Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
AGENDA - Heritage Advisory Committee -20200914
Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Date:Monday, September 14, 2020 Time:7:00 p.m. Location:Video Conference Pages 1.Procedural Notes This meeting will be held electronically as per Section 20.1 of the Town's Procedure By-law No. 6228-19, as amended, due to the COVID-19 State of Emergency. 2.Approval of the Agenda 3.Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 4.Receipt of the Minutes 4.1 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of June 1, 2020 1 That the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting minutes of June 1, 2020, be received for information. 1. 5.Delegations 5.1 Nick Racanelli, Racanelli and Associates Inc., Re: Item 6.2 - HAC20-010 - Major Heritage Permit Application File HPA-2020-01, 31 Catherine Avenue 7 *5.2 Rebecca Beaton, Resident; Re: Aurora Train Station Building 8 6.Matters for Consideration 6.1 HAC20-009 - Heritage Designation for 28 Wellington Street West “Alfred Love House” 20 That Report No. HAC20-009 be received; and1. That the comments regarding the heritage designation for 28 Wellington Street West be received and referred to staff for consideration. 2. 6.2 HAC20-010 - Major Heritage Permit Application File HPA-2020-01, 31 Catherine Avenue 88 That Report No. HAC20-010 be received; and1. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding Heritage Permit Application File: HPA-2020-01 be referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. 2. 6.3 HAC20-011 - Amendments to the Conditions of Delisting 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad 104 That Report No. HAC20-011 be received; and1. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding amendments to the conditions imposed by Council on May 15, 2019 for the delisting of 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad be referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. 2. 6.4 Memorandum from Manager, Parks and Fleet; Re: Tree Removal Permit Application - 53 Metcalfe Street 110 That the memorandum regarding Tree Removal Permit Application – 53 Metcalfe Street be received; and 1. That the Heritage Advisory Committee provide comment with respect to the proposed Tree Removal Permit Application for 53 Metcalfe Street. 2. 6.5 Memorandum from Manager, Parks and Fleet, Re: Tree Removal Permit Application - 126 Temperance Street 119 That the memorandum regarding Tree Removal Permit Application – 126 Temperance Street be received; and 1. That the Heritage Advisory Committee provide comment with respect to the proposed Tree Removal Permit Application for 126 Temperance Street. 2. 7.Informational Items 7.1 Memorandum from Planner; Re: Alterations to a Listed Heritage Property – 95 Metcalfe Street 127 That the memorandum regarding Alterations to a Listed Heritage Property – 95 Metcalfe Street be received for information. 1. 7.2 Memorandum from Planner; Re: Ontario Barn Preservation Letter 137 That the memorandum regarding the Ontario Barn Preservation Letter be received. 1. 8.Adjournment Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Date: Monday, June 1, 2020 Time and Location: 7 p.m., Video Conference Committee Members: Jeff Lanthier (Chair), Neil Asselin, John Green, Councillor Sandra Humfryes, Bob McRoberts (departed 8:21 p.m.), Mayor Tom Mrakas (ex-officio) Members Absent: Matthew Kinsella, Hoda Soliman (Vice Chair) Other Attendees: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Linda Bottos, Council/Committee Coordinator This meeting was held electronically as per Section 20.1 of the Town's Procedure By- law No. 6228-19, as amended, due to the COVID-19 State of Emergency. The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. The Chair relinquished the chair to Neil Asselin at 8:35 p.m., during consideration of Item 4 – HAC20-008 – Streetscape Improvements for the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District, and resumed the chair at 8:50 p.m. 1. Approval of the Agenda Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by Bob McRoberts That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved. Carried 2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof Page 1 of 142 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Page 2 of 6 Declarations of pecuniary interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50, were made by Jeff Lanthier and Bob McRoberts regarding Item 4, Report No. HAC20-008 – Streetscape Improvements for the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District, as they each own property in the subject area. Mr. Lanthier and Mr. McRoberts did not participate in any discussion or voting on Item 4. 3. Receipt of the Minutes Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of February 3, 2020 Moved by John Green Seconded by Councillor Humfryes That the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting minutes of February 3, 2020, be received for information. Carried 4. Delegations Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green That each delegation be allowed to speak to their respective agenda item just prior to the consideration of each item. Carried (a) Douglas Reeve, co-owner of 67 Catherine Avenue Re: Item 1 – HAC20-005 – Major Heritage Permit Application File: HPA- 2019-08, 67 Catherine Avenue Mr. Reeve expressed appreciation to the Committee and staff for their efforts through the heritage preservation process. Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green That the comments of the delegation be received and referred to Item 1. Carried Page 2 of 142 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Page 3 of 6 (b) Claudio Brutto, representing Cedartrail Developments Inc. Re: Item 2 – HAC20-006 – Heritage Street Naming for Cedartrail Subdivision File: SUB-2014-04 – 14288 Yonge Street Mr. Brutto presented background and history of the current owner, Mr. Frank Dodaro, principal of Cedartrail Developments Inc. and North Star Homes Inc., in support of his recommendation that the new private road be named Dodaro Lane or North Star Lane. Moved by John Green Seconded by Neil Asselin That the comments of the delegation be received and referred to Item 2. Carried (c) Wayne Morgan, representing agent for owner of 15074 Yonge Street Re: Item 3 – HAC20-007 – Heritage Designation and Consent Application for 15074 Yonge Street (Poplar Villa) Mr. Morgan presented background and highlighted various elements of his Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment of the subject property, including the heritage value of the building and landscape, and aspects of the proposed severance and Heritage Easement Agreement. He recommended that the Committee support the proposed heritage designation of the property and the proposed severance subject to conditions. Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green That the comments of the delegation be received and referred to Item 3. Carried 5. Matters for Consideration 1. HAC20-005 – Major Heritage Permit Application File: HPA-2019-08, 67 Catherine Avenue The Committee expressed support for the applicant’s proposal to partially demolish the existing rear addition to accommodate a proposed new addition, Page 3 of 142 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Page 4 of 6 noting that the new addition would blend in with the neighbourhood. The Committee also expressed appreciation of the collaborative process between staff and the property owner. Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green 1. That Report No. HAC20-005 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding Heritage Permit Application File: HPA-2019-08 be received and referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Carried 2. HAC20-006 – Heritage Street Naming for Cedartrail Subdivision File: SUB-2014-04 – 14288 Yonge Street The Committee inquired about the proposed street name and staff provided clarification regarding Mrs. Phila Cannon and the Cannon family farmhouse. The Committee expressed support for staff’s recommendation regarding the proposed street name Phila Lane in order to honour the history of the family and satisfy the condition previously set by Council. The Committee inquired about the street naming policy and the possibility of adding the name Dodaro to the street name list, and staff provided a brief overview of the policy and process. Moved by John Green Seconded by Councillor Humfryes 1. That Report No. HAC20-005 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding heritage street naming for Cedartrail Subdivision File: SUB-2014-04 at 14288 Yonge Street be received and referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Carried Page 4 of 142 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Page 5 of 6 3. HAC20-007 – Heritage Designation and Consent Application for 15074 Yonge Street (Poplar Villa) The Committee inquired about the permitted uses of the property and staff provided clarification regarding its current designation and permitted uses within the “PDS1 Promenade Downtown Shoulder – Central Commercial” zone, an area intended for intensification. The Committee expressed concerns about the severance proposal respecting the resultant frontage size and balance of the lot with an added structure on the south side, the Town’s influence on the architecture of a new structure that would be complementary to the existing building, and the potential for the severed parcel to be joined with the property to the south to accommodate a new development. The Committee suggested that, with the heritage designation and restrictions on the scale of any new development, the benefits to intensification would be greatly reduced. Staff advised that a potential development agreement would apply to the severed parcels with specific restrictions to ensure protection of the heritage attributes including the front yard landscape. Staff noted that any potential development of the severed lot would be subject to the regular site plan review process including review by the Committee and Council. Staff agreed to confirm whether a development agreement registered on title would remain if the severed parcel was merged with another lot. The Committee expressed support for the heritage designation of the property, including interior elements, under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and did not support the proposed severance. Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green 1. That Report No. HAC20-007 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding the heritage designation for 15074 Yonge Street be received and referred to staff for consideration. Carried Page 5 of 142 Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, June 1, 2020 Page 6 of 6 4. HAC20-008 – Streetscape Improvements for the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Staff provided an overview of the report providing a status update on the streetscape improvement recommendations of the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District (NEOAHCD) Plan that have been implemented by the Town and those that are outstanding due to budget constraints. The Committee discussed and agreed that the remaining streetscape improvement recommendations of the NEOAHCD Plan should be moved forward and suggested that staff be directed by Council to complete a cost analysis for consideration in the next budget cycle. It was further suggested that, once the Downtown Street Wall Mural Program is established, the Committee may wish to consider how the retaining wall in front of Our Lady of Grace could be dedicated to the commemoration of the Town’s heritage and the district as part of the streetscape analysis. Moved by John Green Seconded by Councillor Humfryes 1. That Report No. HAC20-008 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding streetscape improvements for the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan be received and referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Carried 6. Informational Items None 7. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Humfryes Seconded by John Green That the meeting be adjourned at 8:51 p.m. Carried Page 6 of 142 ☐☐☐☐ ܆ ܆ ܆ ܆ 1MFBTFDMJDLIFSFGPSNPSFJOGPSNBUJPO &MFDUSPOJD%FMFHBUJPO3FRVFTU September 14, 2020 Heritage # HPA-2020-01, Property 31 Catherine Avenue Nick Racanelli Present and familiarize committee with current property and adjacent properties. - Changes / updates since engagement with planning - Efforts to date to revive character of home with past and upcoming updates - Review depth of addition - North and East side design / facade ✔ Carlson Tsang April 2020 ✔ ✔ Page 7 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Delegation Request Legislative Services This Delegation Request form and any written submissions or background information for consideration by either Council or Committees of Council must be submitted to Legislative Services. Council or Committee Meeting Date: Subject: Name of Spokesperson and Name of Group or Person(s) being Represented (if applicable): Brief Summary of Issue or Purpose of Delegation: Have you been in contact with a Town staff or Council member regarding your matter of interest?Yes տտ No տտ If yes, with whom? Date: տ I acknowledge that the Procedure By-law permits five (5) minutes for Delegations. I wish to submit my delegation by (select one): տ Video/audio* տ Phone*܈ In Writing տ In Person** *Must attend electronic meeting.Please click here for more information. **Subject to meeting format and submission of Screening Registration Form Heritage Advisory Committee - Sept 14, 2020 Aurora Train Station Building Rebecca Beaton, Resident The preservation of the Aurora Train Station Building ✔ ✔ ✔ Page 8 of 142 Page 9 of 142 Page 10 of 142 Page 11 of 142 Page 12 of 142 Page 13 of 142 Page 14 of 142 Page 15 of 142 Page 16 of 142 Page 17 of 142 Page 18 of 142 Page 19 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee No. HAC20-009 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Heritage Designation for 28 Wellington Street West “Alfred Love House” Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. HAC20-009 be received; and 2. That the comments regarding the heritage designation for 28 Wellington Street West be received and referred to staff for consideration. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide the Heritage Advisory Committee with the necessary information for providing comments on the designation of 28 Wellington Street West as a Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act. The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the owner’s Heritage Consultant concludes that the property meets the prescribed criteria in O. Reg. 09/06 for heritage designation. The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group is of the opinion that the property is a ‘Group 1’ property, suggesting that it is of major significance and worthy of heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Background Property Description 28 Wellington Street West is located at the north east corner of Machell Avenue and Wellington Street West, approximately 130 m (426.5 ft) west of Yonge Street (see Page 20 of 142 September 14, 2020 2 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 Attachment 1). The property is listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. There is a two-storey residence on the property known as “The Alfred Love House” constructed circa 1883. Vehicular access off of Wellington Street is provided via a shared driveway with the property immediately to the east. History of the Property In 1797, the Crown granted 210 acres of land on Concession 1, Lot 81 in King Township (the lands located west of Yonge Street) to Thomas Philips. The lands were later sold to a local mill owner and farmer named Jacob Hollingshead. In 1853, the R.P. Irwin purchased the lands from the Hollingshead family and began to subdivide the lands into smaller lots, which created the subject property. In 1881, the property was purchased by Alfred Love who was a teacher in the local community. Biographical records and source material suggests that Love built the house that currently exists on the property in 1883. The house was constructed in the Second Empire Style which grew in popularity in Canada starting in the 1870s. Love later left the teaching profession and began work as a book-keeper for the Fleury Foundry located across the street from his new home on Wellington Street. Love continued to work for the foundry for a decade before again changing careers and becoming a real estate agent and an insurance agent around 1890. Love later became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was also appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896, in addition to duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. In his final years, he served as secretary of the public school board until 1941. Loved died in 1943 at the age of 94. Upon the death of Love’s eldest daughter in 1951, the property was sold out of the family. A plaque was added to the front of the house around 1984 which named it “Alfred Love House”. The property was then owned by Margaret Proctor for a decade before selling it to Hazel Kennedy in 1961. Kennedy sold the property to Edward and Dorothy Kavanagh in 1978, who then sold it two years later to Adrienne Cameron in 1980. At some point during this time, the house was converted to a duplex between the first and second floor. In 1999, the property was purchased by the current owner, Lois Creelman, who has maintained the property as a duplex rented out to tenants. Page 21 of 142 September 14, 2020 3 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 Architectural Features and Setting The Alfred Love House is one of the very few dwellings in Aurora of the Second Empire architectural style characterized by a square massing and a mansard roof with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing. The main house is supported by a fieldstone foundation with a central masonry wall. The exterior wall is clad with a yellow/buff brick on the south and west elevation, and a painted shiplap wood siding on the north and east elevation. The front façade features a central gable roof above a semi-circular brick door opening with decorative wood trim and semi-circular transom with wood shutter. The east elevation contains a brick chimney which was at some point cut down in height and repaired with new brick and metal cap. With the exception of the basement windows, the original masonry openings with both flat and arched brick lintels on