technical memo precedents & recommendations for a heritage

Technical Memo Precedents & Recommendations for a Heritage Conservation District in Pickering Village March 2008 (Final) Prepared by: AREA, Architects Rasch Eckler Associates Ltd. in support of the Pickering Village Land Use Planning and Urban Design Study

GHK International (Canada) Ltd. Young + Wright Architects Inc. Totten Sims Hubicki Associates AREA, Architects Rasch Eckler Associates Ltd.

Pickering Village Land Use and Urban Design Study March 2008 Contents - i Precedents & Recommendations for a Heritage Conservation District Table of Contents Section Contents Pages

A1.1 Policy Framework for Heritage Conservation Districts (HCDs) 1 1.1 Description of Subject Property & Project

1.2 Project History & Engagement of AREA Architects 1.3 Heritage Approval Process & Policies

1 1 2

A1.2 HCD Precedents and Their Lessons 1 A1.2.1 Collingwood Downtown Heritage Conservation District, 2002 2 A1.2.2 Unionville Heritage Conservation District, 1998 5 A1.2.3 Thornhill Heritage Conservation Districts, 1984-86 & 2006

Thornhill Yonge Street Corridor, 2005

8

A1.3 Reasons for a Heritage Conservation District 11 A1.3.1 Previous Heritage Conservation Initiatives 11 A1.3.2 Revisions to Provincial Heritage Legislation 13 A1.3.3 HCD Design Guidelines 14 A1.4 Recommendations for a HCD, its Implementation & Incentives 16 A1.4.1 Recommendations for a Pickering Village HCD 16 A1.4.2 Implementation of a Heritage Conservation District 17 A1.4.3 Incentives Supporting the HCD 18 APPENDIX I FIGURES

APPENDIX II SAMPLE HCD DESIGN GUIDELINES

Pickering Village Land Use and Urban Design Study March 2008 Precedents & Recommendations for a Heritage Conservation District 1

A1.1 Policy Framework for Heritage Conservation Districts (HCDs)

The conservation of cultural heritage properties is governed at the provincial level by the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, amended 2006. Under the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA), municipalities can pass bylaws to formally designate properties of cultural heritage value or interest. Designation under the OHA applies to real property, and helps to recognize and protect the heritage features on that property. Designation also provides a process for ensuring that changes to a heritage property are appropriately managed and that these changes respect the property’s heritage value.

Designation is not limited to buildings or structures but can include groups of buildings, cemeteries, natural features, cultural landscapes or landscape features, ruins, archaeological and marine archaeological sites, or areas of archaeological potential. Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act enables the council of a municipality to designate any defined area or areas of the municipality as a Heritage Conservation District (HCD). District designation enables the council of a municipality to manage and guide future change in the district, through adoption of a district plan with policies and guidelines for conservation, protection and enhancement of the area’s special character.

In April 2005, the Ontario Heritage Act was strengthened to provide municipalities and the province with enhanced powers to preserve and promote Ontario’s cultural heritage. Recent changes to the Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement also provide a more comprehensive approach to the identification, conservation and protection of the wide range of heritage resources in Heritage Conservation Districts. The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is referenced under Section 3 of the Planning Act and is intended to provide policy direction for land use matters, which are of Provincial interest. Planning Authorities are to be consistent with the Policy Statement when exercising any authority. Section 2.6, “Cultural Heritage and Archaeology”, of the PPS is a recent policy which introduced new heritage requirements (such as an impact assessment) as part of the planning process. A1.2 HCD Precedents and Their Lessons

Three other heritage conservation districts (HCDs) can provide solutions for this study area. These HCD case studies have been selected for their similarity to some of the attributes of Pickering Village, namely:

• the area is centred around a historic commercial main street;

• the area provides a more pedestrian scale of building façade; and

• the area forms part of a larger municipality with other commercial and retail nodes.

The HCDs below have been studied with respect to certain strategies which have supported their heritage character.


A1.2.1 Collingwood Downtown Heritage Conservation District, 2002

The historic downtown commercial core of Collingwood, centred along Hurontario St. (Fig. 1), has been struggling for its sustainability since the 1970s against several initiatives to develop a larger format retail zone on the western periphery of the Town. Within a recreational region with winter skiing and summer water activities, the considerable visitor population would by-pass the Town centre in favour of the highway retail. In 1999, the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) ultimately approved a big-box retail development at the Western Commercial Node of the Town, anchored by a Walmart, which threatened the historic retail core of Collingwood. Similar suburban retail power centres have impacted numerous historic town centres throughout Ontario and Ajax is no exception. In recent times, Pickering Village has experienced considerable competition from the large-format shopping centres on Kingston Road (Highway 2) east of Harwood Avenue and also west of Notion Road in the City of Pickering.

Faced with this situation, the Town of Collingwood has endeavoured to assuage the economic impact of the big-box retail by enhancing the uniqueness of its historic commercial core. Together with the approval of the Western Commercial Node, the OMB order at the same time endorsed the Town-proposed Official Plan Amendment (OPA) No. 37 which included the authorization for the designation of the Downtown Core as a heritage district under the OHA. A HCD study and plan were carried out in 20011 and the Collingwood Downtown Heritage Conservation District (CDHCD) was enacted by Town By-law No. 02-12 on December 2, 2002.

But the OMB-approved OPA went even further to distinguish the downtown Collingwood commercial area as follows:

The Downtown Core along Hurontario Street from the waterfront to Fifth Street is Collingwood’s

historical centre. It is intended to be the primary location of cultural and civic uses and a major

commercial focus for the Town of Collingwood. Retail is planned to continue as the largest single

type of use in the Downtown Core. The stores will serve the day-to-day needs of local and

seasonal residents. The Core is expected to function as an attractive regional destination for

tourists and the travelling public and will function to provide comparison and specialty shopping.

The retail functions of the Core, combined with the planned role of the Western Commercial Node

will enhance Collingwood’s role as a centre for regional shopping. 2

To achieve this differentiation of retail activity between the two commercial zones, OPA No. 37 allocated certain uses to the downtown core. The following permitted uses, identified with photographs of their existing locations on Hurontario Street, are encouraged and/or restricted to locate exclusively in the Town’s commercial centre:

1 Collingwood Downtown Heritage Conservation District Study & Plan, Phillip H. Carter Architect & Planner, in association with Paul Oberst, Architect and Nicholas Holman, Heritage Consultant, 2002. 2 Amendment No. 37 to the Official .Plan of the Town of Collingwood, pursuant to OMB Order No. 99 0699, April 13, 1999, art. 3.9.2, “Downtown Core”, p. 15.


• Municipal offices (Fig. 2);

• Government agencies (Fig. 3);

• Small professional offices (Fig. 4);

• Personal and business services (Fig. 5);

• Full-service banking and financial institutions (Fig. 6);

• Liquor stores;

• Small and specialty retail (Fig. 7); and

• Stores serving the day-to-day needs of residents (Fig. 8).

At the current time, it is too early to assess the success of this allocation strategy. From anecdotal evidence, the latter resident-related retail, with the example of drugstores (Fig. 8), appears to have a strong local market in the commercial core. Two pharmacies are expected as tenants in new developments on Hurontario Street, one of which will incorporate a medical clinic on the second floor. With respect to the other retail zone, Town Council has refused an application for a zoning amendment to permit a bank in the Western Commercial Node since this use is only permitted in the downtown area.

The strategy of allocating specific uses to a historic commercial core could equally apply to Pickering Village. Collingwood has a resident population of 21,500 but serves as the retail and service centre to Grey and Simcoe Counties with an economic catchment area of 75,000 and a winter weekend population of 150,000. Ajax has a resident population of 90,000. Ajax does not have Collingwood’s features to attract visitors, but a distinct shopping experience in an historic setting can still be a draw across the region and the GTA. In the Background Report, sections 4.1 ‘SWOT Analysis Summary’ (p. 51), 4.2 ‘Public Consultation Session: Principles and Vision’ (p. 55) and 5.1 ‘Summary of Key Conclusions - Existing Conditions’ (p. 59) confirm stakeholder ambitions for a more distinctive retail district:

• “Limited range of commercial uses; need a variety of commercial i.e. boutiques, cafes, food store.

