HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-08-161 - Heritage Permit App - 2008-V-017, 24 Dill St~ ~, ~
T~ E
Development &
Technical Services
Report To: Heritage Kitchener Committee
Date of Meeting: October 7, 2008
Submitted By: Leon Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning
X519-741-2306)
Prepared By: Michelle Wade, Heritage Planner (519-741-2839)
Ward(s~ Involved: 6
Date of Report: October 2, 2008
Report No.: DTS-08-161
Subject: HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION 2008-V-017
24 DILL STREET
PROPOSED DEMOLITION, ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application
HPA 2008-V-017 be approved in part to permit only the following work in accordance
with the plans submitted with the application, and subject to the final building permit
drawings being reviewed by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building
permit:
^ demolition of the front porch and construction of a new front porch;
^ alteration of the roofline on the side west} elevation dormer;
^ the installation of EIFS cladding; and,
^ the installation of new windows and window openings on the side feast and west}
elevations of the house at 24 Dill Street; and further,
2. That the installation of a new door and windows on the south (front) elevation of 24 Dill
Street, in accordance with the plans submitted with Heritage Permit Application HPA
2008-V-017, is deemed not to comply with the Building Conservation Guidelines of the
Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Plan.
BACKGROUND:
In the fall of 2007 Heritage Permit Application HPA 2007-V-007 was approved to permit the
demolition of an existing addition and construction of a new rear addition subject to the exterior
design details being considered and approved by Heritage Planning staff. During this process,
Heritage Planning staff were informed of the owner's intent to replace the windows on the front
(south) elevation of the house with windows of a different size and style. Staff advised the owner
that such work would require the submission of a new Heritage Permit Application (HPA).
i nougn no appi~cat~on was
,~
~u~
submitted the owner roceeded to ~ ~~~ x~,~ ~ ~~ ~ ~r;~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~,~~~ ~'~~~~~
p
attend the December 4, 2007 ~ ~, a,
,,
Heritage Kitchener Committee
.,
meeting to request that the ~~~~~~ ~,,~~
~~ y~: a
Committee approve the installation ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
} ~ ~ 1~
~.
~'.
of new windows on the front south '~~
~~
~,
and side feast and west) elevation A nj ~ ~ ~,,,,,,
of the house. The owner advised ~'~'; ~~~~' ~~ ~~~~
t~, .
the Committee that ordering the
~,~ w
~~~~ ~~ ~.
windows for both the rear addition
~.~~
and the original house would save ~
~~
money. Several Heritage Kitchener ~~~ ;~~~_~ ~~ ,;
~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~a
Committee members stated that .~~~~
~~~
they were unable to properly
evaluate the request without elevation drawings that depict the dimension, location and
materials to be used in the proposed work. This information is outlined as a requirement in the
Heritage Permit Application Submission Guidelines. As a result, consideration of the request
was referred to the January 8, 2008 Heritage Kitchener Committee meeting. The owner did not
submit the required information for consideration at the January 8t" meeting; however, the
owner did meet with Heritage Planning staff to discuss the proposed alterations. At this time,
Heritage Planning staff were made aware of the owners intentions to demolish the existing
porch and construct a new porch; install new windows on the front (south} and side (east and
west} elevations; and, install EIFS cladding. Heritage Planning staff expressed concern with the
proposed design of the front porch and the design of the windows, especially the triangular
transoms which are not consistent with fenestration typically found on the front elevation of
other Berlin Vernacular buildings located within the heritage district.
Between January and August 2008, Heritage Planning staff corresponded with the owner
several times by e-mail to confirm Heritage Permit Application requirements and deadlines. On
August 18, 2008 the owner applied for a building permit for interior alterations. Recognizing that
some of the interior alterations may have an impact on the exterior of the building, Heritage
Planning staff requested that the owner submit a HPA. The owner submitted an incomplete HPA
on September 5, 2008. Heritage Planning staff advised the owner that a written description and
elevations that accurately reflect the proposed work would be required to process the
application.
At the request of the property owner and in an effort to move forward and reduce a delay in
construction, Heritage Planning staff agreed to accept the additional information (written
description and revised elevation drawings} to complete the HPA two weeks after the
application deadline. As a result, the Development and Technical Services Department is now in
receipt of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2008-V-017. The owner is seeking Council's
permission to demolish the front porch and construct a new front porch; alter the roofline on the
side west) elevation dormer; install EIFS cladding; install a new door on the front (south}
elevation; and, install new windows and window openings on the front and side (south, east and
west} elevations of the house on the property municipally addressed 24 Dill Street.
REPORT:
The subject property is located on the north side of Dill Street in the Victoria Park Heritage
Conservation District, and is subject to designation under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.
The owner is proposing a variety of alterations to the original building, including:
^ The demolition of the existing front porch*;
^ The construction of a new front porch;
^ The alteration of the roofline on the side west) elevation dormer from a shed to a gable
roof;
^ The replacement of stucco with an Exterior Insulated Finish System ~EIFS} ;
^ The installation of a new door* and new windows, with triangular transoms, on the front
south} elevation;
^ The removal of window openings on the side (east and west) elevations; and,
^ The installation of new windows, with triangular transoms, and window openings on the
side (east and west} elevations.
The proposed alterations are considered to be major work under the policies and guidelines
found within the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Plan VPHCD Plan}. The VPHCD
Plan indicates that major work includes additions, demolitions and work that irreversibly
changes the historic fabric of buildings. The removal of window openings; the installation of new
window openings; the installation of a new door and new windows that differ in size and detail
from the original door and windows; and, the installation of EIFS cladding on the front (south}
and side (east and west} elevations of the original building will result in irreversible changes to
the building's historic fabric. As a result, a formal Heritage Permit Application (HPA} is required
for the proposed alterations.
