payne affidavit

8/9/2019 Payne Affidavit

1/157

Court File No. CV-10-14295

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N :

HILARY PAYNE

DAN BEBBINGTON

Applicants,

- and -

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WINDSOR

Respondent.

AFFIDAVIT OF HILARY PAYNE

On Application to Quash

I, Hilary Payne, of the City of Windsor, in the County of Essex and Province of Ontario, make

oath and say as follows:

1. I am one of the applicants herein and as such have knowledge of the matters hereinafter

deposed to. I am also the owner of three rental properties in the Sandwich area of the City of

Windsor being located at 375 Indian Road, 471 Rosedale Avenue and 3111 Donnelly, which are

affected by the matters deposed to below in this my affidavit.

2. I am presently employed as a real estate agent. In my previous career from 1976 to 1994,

I was the Chief Administrative Officer of the Corporation of the City of Windsor.

3. To the extent that I do not have personal knowledge of some of the matters hereinafter

deposed to, I rely on the contents of publicly available documents, transcripts, minutes of


2/157

Council and Heritage Committee meetings thereto, and statements made publicly by various

identified public officials. To the extent that I rely on information provided to me, I will identify

the source of that information. To the extent that I rely on information contained in the written

or recorded minutes and documents, I will identify the records as the source of my information.

To the extent I rely on the information contained in the written or recorded or publicly available

materials which I shall identify, I believe that information to be true.

Overview

4. In October, 2006, Windsor City Council commissioned, pursuant to bylaw, a Community

Improvement Study for the Old Sandwich Town area.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 1 to this my affidavit is a true copy of By-Law

27-2009 commissioning that study.

5. In June of 2007, the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study was completed and

submitted to Council.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 2 to this my affidavit, is a true copy of that

study, as obtained from the City of Windsor publicly available website.

6. In January or February, 2007, City Council passed Interim Control By-law 19-2007 and

Demolition Control By-law 20-2007. The stated purposes of these by-laws were to freeze all

development, redevelopment and demolitions concerning properties in the Old Sandwich Town

area pending completion of a Community Planning Study for that district.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 3 to this my affidavit is a true copy of Interim

Control By-law 19-2007.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 4 to this my affidavit is a true copy of

2


3/157

Demolition Control By-law 20-2007. On February 25, 2008, Interim Control By-law 19-2007

and Demolition Control By-law 20-2007 were extended for another year.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 5 to this my affidavit is a true copy of By-law

Nos. 67-2007, 18-2008 and 35-2008 extending the Interim Control By-Law.

8. A Community Improvement Plan for Old Sandwich Town was adopted by City Council

in November of 2008.

9. In January of 2009, Windsor City Council adopted several other by-laws as follows:

i) By-law 22-2009 which designated 261 properties in the Sandwich Old Town Area

as a Heritage Conservation District;

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 6 to this my affidavit is a true copy of that By-

Law;

ii) By-law 23-2009, which adopted Official Plan Amendment 68 to implement the

Sandwich Heritage Conservation Districts Study;


Law;

iii) By-law 24-2009 which added a supplemental section to the City of Windsor

Zoning By-law to establish regulations for the Commercial and Residential Overlay

zones situate in the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District;


Law;

3


4/157

iv) By-law 27-2009 which adopted the Community Improvement Plan for the Old

Sandwich Town Community Improvement Project Area;

Now shown to me and previously marked as Exhibit 1 to this my affidavit is a true copy

of that By-Law;

v) By-law 28-2009 which adopted the Old Sandwich Town Community

Improvement Plan Supplemental Development And Urban Design Guidelines;


Law;

vi) By-law 29-2009 which adopted Official Plan Amendment to implement the Old

Sandwich Town Community Improvement Plan dated November 2008;

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 10 to this my affidavit is a true copy of that

By-Law;

vii) By-law 30-2009, being a zoning bylaw amendment establishing regulations

regarding residential areas in certain areas of the Old Sandwich Town Community

Improvement Plan Area.


By-Law;

10. I, and many other property owners were completely unaware of the studies and hearings

before the Windsor Heritage Committee, the Planning Advisory Committee, and City Council

until after these by-laws were passed. It is my belief that I and other affected property owners in

the Sandwich area were not given proper written notice of these studies and hearings before the

by-laws were passed.

4


5/157

11. The effect of several of these by-laws, particularly By-law 20-2007 subjected properties

in the Sandwich area of the City of Windsor as being subject to demolition control.

12. The owners of the Ambassador Bridge, the Canadian Transit Corporation (CTC) advised

City Council as far back as 1992 of its intentions to construct a second span to the Ambassador

Bridge immediately adjacent to the existing bridge. The Ambassador Bridge second span, also

referred to as the replacement span, will be located immediately to the west and parallel to the

existing Ambassador Bridge suspension structure and will connect directly to the existing

customs plazas in both the City of Windsor and the City of Detroit. The CTC has since made

numerous requests to demolish derelict houses on properties acquired by it over many years on

Indian Road. Other requests by the CTC to demolish other houses acquired by it along on

Edison Street were also made.

13. Essentially, multiple requests by CTC to Windsor City Council to demolish houses

owned by CTC have been denied by City Council. However, requests to demolish other houses

subject to demolition control in the City and even in the area, but owned by other property

owners, are frequently granted.

14. The CTC has appealed all of the bylaws referred to above designating the subject

properties as either part of the CIP or Heritage District and imposing demolition control and

redevelopment control on the subject properties. Those appeals are pending before the Ontario

Municipal Board.

15. A standoff has therefore materialized between the CTC and the City Windsor. Over 100

homes in the Indian Road and Edison Road area remain boarded up and vacant. These homes

are having a very deleterious effect on other properties, constitute an eyesore and a public

nuisance. They negatively impact property values. City of Windsor officials (ie one or more

City councilors) have taken the position that requests for demolition will not be favourably

entertained unless or until the CTC provides a land-use plan acceptable to the City providing for

5


6/157

the use of the CTCs lands in perpetuity. For its part, the CTC, having been prevented from

proceeding with the demolition of the structures, does not wish to restore the subject homes to

the residential housing stock and it is uneconomical or impossible to repair or renovate them.

The houses remain boarded up.

16. Surrounding property owners who are severely impacted by the boarded up houses are

caught in the middle of this dispute. An unincorporated association of property owners of whom

I am a founding member, BUHDAG (Boarded Up Houses Demolition Action Group), consisting

of property owners in the Sandwich Town area, on three occasions in 2009, appeared before City

Council as delegations, but Council refused on each occasion to hear us. We affected property

owners, whose lives are affected by the continuing existence of these boarded up houses, and the

public nuisance that they are creating, have a legitimate interest in the resolution of the

demolition permit issue. Consequently, affected residents such as I would claim standing to bring

legal proceedings against the City to obtain relief.

17. On this Application, the Applicants seek an Order, pursuant to s. 273 of the Municipal

Act quashing the aforesaid by-laws.

18. The issues on this application turn on whether the said by-laws, which have created and

perpetrated the intolerable position, were:

a) passed in bad faith, arbitrarily and capriciously by City Council and

without the degree of fairness, openness and impartiality required and expected of

a municipal government;

b) illegal, as one or more of the by-laws go beyond the powers afforded to a

municipal council under the Heritage Act, The Planning Act, the Building Code

Act and the Municipal Act;

c) Failed to afford the affected Property Owners in Sandwich Town area with

reasonable notice prior to the passage of the by-laws as required by statute or by

the law.

6


7/157

Background to the Passage of the By-Laws

19. In order to put the present dispute in context, it is necessary to review the history of plans

by the CTC to build a replacement span for the existing Ambassador Bridge.

20. According to information obtained from the Ambassador Bridge website, the

Ambassador Bridge was originally built in the late 1920s. At the time, it was the longest

international suspension bridge in the world. It is also presently one of the only two international

links between Canada and the United States remaining in private ownership. The Canadian side

of the bridge is owned, I believe, by the CTC. The bridge is aging, and requires a great deal of

maintenance to remain in operation. Over 26% of Canadas trade with the United States passes

over the Ambassador Bridge.

21. On or around 1992, CTC publicly announced plans to build a replacement span

immediately adjacent to the existing bridge.