• Not sufficient activity/investment to draw visitors to the area and keep them there.

• Good location to create a boutique shopping area with restaurants, theatre, galleries and public events. Would create both a draw for tourists and residents who do not want to travel to Toronto for entertainment. Diversification and promotion are key.

• Consider establishing a ‘no chains’ policy as per Distillery District in Toronto. No fast food outlets.

• Potential customer base north of study area with new residential development i.e. along Elizabeth St.


• Create a tourist destination for shopping and visiting e.g. St. Jacobs concept.

• More small businesses e.g. bakery, deli. Target prestige businesses for the Village.

• Revitalization of the area should consider encouraging a broader range of retail/commercial uses to respond to local needs and to support economic development within the Town and Region. Recommended retail uses should engender a more unique shopping experience that differentiates itself from neighbouring ‘big box’ commercial development.

• A reduction in property tax should be provided as incentive to encourage retail to locate in the study area.”

This desired commercial revitalization can be achieved with the historic architecture of the area. Some stakeholders expressed concern about the cost of renovating historic buildings to contemporary commercial standards. However, so long as the use is not "big box” scale, the existing building stock has historically accommodated a diversity of modest-sized businesses and stores. The Dale Block at 80-84 Old Kingston Rd., for example, was built c. 1850 (Fig. 9) and the list below demonstrates the broad range of retail-commercial uses in one of the district’s historic buildings. This building was once the largest commercial building in the Village and was variously and sometimes concurrently used as:

• Head’s Hotel,

• a residence with a store,

• a hardware store,

• dry goods stores,

• bakeries,

• a doctor’s office,

• a tailor shop,

• the Pickering News offices, and

• the Independent Order of Odd Fellows Hall.

This building, like others in the district, requires some restoration work in order to remove the later facade layers and expose the original street elevation (Fig. 10). Policies for HCDs, like Collingwood’s, endeavour to counteract those concerns about the costs to restore, upgrade and maintain a historic building. With the proposed Community Improvement Plan (CIP) and other accompanying initiatives, effective financial incentives should be introduced to encourage property owners and tenants in Pickering Village to restore and reuse significant heritage commercial properties such as this.


A1.2.2 Unionville Heritage Conservation District, 1998

The Unionville Heritage Conservation District in Markham (Fig. 11) was established in 1998. This Police Village, as it was originally incorporated, is formed around a winding village Main Street and, with its well-preserved collection of late 19th and early 20th Century residential and commercial buildings, has now become a major GTA tourist attraction. The history of Unionville begins in the late 1700s, and much of its original architecture dating from the mid-to-late 19th Century survives in Unionville to this day (Fig. 12).

The preservation of Unionville began in the 1960s when the then County of York Government proposed to expand the width of its main street to four lanes. Fearing that this would destroy Unionville’s unique character, the community rallied and established the Unionville Festival in protest to raise awareness of its unique heritage character. The planned thoroughfare was abandoned and in the early 1980s a bypass was built around the village, securing its long-term preservation. The Unionville Festival continues today as a celebration of the rich heritage of this community. This “off the beaten track” character of Unionville’s Main Street is very similar to Old Kingston Road in Pickering Village which diverges off from the more active Kingston Road arterial.

The Unionville community and its municipality have continued their strategic initiatives to strengthen the Town core with cultural facilities. The village’s Main Street offers a unique retail environment but its market does fluctuate according to the seasons. The municipality has been successful at supplementing commercial uses in the area with art institutions such as the Frederick Varley Art Gallery (Fig. 13) and the Kathleen McKay Art Centre (Fig. 14). The former facility was newly built specifically to house the donated collection of this Group of Seven artist. The latter art centre is named after its former resident who was the donor of the art collection. The gallery is located at the north terminus of the commercial core while the art centre a few doors away at 197 Main Street is accommodated in the historic Kathleen McKay/Salem Eckhardt house dating from the 1840’s. Both facilities have operated since 1997 at the same time that the Unionville HCD Study and Plan were undertaken. Partly by happenstance and conscious planning, the HCD and this cultural programme were implemented in a coordinated strategy. If a Pickering Village HCD is initiated, it is recommended that the Town of Ajax concurrently undertake a cultural facilities programme for the area.

Although the McKay bequest of the Varley collection was fortuitous and happened to coalesce with the establishment of the Unionville HCD Plan, the Town undertook some specific strategies to make this historic district a cultural precinct as well. The Unionville Heritage Study, which was prepared by Markham’s Heritage Section of Development Services (the same section responsible for the subsequent HCD plan), referenced a 1982 report by LORD Cultural Resources concerning the siting of the then proposed new art gallery on Main Street. This demonstrates quite purposeful planning for a key cultural component. The HCD Study references the LORD report statistic that “this heritage area experiences an annual visitation of almost 1.8 million persons.”


The Town’s study proceeds to provide other data from the district BIA which estimated that “during good weather conditions about 20,000 individuals visit on an average Sunday, 15,000 on Saturdays and about 7,000 per day during the week.”3 These estimates of visitors to Unionville would have certainly increased substantially since 1997, due in no small part to the art facilities which have been developed. In consultation with Varley Art Gallery Director John Ryerson, he described the growth of the audience for his galleries’ programmes:

Since 2002 when I arrived, we have doubled attendance to over 42,000 and put the gallery on the

national map. We promote and brand ourselves around historic Main Street Unionville as it is the

combination that builds up the visitor experience. A thirty minute drive for a two hour visitor

experience (not including shopping and eating). That is the tourism formula, so creating the

experience though story telling, exhibits, events and festivals is what makes it work. A key to our

success is our full participation in the 11 street festival events each year with free admission. 4

The above information offers an example and model of the revitalizing potency in combining cultural facilities with and in a heritage district.

This strategy of integrating cultural facilities into a HCD can be similarly emulated in Pickering Village. The introduction of cultural facilities, as demonstrated by the Unionville model, will attract more visitors to the Village from both the local Durham market and the broader GTA catchment area. The Memorial Park campus, north of Sherwood Road W. and between Linton Avenue and Church Street N., contains a variety of public facilities - an arena, park, library, seniors centre and community centre (Fig. 15). The recreational components of this campus have been contemplated by the Town for redevelopment. However, the cultural programmes of this site (such as the library and community theatre) must not be overlooked. Rather, they should be supported and enhanced in any proposed redevelopment of the park campus. In this regard, both the Town’s Integrated Community Arts and Cultural Plan (2006) and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan currently underway identify Pickering Village as an appropriate focus for arts and culture within the Town. Accordingly, the potential future redevelopment of the Town-owned facilities surrounding Memorial Park as an arts and cultural hub for Ajax is a unique opportunity to shape the development of the Village as a whole.

The reprogramming of the Memorial Park campus as an arts and cultural hub for the Town reflects some of the directions in the consultant team’s Background Report on which this report elaborates. The desired improvements to the arts facilities are addressed in Section 2.12 (p.18) of the Background Report, which discusses the recent Integrated Community Arts and Cultural Plan, and also in section 4.1, ‘SWOT Analysis Summary’ (p. 52), contains the following comments from stakeholders: 3 Unionville Heritage Conservation District: The District Study, Heritage Section, Development Services Commission, Town of Markham, September, 1997, sect. 3.7.4 “Unionville as a Tourist Attraction”, p. 112. 4 E-mail correspondence from John Ryerson, Director, Varley Art Gallery of Markham, December 7, 2006.


• “Potential for synergies between existing arts community and local businesses.

• Need for a multi-functional venue to support a variety of spaces i.e. show space for artists, teaching space for arts/music teachers, performance space.

• Durham West Arts Center interested in building an arts centre for all arts disciplines for Ajax and Pickering. Get an understanding of the magnitude of the arts support/facilities that would be supported in this area.

• A medium sized theatre i.e. 250 seat theatre and 150 seat studio space would be appropriate i.e. similar to Tarragon Theatre in Toronto. This would support a regular performance run plus smaller space for alternative pieces.

• Expand library – possibility to link with a new arts/culture facility and existing seniors homes.

