Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage Kitchener - 2001-11-01HERITAGE KITCHENER MINUTES NOVEMBER 1, 2001CITY OF KITCHENER Heritage Kitchener met this date, chaired by Councillor M. Galloway, commencing at 9:08 a.m., with the following members present: Ms. G. Engel, Ms. C. Martindale, Ms. P. Wagner and Messrs. P. Bufe, R. Green, E. Lucy, and W. Stauch. Mr. B. Scott was in attendance for part of the meeting. Regrets:Mr. J. Clinckett. Others Present:Ms. D. Gilchrist and Messrs. L. Bensason, P. Hicks and S. Vipond. 1 .DTS-01-004-BPS-ST. MARY’S HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT -DESIGNATION The Committee had been provided, at its October meeting, with copies of Development and Technical Services staff report DTS-01-004-BPS, dated 2001-09-19, attached to which is a copy of the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District Study – Heritage Assessment Report, dated September, 2000, and the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District Plan – Guidelines for Conservation and Change, dated August, 2001. Mr. Bensason gave a brief overview of the process undertaken with respect to identifying the area for the District, along with an assessment of the area’s heritage, and the second phase of this project being the actual Heritage Conservation District Plan, including the Guidelines for Conservation and Change. Mr. Bensason then referred to the three recommendations contained in the staff report, requesting the Committee’s consideration and adoption of the first two recommendations. He advised that the Development and Technical Services Committee approved staff’s recommendation number three in the report, with respect to the companion zone change for the area, at its meeting of October 29, 2001. He stated that if recommendations one and two are adopted by this Committee today, all three recommendations will be presented to City Council at its meeting of November 5, 2001. Ms. Wendy Shearer of Wendy Shearer Landscape Architect Ltd. was in attendance, representing all consultants on the consultant team, to present the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District Plan. She highlighted the planning and legislative documentation guiding the identification and designation of Heritage Conservation Districts, stating that the St. Mary’s area meets all the requirements of these documents. Ms. Shearer noted that Council’s by-law to designate the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District will automatically be reviewed by the Ontario Municipal Board and the Heritage Assessment prepared in 2000 will be an important document at the Board, for it provides the reasoning behind the decision to designate the area. Ms. Shearer then pointed out that the area of the District is that of the two original plans of subdivision developed by Housing Enterprises of Canada and Wartime Housing following WW II. Ms. Shearer advised that the guidelines in the plan are voluntary and are designed to address minor changes to property. Also, alteration applications pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act will be required for major alterations that require a building permit. In summary Ms. Shearer advised that this district is defensible, and is unique in all of Canada, as there are no other Heritage Districts that include wartime housing. Mr. Kevin Paul, of 54 St. Clair Avenue, advised the Committee that he is opposed to having his property included in the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District. He spoke of alterations he has already undertaken with his property and his desire to put an addition on his home, and stated that the District Plan contains restrictions which are not acceptable to him. He stated that the City should exclude any properties from the District whose owners have voiced this request. Mr. Bensason advised that the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District and accompanying zone change includes 221 properties. There has been an extensive public consultation process as part of the preparation of the District plan and zone change. He noted that objections were received by the City through the zone change process, including a 61 name petition and requests from three property owner’s to have their properties removed from the District, one being Mr. Paul. Subsequently, some of the objectors have changed their minds, for various reasons. Mr. Bensason advised that some people see the Heritage Conservation District as restricting their rights as property owners and negatively affecting property values. He stated that a 1 .DTS-01-004-BPS-ST. MARY’S HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT HERITAGE KITCHENER NOVEMBER 1, 2001- 45 -CITY OF KITCHENER -DESIGNATION (CONT’D) Heritage Conservation District does not prohibit alterations to property, but does impose an application process which aims to balance property owners’ needs and heritage preservation. He also advised that studies have proven that designation of properties does not negatively affect property values. Mr. Bensason also pointed out that Council has yet to refuse an alteration application for any property in either of the two existing districts. He recommended against removing