Report
to/Rapport au :
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee
Comité consultatif sur la
conservation de l'architecture locale
and /
et
Planning
and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de
l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
31 July 2006 / le 31 juillet 2006
Submitted by/Soumis par : John L. Moser, Acting Deputy City Manager/
Directeur municipal adjoint par intérim,
Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance
Contact
Person/Personne ressource : Grant Lindsay, Manager, Development
Approvals,
Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals/Approbation des demandes d’aménagement et d’infrastructure
(613) 580-2424 x13242, Grant.Lindsay@ottawa.ca
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Local
Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee recommend that the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Designate
the Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District, as identified in Document 1,
by By-law under Section 41 of the Ontario Heritage Act;
2. Adopt by By-law the Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District
Plan, Document 2, to act as a guide to property owners, City staff, Advisory
Committees and Council when making decisions regarding Section 42 of the Ontario
Heritage Act, as amended by the following changes to the District Study
(Document 2), Section 5.5.4 Streetscape, recommended by LACAC, pursuant to its meeting of 24 August 2006:
- Add
the following to (a): "Hard surfaces should be kept to a minimum."
- Amend
(b), second sentence: "Underground parking with an entrance that is
visible from the street is not encouraged."
3. List the properties within
the proposed Heritage Conservation District on the City of Ottawa Register of
properties of cultural heritage value or interest;
4. Amend the zoning of the study area to include a heritage overlay
once the Heritage Designation By-law comes into force.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité consultatif
sur la conservation de l'architecture locale recommande que le Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
recommande au Conseil :
1. de désigner l’avenue Lorne district de conservation du patrimoine,
tel que défini dans le Document 1, par voie de règlement municipal en vertu de
l’article 41 de la Loi sur le
patrimoine de l'Ontario;
2. d’adopter, par voie de règlement
municipal, le plan du district de conservation du patrimoine de l’avenue Lorne,
Document 2, comme guide à l’intention des propriétaires, des employés de la
Ville, des comités consultatifs et du Conseil lors des prises de décisions
touchant l’article 42 de la Loi sur
le patrimoine de l'Ontario ,
tel que modifié par les changements à l’Étude de district (Document 2), article
5.5.4 Paysage de rue, recommandés par le CCCAL à la
suite de sa réunion du 24 août 2006 :
-
Ajouter ce qui suit à (a) :
« Les surfaces dures devraient être minimales. »
-
Modifier (b), deuxième phrase ;
« On n’encourage pas les stationnements souterrains disposant d’une
entrée visible de la rue. »;
3. de faire figurer les propriétés situées dans le district de conservation du
patrimoine dans le registre de la Ville d’Ottawa des propriétés de valeur ou
d’intérêt patrimonial et culturel;
4. de modifier le zonage du secteur d’étude de manière à intégrer un
volet patrimonial une fois le règlement de désignation patrimoniale
entré en vigueur.
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee
Recommendation : 24 August 2006
LACAC unanimously supported the designation of this
district. It also recommended the following changes to the District Study
(Document 2), Section 5.5.4 Streetscape:
- Add the
following to (a): "Hard surfaces should be kept to a minimum."
- Amend (b), second
sentence: "Underground parking with an entrance that is visible from
the street is not encouraged."
BACKGROUND
Residents of Lorne Avenue requested designation of Lorne Avenue between Albert Street and Primrose Avenue under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) in April 2004. City Council approved the Terms of Reference for the Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District Study (HCD Study) in December 2004. The HCD Study was carried out in accordance with the Terms of Reference approved by Council. The Lorne Avenue HCD Study is based on material contained in a report submitted by residents of Lorne Avenue in support of their request for designation under the OHA in April 2004 (see Document 1).
The OHA enables municipalities to designate
heritage conservation districts.
Section 41. (1) of the OHA states,
Where there is in effect in a municipality an
official plan that contains provisions relating to the establishment of
heritage conservation districts, the council of the municipality may by by-law
designate the municipality or any defined area or areas thereof as a heritage
conservation district.