• Potential for growth in arts community – could become a hub for arts and culture and could foster economic development i.e. spin offs.”

A more elaborate arts and culture programme in the Study Area following the Unionville model is able to culturally revitalize a heritage district. A key criterion of any cultural redevelopment of Memorial Park should be a strong connection with the historic Village to its south. The south-west corner of the Town-owned lands is a block north of Old Kingston Road and presently features an outdated community centre, a modest seniors’ centre and a poorly landscaped parking lot (Fig. 16). This site at the northeast corner of Sherwood Road W. and Linton Avenue should be enhanced with improved landscaping and an urban square and/or landmark building as part of the campus redevelopment. This accentuated corner would then have the benefit of its orientation toward, view from and pedestrian access to Old Kingston Road, the commercial core of the historic Village. This corner of the campus could draw visitors from and to the heritage district with the same synergy evident in Unionville between the art facilities and the commercial Main Street.

The Background Report discusses the St. Francis de Sales Church at 78 Church St. S. (Fig. 17) as another possible site for community facilities. This historic 1871 church no longer has a congregation and the Town has recently purchased the property (October 2007). Its large internal space would certainly be adaptable to the cultural uses identified above. Although its distance from the historic centre of the Village at Old Kingston Road does not conform to the Unionville model for the interaction between community art facilities and the HCD, the re-use of the church as a community facility should not preclude arts and cultural uses from being incorporated into a redeveloped Memorial Park. Rather, this church, as an adaptively re-used arts space should be planned as one node of an axis along Church Street which has another compatible cultural node in a redeveloped Memorial Park. This cultural axis, both operationally and geographically, will generate increased visitorship and street activity within and through the historic Village to emulate this successful phenomenon observed in Unionville.


A1.2.3 Thornhill Heritage Conservation Districts, 1984-86 & 2006 Thornhill Yonge Street Corridor, 2005

The neighbourhood of Thornhill was divided along Yonge Street in the 1970s by municipal amalgamation between the Town of Markham and the City of Vaughan. Both parts of historic Thornhill became the first heritage districts in their respective municipalities in 1986 and 1984 respectively. Initiated in 2003 and completed in November 2005, the Thornhill Yonge Street Study was undertaken jointly by both municipalities to enhance the physical attractiveness, retail strength and pedestrian orientation of the existing car-oriented arterial dividing the historic Thornhill community. The Region of York has also committed to improve transit service along Yonge Street and the study examined the incorporation of the proposed bus transit way into an improved streetscape design. The street redevelopment proposals have particular relevance to Kingston Road within the Pickering Village study area. This arterial segment of Kingston Road can adopt some of the Yonge Street study’s solutions to transform a comparable “post-war highway oriented commercial corridor to a more mixed use, pedestrian supportive main street within the historic community.”5

Although the Yonge Street study also discusses private sector building guidelines, its recommendations relating to the street allowance are the most applicable to Kingston Road, and hence are reviewed here. To respond to the Yonge streetscape proposals, the two HCDs are being updated by their respective municipalities. The Markham Thornhill HCD study was completed in 2006, ahead of Vaughan’s counterpart HCD study, but neither HCD Plan has been approved yet. The Markham Thornhill Plan provides a concise summary of the recommended proposals for the Yonge Street road allowance as follows, with references to images from the Yonge St. study:

(a) “A minimum 7 m. public realm between the curb edge and the building front” will be comprised of a 5.2 m. public boulevard and a mandatory streetscape easement of 1.8 m. which will be a setback dedicated from the private property (Fig. 18).

(b) “The overall vision for the streetscape is predicated on the burial or relocation of existing hydro lines.”

(c) “A number of high quality small urban street parks will be developed as part of the redevelopment of properties [with] careful consideration…given to their context, use of hard surface materials, vegetation selection and street furniture to ensure compatibility with the Heritage District.” (Fig. 19)

5 Thornhill Yonge Street Study: A Framework for Renewal, Reinvestment and Community Building, prepared for the Town of Markham & the City of Vaughan, Urban Strategies Inc., November, 2005, p. 5.


(d) “Pedestrian and vehicular laneways and parking courts will be enhanced through the introduction of special paving materials, lighting and landscaping.” (Fig. 20)

(e) “Enhanced intersection and pedestrian crosswalk treatments are supported.” The street design also incorporates a landscaped centre median which, although specific to the proposed transit way, facilitates pedestrians crossing this arterial roadway. (Fig.21)

(f) “A Heritage Art Walk…introducing interpretive features providing visual and textual information on the historical significance of [the street] will be explored.” (Fig. 22)

(g) “All loose streetscape furnishings and fixed street furniture and lighting (including transit/bus shelters and kiosks) will be reflective of and complementary to the heritage character of the area.” (Fig. 23)

(h) “A program of commemorating and interpreting buildings and properties of cultural heritage value or interest in the District will be pursued. The design of interpretive signs will be complementary to the District character and be co-ordinated with other District elements such as street furniture, entry signage, street name signs, etc.” 6

Even though the figures referenced above relate to the Yonge Street study, the text of the recommended proposals is not site specific and is equally adaptable to heritage street including, for the purposes of this report, Kingston Road.

The above design recommendations for Yonge Street are applicable to the Pickering Village study area. The average daily traffic is comparable between the two arterials with estimates of 55,000 vehicles for Yonge Street in Thornhill 7 and 30 to 40,000 vehicles for Kingston Road (as noted in section 3.3, ‘Transportation Characteristics‘, of the Background Report, p.38). Furthermore, the Background Report, also identifies – in sections 4.1, ‘SWOT Analysis Summary’ (pp. 51-53), 4.2, ‘Public Consultation Session: Principles and Vision’ (p. 55), and 5.1, ‘Summary of Key Conclusions - Existing Conditions’ (p. 60) – various issues to be addressed to make Kingston Road more pedestrian-oriented. These issues, with references to photographs of existing conditions, are as follows:

• “Hwy 2 acts as a barrier to Old Kingston Road and remainder of Village area. (Fig. 24)

• Streetscaping could be enhanced along Kingston Rd., east of Church to lead up to the focal point of Old Kingston Rd e.g. Richmond Hill streetscaping. Could also calm traffic so that it is slower through Old Kingston Road. Streetscaping could promote traffic calming. (Fig. 25)

6 Markham Thornhill Heritage Conservation District: The District Plan, Phillip H. Carter Architect & Planner, in association with Paul Oberst, Architect and Nicholas Holman, Heritage Consultant, and Heritage Section, Development Services Commission, Town of Markham, 2006, pp. 32 & 36. 7 Ibid., Urban Strategies Inc., p. 13.


• Improve walkways and create parkettes with benches and parking areas. Bigger, wider sidewalks along Kingston Road [with] safe, more luminous overhead lighting. (Fig. 26)

• The volume of pedestrians crossing is generally very low with exceptions during peak school times. Due to signalized intersection spacing restrictions and the fact that many of the side streets do not have high enough volumes of vehicular or pedestrian traffic to justify signalization, there are no logical locations where additional traffic signals (or Intersection Pedestrian Signals) could be introduced along the major roads. This was recognized in previous studies of the Kingston Road corridor, which resulted in the installation of a raised centre median island on Kingston Road at the Linton Avenue/Randall Drive intersection to act as a pedestrian refuge island for crossings at that location.” (Fig. 27)

The design guidelines for the Yonge Street road allowance are applicable to the above issues identified in the Background Report. The design solutions to address the Kingston Road problems, it should be noted, will likely be implemented over a period of time. The Yonge Street streetscape guidelines, such as the 1.8 m. setback easement, are being implemented as development applications come forward. But many of these streetscape guidelines, whether for Yonge Street or if applied to Kingston Road, are typically fully realized only after a number of years.

The precedent of the Thornhill Yonge Street Study demonstrates the importance of addressing issues related to the street allowance with a pedestrian orientation. The Pickering Village study area, like the historic Village of Thornhill, has been severed by a highway which inhibits pedestrian activity and especially crossings. To revitalize the Village (one strategy possibly being its designation as a HCD), pedestrian circulation and connections must be enhanced throughout the Study Area. The transportation component of the overall Pickering Village Land Use Planning and Urban Design Study will address issues such as parking, transit, medians, vehicle access to properties, etc. Following the example of the Thornhill Yonge Street Corridor, the streetscape design solutions should improve and encourage pedestrian circulation.


