Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage - 2009-06-02HERITAGE KITCHENERMINUTES JUNE 2, 2009 CITY OF KITCHENER The Heritage Kitchener Committee met this date, commencing at 4:05 p.m. Present: Councillor J. Gazzola -Vice-Chair Ms. E. Gallaher, Ms. L. Brohman, Ms. A. Oja and Messrs. J. Ariens, I. Mota, L. Robertson, J. Rice and Z. Janecki. Staff: L. Bensason, Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning M. Wade, Heritage Planner C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator 1. PRESENTATION -COMPASS KITCHENER'S DRAFT DIVERSITY STRATEGY TO ADVISORY COMMITTEES The Committee was in receipt this date of a copy of a presentation entitled `Access, Equity and Inclusion: a Diversity Strategy for the City of Kitchener', dated May 2009 regarding the draft Diversity Strategy prepared by Compass Kitchener. Mr. C. Goodeve requested that members review the circulated material and forward him any comments or questions they may have regarding the draft Strategy. 2. DTS-09-078 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2009-V-003 - 60 HEINSAVENUE The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09- 078, dated May 15, 2009 regarding Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-V-003 regarding the construction of a new garage, the demolition of the existing two-storey rear veranda, and the construction of a new one-storey addition with a second floor veranda at 60 Heins Avenue. Ms. M. Wade reviewed the report and advised that to accommodate the new garage the applicant requires a minor variance from the City's zoning by-law to address the maximum lot coverage for an accessory building. Mr. Steven Montgomery, Applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application and advised that his request for a minor variance is scheduled to be considered by the City's Committee of Adjustment on June 9, 2009. He stated that if the Committee of Adjustment refuses his request, he would be willing to reduce the scale of his proposal to conform to the City's zoning requirements. Ms. Wade noted that if the minor variance is not approved, staff would need to review any revised plans priorto the issuance of a building permit. On motion by L. Brohman - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-V-003, be approved to permit the construction of a new garage, the demolition of the existing two-storey rear veranda, and the construction of cone-storey addition with a second floor veranda at 60 Heins Avenue in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following conditions: • That a sample of the proposed cladding materials be approved by Heritage Planning staff; and further, • That the final building permit drawings be reviewed and heritage clearance issued by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit." 3. HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2009-IV-006 -191-197 KING STREET WEST The Committee was in receipt this date of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-006 regarding the restoration of the King Street entrances on the north elevation of 191-197 King Street Uvest (PUC Building). Ms. M. Wade reviewed the application. Ms. Sandra Dunn, Two Smiths, was in attendance in support of the application and advised that water penetrating the entranceways and freezing has caused the base of the door jambs to expand and split. She stated that the door jambs are made of bronze and the proposed work will also be done in bronze to match the existing material. HERITAGE KITCHENER JUNE 2, 2009 - 21 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2009-IV-006 - 191-197 KING STREET WEST (CONT'D) On motion by Mr. J. Ariens - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-006 be approved to permit the restoration of the King Street entrances on the north elevation of 191-197 King Street West in accordance with the plans submitted with the application." 4. HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2009-IV-005 -117-119 KING STREET WEST The Committee was in receipt this date of Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-005 concerning the installation of a new sign and awning on the north elevation of 117-119 King Street Uvest (Matter of Taste}. Ms. M. Wade reviewed the application. Several members expressed concern with the possibility that the design of the proposed sign could appear flat unless some kind of detailing was added to its perimeter. Ms. Wade advised that the photographs circulated with the application are just a rendering of what the proposed sign may look like and should not be considered a true representation of the final design. She stated that the method of fastening the sign to the building's facade has yet to be confirmed, as the sign company is unable to determine the condition of the facade until the existing sign has been removed. She noted that included as a condition of approval, Heritage Planning staff must consent to the final sign design prior to installation. On motion by Mr. L. Robertson - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-005, be approved to permit the installation of a new sign and awning on the north elevation of 117-119 King Street West in accordance with the plans submitted with the application, subject to the following condition: • That the final sign design be reviewed and heritage clearance issued by Heritage Planning staff prior to installation of the sign and awning." 