DRIC, DRTP and the Schwartz Report

22. The international bridge crossing has come under close scrutiny by Federal, Provincial

and Municipal governments on both sides of the border and particularly Canada since the

terrorist events in New York in 2001. Changes in trans boarder travel led, in the period of time

post September 11, 2001, to lengthy traffic and truck lineups and greatly increased border

security on the U.S. side, thereby creating significant problems for local traffic. The Provincial

and Federal government, in concert with the State of Michigan and the U.S. government, created

initiatives to study and design an alternative boarder crossing. In Canada it is well known that

this became known as the Detroit River International Crossing Initiative.

22. In or around 2004, the City of Windsor commissioned its own study by Sam Schwartz

Engineering PLLC who delivered a report through a public presentation to City Council in

January 2005.

7


8/157

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 12 to this my affidavit is a true copy of the

Summary of that report which was obtained from the City of Windsors website.

23. The Schwartz report studied a proposal by the Detroit River Tunnel Partnership (DRTP)

to renovate an existing rail tunnel under the Detroit River to make it serviceable exclusively to

truck traffic. The report also considered a proposal to build another bridge to the South-West of

the existing Ambassador Bridge and a proposal put forward by the CTC to replace the existing

bridge with an adjacent structure.

24. The twinning of the Ambassador Bridge proposal was studied by Schwartz in some

detail, according to his report. At page 9 of the summary report, he notes that the proposal

consisted of a second bridge, four lanes wide, which would be built next to the Ambassador

Bridge providing for 4 lanes in each direction. The proposal also involved a CTC parkway route

from highway 401 to the bridge. A full controlled limited access highway, 3 lanes in each

direction, would be built from highway 401 to the E.C. Row Expressway via Talbot Road and

Huron Church Road. Figure 10 at page 10 of the report shows the Ambassador Bridge access

route as provided by the CTC to Schwartz. Figure 11 in the Schwartz report shows the

Ambassador Bridge Access from E.C. Row Expressway again as provided by the CTC to

Schwarz. Figure 12 of the Schwartz report shows the Ambassador Bridge access route along the

Essex Terminal Railway through Sandwich.

26. At Page 16 of the Schwartz Report, Schwartz evaluates the CTC proposal as follows:

The CTC proposal provides adequate capacity and works acceptable from a trafficpoint of view. Traffic volumes on the bridge are expected to remain below capacity

beyond 2030 with the proposed fully controlled parkway. The proposed parkway does,however, channel all cross border traffic to the E. C. Row Expressway West of Huron

Church Road.(Emphasis added)

And later:

The Major drawbacks of the CTC proposal are the impacts on several communities ofthe proposed assess roadApproximately 1383 residences and apartment or publichousing and apartment complexes lie in a 200 meter corridor adjacent to the proposedroute. We conservatively estimate these 55 apartment buildings represent an additional

8


9/157

400 households. Additionally, the Forrester High School likes within the 200 metercorridor adjacent to the proposed Parkway. Air and noise quality would worsen forthese impacted properties.

Construction of the second bridge span, and a proposed access route would posesignificant and lengthy traffic disruptions during the reconstruction of Talbot and HuronChurch Road. The Windsor touchdown location for the second span would heavilyimpact adjacent residential areas and the University of Windsor during a lengthyconstruction phase

27. At page 20 Schwartz notes that:

we conclude that the combination of River-crossing flaws and approach road flaws arefatal to the DRTP and the Twinning of the Ambassador Bridge

28. Schwartz recommended that continued improvements occur on the Ambassador Bridge.

9


10/157

The Green Corridor Proposal Presented to City Council

29. In 2007, on a public website entitled www.greencorridor.ca The Ambassador Bridge

Company funded and participated in an initiative called the "Green Corridor".

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 13 to this my affidavit, is a true copy of that

website containing a Green Space Proposal.

30. According to the said website, which was in part sponsored by the Ambassador Bridge,

the "Green Corridor" initiative is described as a series of proposals "for generating a green

redevelopment of the international bridge corridor linking Canada to the United States. As a

gateway to the city of Windsor, the corridor presents opportunities to involve local communities

in transforming their environment. The initiative harnesses the capacity of interdisciplinary and

multi-institutional collaboration..."

31. The said website further notes that "in the spring of 2007 the Ambassador Bridge

Company donated funds to the University of Windsor to allow the Green court or to

conceptualize opportunities as a vision study for the Green development of the Ambassador

Bridge properties adjacent to the current customs moved expansion. Our exploration andresearch was pervasive resulting in a 1/200 scale model illustrating the vision with associated

display panels illustrating a template of green space opportunities shadowing the Ambassador

Bridge."

32. The green space study area is shown on a map as including the existing bridge Plaza,

customs area, storm water remediation areas, a parking lot, and a shaded area which includes

some of the existing bridge facilities.

33. Consequently, by the spring of 2007, the plans of the Ambassador Bridge to extend its

existing facilities, and to construct a replacement span for the existing bridge were very well

known in the city of Windsor, and particularly to Windsor City Council.

10


11/157

34. I have become aware that over the course of a decade the CTC had acquired houses on

the east side of Indian Road, from University Avenue West to Mill Street and on Edison and

Peter Streets. As I understand it, CTCs plan is to demolish these hoses, re-grade the lots, and

seed and plant them. As I understand it, these lots were to form a buffer between the replacement

span and the rest of the homes on the west side of Indian Road. This information is clear from a

review of the Ambassador Bridge website: www.ambassadorbridge.com. That website describes

the proposals for the second span, and shows artistic renderings and a video describing the plans

to create a second span to replace the aging existing bridge.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 14 to this my affidavit, is a true copy of the

Ambassador Bridge website as saved onto a data stick.

35. Since the time of the presentation of the Schwartz report, referred to above, Windsor City

Council has been opposed to the CTCs plans.

Council Passes Interim Control By-Law

36. As I have stated above, on January 29, 2007, City Council passed Interim Control Bylaw

19-2007, a Demolition Control By Law to ensure that actions were not taken within the Olde

Sandwich Towne Community Planning Study Area, such as demolition of buildings, "which

could have the effect of destabilizing its inherent features, the community, and the functions and

characteristics of existing buildings." I have also stated above how, on January 20, 2007, City

Council had also passed Interim Control by-law to prohibit certain uses of land and buildings in

the Sandwich Towne area.

City Council Refuses to Exempt CTC Houses from Demolition Control

37. I am advised by my solicitor and do verily believe that the passage of the Demolition

Control Bylaw required that any exemptions or applications to demolish a building in the area

subject to demolition control be made to the City Council. I am aware from a staff report made

11


12/157

to City Council, which shall be referred to below, that CTC made an application with respect to

686, 718, 738, 750, 778, and 784 Indian Road for exemption. Those applications came on for

Council's decision on May 28, 2007.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 15 to this my affidavit is a true copy of the

staff report dated March 27, 2007 concerning the May 20, 2007 Council meeting.

38. Attached as an appendix is to the aforesaid staff report, is a letter dated February 20, 2007

from Danbury Property Management to the CTC. That letter states as follows:

"We have been trying to lease the houses above despite our efforts to lease these houses

they are now vacant

And in some cases have been vacant for more than 6 months.

None of the houses have had substantial work done to them over the life of their existenceand as a result are need of major repairs such as new roofs, flooring, major kitchen andbathroom work, window and sill replacement, all repairs, furnace replacement, leakagein the basement and sewage issues. The leakage in the basement is causing mold issuesand further damage to the structure. As well, each House requires plaster repairs andextensive painting throughout. The outside surface and structure of each house is also

subject to numerous repairs, service painting and replanting of brick work.

There are several homes with broken windows and the interiors of some of the houses

had been vandalized. Copper and other materials have been removed by vandals. Thereare numerous windows and rotting windowsills and there is evidence of garments withinthese homes.

In our opinion it is not a safe condition to allow these houses to stand empty due to their poor condition. The cost of repairing the houses would be substantial and notrecoverable through rental income or resale. The houses are in a state of majordisrepair. They are negative influence on the neighborhood and in our opinion should bedemolished as soon as possible."