A1.3 Reasons for a Heritage Conservation District

Municipalities throughout Ontario have been designating Heritage Conservation Districts since 1980; there are now over 75 such districts in place across the Province. The reasons for implementing a HCD are attributable to the considerable benefits they impart to the municipality, as described in the Ministry of Culture’s ’Heritage Conservation Districts: A Guide to District Designation Under the Ontario Heritage Act’ in the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit 8:

• A unique planning framework – HCD designation is a planning process that respects a community’s history and identity.

• Enhanced quality of life and sense of place – Designation allows a community to recognize and commemorate what it values within an area, that contributes to its sense of place.

• Cultural and economic vitality – District designation contributes towards the development of a rich physical and cultural environment [which creates] attractive areas for commercial, residential and mixed-use investment.

• Healthy cultural tourism – Designation can be used both to encourage and manage tourism activity in rural and urban areas.

This rationale would also apply to the establishment of a HCD in Pickering Village. The following sections describe the specific benefits of implementing a HCD for Pickering Village, not only for the Village itself, but also for Ajax as a whole and the City of Pickering just to the west. A1.3.1 Previous Heritage Conservation Initiatives

The Pickering Village Land Use Study prepared for the Town of Ajax by IMC Consulting Group Inc. and K.W. Buck and Associates and issued in draft on September 21, 1990 incorporated numerous heritage-related recommendations. This multi-disciplinary report, in fact, included and summarized a “Pickering Village Heritage Study” prepared by Peter John Stokes dated February 1990 as Appendix III to the study. In the appended heritage study and, as reflected in the main report, it is recommended that “Council should consider establishing the entire Study Area as a Heritage Conservation District under Section 5 of the Ontario Heritage Act.” 9 It should be pointed out that this previous report studied only the east portion of the current study area; that is, Kingston Road east of Church Street to Rotherglen Road. The Stokes study comments on the limited scope of the study area which was similarly relayed in the main report:

8 Ontario Heritage Tool Kit, Ontario Ministry of Culture, part 4, ’Heritage Conservation Districts: A Guide to District Designation under the Ontario Heritage Act’, issued February 21, 2006, pp. 8-9. 9 Pickering Village Land Use Study, IMC Consulting Group Inc. and K.W. Buck & Associates, 1990, p. 73


This study of the eastern half of old Pickering Village…is deemed an incomplete investigation and assessment of the only historic community of any scale surviving within the new Town of Ajax. [It is recommended to] extend the study area to Duffin’s Creek on the west to take in the former historic commercial core along old Kingston Road as well as the new highway re-alignment to include the head and spine of Pickering Village.

A Stage Two Study should be initiated to complement the existing assessment, evaluating whatever information is already at hand on the subject area plus undertaking further examination as may be required.

This second stage should deal with the design of the western approach to Pickering Village. Moreover it should try to solve, in a satisfactory and fascinating way, the current split of the old core area caused by the modern highway diversion and thus re-unite the two parts of old Pickering Village. 10

The recommendations to enlarge the Study Area and to establish a HCD, among others, were incorporated into the Planning & Business Development Committee report to Town Council dated December 8, 1990 which presented the Pickering Village Land Use Study for consideration. One recommended action from this report to Council was “that staff be authorized to arrange a meeting with the property owners within the Study Area to determine their receptiveness and interest in the establishment of a Heritage Conservation District.” 11 This HCD was never pursued further which suggests that the property owners in the Study Area were not supportive of this initiative at the time.

But resistance to the district designation may have been attributable to the proposed boundary of the HCD. As mentioned, the 1990 report considered only Kingston Road east of Church Street and it is unclear whether the recommended enlargement of the Study Area was discussed with respect to the HCD. In any event, this eastern portion of the Study Area exhibits some of the transition in uses from residential to commercial and the resultant conversion of houses into offices as discussed in sections 3.1.2, ‘Kingston Road District’, 3.2.2, ‘Heritage Building Types & Issues‘, and 5.1, ‘Summary of Key Conclusions - Existing Conditions‘, of the Background Report. The previous 1990 Study Area, being of mixed uses and in transition, is difficult to include in a HCD for which policies and guidelines would have to be applied to diverse building types. In the Ministry of Culture’s listing of approximately 58 approved HCDs across the province, only 8 have mixed commercial/residential uses while the rest contain a single-use zone. This concern about the wide range of uses within the Study Area was brought up during the study consultations as noted in sections 4.1, ‘SWOT Analysis Summary’, and 4.2, ‘Public Consultation Session: Principles and Vision’ of the Background Report.

10 “Pickering Village Heritage Study,” Peter John Stokes, 1990, pp. 15-16. 11 “Planning & Business Development Directors’ Report to Committee of the Whole of Council for December 10, 1990,” December 8, 1990, p. 6.


For this reason, a smaller sub-portion of the current Study Area having a single consistent land use should be considered for a HCD designation. As alluded to in the 1990 Stokes report, the former historic commercial core along Old Kingston Road represents a significant assemblage of heritage buildings and should be studied for the proposed HCD. The portion of Church Street north of Kingston Road, since it contains commercial uses, can also be included within the boundaries of the proposed HCD. After a number of years, the effectiveness of this initial HCD can be evaluated and its expansion to Kingston Road and/or Church Street considered. A1.3.2 Revisions to Provincial Heritage Legislation

In the time since the previous land-use and heritage studies were undertaken, there have been several changes in provincial cultural heritage policy, notably the following:

• Ontario Heritage Amendment Act (OHAA), 2005 (Bill 60)

• Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), 2005

• Ontario Heritage Act (OHA), New Regulations 2006, O.Reg. 8/06, 9/06, 10/06, 11/06

The Ontario Heritage Amendment Act, 2005 came into force April 2005. It contains substantial amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act, including some revisions and new provisions in Part V, Heritage Conservation Districts. Under the OHAA, it is now required that a HCD plan that meets certain minimum standards be developed and adopted by bylaw. The designation bylaw must be passed with provision for adopting the plan:

S.41.1 (1) A by-law under section 41 designating one or more heritage conservation districts in a municipality shall adopt a heritage conservation district plan for each district designated in the by-law.

This amendment is considered an acknowledgement that a designation by-law alone cannot clearly assist and does not bind council when making decisions regarding proposed alterations and developments within the HCD. A HCD Plan process involves defining and managing heritage features on a planning scale rather than just for each singular, individual building.

This new criterion for HCDs under the OHAA is reinforced by the other accompanying legislation which together offer a considerable advantage over other types of architectural controls from previous planning and heritage regulations. The requirement of a HCD Plan ensures that the environment of a district is preserved in a holistic fashion, including not only historic building elevations but also significant accessory structures, streetscapes, land forms, vistas, landmarks and natural features. In the absence of a HCD plan, exterior district features cannot be protected, either by the Planning Act or through individual property designation under Part IV of the OHA. The revised PPS supports this district-wide protection vis-à-vis Policy 2.6.3, which formally introduces the control of development adjacent to heritage resources:


Development and site alteration may be permitted on adjacent lands to protected heritage property where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved.

This recent policy extends design guidelines to new construction within the HCD which might impact a heritage feature.

The most recent applicable legislation for HCDs was the OHA amendment entitled ‘Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest’, O.Reg. 9/06. This regulation determines a property’s cultural heritage value based on any one of three criteria rather than combining the grading of all evaluation categories, as was the previous practice. One of the criteria categories deals with the context of a property, i.e.:

1.(2).3. The property has contextual value because it,

i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area,

ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or

iii. is a landmark.