5. DTS-09-072 -LISTING OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTY OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE I INTEREST ON THE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE REGISTER (MHR) The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09- 072, dated May 20, 2009 regarding a proposal to list 10 properties on the Municipal Heritage Register (MHR} as non-designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest. Ms. M. Wade reviewed the report. Mr. Paul Snyder, President, Black Tusk Capital Corp., addressed the Committee in opposition to the proposed listing of 300 Breithaupt Street 172 St. Leger Street on the MHR. He circulated to the Committee this date an information package outlining his reasons for opposing the proposed listing. Referring to the Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation form appended to the statement of significance, he pointed out that the Evaluation Sub-committee determined that the architectural style, construction materials, methods and design of the building have no historical significance, which suggests that the building does not warrant inclusion on the Register. He added that contrary to the assurances he has received from City staff, he believes that listing does impose additional costs and administrative processes on an owner. He noted that listing the property would inhibit implementation of the adaptive re-use of the building by adding cost and complexity to dealing with building maintenance. Mr. Snyder cited concerns regarding the broad scope of the statement of significance, which includes the entire property; thereby covering the two-thirds of the building constructed in the 1980s and the single story separate building built in the 1950s. In response to questions, Ms. Wade advised that the built heritage attributes of interest of 300 Breithaupt Street / 72 St. Leger Street, relate to the construction and architectural detailing of HERITAGE KITCHENER JUNE 2, 2009 - 22 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. DTS-09-072 -LISTING OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTY OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE I INTEREST ON THE MHR (CONT'D) the older (c.1912) portion of the building. She added that the building is in good condition with many intact original elements, including: yellow brick construction with decorative brick details; concrete foundation; large window openings with windows doubled or tripled with 15 or 18 panes; and, concrete headers and sills. She stated that while the MHR Evaluation Sub- committee did not identify the building as being a rare or unique example of a particular architectural style, it does have a strong association to both the Breithaupt and Greb families; and is valued for the important contribution it makes to the community's understanding of the industrial heritage of the City. Mr. Snyder stated that while he would prefer not to see the building listed on the MHR; should his appeal to exclude the property prove unsuccessful, then the listing should exclude the 1980s addition, the 1950s single storey small brick building, and the windows on the old building. He noted that as a small business owner he cannot afford the additional costs associated with listing, especially given what he has already spent on a site plan application to bring the property into conformity with the City's zoning by-laws. He commented that the Breithaupt and Greb families owned many properties in the Kitchener-Waterloo area, noting that this property contributes little to the community's understanding of their respective contributions. Ms. E. Gallaher suggested that additional research was needed into the contextual value of the property given its close proximity to a major railway line, which was significant to the City's industrial history. She then provided details as to the important role the Breithaupt and Greb families played in the development of the City as an industrial centre. Mr. L. Bensason advised that listing on the MHR does not impose restrictions or obligations with regard to obtaining heritage approvals, meaning property owners do not require a heritage permit or City approval to make alterations; such as replacing the existing windows. However, listing does increase the amount of time the City has to process demolition applications, up to 60 days, and has implications in ensuring that the City is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement when processing Planning Act applications. For instance, if a site plan application proposes to materially alter a building, the City needs to understand the impact that this could have on the identified heritage attributes; and therefore, the City could require the owner to complete a heritage impact assessment (HIA). He commented that this is similar to the City's ability to require other studies under the Planning Act and does not apply to applications made under other Acts; such as building permits. Mr. Bensason suggested that given Mr. Snyder's concerns related to the scope of the statement of significance, the recommendation could be amended so that the listing only applies to the portion of the building constructed in 1912. On motion by L. Brohman - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, 300 Breithaupt Street 172 St. Leger Street (circa 1912 portion only), be listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest, in accordance with the Statement of Significance attached as Appendix `A' to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-072." Mr. Peter Vos addressed the Committee in opposition to the proposed listing of 628 New Dundee Road on the MHR, citing concerns regarding the impact that this may have