39. Also attached as an appendix to the said staff support is a letter dated April 23, 2007 from

the Ambassador Bridge to the attention of the then CAO of the City of Windsor. The letter

provides information regarding the application for demolition permits for these six houses on

Indian Road as follows:

"as you are aware, in August of 2005, Windsor City Council approved a building permit and siteplan control agreement for the current expansion of the Ambassador Bridge Plaza to allow forthe construction of 6 more custom booths designed solely for trucks. Among other things, that site

12


13/157

plan control agreement provides that the Ambassador or Bridge will provide landscaping alongHuron Church Road, Wyandotte Street And Mill Street as part of the completion of this project.The removal of these houses is necessary for the overall landscaping plan, which will include abuffer zone and a proper security perimeter; as such, they will be no buildings erected on the site

of these homes. Further, our contractor has now informed us that several of these houses need tobe removed to allow the most expedient completion of this work.

We can advise that the 6 houses are now vacant and in disrepair.

For your information, we have partnered with the Green Corridor at the University of Windsor toassist in our landscaping efforts to ensure that we create an environment that enhances theproperty that surrounds the Ambassador Bridge and improves the environment for our neighborsin the surrounding community as well as those who enter Windsor as the Gateway to Canada."

40. Also attached as an appendix to the staff report to counsel is a memorandum from Avalon

Consulting Professionals of Ontario, LLC dated March 8, 2008. That report notes as follows:"The following information is a summary of the research conducted on the 6 vacanthouses that are scheduled for demolition. All of these houses are located on the east sideof Indian Road between Mill Street and Wyandotte street west. The demolition of at least6 houses on the east side of Indian Road has already occurred. The city Windsor issuedpermits for the demolition of the 6 houses without expressing concern about any possible

historical or architectural significance.

The Ontario Ministry of Culture identifies real property cultural heritage resources as:archaeological sites; buildings and structural remains of historical,architectural and contextual value; districts or landscapes of historic

and scenic value in rural, village and urban contexts; places which holdsignificance because of sacred value or along traditional use.

We carefully analyzed the characteristics of each of these houses and concluded that nopreservation was warranted nor are they eligible for designation as heritage properties.

The Ontario Ministry of Culture database showed no designated heritage properties onIndian Road in the city of Windsor.

Avalon has reviewed orthophotography of the area from present date back to the late1960s. This photography indicates that the area was fully developed by 1970. Obliqueangles aerial photography taken during the construction of the Ambassador Bridge in thelate 1920s indicates that there were only 3 houses on the east side of Indian Road.

The architectural styles of the houses indicate that the majority are between 50 and 75years of age. Generally, the houses are one to two story single-family homes with no

architectural significance whatsoever. All of the house is scheduled for demolition arecomparable to those previously removed on the east side of Indian Road. None of the

houses to be demolished or associated with a historic event or in a historic propertiesdesignation.

13


14/157

The house at 686 Indian Rd... is in a state of disrepair with some rot occurring on wooddoor and window framing and the brick work needing substantial replanting. There areno significant architectural features of the unique character or representation of a styleof architecture warranting heritage properties designation.

The houses located at 718..., 738..., 750..., and 778... are of a very common architecturalstyle within the neighborhood. The houses at 718, 738, and 778 Indian Rd. to bedemolished are architecturally similar to the former houses located at 78, 734, 638, and630 Indian Rd. The City of Windsor previously issued demolition permits for thesehouses (678, 734, 638, and 630 Indian Road) without raising any issues relating to theirhistorical or architectural significance. None of these houses or any of the housesalready demolished exhibit significant architectural features of a unique character orrepresent a style of architecture warranting heritage properties designation.

The house at 734 Indian Rd... has some features such as exterior wood finishing andbrick work that are in need of repair. This house does not exhibit significant

architectural features of the unique character or representation of a style of architecture

warranting heritage properties designation.

The houses subject to the demolition permits do not have any significant architectural features, nor do they have any unique characteristics, as a result the houses do notrepresent a style of architecture that would warrant any heritage designation."

41. In the Exhibit 18 staff report, to the Mayor and members of City Council, the following

facts are stated:

"For these particular houses, there has been no redevelopment plan proposed. Nobuilding permit for new construction is been applied for. Section 5 of the demolition

control by-law 20-2007 provides that before a demolition permit is issued in the OldeSandwich Towne Community Planning Area, a building permit must be issued to erect anew building on the site of the residential property sought to be demolished.

An inspection of the homes by the building and development Department found that,while the houses may be in need of some repair, they do not appear to be structurallyunsound or not repairable.

City Planning staff had previously reported at houses on Indian Road, given their

proximity to the University of Windsor Campus and status as rental housing, play animportant role in providing accommodation for university students.

Administration has reviewed the Site Plan Control Agreement and can confirm thatdemolition of these homes on Indian Road is not part of the Site Plan application for thePlaza, as approved by CR 29/2006, nor is demolition of homes mentioned as part of, or arequirement for a landscaping plan. The only requirement is for the planting of sometrees in the rear yards of the homes on Indian to buffer them from the Bridge's retainingwall and structure. The removal of these homes is not required under the terms of theapproved Site Plan Control Agreement.

14


15/157

Administration has not received an overall landscape plan submitted by the DetroitInternational Bridge Co. Administration recommends that the Planning Study for theInterim Control By-Law evaluate this option, as an integral component of this study is toexamine how the character of the Sandwich Planning Area will be affected."

.

Conclusion:The adoption of interim control and diligent control by-laws is an important prerequisiteto the completion of a viable Sandwich Community Improvement Plan. These bt-lawsensure that no actions will be taken that could potentially have a negative effect of thestabilizing neighborhoods or key components and characteristics of the community. Inthis particular case, the demolition of the houses would have a negative impact on theneighborhood. Therefore it is recommended that the applications to demolish thesehouses be denied."(Emphasis added)

The N.K. Becker Report Concerning the Empty Houses

42. I am advised by Dr. N.K. Becker, a professional engineer, that he wrote a report for the

Canadian Transit Company dated June 6, 2007.


report.

43. In his report Dr. Becker indicates that he carried out a detailed inspection of the Indian

Road houses to assess their age, condition and heritage value within the City of Windsor's

proposed Sandwich Heritage Conservation District. Dr. Becker states the following in his report:

"The Study Area for this Heritage Conservation District is a large, pie-shaped areabounded by the Detroit River, Huron Church Road and Prince Road, which includesapproximately 2600 properties. As such it extends well beyond the boundaries of thehistoric Huron Indian Reserve as well as the original town site of Sandwich which wasoccupied by French, British, African and other immigrants who firs settled the shores ofthe Detroit River in the 1700's and subsequently cleared the woodlands and built homes,farms and other buildings further inland.

The Final Draft of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study was recentlycompleted and has been posted on the City of Windsor website. It recommends a

proposed Heritage Conservation District Boundary that encompasses two distinct areas;namely a historic commercial-institutional core along Sandwich Street from DetroitStreet to just south of Brock Street, and the majority of the circa 1820's Subdivision inthe Rosedale/Alexander area that includes a collection of 'generally well-maintained,finely-detailed residential dwellings.'

15


16/157

I understand that your clients, the Detroit International Bridge Company, purchased allof the houses on the east side of Indian Road from Wyandotte Street to Mill Street sometime ago. Four of these house (i.e., 678, 734, 638, and 630 Indian Road) weredemolished pursuant to Demolition Permits issued by the City of Windsor Building and

Development Department.

Concern has been expressed by the City of Windsor Administration that the demolition ofthese houses could have a detrimental effect on the City's ability to implement therecommendations of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study. Administrationstaff has also concluded that 'houses on Indian Road play an important role in providingaccommodations for University students' and that 'the demolition of the (subject) houseswould have a negative impact on the neighbourhood'.

1. All these houses are unoccupied.

2. None of these houses are in fit condition for re-occupancy. Although all the

doors were equipped with locks and 'No Trespassing' signs have been posted on

each house, they have been forcibly entered, vandalized and pilfered. Much ofthe accessible copper piping and the electrical wiring (including some of theelectrical panels) have been stolen. Water, frost and vandals have damaged the plaster, drywall, hardwood flooring and other finishes. And animals haveentered these houses through broken windows and doors and nested within thedebris. The rank odour of urine and fecal matter in several of the basements isoverpowering.

3. None of these houses merit a historical or a heritage designation based on

established Provincial, National, or International guidelines. The oldest (i.e.784 Indian Road) was built in or about 1925. The youngest (778 Indian Road)was built in or about 1970. All of these houses are of an age, type and style

common to the City of Windsor and other areas of North America.