The City Council Approved Official Plan
provides a framework for the conservation of heritage resources within the
city. The Lorne Avenue Heritage
Conservation District Study was undertaken in accordance with Section 2.5.5.2
of the Official Plan, that states:
Groups of buildings, cultural landscapes, and areas of the city will be designated as Heritage Conservation Districts under Part V of the OHA.
DISCUSSION
Recommendation 1
The objective of the HCD Study was to provide an
overview of Lorne Avenue’s history and architectural character. The results of the study have determined
that the study area, identified in Document 1, is worthy of designation under
the OHA. Lower
Lorne Avenue (between Albert Street and Primrose Avenue) is a well-preserved
streetscape, typical of the type of housing built in Ottawa for the working
class from 1900 – 1907. The history of
lower Lorne Avenue, located adjacent to the LeBreton Flats, is associated with
the development of the LeBreton Flats as an industrial centre and as a
residential area for the mill and railway workers who worked there. The fire of April 26, 1900 is a pivotal
event in the history of Ottawa, destroying 400 acres of the west end of Ottawa
including all of the buildings on lower Lorne Avenue. The LeBreton Flats area was rapidly rebuilt following the fire
and all of the buildings on lower Lorne Avenue were rebuilt within seven
years. Areas adjacent to lower Lorne Avenue present
streetscapes that have a different development history, being composed of
buildings constructed before and after the fire.
Lorne Avenue’s cultural heritage significance is
enhanced by the fact that its character is representative of the type of
streetscape that was eliminated when the LeBreton Flats community was levelled
in the early 1960s.
Designation under the OHA will give the City of
Ottawa the authority to review and approve the design of new construction and
alterations to heritage buildings within the proposed district. Under the provisions of the OHA, City
Council can deny an application to demolish a designated building. The owner has the right to appeal Council’s
decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Recommendation
2
The OHA requires that a Heritage Conservation
District Plan (HCD Plan) be adopted by By-law.
The HCD Plan, included as Document 2, will provide a framework for the
management of the proposed heritage conservation district if it is designated
under the OHA. The HCD Plan contains
design guidelines to be used to evaluate the compatibility of a proposed
development with the heritage character of the streetscape. The objective of the design guidelines is to
conserve the heritage character of individual properties and the district as a
whole. Heritage staff prepared the HCD
Plan in consultation with the residents of Lorne Avenue.
Recommendation 3
Bill 53, the City of Toronto Act, passed in June 2006, amends Section 27 of the OHA. The amendment requires that a person who owns a building that is included on a municipal register of property of cultural heritage value or interest,
shall not demolish or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the owner's intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or to permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure.
Residents of Lorne Avenue have indicated that they are concerned about the possible demolition and redevelopment of property within the study area prior to the passage of the heritage district designation By-law. Including the buildings within the study area on the City of Ottawa Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest will provide some interim protection from demolition.
Recommendation 4
The heritage overlay is a provision of the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, 1998 and is included in the draft Comprehensive Zoning By-law. It is intended to encourage the retention of the heritage character of an existing streetscape and is a complement to the protection provided by designation under the OHA. The heritage overlay requires that when an existing building is removed or destroyed, the replacement building must retain the form and siting of the former building. Additions to existing buildings are permitted in the rear yard, provided the height and roof slope are maintained and subject to an increased setback from the side lot line to minimize the visibility and impact of the addition. Details are included as Document 4.
CONSULTATION
Residents of Lorne Avenue requested the designation under the OHA and have been active throughout the HCD Study process. A public meeting was held on March 3, 2005 to provide information about designation under the OHA, and to describe the HCD Study process. On June 22, 2006 a public meeting was held to review and receive comments on the draft Lorne Avenue HCD Study, and in particular the HCD Plan. All building owners and tenants were given written notice of the purpose, date, time and location of the meetings. A series of comment sheets and a copy of the draft study were provided to building owners ten days prior to the June 22, 2006 meeting. Completed comment sheets were received until July 14, 2006. As of July 27, 2006, no negative written comments regarding the proposed designation have been received. An ad will appear in the July 28, 2006 edition of the Ottawa Citizen and LeDroit, notifying the public that the proposed designation of Lorne Avenue will be considered at the August 24, 2006 meeting of the Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee and the September 12, 2006 meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee.