The increased importance given to the context of a heritage property is quite applicable to Pickering Village with its historic commercial core. In the ”Background Report”, section 3.2.1 ‘Heritage Property Inventory’ (pp. 31-32) describes and illustrates on a map the abundance and close groupings of properties with heritage interest which are either designated (18 addresses) or on the HAAC ‘Wish List’ (43 addresses). Besides simply preserving the area context, an HCD also provides a more efficient procedure for heritage protection which would otherwise be impractical as individual property designation under Part IV of the OHA. This OHA Regulation and the new OHAA and PPS, altogether, govern the assemblage of buildings and lands, not just their individual properties, which preserves the spaces between them and their relationship and is therefore particularly applicable to an historic village. A1.3.3 HCD Design Guidelines

Given that a HCD, as currently regulated, emphasizes open space between buildings and properties, a HCD plan should provide guidelines for the building exteriors which are important in defining the district character. The guidelines for existing buildings should address what are called “interventions” in three categories - restoration, alterations and additions. The guidelines for existing buildings, in whichever category of intervention, should encourage traditional treatment of building elements as follows:


• Roof Form & Cladding – Roofs should be maintained with sloped pitches in gable or mansard forms using traditional materials such as slate, cedar shakes or standing seam metal.

• Exterior cladding should typically be either masonry – comprising brick with stone accents – or wood clapboard.

• Windows are usually punched openings in a double-hung style, vertically oriented with a proportion of 2: 1 or greater, comprising sashes of 1-over-1 or 2-over-2 pane configurations.

• Shopfronts are an essential component of the grade-level façades along the historic commercial core of Old Kingston Road and should incorporate traditional components such as a signage fascia, decorative clerestory glazing, wood framing, retractable canvas awnings and recessed entrances.

• Front entrances, other than shopfronts, should preserve and/or reinstate original features such as a front yard, raised porches with steps and an elaborate front door with a transom fanlight.

The above general guidelines are quite typical for a nineteenth century commercial core and would be elaborated in more specific detail during the process of a HCD Plan. Some sample heritage design guidelines, which AREA Architects helped develop for the Yorkville-Hazelton Heritage Conservation District, can be referenced in an appendix following this report.

The more significant design guidelines for the heritage district, rather than those related to the preserved historic buildings, would govern interventions in the categories of:

• the demolition of non-historic buildings,

• new construction on empty lots, and

• landscaping within the road allowance and front yards.

These alterations to the district are independent of but, at the same time, must be compatible with the preserved buildings which have heritage value. The design guidelines governing the non-heritage land of a HCD, as alluded to in section ‘A1.3.2’, do not have any equivalent controls in other heritage or planning policies. However, the development of the unbuilt lands is critically important to preserve the overall heritage character of the district. For this reason, these heritage guidelines must be formulated in a HCD study process involving consultation with the affected community in order to determine the amount and type of controls which can feasibly be implemented. The HCD Plan process, as directed by Part V of the OHA, will involve public meetings to ensure that district-specific design guidelines are approved by the community stakeholders.


A1.4 Recommendations for a HCD, its Implementation & Incentives

Based on the analysis of the Study Area, the historic commercial core of old Pickering Village has the heritage value to warrant the implementation of a HCD. To undertake this heritage designation process, the Town of Ajax Council should direct its staff and qualified heritage consultant(s) to put into effect some specific recommendations, the implementation of the district study, and supporting incentive programs, all of which are described in the sections below. A1.4.1 Recommendations for a Pickering Village HCD

In terms of the implementation of a HCD for Pickering Village, the following is recommended:

1. The HCD should comprise the properties of the historic commercial core of Old Kingston Road and Church Street north of Kingston Road. Other adjacent portions of the Study Area, such as the remainder of Church Street and Kingston Road, should be considered as supporting areas which buffer, connect and contribute to the historic core and could be added to an enlarged heritage district in the future.

2. The proposed heritage district must be in conjunction with a HCD Plan which preserves, not only historic building elevations, but also significant accessory structures, streetscapes, land forms, vistas, landmarks and natural features comprising the exterior environment of a district.

3. The study process for the HCD Plan will involve district-specific design guidelines, formulated and approved by the community stakeholders, which will regulate both preserved historic buildings and also non-heritage properties.

The precedents of other HCDs established in Collingwood, Unionville and Thornhill suggest other recommendations for the Pickering Village HCD:

4. Investigate the adoption of zoning policies to allocate specific uses exclusive to the HCD and establish effective financial incentives to encourage property owners and tenants in Pickering Village to restore and reuse significant heritage commercial buildings.

5. Generate a more elaborate arts and culture programme in the Study Area including redevelopment of Memorial Park and its community facilities (e.g., the library and seniors’ centre) and the use of St. Francis de Sales Church as an arts and cultural venue.

6. To revitalize the Village as a HCD, pedestrian circulation and connections must be enhanced throughout the Study Area, particularly along and across Kingston Road.


A1.4.2 Implementation of a Heritage Conservation District

The process of designating a Heritage Conservation District starts with a municipal by-law (a By-Law of Intent) authorized by the Council to conduct a detailed study of an area. Approving a by-law of intent to study only authorizes the study to go forward. The Municipality defines an area to be examined for future designation and consults with its Municipal Heritage Committee, in this case the Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC). To pass a bylaw adopting a HCD plan, Council must comply with the process defined in OHA section 41.1 (3). This involves proper notice, distributing information, consulting with the municipal heritage committee, and holding at least one public meeting. After examination of the study area the Municipality may designate a Heritage Conservation District through a by-law. The Municipality notifies affected property owners and informs the Ontario Heritage Foundation of the designation. Anyone may appeal Council’s creation of a Heritage Conservation District. If such an appeal is launched, it will be heard by the Ontario Municipal Board. If the Board approves Council’s action, the municipal by-law comes into effect. Designation of a property under the Ontario Heritage Act (either Part IV - individual designation or Part V - Heritage Conservation Districts) means that the Municipality, with the advice of its Municipal Heritage Committee, reviews (and approves or refuses) building permits and planning applications. All changes affecting the reasons for designation - primarily the building’s heritage character - are examined to ensure that they are protected adequately. For properties within a HCD, the review of changes is confined to exterior portions of the property rather than internal changes, unless the property is individually designated on a site specific basis for reasons which include interior features.

The procedure for designation of a district can be summarized as follows 12:

Step 1 - Request to designate

Step 2 - Consultation with the Municipal Heritage Committee

Step 3 - Official Plan provisions

Step 4 - Area Study and Interim Control

Step 5 - Evaluation of cultural heritage resources and attributes

Step 6 - Delineation of boundary of the study area & potential HCD

Step 7 - Public consultation on draft HCD plan

Step 8 - Preparation of the HCD plan and guidelines

Step 9 - Passing the designation bylaw & adoption of the HCD plan

Step 10 - Registration of bylaw on title

Step 11 - Notification of passing of bylaw to the Ontario Heritage Trust

Step 12 - Proposed changes to existing bylaws and Official Plan provisions

Step 13 - Implementing the HCD plan 12 Ibid., ’Heritage Conservation Districts’, p. 16.


A Heritage Conservation District designation is not intended to prohibit changes to properties required by contemporary needs or the district’s revitalization. Its purpose is to guide those changes so that change contributes to the district’s architectural and historic character. A1.4.3 Incentives Supporting the HCD

The Town should consider incentive policies which can encourage preservation and restoration of heritage properties in the conservation district. Many municipalities throughout Ontario give financial assistance and/or tax incentives to encourage and support owners to properly maintain and restore their heritage properties. Both the provincial and federal upper levels of government offer grants and loan programs to assist in the restoration of historically-designated buildings. The following municipal-based incentive programs have been used successfully in other jurisdictions throughout Ontario 13 and should be considered by the Town of Ajax for supporting heritage preservation, both currently and in conjunction with a future HCD:

Heritage Property Tax Relief

Under recent amendments to the Municipal Act (2001), municipalities can pass by-laws to offer tax relief of between 10% and 40% to owners of eligible heritage properties. Many municipalities have established heritage property tax relief programs in conjunction with other tax relief measures to support economic development and the revitalization of older downtowns and heritage areas. The province shares in the cost of the program by funding the education portion of the property tax relief. For more information about Heritage Property Tax Relief programs, refer to the Ministry of Culture’s publication Getting Started: Heritage Property Tax Relief - A Guide for Municipalities.