4. The original brick veneer, wood siding, porches, dormers and roofing of the pre-1950s houses have deteriorated badly and/or been retrofitted with asbestos-cement, insulbrick, aluminum or vinyl siding; aluminum fascias, soffits, awningsand windows; etc. to the extent that there original feature have been materiallyaltered, removed or destroyed. The cracks, displacement and other distress we

observed in the original brick veneer on the two oldest houses indicate that theconcealed brick ties are failing and the brick veneer itself is potentially unstable.Vibrations or impact loads could cause sections of this brick veneer to fall offthese houses.

5. Construction of the new Customs Booths on the west side of the AmbassadorBridge near Mill Street is progressing towards the rear yards of these six houses.The proximity of the construction activities to these houses posses increasingchallenges and safety risks to the construction workers as well as damage risksto these houses (e.g., the stability of the brick veneer, the masonry foundation

walls and the unreinforced block masonry chimneys).

. these vacant houses are destabilizing rather than stabilizing features within their

16


17/157

neighbourhood. They also do not enhance the City's proposed designation of others partof Olde Sandwich Town s a possible Heritage Conservation District.

The conclusion expressed by the City Administration in its 27 March 2007 report to City

Council regarding the demolition of these six house that 'given their proximity to theUniversity of Windsor Campus and status as rental housing" these houses on IndianRoad 'play an important role in providing accommodation for University students' failsto recognize the following realities:

1. None of these houses was originally designed or built as a rooming, boarding orlodging house to accommodate students, but as modest single-family dwellingsAlthough most have been modified over the past 20 years to accommodatemultiple tenants (e.g., basement finishes, partitions, extra bathrooms, etc.) theyare not compliance with the renovation and retrofit requirements of either the

Ontario Building Code or the Ontario fire Code imposed on such multiple tenantoccupancies as defined by these Codes.

3. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the City Administration has no authorityunder any existing By-Law or Legislation to compel a landlord to convert asingle-family dwelling to a rental property suitable for use and available forstudents. To suggest that these six vacant houses which do not comply with thestandards imposed on multiple family, or boarding, rooming and lodging houses

should be retrofitted to provide appropriate code-compliant rentalaccommodations for students therefore seems both unreasonable and unrealistic.

4. In my professional opinion, the construction costs required to convert theseexisting single-family dwellings to legal, code-compliant duplex rental units, or

multiple-tenant rooming, boarding or lodging houses would be far tooprohibitive to be economically viable.

5. The proximity of these six vacant houses to the noise and exhaust fumesgenerated by the high volumes of daily truck traffic that is the international linkfor much of the NAFTA trade between Canada and the United States is anobvious detriment to their being rented to any tenants. To suggest that the

Detroit International Bridge Company which purchased these houses to providea buffer for the neighbouring occupied houses should repair, upcode and rentthese houses to students contradicts the most fundamental principles of goodurban planning.

As a Professional Engineer who has donated considerable time and effort to supportHeritage Conservation in Windsor and Essex County, I wholeheartedly support the City'sinitiative to conserve, preserve and restore historic buildings, neighbourhoods anddistricts within Olde Sandwich Towne, for the benefit of future generations. However, in

my opinion any attempt to apply such an important designation to buildings,neighbourhoods or districts that so obviously do not merit such designation, only serves

to diminish the value of those that do.

17


18/157

The results of my investigations and inspections demonstrate the following:

1. Neither these six vacant houses, nor the neighbouring house merit any heritage

designation based on the well-established Provincial, National or InternationalGuidelines or Accords that apply to such a designation.

2. Both the proximity of these houses to the increasing noise and exhaust from theinternational truck traffic that crosses the Ambassador Bridge, and the noise,litter and other inconsiderate acts committed by the less responsible studenttenants who have occupied the houses in this neighbourhood, have had adebilitating effect on this neighbourhood.

3. In my professional opinion, this neighbourhood is in an irreversible decline. Any

motion that the demolition of these six vacant houses will destabilize or hastenthe decline of the neighbouring houses defies common sense and established

principles of good urban planning. The environment in which these houses exist

will not likely improve with time. However, demolishing these six vacant houseand constructing a landscaped area in their place, would not only remove aneighbourhood liability but provide an opportunity to mitigate the detrimentalimpact of truck traffic crossing the Ambassador Bridge through the creation ofan attractive, landscaped buffer for the remaining houses in this neighbourhood.

in my professional opinion that in their present condition, these six vacant,deteriorated houses pose a foreseeable risk to any person who ignores or is unable to

read the 'No Trespassing" sign posted on each of these houses. These houses haveobviously been broken into, trespassed and plundered. They have also served as nestsfor rodents and other animals whose urine and fecal matter poses a potential health risk

to anyone who might enter these premises, either legally or illegally.

In my opinion, these house should be demolished as soon as possible. However, if theirdemolition is delayed for any reason, I recommend that all windows, doors and otheropenings be boarded-up completely and securely, all debris within their yards beremoved; and these properties be protected. "

Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project

44. On June 11, 2007, Paula Lombardi and Susan Whelan, lawyers representing the

Ambassador Bridge, along with Dan Stamper, President of the Detroit International Bridge

Company and Noel Harding, a representative of the Green Corridor initiative, appeared before

Windsor City Council to provide an overview of the "Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project".

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 17 to this my affidavit is a true copy of Council

18


19/157

Minutes for June 11, 2007.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 18 to this my affidavit is a true copy of a

transcript of a verbatim recording of that meeting as it pertains to the Ambassador Bridge.

45. During the course of the Council Meeting, the Ambassador Bridge and Green Corridor

representatives attempted to give a presentation of the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project

and the Green Corridor project, including the project objectives, the actual enhancement project

details, benefits, the corridor history, the Canadian Plaza Project, the U.S. Ambassador Bridge

Gateway Project Finding of No Significant Interest (FONSI), existing conditions, the Windsor

Plaza expansion, partnering opportunities and environmental analysis. The presentation was

limited by City Council to 10 minutes and a request for an extension of time to allow the

presentation to be completed was denied by the Mayor.

Council Refuses CTC Permission to Demolish

46. City Council also deal with CTC's request to demolish certain of the Indian Road houses

as set out above. City Council denied CTC's request to demolish these house. Furthermore,

Council directed the Chief Building Official ("CBO") to prepare a report for consideration by

Council, outlining steps available to secure those subject properties so that there was no further

vandalizing.

Sandwich Heritage District Study Report

47. In June of 2007, the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Final Report was prepared

for submission to the Windsor Heritage Committee and eventually to City Council.

Previously marked as Exhibit 2 to this my affidavit is a copy of that report which was

taken off the City of Windsor's official website (http://www.citywindsor.ca/002570.asp). The

following excerpts are taken from that lengthy document:

"Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study, Final Report,

19


20/157

Prepared in association with:

Ecoplans, Stephen J. Mawdsley Architect SJMA and Michael Baker,

June 2007

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Heritage Conservation Districts are created under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Actfor the purposes of conserving something of heritage value that is common to a whole

district. conservation district is the collective character of the overall area, as definedby its historical context architecture, streets, landscape and other physical and visualfeatures.

One of the key recommendations in this study was to undertake a study investigatingthe possibility of designating Sandwich as a Heritage Conservation District.

Approval for undertaking the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study was given

by the City of Windsor on September 5, 2006 based on the Terms of Reference that hadbeen prepared by the City of Windsor Planning Department.

[pg. 1.1]

1.2 WHAT HAPPENS IN A HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT

As previously mentioned, a Heritage Conservation District focuses on the preservation ofa collective area to help retain the key functional and visual attributes that conveyorhave a connection to the history of the area in which they are located. A HeritageConservation District can include buildings, landscapes or both. When an area isdesignated as a Heritage Conservation District, it means that its essential elements are

to be protected, but it does not mean that an area is 'frozen' in time or intended to berestored to some specified historical period or style.

Generally, it is the streetscape that is the focus of a Heritage Conservation District - as aresult, policies and guidelines are put in place to provide direction about what kinds ofalterations, additions or new construction will be considered appropriate for areasvisible from the street. Heritage alteration permits are generally required to majorstreet-facing alterations and additions, as well as new construction. Minor repairs andalterations, or additions and renovations to the side or rear of buildings typically do notrequire heritage alteration permits, even when in a Heritage Conservation District,

although conservation guidelines may still be provided to assist with maintenance andrepair of certain building elements. The interior of buildings is not affected in any way

in a Heritage Conservation District. [pg. 1.2]

1.3 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

Consistent with the Act, the purpose of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation DistrictStudy is to 'provide an architectural and historical analysis of the Sandwich communityon the west side of Windsor with a view to establishing one or more heritage

20


21/157

conservation district/s.'