the ground floor remain intact. There are several dormer windows complete with decorative wood window surrounds. The house is surrounded by generous lawns and is elevated from the public road with views overlooking Wellington Street. There are currently dense trees along the west property line that obscure the visibility of the house from Michel Avenue. The property is built with a stone retaining wall fronting Wellington Street and Machell Avenue. A concrete stair with metal handrail is located at the front to provide access to the property from the sidewalk. Ontario Heritage Act 28 Wellington Street West is currently a non-designated property listed on the Town’s Heritage Register. The Ontario Heritage Act enables municipalities to pass a by-law to individually designate a property of cultural heritage value or interest. Individual properties being considered for heritage designation must meet one or more of the prescribed criteria from the O. Reg. 9/06, with respect to design or physical value; historical or associative value; and contextual value. Provincial Policy Statement (2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest. The PPS identifies that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. Built heritage resource is defined in the PPS as a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community; and they are generally located on a property that has been designated Page 22 of 142 September 14, 2020 4 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 under Part IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, provincial and/or federal registers. York Region and Town of Aurora Official Plans The York Region Official Plan encourages local municipalities to compile and maintain a register of significant cultural heritage resources, in consultation with heritage experts and local heritage committees. It requires local municipalities to conserve significant cultural heritage resources and ensure that development and site alteration of adjacent lands to protected heritage properties will conserve the attributes of the protected heritage property. The Town’s Official Plan states that all significant heritage resources shall be designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act to ensure effective protection and their continuing maintenance, conservation and restoration. Analysis The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) prepared by the owner’s Heritage Consultant concludes that the property meets the prescribed criteria from O. Reg. 09/06 for heritage designation. The owner retained Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) to prepare a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) to assess the heritage value of the subject property (see Attachment 2). The report concludes that the subject property meets the criteria for heritage designation under Ontario Regulation 09/06 based on the design and contextual association for its exterior elements and setting. Below is a summary of the comments in the CHER: Design or Physical Value The house is one of five remaining examples of the Second Empire Style of architectural design in the Town of Aurora. It is arguably one of the finest due to its location along a prominent street and its large lawn that surrounds the house (both key characteristics of the Second Empire Style). Historical or Associated Value The building has historical association with Alfred Love, a well known public servant who made considerable contribution to the local community. Love served Page 23 of 142 September 14, 2020 5 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 on Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for a local high school. He was also appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and work for the Town in this capacity well into the 20th Century. He also performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes and Secretary of the Public School Board. Contextual Value The property supports the historical character of this neighborhood within the “Old Town” of th Aurora Promenade. The house was constructed in 1883 and is one of the remaining houses in the residential neighborhoods that surround the main street. At one time, the house could conceivably have been a landmark due to its proximity to the commercial main street as well as its setting high above Wellington Street, the major east-west thoroughfare in Aurora. The CHER recommends the following attributes be listed in the Designation By-law should the property become designated: Overall massing with main house and rear wing; Fieldstone foundations of the main house; Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar; Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings; Brick chimney (modified); Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing; Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides; Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards); Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi- circular wood shutter (hardware if extant); The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street; Page 24 of 142 September 14, 2020 6 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. The Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group is of the opinion that the property is a ‘Group 1’ property, suggesting that it is of major significance and worthy of heritage designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act On August 12th, 2020, the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Evaluation Working Group met with Planning Staff to perform an evaluation of the subject property (see Attachment 4). The property scored 84.6/100. The score places the property in Group 1, which suggests that the property is of major significance and should be subject to the following protection measures according to the Town’s criteria: The designation of the building pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act; Every attempt must be made to preserve the building on its original site; Any development affecting such a building must incorporate the identified building; Legal Considerations If Council decides to proceed with designation, a notice of intention to designate will be served on the property owner, Ontario Heritage Trust, and published in the local newspaper. Once the Town issues a Notice of Intention to Designate, the property is protected under the Ontario Heritage Act as designated. Any person may object to the notice of intention to designate within 30 days of its publication. If there are no objections within the 30-day period, the designation by-law for the subject property will be brought forward to Council for approval. If there are objections, they will be referred to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal for a hearing. Financial Implications N/A Communications Considerations The Town of Aurora will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this matter. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in Page 25 of 142 September 14, 2020 7 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website, and the approval of the recommendations will authorize the Town Clerk to publish and serve Council’s Notice of Intention to Designate in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, including notice in the local newspaper Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation N/A Conclusions Staff support the recommendations in the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report prepared by the owner’s consultant and the results of the evaluation undertaken by the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group. Staff are recommending that 28 Wellington Street West be designated under Section 29 (Part IV) of the Ontario Heritage Act. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 - Cultural Heritage Evaluation Recommendation Report Attachment 4 – Evaluation Working Group Score Previous Reports None Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on September 3, 2020 Page 26 of 142 September 14, 2020 8 of 8 Report No. HAC20-009 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Page 27 of 142 LOCATION MAP ADDRESS: 28 Wellington Street W ATTACHMENT 1 SUBJECT LANDS Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Building Services Department, August 29 2019. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora. Air Photos taken Spring 2018, © First Base SoluƟons Inc., 2018 Orthophotography. 0 10 20 30 40 4 Metres Subject Property Page 28 of 142 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORT for 28 Wellington Street West Town of Aurora, Ontario SBA Project No.: 20048 Date: August 7th 2020 Front Elevation as of 2020 Credit: SBA $WWDFKPHQWPage 29 of 142 Owner Mrs. Lois Creelman 37 Spruce Street Aurora, ON L4G 1R7 Phone: 905-506-4256 (c/o Ian Creelman, email: ian.creelman@mac.com) Heritage Consultant Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) 301-40 St. Clair Avenue East Toronto, ON M4T 1M9 Phone: 416-961-5690 Authors:Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEEP AP email: kellyg@sba.on.ca Julia Rady PhD email: juliar@sba.on.ca Page 30 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT..............................................2 2.1 Location .............................................................................................................2 2.2 Legal Description and Survey ...................................................................................3 2.3 Area Character and Physiography............................................................................4 2.4 Context - General Character.....................................................................................7 2.5 Context - Municipal Heritage Status .........................................................................8 2.5.1 Official Plan and Secondary Plan ...................................................................8 2.5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties ....................................................12 3.