Grants and Loans

Municipalities are authorized by subsection 39.(1) of the OHA to pass bylaws to provide grants or loans to owners of designated property, to assist with the cost of repair and restoration to heritage properties on such terms and conditions as council may prescribe. Many municipalities have established financial incentives programs to assist property owners with the conservation of their designated heritage properties. In several communities, there are long-established heritage funds with large reserves to provide assistance for eligible work in HCDs.

Municipalities also have the power under the Planning Act to provide grants or loans to property owners in HCDs to assist them with rehabilitation projects. Several Ontario municipalities have used their granting powers under the Ontario Heritage Act and the Planning Act to offset the increase in municipal property taxes - in part or in whole - that can result from improvements to heritage properties. Usually, no money changes hands, as the “grant” is actually a tax relief, which allows the property owner to retain the pre-restoration tax rate for a set period of time –

13 Strengthening Ontario’s Heritage: Identify, Protect, Promote, Ontario Ministry of Culture, 2005, pp. 25-27.


for example, five to ten years. These grants and interest-free loans are commonly required to be matched by the property owner. For this initiative, the Town’s Planning and Development Services Department and the Heritage Advisory Committee should review and approve the loan/grant applications submitted together with drawings and specifications of the proposed restoration work.

Revolving Funds

Some municipalities provide seed money to foundations or other not-for-profit organizations to set up a revolving fund to support heritage conservation. A revolving fund is a pool of capital created and reserved for a specific purpose with the condition that money will be returned to the fund and “revolved” to new projects.

Revolving funds can be used to provide loans to heritage property owners for restoration; as loans are repaid, the money is returned to the fund and loaned out again. Loans are usually at a lower interest rate and secured by a mortgage registered against the title to the land in the applicable land registry office. Revolving funds can also be used to buy neglected historic property. After the property is restored, it can be sold or leased and then the income used to buy another threatened property.

Heritage Endowment Funds or Heritage Foundations

Through seed money or other means, municipalities can help foundations establish endowment funds for heritage conservation. Foundations or other not-for-profit organizations have the advantage of soliciting volunteers and funding from sources that are not always available to municipal governments. Endowment funds can support a variety of local conservation projects – both capital and non-capital – and over time, become significant sources of income through wise investment. They can also be attractive to donors whose contributions help ensure the future of heritage property in the community. These funds often take the form of a heritage foundation with charitable status which is named for the municipality or other area whose heritage programs it finances.

Pickering Village Land Use and Urban Design Study March 2008 Appendix I - 0Precedents & Recommendations for a Heritage Conservation District

APPENDIX I – FIGURES

(1) Hurontario Street Commercial Core, Collingwood. (2) Collingwood Town Hall (c. 1890), 97 Hurontario St. (3) Collingwood Post Office (c. 1913-15), 44 Hurontario St. (4) 45-49 Hurontario St., Collingwood, professional law offices. (5) 85 Hurontario St., Collingwood, ‘Maple Leaf Hall’, insurance offices. (6) 79 & 81 Hurontario St., Collingwood, Bank of Montreal. (7) 15-21 Hurontario St., Collingwood, ‘Carmichael Block’ (c. 1890), specialty craft store. (8) 169 & 171 Hurontario St., Collingwood, (c. 1905) IDA Pharmacy. (9) 80-84 Old Kingston Rd., Pickering Village, ‘Dale Block’ (c. 1850), current photograph. (10) 80-84 Old Kingston Rd., Pickering Village, ‘Dale Block’ (c. 1850), historic photograph. (11) Main Street, Unionville, Markham, Decorated for Christmas Season, 1996. (12) Main Street, Unionville, Markham, Unionville Festival, 1999. (13) Frederick Horsman Varley Art Gallery, 216 Main St., Unionville, Markham. (14) Kathleen McKay Art Centre, 197 Main St., Salem Eckardt House (c. 1850), Unionville, Markham. (15) Memorial Park, 96 Church St. N., Ajax, aerial photograph, contains arena, park, library, seniors

centre and community centre. (16) Memorial Park Arena, 96 Church St. N., Ajax, parking lot at north-east corner of Sherwood Rd. W.

and Linton Ave. (17) St. Francis de Sales Church, 78 Church St. S. Ajax. (18) Yonge St. streetscape section provides 7 m. public realm from curb edge to building front, Thornhill

Yonge Street Study, p. 80. (19) Urban street parks along Yonge St. are integrated with the Heritage District, Thornhill Yonge Street

Study, p. 70. (20) Parking courts on Yonge St. enhanced with special paving materials, lighting and landscaping,

Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 83. (21) Yonge St. road allowance cross-section incorporates a landscaped centre median to facilitate

pedestrian crossing, Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 76. (22) The Heritage Art Walk featuring heritage buildings and historical information about Yonge St.,

Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 46. (23) Streetscape furnishings, furniture, lighting, transit/bus shelters and kiosks will complement the

heritage character of Yonge St., Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 86. (24) View of Old Kingston Road from south-east corner of Kingston Rd. And Church St. Highway 2

(Kingston Road) traffic acts as a barrier to Pickering Village. (25) View west along Kingston Rd. from east of Church St. Kingston Road needs streetscaping to calm

traffic. (26) View east along Kingston Rd. from west of Church St. Kingston Rd. needs improved, wider

sidewalk. (27) View of the raised centre median island on Kingston Rd. at the Linton Avenue/Randall Drive

intersection. Kingston Road needs added and enhanced medians for pedestrian crossing.

TECHNICAL MEMO - FIGURES 1 TO 27 Appendix I


Fig. 2 Collingwood Town Hall (c. 1890), 97 Hurontario St.

Fig. 1 Hurontario Street Commercial Core,Collingwood.

Fig. 4 45-49 Hurontario St., Collingwood, professional law offices. Fig. 3 Collingwood Post Office (c. 1913-15), 44

Hurontario St.

Fig. 5 85 Hurontario St., Collingwood, ‘Maple Leaf Hall’, insurance offices.

TECHINICAL MEMO - FIGURES 1 TO 27

Fig. 6 79 & 81 Hurontario St., Collingwood, Bank of Montreal.

Appendix I


Fig. 8 169 & 171 Hurontario St., Collingwood, (c. 1905) IDA Pharmacy.

Fig. 7 15-21 Hurontario St., Collingwood, ‘Carmichael Block’ (c. 1890), specialty craft store.

Fig. 10 80-84 Old Kingston Rd., Pickering Village, ‘Dale Block’ (c. 1850), historic photograph.

Fig. 9 80-84 Old Kingston Rd., Pickering Village, ‘Dale Block’ (c. 1850), current photograph.

Fig. 11 Main Street, Unionville, Markham, Decorated for Christmas Season, 1996.


Fig. 12 Main Street, Unionville, Markham, Unionville Festival, 1999.

Appendix I


Fig. 13 Frederick Horsman Varley Art Gallery, 216 Main St., Unionville, Markham.

Fig. 14 Kathleen McKay Art Centre, 197 Main St., Salem Eckardt House (c. 1850), Unionville, Markham.

Fig. 15 Memorial Park, 96 Church St. N., Ajax, aerial photog h, contains arena, park, library, seniors centre and community centre.

rap

TECHINICAL MEMO - FIGURES 1 TO 27 Appendix I


Fig. 17 St. Francis de Sales Church, 78 Church St. S. Ajax.

Fig. 16 Memorial Park Arena, 96 Church St. N., Ajax, parking lot at north-east corner of Sherwood Rd. W. and Linton Ave.

Fig. 18 Yonge St. streetscape section provides 7 m. public realm from curb edge to building front, Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 80.

Fig. 19 Urban street parks along Yonge St. are integrated with the Heritage District, Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 70.
Fig. 20 Parking courts on Yonge St. enhanced with special paving materials, lighting and landscaping, Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 83.

Fig. 21 Yonge St. road allowance cross-section incorporates a landscaped centre median to facilitate pedestrian crossing, Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 76.

Appendix I


Fig. 22 The Heritage Art Walk featuring heritage buildings and historical information about Yonge St., Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 46.

Fig.23 Streetscape furnishings, furniture, lighting, transit/bus shelters and kiosks will complement the heritage character of Yonge St., Thornhill Yonge Street Study, p. 86.