The Ward Councillor, Diane Holmes, the Dalhousie Community Association and Heritage Ottawa support the proposed designation of Lorne Avenue.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Direct costs to the
City would be comprised of the cost of Legal Services Branch and Planning and
Growth Management Department staff preparing the By-law, the notice of passage
of the designation and the registration of the Bylaws. Existing City resources would be used and
are reflected within the Departmental Operating budgets. The cost of the advertising in the Ottawa
Citizen and Le Droit shall be paid out of the 2006 Operating budget of the
Planning and Growth Management Department.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Map of proposed Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District
Document 2 Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan
Document 3 Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District Study (Distributed separately and on file with City Clerk)
Document 4 Heritage Overlay Zoning Provisions
DISPOSITION
- City of Ottawa Legal Services Branch to prepare a By-law to designate Lorne Avenue, as identified in Document 1, as a heritage conservation district under Section 41 of the Ontario Heritage Act and also adopt by By-law the Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan, Document 2;
- City of Ottawa Legal Services Branch to cause notice of the passage of the designation By-law to be served on each owner of property located in the proposed heritage conservation district and on the Ontario Heritage Trust;
- City of Ottawa Planning and Infrastructure Approval Branch to cause notice of the passage of the designation By-law to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality;
- City of Ottawa Heritage Section to list the properties within the proposed heritage conservation district on the City of Ottawa Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest;
- City of Ottawa Legal Services Branch to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board in the event there are objections to the By-law under Section 41 of the Ontario Heritage Act;
- Upon the designation By-law coming into force, City of Ottawa Legal Services Branch to register the By-law on the title of all properties in the heritage conservation district and ensure that a copy of the designation By-law is registered in the appropriate land registry office;
- Upon the designation By-law coming into force, Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy Branch to amend the zoning in the study area to include a heritage overlay;
- Upon the designation By-law coming into force, staff of the Planning and Growth Management Department to implement the HCD Plan as the guiding document for managing development in the district.
3.0
Heritage Conservation District Plan
3.1 Objectives to be achieved through designation
The objective of designation of lower Lorne Avenue is to conserve and enhance the historical and architectural character of this early 20th century, working class streetscape. Designation under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act will establish a planning process that respects the history and architecture of Lorne Avenue.
Development in a heritage conservation district takes place by adding to existing buildings and/or by infilling vacant land. The design guidelines contained in this plan will provide the means to encourage development that is compatible with the character of the proposed district. The objectives of the design guidelines are to:
• Encourage infill construction and alterations that respect the architectural character and scale of buildings in the streetscape;
• Encourage infill construction to be of contemporary architectural expression, while respecting the architectural character and scale of buildings in the streetscape;
• Encourage the restoration of buildings;
• Prevent the demolition of heritage buildings identified in the district inventory;
• Discourage the removal or alteration of original architectural features;
• Encourage landscaping on private property that is consistent with the existing streetscape character.
3.2
Current
conditions
The portion
of Lorne Avenue located between Albert Street and Primrose Avenue is known
locally as ‘lower Lorne Avenue.’ A
steep escarpment, Nanny Goat Hill, separates lower Lorne Avenue from upper
Lorne Avenue to the south. For many years the expectation that buildings on
lower Lorne Avenue might be expropriated discouraged redevelopment and lower
Lorne Avenue remained relatively unchanged.
Within the last fifteen years development pressure, in the form of
infill development, has replaced the threat of expropriation. Residents of lower Lorne Avenue requested
designation because they would like to prevent incompatible infill development. The goal of the residents is to conserve the
historical and architectural character of lower Lorne Avenue.