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY................................................................................................13 3.1 Development of the Area.........................................................................................13 3.2 Chronology of Ownership........................................................................................17 3.3 History of the Subject Property ...............................................................................18 4.0 BUILT and SITE RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS.............................................................24 4.1 Built Resource.........................................................................................................26 4.1.1 Exterior ..........................................................................................................27 4.1.2 Interior............................................................................................................35 4.2 Setting ...................................................................................................................39 5.0 HERITAGE EVALUATION OF THE RESOURCES........................................................41 5.1 Preamble ...........................................................................................................41 5.2 Application of Provincial Criteria: Regulation 9/06 Criteria.....................................41 5.2.1 Design Value or Physical Value....................................................................42 5.2.2 Historical Value or Associative Value ...........................................................42 5.2.3 Contextual Value...........................................................................................42 5.3 Overall Evaluation Summary...................................................................................43 5.4 Heritage Integrity.....................................................................................................44 5.5 Statement of Significance........................................................................................45 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................47 6.1 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................476.2 Recommendations...................................................................................................47 7.0 REFERENCES AND QUALIFICATIONS OF AUTHORS...............................................48 7.1 References ...........................................................................................................48 7.2 Qualifications of Authors .........................................................................................50 APPENDICES................................................................................................................................... Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Authors...................................................................................A Page 31 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In July 2020 Ian Creelman, on behalf of the Owner of the property at 28 Wellington Street West, commissioned Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) to prepare a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property as part of an Owner initiated request to the Town of Aurora (“Town”) to have the property de-listed from the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest. The property at 28 Wellington Street West was added to the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest as a listed property in accordance with Section 27 (1.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act in 1984. Through the course of investigation and research it became clear that de-listing the property would not be defensible and SBA would not be in a position to recommend having the property de-listed and removed from the Register. With agreement from the Owner, the Owner’s representative, and the Town’s Heritage Planner the scope of work shifted from the format of a Heritage Impact Assessment to a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) with the recommendation that the property be designated by the Town under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEED AP and Julia Rady PhD of SBA conducted a visual and photographic review of the property on July 27 th 2020. The Town’s Heritage Planner, Carlson Tsang, was contacted as well as Jackie Stewart and Shawna Lewis of the Aurora Museum and Archives for information pertaining to the history and context of the site. The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) was prepared in consultation with the following materials: x Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act - Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; x Provincial Policy Statements (PPS) dated 2020; x Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada; x Town of Aurora Official Plan, dated 2015 (revision); andxYork Region Official Plan, dated 2019. All photographs and figures are credited to SBA unless otherwise noted. North orientation is to the top of any site plans/mapping unless otherwise cited. Page 32 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT 2.1 Location Figure 1: Site Context and Location Map (highlighted in red) Credit: Google Maps (2020) with SBA nnotations 28 Wellington St. W. is located in the Town of Aurora (formerly the Township of King) in the Regional Municipality of York on Lot 2 of Plan 36 to the west of Yonge Street and north of Wellington Street. The subject property is a corner lot fronting on Wellington Street West to the south and Machell Avenue on the west. There is a low-rise apartment building immediately to the east and a residence and barn on the property to the north. The subject property is obscured from view along Machell Avenue as a result of dense trees and shrubs. To both the immediate west and across Wellington Street are a series of low scale commercial buildings. Page 33 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 3 Given the elevation of the site, high above the adjacent streets, the prominent 2-storey residence (with a rear one-storey wing) has a large front lawn encircled by a stone retaining wall that follows the property lines along Wellington Street West and Machell Avenue. A concrete stair with a metal handrail provides access from the grassed area to the street; however, although there are indications of a former walkway, no path from the stair to the house currently exists. There is no garage, and parking for the property is accessible via a shared right-of-way driveway with the apartment building to the east. 2.2 Legal Description and Survey The house at 28 Wellington Street West is located at the corner of Wellington Street West and Machell Avenue in the Town of Aurora. The property is located on Lot 2 of Plan 36. Figure 2: Site Survey Credit: Property Owner Page 34 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 4 2.3 Area Character and Physiography The Town of Aurora is located 30km north of Toronto, north of the Town of Richmond Hill, and south of the City of Newmarket.1 King City is located to the west and the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville to the east. Yonge Street and its development north from Toronto to Cook’s Bay in Lake Simcoe during the 19th century had a formative influence on the geography of the area. Aurora was one of many towns established during the northern extension of Yonge Street. Aurora is situated just north of the Oak Ridges Moraine with some of the southernmost parts of the Town situated on the moraine. The Town is part of the Holland River watershed that formed after the recession of glaciers 12,000 years ago. The watershed contributed to rich soil, which made the area attractive to settlers wishing to farm in the 19th century. Figure 3: Area Physiography of Aurora and Surrounding Communities Credit: Google Maps, 2019 1 https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora Page 35 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 5 The subject property is located substantially above the Wellington Street grade and is relatively level at the house. The front lawn slopes towards Wellington Street, and is completely raised along Machell Avenue with the property supported by a retaining wall along the property lines along Machell Avenue and Wellington Street. There is a small green space at the rear of the property. There are no permanent creeks or watercourses on the property. The area surrounding the subject property was predominantly rural throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries with residential settlements punctuated by the occasional industrial site such as the Fleury Foundry. As indicated within the following aerial photographs 2 (the property is outlined in red), the area remained largely rural in context at the midpoint of the 20th century but over the following decades became more a mixed-use commercial and residential neighbourhood. 