Fig. 25 View west along Kingston Rd. from east of Church St. Kingston Road needs streetscaping to calm traffic.

Fig.24 View of Old Kingston Road from south-east corner of Kingston Rd. And Church St. Highway 2 (Kingston Road) traffic acts as a barrier to Pickering Village

Fig. 26 View east along Kingston Rd. from west of Church St. Kingston Rd. needs improved, wider sidewalk.


Fig. 27 View of the raised centre median island on Kingston Rd. at the Linton Avenue/Randall Drive intersection. Kingston Road needs added and enhanced medians for pedestrian crossing.

Appendix I

Pickering Village Land Use and Urban Design Study March 2008 Appendix II - 0Precedents & Recommendations for a Heritage Conservation District

APPENDIX II – SAMPLE HCD DESIGN GUIDELINES

Sample heritage design guidelines from the Yorkville-Hazelton Heritage Conservation District, prepared by a consultant team including AREA, Architects Rasch Eckler Associates Ltd. and approved by Toronto City Council on August 1, 2002.

Yorkville-Hazelton Area Heritage Conservation District Plan, IBI Group, AREA Architects Ltd. & Commonwealth Historic Resources, ‘Guidelines’, pp. 12-27.

TECHNICAL MEMO - SAMPLE HCD DESIGN GUIDELINES Appendix II

Yorkville-Hazelton AreaHERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN

12

2.1 ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS

The following guidelines are intended to apply to the alteration of existing buildings.Additions and new construction are dealt with in Section 2.3.

2.1.1 Alterations of Elements Within the Principal Elevation

The principal elevation is generally considered to be that portion of the building that addresses orfaces the street. (1) In the case of a corner property, there are two principal elevations (2)(3).Alteration to the original features of the principal elevations should be avoided or minimized. Ifalterations are required, they should be sympathetic to the style, era, scale and craftsmanship ofthe original.

�

��


13

2.1.2 Roof Form, Shape, Pitch and Features

The form, mass, rhythm, proportions and texture of the roofs and roof features support theheritage character of the individual building and the area.

Ø Dormers and gables address the street. Skylights,modern chimneys, and roof vents should not bevisible from the street. (1)

Ø Electronic and communication apparatus such asa satellite dish are to be located to the rear of thedwelling.

Ø Repairs and alterations are to consider usingsteep-pitched, gable or mansard roof designs. (1)

Ø Original decorative features and originalmaterials should be maintained or restored usingthe same materials where possible. (1)

Ø Slate and wood were commonly used materialsin the district. When rehabilitating their roofs,owners are encouraged to use original materialsbased upon documentary proof.

Ø Colour and pattern of replacement materials areto compliment the existing overall look of theroof.

�

�

�


14

2.1.3 Windows

Windows on the principal elevation are essential to the overall architectural character of thebuilding and shall not be substantially altered.

Ø Retain existing windows where possible throughrepair and maintenance. (1)

Ø Replacement windows are to fit into existingopenings with minimal if any alteration of theproportions.

Ø Window jamb, frame and sashes of replacementwindows shall reflect the original character andera of the building

Ø Existing materials in and around a window, such asa bay window assembly, must be protected withsuitable treatment and frequent maintenance. (2)

Ø Storm windows were often used to conserve heatand contribute to the character of the windowtreatment. Efforts should be made to maintainexisting storm windows.

Ø Stained glass is an essential element used asaccents in buildings of this period, and should bemaintained or repaired by a specializedcraftsperson. (1)

Ø Blocking of any existing window openings is tobe avoided. Installation of new windows, in theprincipal elevation where none exists should beavoided, except to open up a previously blockedwindow opening.

�

�

�


15

2.1.4 Doors

Doors located on the principal elevations are an important expression of the character andarchitectural style of the building and maintain the linkage between public and private realms.Substantial alterations are not recommended.

Ø Maintain original doors wherever possible. (1)Ø Alterations to existing opening proportions must

be avoided.Ø Style and type of doors are to reflect the character

and the architectural style of the building.Ø Many of the doors within the District are

partially glazed or solid wood and new doorsshould reflect the original or existing condition.

Ø Metal storm doors are discouraged as areplacement option.

Ø Front doors must face the street, with clear sightlines to the sidewalk

Ø Transoms should remain unobstructed. (1)Ø Original moulding and detailing are to be

preserved on both doors and frames.

�

�


16

2.1.5 Cladding and Trim

Alteration to the original cladding and trim on principal elevations should be avoided.Replacement materials are to be the same or similar to the materials being replaced.

Ø Brick coursing over windows and doors shouldbe preserved. (1)

Ø Masonry replacement or repairs are best appliedby a skilled craftsperson. Masonry should reiteratethe existing colour and texture of the principalelevation.

Ø Alteration to original cladding and trim are to beavoided. Repair and maintenance of theseelements are essential. (2)

Ø Brick is the predominant cladding material in theDistrict. Repair and alteration should use brickand mortar to match the original. In the casewhere alteration involves a large exterior surfacearea, and suitable, matching brick is unavailable,stucco may be an acceptable alternative.

Ø Pigment with stucco is best applied during theapplication phase, afterwards as a finish. (1)

Ø Ornamental and decorative eaves and fasciamoulding, gable finials, porch columns and bracketsall contribute to the architectural character of theDistrict and should be preserved. (1)

Ø Polychrome brick was a favourite technique usedby Victorian builders to suggest stone detailing toenrich the texture of the buildings elevation andought to be maintained. (2)

�

�

�

�

�


17

Ø Where possible, avoid using unfinished orpainted synthetic trim on windows and doors.

Ø Use similar materials such as wood cladding,brick and stucco to replace existing.

Ø Additions of design elements not in characterwith the original architecture are to be avoided.

Ø Owners are encouraged to replace existingdecorative elements where adequate documentationexists to guide the replacement.

Ornamental MetalsØ Architectural metal features like metal cornices, roof, roof cresting, fencing should be

retained and if missing, replicated based on historical pictorial and physical documentation.Ø Cleaning metals when necessary to remove corrosion before repainting is advised.Ø Use the gentlest cleaning method for that particular metal.Ø Do not use a cleaning method that will change the colour or texture of the metal.

2.1.6 Foundations

Visible foundations, expressed by a change of material, often from stone to brick, are an importantcomponent of the Victorian residential character in the District.

Ø Foundations are expressed as a base to thebuilding. (1)

Ø Substantial alterations to the visible foundationshall be avoided such as the addition of new doorand window openings.

Ø Repair existing masonry with similar materialsand techniques.

Ø Original foundation material should be protectedfrom harmful cleaning methods, alterations andcovering by other building materials.

Ø Consultation with professionals is encouragedwhen repair work is required to ensure structuralstability.

Ø Proper drainage away from the dwelling such asdrainage tiles and sloping of the grade away fromthe dwelling to minimize future damage.

�


18

2.1.7 Porches, Porticos and Exterior Stairs

Porches, porticos, and exterior stairs are integral to the principal elevation and should have asimilar proportion and an open appearance similar to traditional porches in the District.

Ø Maintain porches and porticos that traditionallywere used to protect entry doors and glazing,provide sheltered outdoor space and serve as atransition between the public outdoor andprivate interior space. (1)

Ø Substantial alterations or removal of the originalporch and stair elements alters the principalelevation and shall be avoided where possible. (1)

Ø Handrails and balusters were commonly used toenclose and define a porch and were made ofwood or cast iron. These are important secondarycharacter elements and should be preserved orrestored where missing.

Ø The overall mass, material, run and rise of theexterior stairs reflect the character and style ofthe principle elevation.

Ø Ramps will comply with the building code,meeting the specific needs of the resident and beeasily removed in the future.

Ø Stairs usually run at right angles to the street andallow for a landing at the sidewalk grade beforemeeting the sidewalk.

Ø Avoiding using open riser stairs.

�

�


19

Ø Porch and stair style, finish, colour and detailingshould reflect the original character of thebuilding and compliment the principal elevation.(1)

Ø Enclosing a porch that was originally open candetract from the architectural style and characterof the principal elevation and should be avoided.