3.3
Proposed
boundaries of the district
The history of development and the architectural character of lower Lorne Avenue differ from that of adjacent streets. Lower Lorne Avenue is separated from upper Lorne Avenue by the escarpment, Nanny Goat Hill. The buildings on lower Lorne Avenue were destroyed fire on April 26, 1900, while the area to the south, upper Lorne Avenue, was protected from the fire by the escarpment. The result is that the lower Lorne Avenue streetscape is homogeneous in its architectural character because all of the buildings were built in a similar style within a seven-year period. Upper Lorne Avenue is more heterogeneous in architectural character, containing buildings of varying architectural styles from various periods before and after the fire of 1900. The areas to the west and east, Booth and Perkins Streets respectively, are also heterogeneous in character, having had infill development in various architectural styles over the years. Buildings located on the LeBreton Flats, to the north of Lorne Avenue, were expropriated and demolished in the early 1960s. The LeBreton Flats have been vacant since that time. The proposed boundary is the dark outline around the properties.
3.4
A
description of the cultural heritage value and heritage attributes of lower
Lorne Avenue
The
description of the cultural heritage value and the heritage attributes of the
study area is important because it defines what is to be conserved by the
guidelines. The description also helps
to promote an understanding of the heritage character of the lower Lorne Avenue
streetscape and provides a means for evaluating the compatibility of a proposed
development.
3.4.1 Cultural
heritage value or interest of lower Lorne Avenue
Lower Lorne
Avenue (between Albert Street and Primrose Avenue) is a homogeneous,
well-preserved streetscape, typical of the type of housing built in Ottawa for
the working class from 1900 – 1907. The
history of lower Lorne Avenue, located directly adjacent to the LeBreton Flats,
is associated with the development of the LeBreton Flats as an industrial
centre and as a residential area for the mill and railway workers who worked
there. In the early 1850s, only a
handful of labourers lived in the LeBreton Flats area. However, the sawn lumber industry expanded
in the 1860s and new lands were subdivided to house workers within walking
distance of the mills and railway yards located on the LeBreton Flats. The Perkins Block, the current location of
lower Lorne Avenue, was surveyed and registered in 1860.
The fire of
Thursday, April 26, 1900 is a pivotal event in the history of Ottawa. It destroyed 400 acres of the west end of
Ottawa, including all of the buildings on lower Lorne Avenue. Within a short period of time following the
fire the residential and industrial buildings in the LeBreton Flats area were
rebuilt. The rapid rebuilding that
followed the fire resulted in the construction of the architecturally
homogeneous streetscape on lower Lorne Avenue.
These modest, brick, two-storey row houses were an affordable
solution to the problem of finding a housing form that could replace the wood
frame buildings that were destroyed by the fire.
Areas adjacent to lower Lorne Avenue present streetscapes that have a different development history, being composed of buildings constructed before and after the fire of 1900. Streetscapes to the south of Lorne Avenue that were not destroyed by the fire have had infill development over the years, resulting in a more heterogeneous architectural streetscape character. Lorne Avenue’s cultural heritage significance is enhanced by the fact that its character is representative of the type of streetscape that was eliminated when the LeBreton Flats community was levelled in the early 1960s, leaving lower Lorne Avenue as a significant working class streetscape to be conserved.
3.4.2 Heritage
attributes of lower Lorne Avenue
The modest
two-storey, singles and rowhouses on lower Lorne Avenue were built in the
vernacular Italianate style between 1900 and 1907. These red brick buildings are generally uniform in appearance and
display elements typical of the vernacular Italianate style including modest
brick surface ornamentation such as corbeling and stringcourses. Other elements typical of the vernacular
Italianate style include a shallow projecting bay on the front façade and a
flat roof with building cornice of wood or pressed metal. Many of the buildings have some or all of
the original cornice brackets. The
building cornices are a unifying element in the streetscape. A continuous line of building cornices
extends along the length of lower Lorne Avenue.
