT The Committee was in receipt of a memorandum from Mr. L. Bensason, dated 2001-08-28, with respect to identifying an area of interest in the Civic Centre Neighbourhood for a Heritage Conservation District. Attached to the memo was a coloured map of the neighbourhood including identification of properties already determined to be of heritage significance. At the meeting, Committee members were provided with criteria for Heritage Conservation Districts as outlined in the Municipal Plan, along with background information on the Civic Centre Neighbourhood. Representatives of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Association were in attendance. Mr. Bensason reminded the Committee that an area of interest for Lower Doon has already been identified and the next step in the Heritage Conservation District Program is to identify a specific area of interest in the Civic Centre. When questioned by the Chair, Ms. D. Kuehl, Chair of the Neighbourhood Association advised that at a meeting last year, members of the neighbourhood agreed they want the whole neighbourhood included in a Heritage Conservation District, as they wish to preserve all that is existing. Several suggestions were put forward by the Committee as to what areas should or should not HERITAGE KITCHENER SEPTEMBER 7, 2001- 39 -CITY OF KITCHENER 7. CIVIC CENTRE NEIGHBOURHOOD – AREA OF INTEREST FOR POSSIBLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT (CONT’D) be included in a Heritage Conservation District in the Civic Centre area: · include area of Centre in the Square, which historically would have been part of the neighbourhood; · run the boundary along the rear lot lines of the properties fronting Victoria Street and Weber Street; · include park beside the Centre in the Square and the Kitchener Public Library; · include both sides of Lancaster Street from Luella Street to Frederick Street; · exclude the triangle of land formed by the intersection of Weber Street, Water Street and Victoria Street. Mr. Bensason then advised the Committee that he intends to prepare a brochure for each of Lower Doon and Civic Centre and hold a public meeting in each area to determine neighbourhood interest, which he would like to accomplish before the end of the year. Mr. E. Lucy questioned whether Mr. Bensason still has reservations about a Heritage Conservation District in Lower Doon. Mr. Bensason stated that there are still some areas in Lower Doon that maintain village characteristics or heritage characteristics; however, the area has a high concentration of contemporary new buildings. He stated that his reservation lies with the fact that some residents in that area believe that a Heritage Conservation District will freeze development, which it will not. He stated that he did not believe that a Heritage Conservation District will address the concerns of the neighbourhood. Mr. Bensason advised that staff will prepare a new map taking into consideration the revisions to the boundaries made at this meeting. The Committee then agreed to walk the area on Wednesday, September 12, 2001, at 2:00 p.m. Everyone will meet in front of the library, and Mr. Bensason advised that he will inform Councillor Galloway and will invite Councillor John Smola, the Ward Councillor. Ms. Kuehl advised that the next Neighbourhood Association meeting will be held on October 15, 2001 and she will inform the neighbourhood of the discussion that took place at this meeting today. 8. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Bufe questioned whether the Hydro substation on East Avenue, near the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium, still exists, and suggested that it be placed on the City’s Heritage Inventory. Mr. Bufe questioned the current situation with respect to the property at 237 Frederick Street, and was advised by Mr. Bensason that there had been some discussion of demolishing the building and rebuilding with a similar style on the same footprint. He noted that the building has deteriorated and he though it would likely be ordered to be demolished. 9. ADJOURNMENT On a motion, the meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m. Dianne H. Gilchrist Committee Administrator