Ø Retain original porches wherever possible. (1)

2.1.8 Trim, Windows and Door Colour

Ø Regular painting of previously paintedarchitectural elements is recommended. Paintcolour should rely on historic and Districtprecedence for inspiration and guidance.Historic precedence can be determined bysimple testing of the building surface.

Ø Painting over existing, unpainted brick is notadvised. Where brick is currently painted,period colours that are complimentary to thewhole building are encouraged.

Ø Cleaning brick with only non-abrasive methodsis recommended. Sandblasting and/or highpressure water wash is not recommended.

�

�


20

2.2 ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS

Additions must be compatible with the character, scale and form of the existing building,while being clearly distinguishable from the original heritage building. The additions mustnot detract from or obscure the heritage features of the existing building.

Additions should generally be located at the rearor in an inconspicuous elevation of the buildingto reduce their visibility from the street and mustnot overwhelm the existing building.

2.2.1 Location

If located at the rear of an existing building, additions should extend the form and mass of theoriginal and be clearly distinguishable. If located on a corner property, the addition must becarefully considered because of it visibility. A continuation of massing, clear indication of new andold, door and window rhythm and floor lines are important elements as well.

2.2.2 Design, Form and Massing

The style of the addition should be compatible with the mass, height, window and door openings,material and colour of the existing building. The point where new is joined to old should help todistinguish the addition from the original.

2.2.3 Entrances

New entries in additions should be located on secondary elevations and not detract from theprinciple entry.

2.2.4 Foundations and Walls

New foundations and wall surfaces should, where possible, step back from the original to avoidan incompatible relationship of materials.

2.2.5 Windows

Windows and other openings in the visible elevation of the additions shall repeat the proportions,head and sill height, location and rhythm of windows in the existing building.


21

2.2.6 Roofs

Compatible roof slopes are to be used either to match existing or create historically appropriateslopes. Roof elements such as, vents, skylights and hatches are to be located out of view. Roofmaterials should be compatible with existing materials wherever possible. If new materials areused, there shall be a clearly articulated point of change where the new meets the old.

2.3 DEMOLITION

Demolition is discouraged but to be considered for demolition a building in the district may bedemolished if it meets all of the following criteria;

1. Poor condition, and2. Minimal heritage value, and3. Not essential to the heritage character of the area, and4. The replacement building complies with the Guidelines and Zoning By-law.

2.4 NEW BUILDINGS

New buildings within the district must be compatible in character, form, massing andlocation on the site. It is important that new buildings are distinguishable, but in harmonywith, their neighbours.

2.4.1 Location

For Hazelton Avenue and other streets within the District, the setback for new construction willbe the average of the setbacks for buildings on both sides.

Ø Maintain predominant or average setback alongthe street

Ø New construction shall not project beyond theadjacent dwellings units’ façade and encroach onexisting setbacks.

Ø Corner lots should maintain the existing setbackor follow the profile determined by neighbouringproperty.

2.4.2 Design, Form, and Massing

The massing of buildings within each character area varies from 1-1/2 storey to 3 storey. Newbuildings are to be compatible with the building height of the adjacent buildings. The newbuilding should be compatible to the vertical proportions and widths that predominate on eitherside of the building site.


22

2.4.3 Entrances

Entrances are important elementson the principal elevation andshould address the street and beclearly visible. (1) The relationshipof the ground floor to grade shouldbe consistent with the building oneither side and the street in general.The architectural treatment of theentry, porch, and portico shouldexpress the style of the new buildingand be compatible in form anddetail with the similar elements onthe street.

2.4.4 Foundations

Victorian houses generally expressed a visible change from foundation to above grade wall. Thisdefinition of foundation was often expressed by a change of material from stone to brick, or by adecorative brick or stone string-course treatment. New buildings should reference this expressionand locate a change of material or element at a height above grade that is similar to the top of thefoundation wall of the buildings on both sides.

2.4.5 Windows

The window proportions in the District are generallyvertical and rectangular. New windows shouldmaintain these proportions and location in relationto the adjacent buildings.

�


23

2.4.6 Exterior Walls

Brick with stone trim and detailing or stucco are the predominant wall cladding materials in theDistrict. New buildings should utilize these materials for principal elevations in a compatiblerange of colours and proportions. Wood clapboard and shingles are acceptable wall cladding forsecondary elevations or rear additions. Aluminium or vinyl siding are discouraged.

2.4.7 Roofs

Roof pitch and type should match or be compatible to the style and form of adjacent roofs. Slade,wood or asphalt shingles are appropriate cladding. Roof elements such as vents, skylights, etc.should be located to the rear to avoid visibility.


24

2.4 PARKING

Parking between the building face and streets should be minimized or avoided.

Ø Avoid front yard parking.

Ø Where existing driveways and front yard parkingoccurs, hedges can be used to reduce and softenthe visual interruption of the cars and tocontinue the ‘feel’ of front yard landscaping.

Ø On street parking should primarily be forresidents with permits.


25

2.5 LANDSCAPE

2.5.1 Front Yards

The private landscape should mediate between the public street and the private house, framing theentrance and highlighting architectural features.

Ø Landscaping between the house and thesidewalk should not obscure or hide the frontdoors and principal façade.

Ø New trees and shrubs are to be selected fromspecies traditionally found in the area whichinclude Freeman Maple Autumn Blaze, Red Oakand White Ash.

Ø Hard surface treatment for front yards isdiscouraged.

Ø Private walkways are clearly defined through theuse of decorative paving material (brick, stone)along with vegetation.

Ø Use of archival photos and publications may beused in conjunction with existing styles found inthe neighbourhood environment to contribute tothe understanding of period design principles.

2.5.2 Fences

Fences and planting clearly defines private and public areas and should reflect the character of theDistrict.

Ø Fences should be no higher than 1.5m (4’9") andbe transparent to allow an open view form thesidewalk to the building face.

Ø Existing hedges should be preserved on theirown or along with decorative iron or woodfencing combination.


26

2.5.3 Other Exterior Elements

Other 20 and 21st century exterior elements, such as air conditioning units, barbecues, satellitedishes, Fedex, or other courier drop boxes, and solar panels are incompatible in appearance withthe 19th century principal elevations of most District buildings. These elements should be locatedat the rear or sides of the building, or in inconspicuous or screened locations at the front.

2.6 STREETSCAPE

The experience of the district is partially determined by the views created by the canopy ofmature street trees, boulevards and sidewalks. Maintenance of these elements is essentialto the character within the neighbourhood.

2.6.1 Streetscape Community

Ø Each street within the district has itscharacteristic streetscape that reflects the size oflots, street width and house/building type.

Ø Removal of deciduous trees and other plantingsdue to road repairs, pubic works anddriveway/walkway creation should be avoidedwhere possible and replaced wherever possiblewith an appropriate species.

Ø Planting beds and grass treatment along theboulevards should be maintained.

Ø Proper drainage on sidewalks and roads arenecessary to protect existing landscaping.

Ø A program to care for existing and replanting isimportant to the preservation of the distinctstreetscape character and amenity.

Ø Public spaces and courtyards should incorporatesimilar landscaping principles as found along theresidential street.

Ø Historic surface paving material such as brick,granite cobbles, slate and stone pavers areencouraged both on private and public areas.


27

2.6.2 Sidewalks, Street Furniture

Ø Concrete sidewalks are a consistent feature of thedistrict. They should be maintained.

Ø Signage, bollards and other street furnitureelements are to be carefully considered tominimize visual clutter and to avoidincompatible colour, form and texture.

Ø The blue Yorkville area standard pedestrianstreetlight should be considered for installationthroughout the district, with appropriate lightingadjustment. (1) The colour could be changed todistinguish the District street light from the lightin adjoining and supporting areas. This wouldhelp to visually link the whole Districtneighbourhood with the Yorkville area.

2.6.3 District Entry Features

The city should look at the possibility of erecting compatible district entry features that will definethe entry point to the neighbourhood and resemble some of the heritage character of the district.Compatible features could include brick or stone gateposts, bronze plagues at each entry point, aspecial tree type or other horticultural treatment.

�

technical memo precedents & recommendations for a heritage

Documents