properties from the District as it would lead to an overall disintegration of its design. Councillor M. Galloway pointed out that there are only 50 heritage conservation districts in all of Canada, and St. Mary’s will be the third heritage conservation district in Kitchener. Also there are several more heritage conservation districts planned for the City. He advised Mr. Paul that the City’s heritage conservation districts are effective because the City looks objectively at alteration applications. The City has never refused an alteration application, although some may have been amended. Councillor Galloway continued to advise that this District has significant heritage value and the buildings are structurally sound and are worthy of preservation. He stated that he has regard for the value that heritage conservation districts have for this community. The Committee then considered the two recommendations in the staff report, and, On motion by Ms. P. Wagner – : it was resolved “That pursuant to Section 41 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Council adopt a by-law to designate as a Heritage Conservation District that part of the St. Mary’s Neighbourhood identified in Appendix “D” to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS- 01-004-BPS, and forming part of the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District Plan, dated August 2001.” - and - On motion by Ms. P. Wagner – it was resolved: “That the St. Mary’s Heritage Conservation District Plan, as prepared by Archaeological Services Inc., Wendy Shearer Landscape Architect Limited, L. Alan Grinham Architect Inc. and Unterman McPhail Associates, dated August 2001, be adopted and constitute Council’s intent with respect to the conservation of the St. Mary’s area.” Mr. B. Scott entered the meeting at this time. 2. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC MEETINGS -LOWER DOON AND CIVIC CENTRE -POSSIBLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS Mr. Bensason distributed flyers identifying the date, time and location for the public meetings to be held in Lower Doon and Civic Centre, to help identify the degree of neighbourhood support for a Heritage Conservation District in these neighbourhoods. The public meeting for the Lower Doon community will take place on Thursday, November 27, 2001, at 7:00 p.m., in the Blue Room, Conestoga College (Main Building) 299 Doon Valley Drive. The public meeting for the Civic Centre neighbourhood will take place on Thursday, December 6, 2001, at 7:00 p.m., in the Hamblyn Room, Kitchener Public Library, 85 Queen Street North. 3. J. STECKLE HERITAGE HOMESTEAD – ADDITION OF LAND Mr. Bensason advised that the City is proposing to convey a parcel of land to be added to the J. Steckle Heritage Homestead, and the Homestead has requested that its designation be extended to cover this additional land. 3. J. STECKLE HERITAGE HOMESTEAD – ADDITION OF LAND (CONT’D) HERITAGE KITCHENER NOVEMBER 1, 2001- 46 -CITY OF KITCHENER It was pointed out by Mr. P. Bufe that the Homestead and this new additional land will have two different owners. Ms. P. Wagner recommended that the designation be reviewed at this time, as the original designation is quite limited and any new designation should include the Heritage Study conducted by Andre Scheinman. 4. MIKE WAGNER HERITAGE AWARDS Mr. L. Bensason distributed copies of a notice and nomination form with respect to the 2002 Mike Wagner Heritage Awards, noting that the deadline for submissions is December 6, 2001. The nominations will be presented to Heritage Kitchener on December 7, 2001. He advised that nomination forms will be sent to all owners of designated properties, and will be available at the Kitchener Public Library. 5. ALTERATION APPLICATION -WATERLOO COUNTY GOVERNOR’S HOUSE & GAOL -CANOPY OVER GAOL ENTRANCE The Committee was in receipt of an alteration application from the Region of Waterloo, dated October 23, 2001, requesting approval to erect a canopy over the main entrance of the Gaol at 73 Queen Street North. Messrs. Brian Bechtel and Ken Noonan were in attendance to represent the application and Mr. L. Bensason displayed images of the main façade of the gaol. Mr. Bechtel noted that due to the rooflines of this building, snow and ice will accumulate and fall from that portion of the roof immediately above the main entrance. The canopy is necessary to protect people using this main entrance. He advised, as noted in the application, that the canopy will be made of lightweight, extruded aluminum and glass, and it will have a depth of 46-48”. Mr. Bechtel noted that, through the renovation/alteration process, it was determined that there had been a canopy over this door at one time. Committee members discussed with the delegation other options for canopy design and material. Mr. Bechtel advised that Regional staff had considered design and material alternatives and believe the suggested canopy to be cost effective and least intrusive on the building. He also advised there is a health and safety issue that must be resolved. On motion by Mr. E. Lucy – it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, approval be given to the application of the owner to alter the designated property municipally known as 73 Queen Street North (Waterloo County Governor’s House and Gaol), dated October 23, 2001, to erect a canopy over the main entrance of the Gaol, as outlined in the application.” 