The Study is a two-phase process, whereby Phase 1 focuses on background research andexamination to identify an area (or areas) that warrant more in-depth examination as a

potential heritage conservation district(s) based on the City's Official Plan criteria. Individual properties suitable for Part IV designation or inclusion on the WindsorHeritage Properties Inventory are also to be identified.

Phase 2 of the study is the preparation of a Heritage Conservation District Plan for thearea(s) identified in Phase 1, to provide policy direction and strategies to conserve andenhance the character of the Heritage Conservation District.

1.4 LOCATION

The specific study area, as identified in the Terms of reference by the City of Windsor,is a pie-shaped area bounded by the Detroit River, Huron Church Road to the east andPrince Road to the west / south as shown in Figure 2. These initial boundaries include

approximately 2,600 properties, primarily residential, but with some commercial , retailand office uses on Sandwich Street as well as on Huron Church Road and Felix Avenue.

[pg. 1.3]

2.5 CONCLUSION

Continual redevelopment and growth has left little of 19th century Sandwich in evidence.Buildings constructed before 1900 represent only 5% of the pre-amalgamation buildingstock in existence today and very few of those retain all of their original features. Yetwithin what was the built up area before 1914 there are handful of well-preserveddwellings from most of the periods in Sandwich's long development. These structuresshould be listed, based on criteria established for historic Sandwich as a whole.

The growth pattern of Sandwich was quite dispersed. The boundaries set by the Huron

Church Reserve encompassed a large territory which was made even larger when themunicipality boundary was established in 1858. Today, surviving structures of differentperiods can be found in close proximity. This pattern changed somewhat in the 1920swhen the first instances of suburban growth created large tracts of similar housing in thecourse of a single decade.

[pg. 2.6]

2.5.1 The Town Centre

In a two block section of the core area can be found most of the structures that relate tothe founding of Sandwich and of the Western District itself.

[pg. 2.7]

3.1.6.2 Detroit Street to Huron Church Road

The area from Detroit Street to Huron Church Road consist of unique residences, open

21


22/157

space, and wonderful vista of the Ambassador Bridge, a historic structure in itself, in thebackground of this area. While there has been a influx of multi-unit residentialcomplexes in the last 30 years, this area has retained some of the most unique residencesin the Sandwich study area.

While many of the house along Indian Road function as rental properties, as do amajority west of College Avenue, these buildings contribute to the unique residentialarea of the Sandwich Study area, with those on the south side of Indian Road being moreintact.

This area deserves further investigation as a part of a Heritage Conservation District.

[pg. 3.18 to 3.19]

3.1.7 Summary of Architectural Inventory

Although more difficult to reverse, there is a discontinuity of scale in some buildingsdue to the abandonment and removal of the second and third floors. As well there

appear to be a number of open undeveloped lots on Sandwich Street. This is anopportunity to develop policy and guidelines for the development of the lots in theHeritage Conservation District that will reinforce the existing heritage built form. Theintegration of similar building form, scale, architectural detail, and setbacks will assistin developing and reinforcing the continuity necessary within a Heritage District.

In summary, there are two areas deserving consideration of a Heritage ConservationDistrict designation from an architectural perspective: the Central Business District and

residential area north of Detroit to the Ambassador Bridge between Sandwich andDonnelly. These areas contain the broadest selection of architecturally significant built form with generally greater consistency and integrity and should be considered fordesignation as a Heritage Conservation District in part or as a whole due to thearchitectural form, architectural features, streetscape, and history of the buildings inthese areas. While there are significant architectural and historical selections adjacentto this boundary, these properties would be more appropriately considered fordesignation on an individual basis under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

[pg. 3.23]

4.10 VISUAL DETRIMENTS

Some of the buildings within the study area have been abandoned by owners, in effectabandoning the entire neighbourhood. Homes that are in a state of disrepair, have beendamages by fire, or are boarded up occur regularly on the fringes of the pre-war area,

often at the interface between industrial and residential land uses. These homesrepresent gaps within the streetscape, and detract immensely from the rest of thestreetscape.

[pg. 4.15]

5.2 OFFICIAL PLAN STATUS

5.2.1 Heritage Policies

22


23/157

At the present time, a section of the Sandwich Study Area, generally corresponding tothe strip of Sandwich Street extending from South Street to Detroit Street is one of four'Heritage Areas' shown on Schedule G.

It should be noted that areas identified on Schedule G as Heritage Areas are notnecessarily currently designated (only one of the four areas - Prado Place - is currentlydesignated), nor is the designation of potential Heritage Conservation Districts limited tothose areas that are shown on Schedule G. Policies pertaining to Heritage Areas statethat any new development or infrastructure in those areas should respect, and wherepossible, enhance the historical character of the area with respect to compatible height,massing, scale, setback and architectural style.

The Official Plan also states that recognition of Windsor's heritage resources may occurby designating groups of buildings and areas as Heritage Conservation Districts underthe Ontario Heritage Act. Heritage Conservation Districts are required by the OfficialPlan to meet one of more of the following criteria:

1. The area will be comprised of buildings, structures or part thereof, and sites oflandscapes of architectural and/or historical significance meeting the criteriaestablished in Policy 9.3.3.2; and

2. The area may also include other buildings, structures, sites or landscapes whichdo not individually merit designation, but which constitute infilling among properties ofarchitectural and/or historical significance and are necessary for the conservation of theoverall character of the area.

Specific criteria defined in Section 9.3.3.2 include the following:

- Property is to be associated with an important person or group of persons or haveplayed a role in an important historical event;

- Building or structure will have distinguishing architectural characteristics (type, styleor method of construction or be a notable example of work by any early master

builder, designer or significant architect);

- Building or structure will be a rare example of a formerly more common architecturaltype or method of construction, or be a rare surviving example of work by an earlymaster builder, designer or significant architect);

- Association with the past living / working environment of a significant element ofWindsor's population or have been associated with an important aspect of the city'spolitical, economic, social or technological development;

- Be recognized as a long-standing landmark or is considered to contribute positively tothe cityscape due to aesthetic value.

It is determined that an area meets these criteria, the official plan gives Council theauthority to designate groups of buildings and areas as Heritage Conservation Districts

23


24/157

under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. The foregoing criteria from Section 9.3.3.2are also the criteria if individual designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.At the present time, the Sandwich study area contains 16 designated properties, as wellas a further 25 listed properties (i.e. - properties of interest that have not been

designated). A map illustrating the designated and listed properties in adjacent toSandwich is provided in Figure 8.

[pg. 5.1 - 5.3]

5.3.6 Summary

Greater variability in lot sizes occurs in the older area of Sandwich (i.e. - west ofCollege Avenue, most likely as a result of a relatively lengthy time period of developmentas it spans from the mid 1800s to the 1950s.

[pg. 5.12)

5.4 OTHER STUDIES AND PLANNING INITIATIVES

5.4.1 Olde Sandwich Towne Community Planning Study (2006)

The Olde Sandwich Town Community Planning Study was undertaken in 2006 by theCity of Windsor Planning Division to develop a plan to 'improve the quality of theexperience of living, visiting and working in Sandwich'. The plan had extensive

involvement from the Olde Sandwich Towne Community Task Force and identifiedstrategies and actions to help the community realize its vision of Olde Sandwich Towne.The area of the Community Planning study was smaller than the heritage conservationdistrict study area, as it did not extend beyond College Avenue, with the exception ofMaryvale College. However, it did extend farther to the south, with Prospect Avenue asits boundary.

The study included extensive public consultation through task force participation,community meetings, visioning sessions and workshops.

Weaknesses- Boarded up buildings

- Unkempt lots- Need to build on history- Poor image

Ultimately, the Community Planning Study established a vision for the community:"Olde Sandwich Town is a vibrant waterfront community" and a series of associated

strategies and actions focused on six categories.