The window
openings are generally rectangular, with voussoirs and masonry window
sills. All of the buildings have a
front porch with modest wood ornamentation.
A shed roof with a decorative pediment detail is the most common porch
roof form.
There is a
vertical emphasis to the building massing, a result of the narrowness of the
typical width of a single unit in a row, relative to the height of the
building. All of the rows are broken
into a series of narrow divisions, two bays wide. The front yard setback is relatively uniform, with minor
variations in the streetscape. The side
yards setbacks are zero or are very narrow.
Parking is usually at the side or rear of the property, accessed by a
narrow driveway from the street or from Perkins Street.
Front yards display a layering of landscape
elements including annuals, perennials, shrubs, climbing vines, small areas of
lawn and small trees. The regularly
spaced, small, flowering street trees in the shallow front yards provide shade
and help to screen views into residences.
The narrow street and lot dimensions were established by the survey
completed in 1860. The narrow front and
side yard setbacks are a result of the desire to construct the largest building
possible on the narrow lots. The height
of the buildings relative to the width of the street and the proximity of the
front façade to the sidewalk establishes a particular relationship unique to
Lorne Avenue; the narrow street and continuous wall of uniformly set back
buildings produce a shallow tunnel effect.
This, combined with the soft edge of layered landscaping in the front
yards results in a streetscape that is pleasantly sheltered and pedestrian in
scale.
3.5
Policy
statements, procedures and design guidelines for managing change in the
heritage conservation district
Various
policy documents at the provincial and municipal levels establish a framework
for the conservation of heritage resources.
These policies as well as the procedures for the approval of development
applications in heritage conservation districts are explained in this
section. The design guidelines
contained in this section will provide the means for evaluating the
compatibility of proposed developments with the heritage character of Lorne
Avenue.
3.5.1 General policies supporting the conservation of heritage resources
With regard to cultural heritage resources, the
Provincial Policy Statement states in Section 2.6.1 that a decision of a
council of a municipality in respect of the exercise of any authority that
affects a planning matter “shall be consistent with” the following,
“Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage
landscapes shall be conserved.”[1]
The Provincial Policy Statement defines
cultural heritage landscapes as, “a grouping(s) of individual heritage features
such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites and natural elements, which
together form a significant type of heritage form, distinctive from that of its
constituent elements or parts.” [2] Significant cultural heritage resources are
resources, “that are valued for the important contribution they make to our
understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people.”[3]
The Provincial Policy Statement defines conserved as,
“the identification, protection, use and/or management of cultural heritage and
archaeological resources in such a way that their heritage values, attributes
and integrity are retained. This may be
addressed through a conservation plan or heritage impact assessment.”[4]
The Ontario Heritage Act enables
municipalities to designate heritage conservation districts. Section 41. (1) of the Act states,
Where there is in effect in a municipality an
official plan that contains provisions relating to the establishment of
heritage conservation districts, the council of the municipality may by by-law
designate the municipality or any defined area or areas thereof as a heritage
conservation district.
The City of Ottawa Official Plan provides a
framework for the conservation of heritage resources within the city. The Lorne Avenue Heritage Conservation
District Study was undertaken in accordance with Section 2.5.5.2 of the City of
Ottawa Official Plan, that states:
Groups of buildings, cultural landscapes, and
areas of the city will be designated as Heritage Conservation Districts under
Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.
3.5.2 Application to alter a heritage building
The Ontario
Heritage Act and the City of Ottawa require that all proposals for new
construction or alteration to the exterior appearance of properties within a
heritage conservation district must be approved by City Council, and a permit
must be issued before any work may begin.
In
order to initiate the application process, the applicant must complete a
heritage permit application and submit it to heritage staff along with plans
and material samples, if applicable. Staff review the application to determine
if the alterations meets all City requirements, and a report will be prepared
and sent to the Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC),
Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) and City Council. Council may approve
the application with or
without
conditions, or refuse it. If Council approves the application, a Heritage
Permit is issued. A Heritage Permit
must be issued before a Building or Demolition Permit may be issued. In the case of alterations within a heritage
conservation district, the applicant can appeal Council's decision to the
Ontario Municipal Board.