2 The base map is from York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data https://ww6.yorkmaps.ca/YorkMaps/nindex.html Figure 4: Aerial Photograph, 1954 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Page 36 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 6 Figure 5: Aerial Photograph, 1978 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Figure 6: Aerial Photo, 2002 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotations Page 37 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 7 2.4 Context - General Character The residence is located within a mixed-use commercial and residential neighbourhood. The entire surrounding area is predominantly urban. The subject property is located one block west of Yonge Street and the commercial main street that extends south from the intersection at Yonge and Wellington Streets. During the 19th century this main street provided the primary transportation route north and south. Wellington Street, upon which the property is situated, provided the primary east-west transportation corridor for the Town. Presently, Wellington Street is a four lane arterial road. Machell Avenue is located immediately to the west of the property with its southern terminus at Wellington Street West. This avenue is a two lane road that runs north-south with houses and some low-rise residential buildings along it. A low-rise apartment building is located on the property to the east. A commercial wholesale building is situated on the south side of Wellington Street immediately across from the subject property. The property is located one block east from the York Regional District School Board head office. There is commercial development to the south and residential neighbhourhoods to its north. At one time the Fleury Foundry (now Beacon Basketweave Ltd.) was located on the south of Wellington Street immediately across from the subject property. The Foundry was one of the foundational industries within the Town in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Figure 7: Aerial Photo, 2019 Credit: York Region Interactive Maps and Spatial Data with SBA annotation Page 38 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 8 2.5 Context - Municipal Heritage Status 2.5.1 Official Plan and Secondary Plan In the Town of Aurora’s Official Plan (Rev. 2015), the Town identifies policies to protect and preserve its history in order to “enhance the diversity, beauty and richness of the natural and built environments.”3 The relevant sections as they pertain to the subject property are 13.1 and 13.3. Section 13.1 - Objectives and the relevant subsections are as follows:4 13.1 a) Conserve and enhance recognized cultural heritage resources of the Town for the enjoyment of existing and future generations; b) Preserve, restore and rehabilitate structures, buildings or sites deemed to have significant historic, archaeological, architectural or cultural significance and, preserve cultural heritage landscapes; including significant public views; and, c) Promote public aware of Aurora’s cultural heritage and involve the public in heritage resource decisions affecting the municipality. The relevant subsections from Section 13.3 - Policies for Built Cultural Heritage Resources are as follows:5 a) The Town will maintain a Register of Cultural Heritage Resources that are considered significant and have been identified by one or more of the following means: i. designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; ii. protected by an easement entered into under the Ontario Heritage Act; iii. designated by the National Historic Sites and Monuments Board as a National Historic Site; iv. identified by the Province of Ontario; and, v. endorsed by the Council as having significant cultural heritage value, including built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes, areas with cultural heritage character and heritage cemeteries. b) The Register shall contain documentation, including legal description, owner information, statement of cultural heritage value and description of the heritage attributes for designated properties. A sufficient description of listed heritage resources will also be included. To ensure effective protection and to maintain its currency, the Register shall be updated regularly and be accessible to the public. c) All significant heritage resources shall be designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act to help ensure effective protection and their continuing maintenance, conservation and restoration. d) Evaluation Criteria for assessing the cultural heritage value of the cultural heritage resources have been developed by the Town in consultation with its Municipal 3 Town of Aurora, Official Plan (2015 Revision)155.4 Ibid 155.5 Ibid,158-160. Page 39 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 9 Heritage Committee. The identification and evaluation of cultural heritage resources must be based on the following core values: i. aesthetic, design or physical value; ii. historical or associative value; and/or iii. contextual value. i) Heritage resources will be protected and conserved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, the Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built Environment and other recognized heritage protocols and standards. Protection, maintenance and stabilization of existing cultural heritage attributes and features over removal or replacement will be adopted as the core principles for all conservation projects. Once a property is listed on the local inventory an owner or party must make an application for the consideration of the removal of the property. This application will be submitted to the City for review by the Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee that will make recommendations with respect to the property and application that must be met with the Town Council’s approval.6 In addition to the heritage policies outlined in Section 13.0, the Town of Aurora Official Plan (Rev. 2015) indicates that the subject property is located within a secondary plan area identified as the “Aurora Promenade.”7 It is an area defined as one that “represents both the foundation of Aurora’s rich and proud history, as well as the definition of its potential future.”8 One of the primary objectives for the Aurora Promenade pertains to its Distinct Heritage and Culture: This Plan builds on the distinct heritage and culture of the Aurora Promenade. It defines the heritage resources and provides guidance on methods to conserve, protect and reinforce the neighbourhoods, streetscapes and significant buildings.” 9 6 https://www.aurora.ca/en/business-and-development/resources/development-planning/Heritage-Planning/Request- to-Remove-a-Listed-Property-from-the-Register-Application-Form.pdf7Town of Aurora Official Plan, Section 11: Aurora Promenade, (Revised 2015), 87. As noted in Section 2.4 of this evaluation, the inclusion of Section 11 in the Official Plan occurred in 2010 with the formulation of the OP documents and based upon the Aurora Promenade Concept Plan developed between 2009 and 2010. The Secondary Plan, too, is based in this planning data.8 Official Plan (2015 rev.), 879Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan (September 2010), 1. Page 40 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 10 The property is located in the area identified as “Old Town” within the Aurora Promenade Concept Plan.10 Figure 8: Character Area Map Credit: The Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, with SBA annotation(subject property highlighted in red) Page 41 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 11 The General Character Area of “Old Town” descriptions that apply to the property are as follows: x The “Old Town” is centered on the Yonge and Wellington Street intersection. It includes the Historic Downtown, the Wellington Street Village, the Cultural Precinct and the residential neighbourhoods. x The adjacent neighbourhoods were the earliest residential areas built in Aurora. They have a diverse mix of predominantly historic houses on tree lined streets. The “Old Town” is a large character area that contains within it three other character areas: the Cultural Precinct, the Wellington Street Village, and the Historic Downtown.11 The subject property is not located within any of these identified supplementary character areas within the “Old Town.” 11 Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan,(September 2010),16. Page 42 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 12 2.5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties The subject property is not identified as a designated heritage property or as part of the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District (HCD) on Schedule D of the Aurora Official Plan. This HCD is located east and north of the property (identified on the map below). The property is, however, within a “heritage resource” area as identified above in Section 2.5.1. The subject property is located adjacent to or nearby other heritage properties as identified on the location map and chart below. The adjacent/nearby heritage properties identified below are all Listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Heritage Value or Interest. The property is located one block north and west from the historic downtown main street of Aurora that proceeds south from the intersection of Yonge and Wellington Streets. Figure 9: Context Map showing Adjacent / Nearby Heritage Properties Credit: Google Map Base, 2020 with SBA annotations No. Address Listed/Designated Notes 1 28 Wellington Street W. Listed Subject Property 2 11 Machell Ave Listed Home 3 12 Machell Ave Listed Home 4 16 Machell Ave Listed Home 5 35 Wellington Street W. Listed The Fleury Foundry Northeast Old Aurora HCD Designated under Part V of Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) Page 43 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 13 3.