- Investigation of the potential for a heritage Conservation District designation forSandwich (the focus of this study);

- Development of urban design guidelines and performance standards for areas outsideof any heritage conservation district;

24


25/157

- Improved streetscape standards on Sandwich Street;

- More stringent property standards enforcement;

- Financial incentives for building renovation / restoration;

- Expansion of the historic murals project;

- Public art, landscaping and signage improvements at gateways;

- Encouraging students to learn more about the history of Sandwich;

- Protection and replanting of street trees, including reintroduction of Mission PearTrees;

5.4.2 Interim and Demolition Control By-Laws (January 2007)

It essentially permits only the continuation of existing permitted uses, repairs tobuildings to comply with the City's property standards by-law, and work which does not

require a building permit for a period of one year. At the same time, the City enacted a Demolition Control By-law to prevent the demolition of any whole or part of a

residential building unless a demolition permit is issued by Council. These measureswere taken to ensure stability in the Sandwich community during the course of theCommunity Improvement Plan that is being initiated, ad to prevent potential destructionor loss of Sandwich's attributes prior to the completion of the CIP.

5.4.3 Other Studies and Initiatives

A number of other studies aimed at promoting and strengthening the Sandwich

community, improving the quality of life, and preserving and enhancing the physicalenvironment of Sandwich have also been undertaken in the past, including:- Sandwich Community Improvement Plan (1989)- Heritage and Design Guidelines Study (1986)- Neighbourhood Improvement Plan (1979)

recognized that the physical appearance of the core, particularly its heritage assets,were key elements of economic vitality; and established various strategies and designguidelines intended to help revitalize the economic and physical fabric of Sandwich.

evident that some stagnation has occurred in recent years. This gave rise to the currentinitiatives including the Community Planning Study (previously outlined), this Heritage

Conservation District Study, and the soon to be initiated Community Improvement Plan.[pg. 5.12 - 5.14]

5.4.4 City of Windsor Archaeological Master Plan

Nearly all of the Sandwich study area is identified as an area of "high Potential" (seemap in Appendix F)

25


26/157

will be reviewed for their potential to impact archeological resources. If such plansare considered to have a potential impact on archaeological resources, requirements forarcheological assessment and mitigation are typically incorporated as conditions ofplanning approval.

[pg. 5.14]

5.5 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY

A general analysis of development activity in the Sandwich Study Area was undertaken toreview the extent of architectural and land use change over the past five years(approximately) to help identify areas that may be subject to greater threats oropportunities as a result of proposed or anticipated development or redevelopment.Data reviewed.

Alterations most frequently identified were repairs and replacements to porches, roofsand windows. It is likely that other alterations were undertaken that did not require

building permits. Additions included new porches, dormers and decks at the front ofhouses. A total of fourteen new buildings were constructed since 2000, including one-

storey dwellings and duplexes. Most of these new dwellings were located in the older part of the neighbourhood west of College Avenue. There were also a substantialnumber of demolitions, with 20 buildings removed. The majority of these (9 dwellings)were on Indian Road, likely due to the proposed twinning of the Ambassador Bridge, andMill Street (5 dwellings) with the remainder on Peter, Sandwich and Russell Streets.

It is apparent from the review of development activity that the majority of 'significant'activity (i.e. - demolitions, new construction, site plans and re-zoning) is occurring in theolder part of Sandwich. - See Table 5.1

[pg. 5.14 - 5.15]

5.6 PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

The Sandwich study area is very unique in that it contains a wide variety of uses,including residential This land use variety presents a challenge for heritageconservation district designation, not only because of diverse interests and expectations,but also because of the attendant diversity of built form and streetscape. It is also clearthat the Sandwich study area reflects a lengthy period of development, ranging from thelate 1700's to present day. .. developed during and after World War II neighbourhoodstill retains the original structures although many have been altered or are in need ofsome maintenance and repair. There are also a number of locations where vacant or

underutilized lots exist in the study area - development of these areas has the potential toenhance the overall character of the neighbourhood of [if] done sensitively, or detractfrom it if not compatibly designed.

From a planning perspective, the current policies, designations and zones that exist inthe Sandwich study area are reasonably conducive to preserving existing heritageresources in much of the area as permitted uses and densities are similar to what alreadyexists, limiting the pressure for redevelopment to some extent. However, portions of the

26


27/157

study area on Peter and Russell Streets are zoned R3-3 which permits higher densitydevelopment. In these areas, a mix of more recent apartments ranging from 3 to 9storeys has been constructed alongside a few remaining original dwellings. Futurepressure for redevelopment in these areas could result in the loss of the existing housing

stock and heritage assets.

Also, substantial areas directly adjacent to or in close proximity to the river that arecurrently designated and zoned for industrial purposes, but which appear to be vacant orunderutilized, present substantial opportunities for redevelopment. Brownfields programs and initiatives, combined with appropriate Official Plan redesignation,policies and urban design guidelines, could ensure that any new development is sensitiveto and enhances the existing cultural, architectural and landscape heritage attributes ofSandwich.

as it is (and should be) a prime location for students to live. However, such areasoften experience additional pressure for redevelopment or conversion of existing

dwellings for student housing purposes. appropriate mechanisms and policies be in

place to protect the key heritage attributes and features of the area and to guideredevelopment efforts so they are compatible with hose heritage features, while alsorecognizing that change and evolution of the neighbourhood will also occur.

Ultimately, an integrated "suite" of policies, programs and guidelines that meshcommunity and cultural development, heritage preservation and economic vitality willlikely be most effective to provide the rejuvenation that Sandwich residents and

businesses are seeking.

[pg. 5.15 to 5.17]

6.1.1 Population Profile

The population of Sandwich is estimated to be approximately 9,985, composed of 49%males and 51% females. The age distribution is generally quite similar to the City ofWindsor as a whole. Exceptions to this are most notable in the 20-24 year age group,where Sandwich has a substantially larger proportion, likely a reflection of the proximityto the University and the 45-64 year age group, which is considerably smaller thanWindsor as a whole. See Table 6.1 - Age Distribution (p. 6.1)

[pg. 6.1]

6.1.2 Housing Profile

the proportion of housing that is owned versus rented in Sandwich is almost the

reverse of the City notable that the area west of College, for which the Olde SandwichTowne Community Planning Study was completed, had an even higher proportion ofrenters at 73%. See Table 6.3 - Tenure at p. 6.2.

The high proportion of renters throughout Sandwich may have implications for apotential heritage conservation district, as property owners may not reside in the areaand may be less inclined to invest in their buildings to help retain and restore heritagefeatures or may be less supportive of designation.

27


28/157

the proportion of apartments in Sandwich is much higher than in the City as a whole. quite a number of apartment buildings in the older areas of Sandwich, but it is alsolikely that quite a few apartments are also located in converted dwellings.

[pg. 6.2]

6.1.3 Economic Profile

The primary occupations for residents of Sandwich are in the manufacturing sector andin sales and service occupations, with the greatest proportion of education attainmentbeing at the high school completion level. It was also noted in this socio-economicanalysis that household incomes in Sandwich are substantially lower than the incomes ofWindsor residents as a whole. This is likely a reflection of the fact that there is a higher

proportion of younger people in the neighbourhood (including students) and thedominance of sales and service occupations which are typically lower paying. Lower

incomes may result in greater financial inability for occupants to undertake repairs andmaintenance on properties that are showing signs of age and/or deterioration and points

out the potential need for heritage grant and incentive programs to assist homeownerswho need to undertake improvements to their dwellings.

[pg. 6.3]

6.2 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Sandwich reveals that it is a community with a relatively high proportion of one and

two person households, substantially lower incomes and a very high percentage ofresidents who rent their accommodation compared to the rest of Windsor. A youngerage profile also exists in Sandwich

Issues associated with the socio-demographic profile in Sandwich are most likely tooccur in the realm of property standards and maintenance, given the lower income profile, as it may be more financially difficult for owners and tenants to undertakerepairs or upgrades to their property. The high rental rate that exists is also potentiallya problem, particularly if owners are absentee landlords, as it may be more difficult toenforce property standards if landlords are not maintaining the properties.

Awareness and support for heritage conservation district designation may also be agreater challenge with a younger, non-owner population as there is typically lesspersonal investment in communities or areas dominated by transient, student centeredpopulations. This is not intend ed to be a criticism, but simply a recognition that manystudents' interests and priorities tend to focus on their studies and university / college

events rather than what is occurring in or important to long-term residents of the largercommunity in which they live.