Demolition
of buildings within the proposed district is discouraged. Demolition of Category 4 buildings within
the district may be considered subject to the replacement building being
compatible with the heritage character of the streetscape. An application for demolition and for new
construction under the Ontario Heritage Act, and a building permit for
the construction of the new building are required before a demolition permit
can be issued. Section 42 (2.1) of the Ontario
Heritage Act states,
The
owner of property situated in a designated heritage conservation district may
apply to the municipality for a permit to alter any part of the property other
than the interior of a building or structure on the property or to erect,
demolish or remove a building or structure on the property.
The
decision of the municipal council must be made within 90 days of the date of
the notice of receipt of the application, or within such longer period of time
as is agreed upon by the applicant and the council. The council may grant approval of the permit applied for, refuse
the application for a permit, or grant approval of the permit subject to terms
and conditions. If the council refuses
the permit applied for or gives the permit with terms and conditions attached,
the owner of the property may appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Other
approvals or permits may be required:
▫ Zoning By-law Amendment or Minor Variance;
▫ Site Plan Control Approval - for certain residential developments, for certain changes in land use, and for any developments in certain zones;
▫ Building Permits - required for most construction;
▫ Review of Site Elements – required for new construction and some additions to existing buildings within a heritage conservation district.
3.5.3 Alterations that do not require an application to
alter under the Ontario Heritage Act
The following
is a list of the types of work that do not require a heritage permit:
▫
interior alterations;
▫ painting/paint colour;
▫ on
– going building maintenance such as repointing, a new roof and foundation repairs;
▫
repair, using the same materials, of existing features including roofs,
exterior cladding, cornices, brackets, columns, balustrades, porches and steps,
entrances, windows, foundations and decorative wood, metal or stone;
▫
minor alterations to the rear of the building;
▫ landscaping.
3.5.4
Heritage
grants
Heritage grants are available to assist owners of heritage buildings designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act with restoration work. Grants are approved subject to the availability of funding, which is approved by Ottawa City Council as part of the overall City budget each year. Grants are for projects that involve the restoration of building elements to their original condition or material. Examples of eligible projects include:
▫ conservation of existing exterior elements, such as deteriorated original windows, gingerbread trim or decorative metal work;
▫ repointing mortar joints in masonry surfaces;
▫ restoration of missing features based on documentary evidence, such as reinstating a blocked-in window, rebuilding an interesting chimney stack or re-roofing with the original material;
▫ custom restoration work, such as replicating porch columns or trim, or building new windows to replace originals that are beyond repair.
3.5.5 Design
guidelines
These
design guidelines will be used to evaluate the compatibility of a proposed
development with the heritage character of the streetscape as defined in the
description of cultural heritage value and heritage attributes. The objective of the design guidelines is
to conserve the heritage character of individual properties and the district as
a whole. The guidelines, as they relate
to infill construction, encourage the use of contemporary approaches to
architectural design that are compatible with the historic character of the
streetscape.
3.5.5.1
Conservation of existing building fabric
Conservation is the
general term used to describe the retention and safeguarding of heritage
buildings and areas. The term is used
to describe the broad range of processes associated with the identification,
protection, maintenance, revitalization and management of heritage
properties. Conservation may involve
the preservation, restoration, renovation, rehabilitation, and/or adaptive
re-use of heritage buildings.