A HPA for the proposed alterations was submitted on the application deadline -September 5,
2008. A review of the HPA revealed that the application was incomplete. Additional information
was submitted two weeks after the application deadline. A review of this information revealed
that the revised elevation drawings were not drawn to scale; however, the proposed dimensions
were generally consistent with the proposed dimensions on the original scale elevation drawings
submitted on September 5th. Although not ideal, Heritage Planning staff have accepted the
HPA and will provide comments and recommendations based on the review of both the original
scale elevation drawings and the revised (not to scale} elevation drawings.
The house at 24 Dill Street is built in the Berlin Vernacular architectural style. The Berlin
Vernacular architectural style is a dominant style within the VPHCD with most buildings being
built between 1900 and 1920. This style is plain and features a 1 '/2 storey front-gable house
with a front porch and few decorative features.
The VPHCD Plan aims to conserve and enhance the historic buildings in the area and ensure
compatible alterations. The VPHCD Plan primarily has its interest with features that are visible
from the public realm and contribute to the streetscape and character of the area. As a result,
the front elevation of 24 Dill Street represents the primary elevation of interest. The guidelines
and policies contained within the VPHCD Plan provide guidance on appropriate sizes, styles,
materials and colours as they relate to additions and alterations.
The owner is proposing to demolish the existing porch and construct a new full width porch with
a gable over the entrance. The new porch will be constructed of pine with square spindles and
columns painted dark brown. In addition, the new porch will feature a shed roof with brown
asphalt shingles. The size, style, materials and colours of the proposed front porch are
appropriate for the house and the surrounding area since the VPHCD Plan encourages the
incorporation of full width painted wood porches with a gable over the entrance.
The owner is proposing to alter the roofline on the side (west) elevation dormer. The existing
dormer features a shed roof and the applicant is proposing to remove the shed roof and replace
it with a gable roof. The visibility of the proposed alteration will be slightly obscured due to the
existing setbacks between buildings. The alteration will not detract from the house or the
character of the surrounding area.
The existing building features a stucco exterior that is in a poor state of repair. The owner has
been unable to find a local contractor to repair the existing stucco. As a result, the owner is
proposing to remove the existing stucco on the front (south) and side (east and west)
elevations, and replace it with a synthetic material known as EIFS, which will be light brown
colour. The use of EIFS has been approved for other designated buildings as well as additions
to designated buildings. The proposed colour and material will not detract from the house or the
character of the surrounding area.
The owner is proposing to remove two windows and a door from the side (east) elevation in
order to install three new window openings. The new windows are proposed to feature divided
lights with a triangular transom. The owner is also proposing to remove one bay window from
the side (west) elevation in order to enlarge two existing window openings. The new windows
are proposed to feature divided lights with a triangular transom. This style of window was
approved for use on the new rear addition, and in the opinion of City staff may be considered for
use on the secondary (east and west) elevations of the building. However, the owner is also
proposing to install a new door and new windows with similar triangular transoms on the front
(south) elevation. Staff are of the opinion that the door (with sidelight and triangular transom)
and windows (with triangular transom) proposed to be installed on the front (south) elevation,
are inappropriate for use on the front facade of this building. Retaining a more traditional shape,
size and proportion of door and window design on primary street facing facades is an important
aspect of preserving the character of a heritage district. The door and windows proposed to be
installed in the front facade of 24 Dill Street are contemporary in design compared with the
recurring doors and windows found on the front elevations of other buildings on the street and
on other Berlin Vernacular buildings within the heritage district. As a result, the installation of a
new door (with a sidelight and triangular transom) and new windows (with triangular transoms)
on the front (south) elevation will detract from the character of the house and the heritage
district. In the opinion of staff, the installation of a new door (with a sidelight and triangular
transom) and new windows (with triangular transoms) on the front (south) elevation does not
comply with the Building Conservation Guidelines found within the Victoria Park Heritage
Conservation District Plan.
In reviewing the merits of the application, City staff note the following:
^ The size, style, materials and colours of the proposed front porch are appropriate for the
house;
^ The gable dormer on the side (west} elevation will have limited visibility from the public
realm;
^ The use of EIFS is a recognized and acceptable alternative to stucco;
^ The proposed windows with transoms are contemporary in design and thus are only
suitable for use on secondary elevations of the building (e.g. east and west}; and
therefore,
^ The proposal to install a new door* and new windows with transoms on the front south)
elevation will detract from the character of the house and surrounding area, and does
not comply with the Building Conservation Guidelines found within the Victoria Park
Heritage Conservation District.
* Heritage Planning staff conducted a site visit following the submission of the HPA and note
that the front porch has been partially demolished and that a new door with sidelights and a
triangular transom has been installed.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
CONCLUSION:
Staff are of the opinion that HPA 2008-V-017 should be approved in part, to permit the work in
accordance with plans submitted with the application, save for the installation of the new door
(with a sidelight and triangular transom) and windows (with triangular transoms) on the front
(south) elevation. Staff will continue to offer advice and guidance to the applicant regarding
appropriate alternatives for a new door and windows on the front south} elevation.
Leon Bensason, MCIP, RPP, CARP Michelle Wade, BES
Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning Heritage Planner
Attachment
Heritage Permit Application 2008-V-017