[pg. 6.4]

7.0 MOVEMENT

An overview of the movement system infrastructure in the Sandwich study area wasundertaken to assess motor vehicle travel and parking, transit, cycling, walking and

28


29/157

goods movements and the potential implications on / of potential heritage conservationdistrict designation. As previously indicated, the study area is a triangular area boundby Huron Church Road, Prince Road and the Detroit River. Within the boundary areapproximately 56 streets of varying classifications.

[pg. 7.1]

7.6 BORDER CROSSING INFRASTRUCTURE

The Ambassador Bridge itself is a historic structure, having been constructed between1927 and 1929. November 1929, it was the longest suspension bridge in the world. Itremains a striking structure, visible from various point in the Sandwich study area. Itdoes not serve any movement function for Sandwich itself, but is a significant centerpieceof international trade, being the busiest international border crossing in North America.

More than 25% of all merchandise traded between Canada and the United States crossesthe Ambassador Bridge. Unusual for such important transportation components, the

Ambassador Bridge is privately owned by the Canadian Transit Company.

it is understood that the Canadian Transit Company is pursuing enhancements to theAmbassador Bridge to better serve the traffic that uses it. Site plans were approved bythe City (January 2006) for a retaining wall and custom inspection booths on the westside of Huron Church Road, south of Wyandotte Street, with three booths completed in2006 and the remaining six expected to be completed mid-2007. Website information( www.ambassadorbridge.com, www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca) also indicates that the Canadian

Transit Company is undertaking an Environmental Assessment process, in accordancewith the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, to construct a 6-lane cable stayed

bridge just west of the existing Ambassador Bridge which will connect directly into theexisting plazas in Windsor and Detroit. the new bridge is construction, the existingAmbassador Bridge will be taken out of service and rehabilitated and maintained forCanadian Transit Company operational vehicles and in cases of emergency, accordingto the owner.

The Canadian Transit Company and its affiliates own many of the dwellings located onthe east side of Indian Road between the Detroit River and College Avenue. Members ofthe pubic have expressed some concern regarding the impacts of the Ambassador Bridgeimprovements on this area and the implications for dwellings on Indian Road.

Information from the Canadian Transit Company confirmed their intent to removestructures from the east side of Indian Road to allow for the creation of a green bufferarea to help mitigate the effects of noise, vibration and lighting from the bridge on theSandwich residential area.

The Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) study is also currently underway, toidentify a preferred alignment for a new crossing of the Detroit River. However, it isnot anticipated that any of the potential alignments will have any significant impact onheritage resources in the Sandwich study area as all the crossings appear to avoid theresidential / commercial area of Sandwich.

[pg. 7.5 - 7.6]

7.7 ASSESSMENT OF MOVEMENT SYSTEM

29


30/157

7.7.2 Weaknesses

- Some properties in the study area are dilapidated, negatively affecting the streetscapefor pedestrians.

- Construction of the Ambassador Bridge span will likely result in the loss of existingdwellings along the north boundary or Sandwich.

[pg. 7.7]

8.0 Public Consultation

8.1 CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES

Consultation opportunities included the following:

- Meetings and input from a Steering Committee composed primarily of residents of the

neighbourhood

- Public meetings (January 25, April 28, 2007)

- Opinion survey and questionnaires at public meetings

- Meeting with the Windsor Heritage Committee (May 9, 2007)

[pg. 8.1]

8.2 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT

Consultation during the project revealed very strong support for Heritage ConservationDistrict designation from those who attended meetings and returned questionnaires. acore group of people in the community are very passionate about the heritage of theSandwich community, particularly its cultural value. opportunities and major themes

arising from the input received. More detailed summaries from Steering Committee andpublic meetings are included in Appendix C.

[pg. 8.1]

30


31/157

8.2.1 Steering Committee

A Steering Committee composed of a number of residents and business owners form theSandwich community was formed shortly after the Study was initiated to provideneighborhood representation and input. The first meeting held with the SteeringCommittee on January 25, 2007 revealed a number of key issued and opportunities:

- Impact of the Ambassador Bridge's potential twinning;

A second meeting with the Steering Committee, held on April 12, 2007, indicatedcontinued support for Heritage Conservation District designation and the preliminary

boundary recommendations.

[pg. 8.1 - 8.2]

8.2.2 Public Meetings

The initial public meeting held on January 25, 2007 was attended by approximately 30residents.

primary issues and comments relating to:

- Impact of the potential twinning of the Ambassador Bridge on existing houses andheritage resources;

- Questions as to whether designation would affect property taxes and insurance;

- and that the Rosedale / Indian Road area was also important from an architecturalperspective.

A second public meeting / open house was held on April 28, 2007 which was again

attended by approximately 25 to 30 people. Comments and questions raised

- What impact would heritage designation have on plans for the Ambassador Bridgeenhancements?

- Concerns that portions of Indian Road are identified as being inside the proposedboundary or in the area for further study and refinement;

At the conclusion of the meeting, there was again strong support from most of those inattendance for designation of a portion of Sandwich as a Heritage Conservation District.

Concerns about designation were expressed by those attending on behalf of theCanadian Transit Company and its potential implications on the enhancements planned

for the Ambassador Bridge.

[pg. 8.2 - 8.3]

31


32/157

8.2.3 Questionnaires

an "opinion survey" was also developed to obtain some additional informationregarding residents' opinions about the key heritage features in their neighbourhood andto gain an understanding of their level of support for or concerns about potentialheritage district designation. Although it was made available at the public meeting andalso provided to the Steering Committee for further distribution, only twelve surveyswere returned. Of those, all were supportive of heritage district designation, and feltthat it was 'very important" to protect the area's heritage features.

important heritage feature in Sandwich most frequently cited the commercial core,

with specific building / architectural features and cultural heritage being the next mostfrequently mentioned response. Buildings / features most frequently identified included

Mackenzie Hall, Duff Baby Mansion and the post office.

A second brief questionnaire was available at the April 28 public meeting to obtainresponses regarding the proposed boundary for the heritage conservation district. Only

two responses were submitted, both of which supported designation and the proposedboundary.

[pg. 8.3]

8.2.4 Windsor Heritage Committee Meeting

A meeting was also held with the Windsor Heritage Committee on May 9, 2007 topresent the Draft Report and obtain input regarding the report and proposed boundary. A delegation was also present at this meeting on behalf of the Canadian TransitCompany. Comments obtained from the Heritage Committee indicated strong supportfor the Study conclusions, with a request to include some additional information in thereport regarding archaeological resources in Sandwich within the study area boundary.

Representatives of the Canadian Transit Company provided a letter outlining theirconcerns. that they felt Indian Road should be excluded from the boundary and area

for further study. also provided by the representatives regarding their intentions forthe existing Ambassador Bridge, they intend to retain and maintain the currentAmbassador Bridge structure.

Moved by Councillor Jones, seconded by Councillor Brister,

That the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Overview Study and Plan draft Report

dated March 2007 prepared by Stantec Consulting BE SUPPORTED, and further that the

comments of the draft study put forth by the Solicitor for the Canadian Transit Company

BE CONSIDERED by the study consultant.Carried.

[pg. 8.3]

8.3 CONCLUSIONS

It appears that there is strong support for designating at lease some portion of

Sandwich as a Heritage Conservation District to help retain and protect the

32


33/157

architectural and cultural heritage of the neighbourhood. the area identified mostrequested as being the most noticeable or important feature to protect was thecommercial core. it is also apparent that the number of people participating inmeetings and responding to the opinion survey is very small relative to the overall size of

the study area. The only concerns expressed regarding designation and the proposedboundary were from the Canadian Transit Company, specifically with respect to theimplications of designation on Indian Road and potential construction of the newAmbassador Bridge span.

[pg. 8.4]

9.0 Recommendations

9.1.1 Recommended Heritage Conservation District Boundary

Based on the evaluation, the portion of the study area that merits inclusion within aproposed Heritage Conservation District Boundary consists of two relatively distinctareas, as illustrated in Figure 13:

- The historic commercial - institutional core of Sandwich, extending from Detroit Street

to just south of Brock Street; and

- The majority of the 1920s subdivision in the Rosedale / Alexander area whichincorporates a collection of generally well-maintained, finely detailed residentialdwellings.