6. ALTERATION APPLICATION – 34 COURTLAND AVENUE EAST The Committee was in receipt of an alteration application from the owner of 34 Courtland Avenue East to replace all windows and sills on this property. Mr. Peter Nikiforuk, property owner, was in attendance to represent the application and answer any questions the Committee might have in this regard. Mr. Bensason displayed images of the front and rear facades of this house and all windows and sills proposed to be replaced. Mr. Nikiforuk advised that all windows will be replaced, except for the stained glass windows, and all wooden sills will be replaced with concrete sills. Upon questioning, he advised that he has chosen concrete sills as they are easier to maintain and they match sills on some of the other houses in this row of houses. The windows will be all wood construction and in this regard referred to the proposal outline and quote attached to his application, which notes that the new wooden windows will have a profile to match those determined to be original to the house. Mr. Nikiforuk also advised that of the ten windows to be replaced, only 3 or 4 are original. 6. ALTERATION APPLICATION – 34 COURTLAND AVENUE EAST (CONT’D HERITAGE KITCHENER NOVEMBER 1, 2001- 47 -CITY OF KITCHENER On motion by Mr. P. Bufe – it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, approval be given to the application of the owner to alter the designated property municipally known as 34 Courtland Avenue East, to remove and replace the existing windows, except the stained glass windows, with new wooden windows and replace wooden sills with concrete sills, as outlined in his alteration application dated October 23, 2001.” 7. PROPOSAL OF DOWNTOWN CHURCHES TO CONSTRUCT LOW COST HOUSING As requested at the October Heritage Kitchener meeting, the Committee was provided with copies of evaluation forms and a brief report from the Heritage Inventory on the following properties: 1) Trinitiy United Church, 74 Frederick Street 2) St. Peter’s Lutheran Church, 49 Queen Street North 3) YWCA, 84 Frederick Street 4) Zion United Church, 32 Weber Street West 5) 22 Duke Street East, along with a map showing their locations. Images of these buildings were shown by Mr. Bensason. It was noted that some of these properties are in the area being considered for a Heritage Conservation District in Civic Centre. The Committee questioned the redevelopment potential for these properties based on the existing zoning. It was generally agreed that Mr. Bensason would investigate the zoning and Municipal Plan designations for these properties and present the information at the December meeting. 8. FOTI GALLERY – 253 QUEEN STREET SOUTH Councillor Galloway noted that the alterations approved for the Foti Gallery, 253 Queen Street South are almost complete, and questioned the materials being used in the alterations and whether they are consistent with the applciation submitted. He requested that this matter be discussed at the December meeting, that the owner be invited to attend and that if possible the members view the property prior to the meeting. 9. ALTERATION APPLICATION -12 CHURCH STREET -VICTORIA PARK AREA HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Mr. Bensason provided the Committee members with copies of an alteration application for the property municipally known as 12 Church Street, located in the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. Images of the building were shown, Mr. Bensason noting that the purpose of the application is to allow for the demolition of the front verandah and balcony, not being original to the house. Mr. B. Scott advised that approval of the application would be a step forward in improving the appearance of this house. If the owner proposes to replace these features, he will have to make an application and come forward with a design. On motion by Mr. B. Scott – it was resolved: “That pursuant to Section 43 of the Ontario Heritage Act approval be given to the application of the owner to alter the designated property known municipally as 12 Church Street, located in the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District, to demolish the front verandah and front balcony as outlined in his alteration application dated October 31, 2001.” 10. NEW BUSINESS Ms. P. Wagner advised of correspondence she has received requesting recognition of the “Kraut Line” and “McKenzie King Park”, asking that some kind of signage be erected in the City to HERITAGE KITCHENER NOVEMBER 1, 2001- 48 -CITY OF KITCHENER recognize both. It was noted that there is a house on Shanley Street connected with a member of the “Kraut Line”; Mr. Bensason advised that it is possible to designate a property based on its historic significance, and he will investigate that possibility. 11. ADDITIONAL STAFF RESOURCES Mr. Bensason advised that Mr. Shayne Vipond will be participating in Heritage Planning and will be available as another staff contact. 12. ADJOURNMENT On a motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. Dianne H. Gilchrist Committee Administrator