a) Cleaning
and repointing brick - The extensive
use of brick cladding is a unifying element in the Lorne Avenue
streetscape. Cleaning of brick should
be approached with caution. Heritage
staff are available for consultation regarding non-abrasive cleaning
methods. Test patches should be made in
unobtrusive locations to first ensure the effectiveness of the cleaning
method. Repointing of brick should be
undertaken in consultation with heritage staff to ensure that lime-rich mortars
similar to the original mortar are used;
b)
Conservation and repair of cornices and cornice brackets - The continuous line
of building cornices is a unifying element in the Lorne Avenue streetscape. The
conservation and repair of cornices and cornice brackets is encouraged. Repair is preferable to replacement. Where replacement is necessary, the
replacement cornice or bracket should be the same design and material as the
original;
c) Conservation and repair of original wood doors and windows –
Retention of original doors and windows is encouraged. Increased energy efficiency can be achieved
through the use of weather stripping or the installation of wood storm windows. If a window or door has to be replaced, the
new window or door should match the size, shape and muntin profile of the
original. When no documentary evidence
regarding the design of the original exists, the design of original windows or
doors from neighbouring buildings can be used as a model. A replacement door or window should not
falsely evoke a particular era;
d)
Conservation and repair of porches - Retention of original porch elements is
encouraged. Regular maintenance is
critical to the preservation of decorative woodwork.
Sources of
water penetration should be identified and removed, and paint cover
maintained. Replacement decorative wood
elements should be based on documentary evidence such as remaining decorative
elements and historical photographs.
Where no original material exists, the design of a replacement porch
should replicate existing early porches in the streetscape. In general, the typical porch has a shed roof
with a pediment. There is precedent for a porch with a flat roof and classically-inspired
decoration. Ghost marks may provide an
indication of where a porch roof was once located on the building.
3.5.5.2
Infill –
additions
a) Height - additions to the rear; additions may be up to two storeys in
height, but must be lower than the original building and set back from the
sides of the original building;
b) Roof and building cornice - The continuous
line of flat roofs and building cornices is a unifying element in the
streetscape. The use of a flat roof, a
building cornice and/or cornice brackets is encouraged;
c) The architectural expression of an addition
may be of its own time. The design of
the addition should, however, be sympathetic to the massing and finishes of the
original building;
d)
Legibility - Additions should be distinguishable from the original building.
There should be a differentiation between old and new;
e)
Windows - Window openings with
voussoirs or rectangular window openings are encouraged. Double or single hung windows are
encouraged.
3.5.5.3
Infill – new construction
a) The
architectural expression of new construction may be of its own time. The massing, finishes, use of decoration,
and rhythm of divisions of buildings should make reference to typical patterns
in the streetscape;
b) Maintaining vertical emphasis - The width of each single or unit within a row should be less than the height. Each single or unit within a row should be two bays wide;
c) Roof and building cornice - A f
lat roof is
encouraged. A building cornice with or
without brackets is encouraged. The
flat roof and cornice are a unifying element in the streetscape and the design
of new buildings should continue this pattern;
d) Building height - A building height of two-storeys is encouraged. The two-storey height of the buildings is a unifying element in the streetscape;
e) Shallow projecting bays - While a flat
façade is common in the streetscape, there is precedent for shallow projecting
bays. Shallow projecting bays are
encouraged;
f) Cladding – Brick cladding is a unifying
element in the streetscape. Brick
cladding is encouraged;
g) Windows - Window openings with voussoirs or rectangular window openings are encouraged. Double or single hung windows are encouraged. A transom window over the front door is typical in the streetscape and is encouraged;
h) Surface decoration - Modest surface
decoration, such as a stringcourse, is encouraged;
i) Porches - Porches with shed roofs and wood
decoration are encouraged;
j) Building
setback – Small variations in building setback from the front property line
occur in the streetscape. Maintaining
this uniform front yard setback is encouraged;
k)
Legibility – New construction should be distinguishable from existing
buildings. There should be a clear differentiation between old and new.
3.5.5.4 Streetscape
a)
Landscaping in front yards should include a combination of the following: small trees, small shrubs, perennials,
climbing vines, small areas of lawn;
b) Parking
should be located at the rear of the property or within narrow driveways to the
side of the lot. Underground parking
with an entrance that is visible from the street is not encouraged. Parking in the front yard is not permitted.