on the potential to develop the property in the future. He noted that while the property is not for sale at this time, having it listed on the MHR might deter prospective buyers. Mr. Bensason advised that Council directed staff to review the heritage significance of rural properties in advance of any potential development applications. He noted that it is becoming more common for the development industry to use heritage buildings as landmarks within their proposed plans of subdivision. Mr. Z. Janecki commented that in his opinion the value of the property would not be impacted by having the farmhouse listed on the MHR. He added that a developer would be more HERITAGE KITCHENER JUNE 2, 2009 - 23 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. DTS-09-072 -LISTING OF NON-DESIGNATED PROPERTY OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE I INTEREST ON THE MHR (CONT'D) interested in the balance of open space land on the property. On motion by Mr. Z. Janecki - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, 628 New Dundee Road, be listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as anon-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest, in accordance with the Statement of Significance attached as Appendix `A' to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-072." The Committee then considered the balance of the properties outlined in report DTS-09-072 and questions were raised regarding the proposed listing of 200 King Street West, Kitchener City Hall, on the MHR. Ms. Wade advised that while City Hall may not have historical significance, it is being recognized for its design and physical value. She noted that the building and public square were the product of a 1989 national design competition and since completion have been recognized through a number of awards. On motion by Ms. E. Gallaher- itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the following properties be listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as non-designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest, in accordance with the Statements of Significance attached as Appendix `A' to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-072: • 51 Breithaupt Street; • 325 Breithaupt Street; • 2-22 Duke Street East; • 27 Gaukel Street; • 200 King Street West; • 621 King Street West; • 23 Water Street North; and, • 64 Water Street North." 6. DTS-09-084 -HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION HPA 2009-IV-004 - 300 JOSEPH SCHOERG CRESCENT Mr. J. Ariens declared a conflict of interest as he is related to the owner of the subject property and did not participate in any voting or deliberations regarding this matter. The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09- 084, dated May 15, 2009 regarding Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-004, requesting permission to install a new wood window and a limestone window sill on the east elevation of the drive shed foundation at 300 Joseph Schoerg Crescent. Ms. M. Wade reviewed the report. On motion by Mr. Z. Janecki - itwas resolved: "That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA 2009-IV-004, be approved to permit the installation of a new wood window and a new limestone window sill on the east elevation of the drive shed foundation at 300 Joseph Schoerg Crescent in accordance with the plans submitted with the application." 7. HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - 234 TILT DRIVE The Committee considered the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for 234 Tilt Drive, prepared by Nancy Z. Tausky Heritage Consultants, dated May 2009. 7. HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (HIA) - 234 TILT DRIVE (CONT'DI HERITAGE KITCHENER JUNE 2, 2009 - 24 - CITY OF KITCHENER Mr. L. Bensason advised that the HIA was made a condition of the registration of Plan of Subdivision 30T-04208 given evidence indicating that 234 Tilt Drive was a log structure circa 1850s. He stated that at the May 6, 2008 Heritage Kitchener meeting, the Committee considered the Built Heritage Assessment Preliminary Report for 234 Tilt Drive, which recommended a partial demolition and documented removal of layers of cladding so that the log structure could be seen and more thoroughly assessed. He stated that staff were informed that the removal of some of the cladding had exposed holes in the clapboard siding, allowing moisture to be trapped between the logs and the siding. Staff expressed concern with the potential deterioration of the original log structure, and requested that additional information be provided and options from a materials conservation perspective regarding the removal of the clapboard siding. He noted that the owners agreed to address this issue with their heritage consultant and undertake a structural assessment prior to completing the HIA. Mr. Bensason advised that the owner's Structural Building Condition Assessment report, prepared by MTE Consultants, deemed the building to be unsafe; which was confirmed by the City's Building Division. Given the conclusions of that report, the Building Division issued an `Order to Remedy an Unsafe Condition'. He stated that the owners were requested to complete the HIA as soon as possible, which was to include the findings of the Building Condition Assessment and recommend remedial work to bring the property into conformity; as well as the conclusions regarding the cultural heritage value and significance of the property. Mr. Dave Aston, MHBC Planning and Ms. Nancy Tausky, Heritage Consultant, presented the HIA