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY 3.1 Development of the Area Prior to any settlement, the area that has since become known as Aurora was the traditional lands inhabited by the Mississauga, Iroquois, Huron, and Algonquin First Nations. These indigenous groups established trading networks amongst themselves and later with European voyageurs (fur traders) and settlers. After Britain established their colonial power in British North America in the 18th century the first Lieutenant-Governor, John Graves Simcoe (Simcoe), sought to capitalize upon the established portage route known as the Carrying Place trail for access to the northern Great Lakes.12 In 1795, Simcoe began a project to extend Yonge Street north from Toronto to Georgian Bay, in part as an effort to fortify British holdings and a military route to the Great Lakes from the threat of American attack, 13 and in part to encourage settlement and agricultural industry in the colony. Simcoe imposed his own plans for the road on the ancient route.14 As the new road developed as an extension of Yonge Street from Toronto, so, too, did small towns, villages, and corners. Newcomers and settlers from Europe were attracted to the promise of ample and inexpensive land and sought out opportunities in the new world. Surveyors began mapping the land to the east and west of the northern extension of Yonge Street from Toronto in the 1790s. In 1797, the Crown began to offer deeds of land to settlers, and by 1801 fourteen homes had been built at the crossroads of Yonge Street and Wellington Street, which became the foundational corners for the town of Aurora. Richard Machell was one of the earliest settlers in the area. He purchased the properties at the northeast, southeast, and southwest corners of Yonge and Wellington Streets in 1833. He established a mercantile business at the southeast corner that same year, and the area became more commonly known as “Machell’s Corners.”15 Tannery Creek, which forms a part of a smaller watershed of the East Holland River,16 cuts across the west side of the Town provided the area with the ability to establish a local mill that helped to bolster the Town’s early agro- industrial economy. This creek provided hydropower for the early industries in the Town, including the Fleury Foundry located along Wellington Street and established in the 1850s.17 Aurora underwent expansion and change during the mid-19th century in part due to the growth of the Town’s industries like the Fleury Foundry. The thriving wheat economy of the province and the expansion of transportation systems, especially railways, accelerated the pace of change due to the ability to transport goods not only across the province but to other markets along the St. Lawrence and further south.18 The Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) extended through Aurora beginning in 1853.19 Contemporaneous to the railway expansion, the area south of Yonge and Wellington Streets began to flourish and grow into a commercial and retail centre for the growing Town and surrounding area. 12 Glenn Turner, The Toronto Carrying Place: Rediscovering Toronto’s Most Ancient Trail (Toronto: Dundurn, 2015).13 Philip Carter, Paul Oberst, and the Town of Aurora, “Appendix C – A Short History of Old Northeast Aurora” in Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan (2006), 191.14 Ibid15https//thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora16https://www.lsrca.on.ca/Shared%20Documents/newsletter/science-newsletter-vol4.pdf17https://www.auroramuseum.ca/assets/ifthese.pdf18Randall White, Ontario 1610-1985, A political and economic history,(Toronto: Dundurn, 1985) 108-110.19 http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-h Page 44 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 14 “Aurora” was officially incorporated as a village in 1863. It was later incorporated as a town in 1888. Between 1850 and 1890, more settlers arrived to the area so that the population increased from around 700 in 1863 to about 2100 in 1888.20 The GTR helped with the Town’s prosperity. Aurora as the “head of the rail” became a significant shipping centre.21 With a growing community and the access to other communities that the train provided, other social, cultural, and institutional sectors emerged. The town boasted four churches, a post office, a school, a Temperance Hall, and a Masonic Hall, as well as a Town Hall and central market.22 20 https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora21http://www.cnr-in-ontario.com/Reports/index.html?http://www.cnr-in-ontario.com/Reports/RSR-013.html22Carter et al “Appendix C,” 198-199. Figure 10: The Lady Elgin on its first trip from Toronto to Machell’s Corners, 1853 Credit: Toronto Public Library Page 45 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 15 During the early twentieth century, Canadians became more engaged in an assortment of leisure activities. Recreational spaces like parks, rural spaces, or if you were able to afford the trip, the wilderness of northern Ontario, allowed citizens time to reflect and enjoy the outdoors.23 Within schools, churches, and broader reform movements, a trend began (and which continued throughout much of the 20th century) that equated leisure and activity for everyone with better citizenship and a sense of well-being and as an “antidote” for the hardships of labour and industrial life.24 Hotels sprang up in smaller communities to accommodate travelers, and the expansion of the railway and highways provided greater access to places outside of a person’s own town.25 In addition to the Grand Trunk, a radial line from Toronto extended to Aurora. By 1904, the Schomberg and Aurora Radial Railway was incorporated as a part of the Toronto and York Radial Rail Company. It expanded its complement of streetcars and extended the rail north along Yonge Street to Lake Simcoe.26 The rail allowed teenagers from surrounding communities to attend the high school in Aurora, and it meant families in Aurora could take day trips to other towns or Toronto easily (and vice versa).27 The Radial Railway ran through Aurora from around 1899 and lasted until 1930. The line was not profitable in large part due to the growing popularity of automobiles; by the late 1920s when more people owned and operated cars as opposed to using the rail, the radial line was retired. 28 Regardless of whether travel was done by train or car, Aurora provided an easy day trip for 23 Donald Kerr, editor, Historical Atlas of Canada – Volume III: Addressing the Twentieth Century 1891- 1961 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990) 68-69.24 Kerr, ed., Historical Atlas of Canada – Addressing the Twentieth Century,70.25 Ibid, 70.26 http://edrh.rhpl.richmondhill.on.ca/default.asp?ID=s10.127Ibid28https://onthisspot.ca/cities/aurora/heritage_aurora Figure 11: Fleury Foundry c. 1900s Credit: Aurora Museum and Archives Page 46 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 16 people living in the city who wanted to leave for the fresh air and quiet provided by the countryside and small town setting. 29 Over the course of the mid to late 20th century, Aurora continued to grow in industry and residential neighbourhoods due to improved and expanded transit infrastructure, especially related to automobiles and highways. Aurora, too, became a destination for tourists seeking a calm refuge from city-life. This industry was not isolated to Aurora, but instead coincided with a national effort to attract tourists, especially those from the United States to Canada and a broader publicity campaign to showcase the charm and beauty of the country.30 The suburban growth experienced across the province after the close of the Second World War in 1945 also transformed Aurora into a bedroom community for Toronto in large part due to its proximity to the metropole but with the added enticement of living outside of the busy city. Local development, such as that of Frank Stronach and his Magna Corporation, in the area also helped to provide new manufacturing and industrial opportunities to bolster the economy of Aurora and the surrounding area. The increased development in Aurora increased the pressure for development intensification. 