Rationale for the proposed Heritage Conservation District Boundary incorporating bothof these areas is based on the following:

- Rosedale / Alexander / Indian Road area has specific features that are distinct to thisarea and contribute to its visual coherence (brick construction, porches, Tudor details,streetscape trees and medians);

- The proposed east/north boundary of the 1920's subdivision, along the centerline of Indian Road, is coincident with at least one of the original subdivision planboundaries;

[pg. 9.1 - 9.3]

9.1.2 Areas for Further Study and Refinement

Additional portions of the study area in immediate proximity to the recommendedHeritage Conservation District boundary have been identified as "areas for further studyand refinement", in order to undertake more detailed evaluation and obtain further inputfrom the Steering Committee and public. These "further study and refinement" areas areshown in shading on Figure 13 and warrant additional evaluation for the followingreasons:

33


34/157

- These areas may be at higher risk of future change / redevelopment given theirproximity to the Detroit River, University of Windsor and Ambassador Bridge;

Establishment of the proposed heritage Conservation District boundary was based on thecombined historical, architectural, streetscape, planning and socio-economic analysis ofthe entire study area. To further evaluate the areas identified for further study andrefinement to determine whether they should ultimately be included within the HeritageConservation District boundary, more detailed analysis should be undertaken in Phase 2regarding the following:

- Review and ranking of the architectural style, integrity, condition and contribution to

the streetscape for specific buildings or blocks;

- Association with specific historical persons or events;

- Streetscape and landscape characteristics / distinctiveness in comparison to areasidentified for inclusion and exclusion;

- Potential risk posed by development, redevelopment or demolition within context ofexisting policies and zoning regulations including the Windsor Archaeological MasterPlan;

Other parts of the study area were not included in the recommended HCD boundary or

"area for further consideration" as they lack the necessary architectural integrity,consistency and distinctiveness that is necessary for designation.

[pg. 9.4 - 9.5]

9.2 BUILDING CONSERVATION, RESTORATION AND IMPROVEMENT

The Sandwich study area contains a wide variety of buildings ranging from residential toindustrial and commercial to institutional. Some are well preserved and well maintainedbuildings with fine architectural details, others are in a serious state of disrepair. ...

[pg. 9.5]

9.3 STREETSCAPE PRESERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT

It appears at times that Sandwich struggles with its collective identity, and this may be

due in part to the fact that there is much variation in the landscape .[pg. 9.6]

9.4 MOVEMENT

The "movement" component of the study indicated that residents are concerned about theimpacts of larger border crossing initiatives on the heritage assets of Sandwich. Boththe Ambassador Bridge and Detroit River International Crossing projects are outside of

34


35/157

the study area and require extensive analysis and environmental assessment that is wellbeyond the scope of the Heritage Conservation District Study.

[pg. 9.8]

*************************************

35


36/157

APPENDIX A

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Project

Consultant Terms of Reference

Goal of the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Studies/ Plan

There are 2,616 properties within the area, including over 4,000 occupied dwellingshousing some 10,000 people.

Overall Structure of the Project

Phase I - .. The study will identify heritage resources and an area (or areas) appropriatefor more in-depth examination as a potential heritage conservation district(s), based onthe City's criteria for Heritage Conservation District designation as defined in the

Official Plan.

Phase II - is the preparation of a Heritage Conservation District Plan for the area/s

identified in Phase I.

[pg. 8]

Background

There are currently sixteen designated heritage properties in Sandwich, with anadditional twenty-five on the Windsor heritage Properties Inventory. In the 1970s thecore of the former Town of Sandwich (original eight block town site centered onSandwich and Mill Streets) was considered a heritage conservation district, but the

designation did not proceed.

The Official Plan designates three neighbourhoods in Windsor containing collections ofimportant heritage resources as Heritage Areas (Schedule G: Civic Image). One ofthese is the Sandwich neighbourhood, with boundaries that reflect the original town site -the eight blocks bounded by Russell, Peter, Detroit and South Streets.

The preservation of the historic Sandwich community has been topic of concern in recent years, as the location for the proposed new international border crossing is beingconsidered on Windsor's west end. On January 30, 2006 the City of WindsorAdministration was requested to report back on the process to designate a Heritage

Conservation District in Sandwich by the following Notice of Motion moved byCouncilor Jones and seconded by Councilor Postma (M26-2006),

A report from the Heritage Planner was considered by Council on March 27, 2006 andthe following resolution was passed (CR159/2006):

That Administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the necessary steps toengage a heritage consultant at an estimated cost of $0,000-$50,000 to becharged to the Budge Stabilization Reserve Fund, to prepare a Heritage

36


37/157

Conservation District Plan and overview study for the Sandwich Study area asoutlined in Resolution M26-2006 (the Pie) with a report back to the WindsorHeritage Committee and Council;

[pg. 9]

Study Objectives

The Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Project will result in a minimum of twodocuments:

1) An Overview Study of the "Pie" that will gather, organize and analyze thenecessary background information that will collectively justify the creation of one ormore potential Heritage Conservation Districts and define the boundaries of such

district/s.

The Sandwich HCD Overview Study shall include examinations/discussions of thefollowing:

h. Opinion Survey - Conduct a sampling of property owner interviews togain insight into attitudes regarding the positive and negative attributes of thestudy area, and the concerns and wishes of property owners relative to

conservation objectives and change.

i. Recommendations for HCD Boundaries - Utilizing the information in theOverview study make recommendations s to the geographic boundaries of one ormore potential Heritage Conservative Districts in the Sandwich area. In theevent more than one area is suggested, prioritize the potential districts.

2) A Heritage Conservation District Plan that will take a closer / more detailedlook at the properties in the recommended HCD area.

[pg. 10 - 11]

Consultation Responsibilities and Public Participation

Public Meetings in Phase I: A minimum of three public meetings will be undertakenduring the preparation of the Overview Study. One public meeting will occur after thedraft of the Overview Study is completed. This will provide an opportunity for theconsultant to incorporate significant pubic concerns in the final draft of the Overview

Study. Council will approve of the final Overview Study after considering therecommendation of the Steering Committee and the Windsor Heritage Committee. Themeetings of the Windsor Heritage Committee and Council are additional public meetings/ public forums relative to this issue.

Public Meetings in Phase II: A minimum of four public meetings will be undertakenduring the preparation of the HCD Plan. The first meeting will occur after the first draftof the HCD study / plan is completed and the second meting after the final draft of the

37


38/157

HCD Plan is completed. The Windsor Heritage Committee will review the final draft ofthe HCD study/plan at a meeting open to the public. Their recommendation will beforwarded to Council. Final approval of the district designation / HCD Plan will be at asubsequent Council meeting, open to the public.

[pg. 11 - 12]

Staff in Planning and other City Departments will provide:

2. Information on file about local history including the draft 1970s heritageconservation district study in Sandwich.

[pg. 12]

****************************************

APPENDIX B

RESIDENTIAL ZONING COMPARISON

PUBLIC MEETING #1 - JANUARY 25, 2007

RECORD OF QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FROM MEETING

A public meeting was held on January 25, 2007 to introduce the Sandwich HeritageConservation District project to residents and to present preliminary findings regardinghistorical background research, architectural inventory and assessment, streetscape and

landscape assessment and planning context. Following the presentation, a question andanswer session was held to obtain input and comments from those at the meeting.Approximately 30 people were n attendance, including Steering Committee members andthe following is a record of the questions and responses from the meeting.

Question:

have you looked into the second crossing of the Ambassador bridge yet?

Response (Consultant):

We will look at it in terms of the bigger picture, and how it fits in. At this point we arestill collecting information and assessing potential implications.

Response (Consultant):

The study area itself was defined by the City, and so we cannot speak to how it was

defined. The study area is quite large already, and it may become unmanageable ifadditional areas were to be studied.

Question (general question by the Consultants to the audience)

What is the level of support for district designation, can I see a show of hands.

38


39/157

Approximately 7% of attendees raised their hands."

48. It should be noted that Figure 13 to this report, at p. 9 - 11, shows the proposed Heritage

Conservation District Study, as established by a green line enclosing the recommended area.

This recommendation appears to exclude the east side of Indian Road.

49. On July 16, 2006, the Sandwich Heritage Conservation District Study was presented to

City Council. It was adopted and Phase II of the study was authorized by Council Resolution.

Now shown to me and marked as Exhibit 19 to this my affidavit is a copy of a transcript

of what occurred at the meeting.

50. The following excerpts are taken from the said transcript:

"Maureen Zunti

payne affidavit

Documents