for 234 Tilt Drive and advised that the Structural Building Condition Assessment of the log structure lists numerous requirements for bringing the building into conformity with the Building Code and making it safe for occupancy. Ms. Tausky stated that the process of uncovering the log house and the post-and-beam structure has proven the value of the buildings, but it has also proven their present instability and caused them to be condemned as unsafe. She added that the most problematic findings relate to the necessity of dismantling and re-assembling the log walls in order to make the corners plumb. This necessity reduces many of the advantages of leaving the building in situ. Accordingly, it is recommended that efforts be made to arrange for the log and timber frame sections of the house to be moved to the designated lot on Pondcliffe Court that extends along the west side of Evens Pond and the surrounding conservation area. She noted that although this option has the disadvantages of moving the house from its original site, and thus losing all real connection with its original foundation, it has several significant advantages, being: • the setting can be buffered on three or even four sides from surrounding development, and it can sit in a natural milieu in keeping with both the aesthetic and historical character of the house; • the house will still be located on the land that belonged to Joseph Gingrich; • it will be situated relatively close to the other Stauffer log houses in the vicinity; and, • the site allows more possibilities for configuring additional living space, should this prove desirable. Ms. Tausky further advised that several conditions are proposed as a means of facilitating the relocation and preservation of the house, which include: the proponent leaving the house standing on its present site for a period of time, during which efforts will be made to sell the house to an interested buyer. In addition, the proponent will contribute at least $50,000. to the dismantling and reassembling of the building when an appropriate buyer is found. She noted that given the relatively small size of the house, a future owner should be afforded some latitude in adapting the structures for contemporary living; and even for incorporating additions that do not obscure the character of the original buildings. She added that it is also recommended that after the house is moved, one or more plaques should be placed in the area to note its original and new locations. Several members commented that they would prefer to see the relocation and rehabilitation of the house occur as soon as possible, to prevent it from deteriorating further. Mr. Aston noted that it is not the intent of the developer to market the house as a separate lot, as they want to provide any potential purchasers with as much flexibility as possible. 8. DTS-09-087 -HERITAGE DELEGATION OF APPROVAL AUTHORITY (CONT'D) HERITAGE KITCHENER JUNE 2, 2009 - 25 - CITY OF KITCHENER The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09- 087, dated May 19, 2009 regarding the delegation of approval authority for Heritage Permit Applications (HPA}. Mr. L. Bensason provided an overview of the report and reviewed the scenarios where delegated approval authority would apply for Part IV and Part V properties, as outlined in appendixes `D' and `E'. He stated that currently, the majority of applications made under the Ontario Heritage Act seek approval to make alterations to property designated under Part V. In most cases, Council approval is granted without conditions or with the City's standard condition requiring heritage clearance prior to issuance of a building permit. He noted that delegation of heritage approval would enable staff to consent to such applications and would streamline the approval process for these and other HPAs. On motion by Mr. Z. Janecki - itwas resolved: "That the draft by-law delegating the power to consent to alternations to property designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act to the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning (or designate), attached as Appendix `A' to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-087, be approved; and, That the criteria for the referral of alteration applications made for property designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act to the City's municipal heritage committee (Heritage Kitchener), attached as Appendix `B' to report DTS-09-087, be approved; and further, That the list of standard conditions of approval for applications made under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, attached as Appendix `C' to report DTS-09-087, be approved." 9. STAFFING CHANGES AND HERITAGE KITCHENER WORK PLAN UPDATE Mr. L. Bensason advised that he has been appointed Interim Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning, effective May 19, 2009 until January 30, 2010. As a result, staff have reviewed the work plan to identify items that would need to be postponed, being: the selection process for the next Heritage Conservation District Candidate Area; reviewing the Designated Heritage Property Grant program; and, the possible re-design of the Mike vVagner Heritage Award program. He noted that staff would continue to move forward with the process of identifying properties of cultural heritage value or interest to be added to Municipal Heritage Register; which was identified in the work plan as the Committee's top priority. 10. ADJOURNMENT On motion, this meeting adjourned at 6:56 p.m. Colin Goodeve Committee Administrator