29 http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/explore/online/tourism/transportation_cottage.aspx30Alisa Apostle, “Canada, Vacations Unlimited: The Canadian Government Tourism Industry, 1934-1959," Ph.D. dissertation. Queen’s University, 2003 Figure 12: Grand Trunk Railway Station, Aurora c. 1909 Credit: Toronto Public Library Page 47 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 17 3.2 Chronology of Ownership Instrument Type Year Grantor Grantee Price ($) Notes/ Comments Patent 1797 Crown Thomas Phillips -- 210 acres Deed Poll 1803 John Jones, Attorney for Thomas Phillips Thomas Hind -- As above Barter & Sale (B & S) 1803 Thomas Hind Jacob Hollingshead -- As above B&S 1853 Eli Hollingshead et al Robert P. Irwin $4200 140 Acres; Eli was Jacob’s son B&S 1876 Robert P. Irwin Richard Wells $1000 11-1/7 acres B&S 1881 Richard Wells Alfred Love $300 lots 1 & 2, Plan 36 Mortgage 1883 Alfred Love Samuel Jewett $800 lots 1 &2 The house was constructed c. 1883 on the property at its current site Discharge of Mortgage 1887 Samuel E. Jewett Alfred Love B&S 1918 Alfred Love William J. Mount $1,500 all lot 2, subject to right of way Grant 1930 Alfred Love Lois E. Love & Alfred Love, joint tenants L&A & 1.00 lots 1 &2 Grant 1951 executors of Lois Love Margaret L. Gillespie Value of Consideration (v.c) + 1.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1961 Margaret Louise Proctor [formerly Gillespie] Hazel Ilena Kennedy v.c. + 1.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1978 Hazel I. Kennedy Edward Kavanagh & Dorothy L. Kavanagh, joint tenants v.c. + 2.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Grant 1980 Edward Kavanagh & Dorothy L. Kavanagh Adrienne J. Cameron v.c. + 2.00 lot 2 & right of way on 1 & 2 Transfer 1999 Adrienne J. Cameron Lois Creelman $227,500 Present Owner Figure 13: Chronology of Ownership Credit: Land Registry Office and Aurora Museum and Archives Page 48 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 18 3.3 History of the Subject Property 31 In 1797 the Crown granted 210 acres of land on Concession 1, Lot 81 in King Township (the lands located west of Yonge Street) to Thomas Phillips. According to the Domesday Book for the County Phillips was one of the original patentees in the area who purchased land that closely abutted Yonge Street to form the early neighbourhoods in the area.32 There is little other historical information about Phillips. Land records show that Phillips’ attorney, John Jones, sold the entirety of the land in 1803 to Thomas Hind, who already owned land in the north west of King County. Early records for Upper Canada note that Hind owned a tavern on Lot 63 further west in the county,33 but there is no evidence that he established any tavern on Lot 81 which is also supported by the rapid turnover of the property from Hind to Jacob Hollingshead later that same year. Jacob Hollingshead was a local mill owner and farmer. 34 Hollingshead married Fanny Dunham who was a member of the Willson family who resided near Sharon, Ontario. The Dunhams and Willsons were members of the Society of Friends, which was heavily located in and around Sharon.35 It is very unlikely that Fanny would have married outside the faith, and so Jacob, too, was likely a member. The land passed to Jacob’s son, Eli. Eli sold 140 acres to R.P Irwin in 1853. Much earlier in the century, Irwin had emigrated from Pennsylvania to Canada in 1818 likely as a Late Empire Loyalist. Irwin worked as a millwright in the Aurora area and established a business in the trade.36 31 As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, access to assessment or tax rolls, fire insurance plans, local archival data, and archival pictures was limited32History of Toronto and County of York, Part III: King Township33http://edrh.rhpl.richmondhill.on.ca/default.asp?ID=saa34http://www.newspapers-online.com/auroran/?wpfb_dl=102735https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/12097563/the-willson-family-sharon-temple36York County “Biographical Notices, “404 Figure 14: Tremaine Map, 1860 Page 49 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 19 It was Irwin who began to subdivide the land into smaller lots. In 1876 Irwin sold about 11 acres of the property to Richard Wells. Wells was born in Aurora and worked on his father’s farm until 1862 when he set off west to work in the gold mines along the west coast of Canada and into the United States. Wells was successful and upon his return to Aurora in 1867 he established an agricultural and stock-raising business. 37 He also acquired more property in the Town, including the purchase of the Queen’s Hotel in 1881.38 Wells’ own dwelling was located east of Yonge Street but his land speculation in the 1870s and 1880s coincided with a period of time in the Town when more residential neighbourhoods were settled as the Town grew in size thanks to radial railway that extended north from Toronto. Figure 15: Survey of the Town of Aurora, 1878 Alfred Love purchased lot 2 and the neighboring lot 1 from Richard Wells in 1881.39 Alfred Love had been born in King County in 1847 to one of the early settler families in the area just to the east of what became Aurora.40 Love was educated and attended the high school in Newmarket. He became a teacher. 37 http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/CountyAtlas/showrecord.php?PersonID=5599238York county 443-44439All information about ownership of the property comes from the abstract index for Plan 36 at the provincial Land Registry Office, Aurora. See the notes attached to this report.40 York County “Biographical Notices, “237 Page 50 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 20 In 1876 Love married Mary Rank and he continued to teach until 1880 when the two moved closer to Aurora. Coinciding with the Loves move to Aurora and contemporary to the purchase of the property, Love left the teaching profession and began work as a book-keeper for the Fleury Foundry located across the street from his new home on Wellington Street. The Loves had four children, two daughters followed by two sons, one of whom died in childhood.41 In 1881 Love purchased the land on Lots 1 and 2 for $300. The survey of Aurora (above) dated 1878 shows no house on the property, which correlates to biographical records and source material that trace the construction to 1883 when Love had built a “fine brick house.”42 No archival data could be found that traced the architect or builder of the house. The house was constructed in the Second Empire Style. This style grew in popularity in Canada beginning in the 1870s. It had originated in Paris in the 1850s and gained popularity across Europe and into North America.43 The style is notable for its incorporation of the mansard roof that allowed for a greater ceiling height within the building or house.44 The Second Empire Style was meant to evince a kind of cosmopolitism or status within a community.45 In towns, this status was reinforced by the location of such houses along prominent streets and a large lawn or garden that surrounded the house.46 In Aurora there are a few examples of the Second Empire Style in residential buildings in the Town; however, it was not the predominant building style.47 Love’s choice of design was an interesting and unique one. The Keeper’s House at the Aurora Cemetery was constructed in 1879 in the same style by a local carpenter, as well as residential houses at 16 Maple Street, 37 Spruce Street, and 116 Wellington Street East were all built in the same style.48 41 York County “Biographical Notices”, 23842Commemorative Biographical Record of the County of York (Toronto: J. H. Beers & Co., 1907): entry for Alfred Love, page 238.43 https://www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/29_second_empire.aspx44Ibid45Ibid46http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/Second.htm 47 Jackie Stewart, the former curator of the Aurora Museum and Archives, mentions in her notes for the property that at one time there were seven examples of the Second Empire Style in Aurora, but as of c. 21st century only five examples remain, It is not known where these two examples were located in the Town or when they were demolished.48 Aurora Museum and Archives curator notes. Both 16 Maple Street and 37 Spruce Street are part of the Old Northeast Aurora HCD and therefore designated under Part V of the OHA; 116 Wellington Street E. is listed on the Town’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and, the Keeper’s House was designated under Part IV of the OHA in 1987. Page 51 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 21 Figure 16: Map of Second Empire Style Houses in Aurora Credit: Google Base Map (2020) with SBA annotations Page 52 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 22 1 28 Wellington St. W Subject Property / Listed 2 16 Maple St. Listed 3 37 Spruce St Listed 4 116 Wellington St. E Listed 6 14253 Yonge St. Designated under Part IV of OHA Figure 17: Second-Empire Houses in Aurora Credit: Google, Canada’s Historic Places and Aurora Museum and Ahi Page 53 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 23 The house on the subject property likely stood out, in part due to its location along the main west-east thoroughfare in Aurora and, in part, because it was located across from one of the primary industries in the Town, the Fleury Foundry, while the Foundry was foundation of the local economy. Love continued to work for the foundry for a decade before again changing careers and becoming a real estate agent, at the time referred to as a conveyancer, and an insurance agent around 1890.49 Over his career, Love became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896, in addition to duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes.50 Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. Love’s wife, Mary, died in 1928. Shortly after her death, Alfred said up a joint tenancy for the property with his elder daughter and oldest child, Lois. Alfred Love was active in the community throughl his final years. He maintained his position as secretary of the public school board until 1941.51 Love died in 1943 and was 94 years old.52 With his death, the property passed to Lois. 53 Lois worked as an operator for the telephone company in Aurora.54 Lois lived on the property until 1949. Upon her death in 1951 the property was sold out of the family. It had been owned by the Love family for close to seventy years.55 A plaque was added to the front of the house some time in the later 20th century (likely c. 1984 during an early heritage inventory of historic houses in the Town by the local archives and museum) noting that the house was the “Alfred Love House.” The Loves had owned both Lot 2 upon which the subject property is located and the adjacent Lot 1. After Lois’ death, lot 1 was sold but the subsequent owner of Lot 2, Margaret Procter, purchased the right of way between the two lots.56 The house remained residential through successive ownerships by Margaret Proctor (nee Gillespie) who owned the property for a decade before selling it to Hazel Kennedy in 1961. Kennedy sold the property to Edward and Dorothy Kavanagh in 1978, who then sold it two years later to Adrienne Cameron in 1980. There are few records for these owners. At some point during this time the house was converted to a duplex with an upstairs and downstairs apartment. More recently, the house was purchased by Lois Creelman in 1999 who has maintained the property as a duplex rented out to tenants. 49 Aurora Museum and Archives curator notes.50 York County “Biographical Notices,” 239.51 Ibid52“Till 94, Alfred Love Dies,” in Newmarket Era and Express, 12 August 1943, 553Ibid54Pp 23855Aurora Archives and museum curator notes56Title records, Land Registry Office Page 54 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 24 4.0 BUILT and SITE RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS Figure 18: Front/South Elevation, 2020 Credit: Property Owner Figure 19: Front/South Elevation, Prior to Removal of Porch Credit: Google, 2016 Page 55 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 25 Unless noted otherwise the following photographs were taken in July 2020. Figure 20: Side/East Elevation Figure 21: Side/West Elevation Page 56 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 26 4.1 Built Resource Style Number 28 Wellington Street West is one of only a very few examples in Aurora of residential architecture in the Second Empire style. Typical features of the style that are found in this house include: x Mansard roof: slightly sloping upper section and lower steeply pitched section, providing useable second floor instead of an attic; x Dormer windows; x Decorative window surrounds; somewhat buttress-like shaped boards; and x Round-arched door opening to balcony (balcony/porch removed in +/- 2018), with round- arched windows in doors (both front door and upper door to former balcony/flat roof of porch)57 Massing The almost square massing (in plan) of the main house is fairly simple with the second floor of the yellow/buff brick house clad with a steeply pitched mansard roof complete with dormer windows with decorative wood surrounds. A simple wood fascia board forms the transition between the lower roof and a low sloped upper roof (not visible at the site visit). Until recently the front elevation would have been graced with a similarly detailed mansard roofed porch with a walk-out from the central second floor door. Currently the ground floor front door opens onto a contemporary wood deck with a small gabled roof above. The rear one storey wing is clad with painted shiplap (coved profile) wood siding on the north and east elevations and the yellow/brick masonry is carried thru on the west wall facing Machell Ave. The west elevation may have been purposely constructed with brick given what is assumed to have been a former prominent view on Machell Ave. prior to the growth of the foliage/trees along this side of the property. On the east elevation a one storey yellow/buff brick element links the main house and rear wing (may have been a former side entrance). The wood fascia element between the lower and upper sections of this roof is clearly evident from the rear bedroom on the 2nd floor. No access to a crawl space or basement beneath this area was evident from within the basement. 57 Aurora Museum and Archives, Curator Notes by Jacqueline Stewart; see also, http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/Second.htm Page 57 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 27 4.1.1 Exterior Foundations The main house is supported by a fieldstone foundation with a central masonry wall running north to south and has a full height accessible basement. The basement is divided into 2 sections with 2” x 7 ½” floor joists @ 16” o.c. spanning the west section supported by a 11” wide x 10” high timber beam bearing on a 9 ½” square timber post to the east side of the wood basement stair. A second column, with multiple drill marks, supports the stair stringer at the north east side. Both basement sections have masonry benches constructed along their perimeter walls though a more contemporary L-shaped bench is located along the north east corner of the west section and is infilled in soil. A former entrance to the basement is evident on the east side though its arched brick lintel is partially hidden on the exterior by changes in the adjacent grading. The rear one storey wing is supported on rubblestone with no basement nor crawl space. Figure 23: East Side of Basement Figure 22: North Side of Basement with Stair Page 58 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 28 Exterior Walls The exterior walls of the main house are a yellow/buff brick laid in a common running bond. The original fine detailing of the mortar joints is most evident on the front façade. The brick work extends along the west elevation of the rear wing where at the northwest corner it changes to painted horizontal wood siding. To the north of the kitchen door (access to ground floor unit) masonry repairs have been completed with a concrete brick. With the exception of the basement windows that generally have been infilled or used for new mechanical and electrical services, the original masonry openings with both flat and arched brick lintels on the ground floor remain intact. Where the original porch was removed the brick was cleaned and some masonry repairs were completed. The original semi-circular brick arch above the door and transom on the second floor central gable remains intact. Discrete areas of repointing are evident as well as it appears that the kitchen window on the west elevation may have been once a door and the area below the window was infilled with brick to suit. Figure 24: Second Floor Central Gable Page 59 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 29 Chimney The brick chimney was at some point cut down in height, repaired at the upper 3 courses with new brick and capped in metal. Though there was no visual evidence of a fireplace or wood burning stove on the ground floor a metal cap remains in place on the east wall within the older (wallpapered) closet adjacent to the chimney on the 2nd floor. Venting for the furnace extends from the base of the chimney. Figure 25: Chimney at East Elevation Page 60 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 30 Roofs, Fascia and Soffits The lower mansard roof of the main house was recently reroofed in black asphalt shingles with matching black aluminum flashings and appears to be in good condition. It was not confirmed on site whether the upper mansard roof was similarly redone. The wood trim, still in a brown tone and separating the two roofs, appears to not have been addressed within this scope of work will require future repairs and repainting.Aluminum soffits were installed at some point and several sections are missing along the front elevation were it is possible to see the wood soffits above. Both the lower and upper sections of the rear wing were similarly reroofed in asphalt shingles with matching black aluminum flashings and appear to be in good condition. The wood trim, still in a brown tone and separating the two roof areas, appears to not have been addressed within this scope of work and will require future repairs and repainting. Eavestroughs and Downspouts Both the aluminum eavestroughs and downspouts appear to be new and in good condition. Figure 26: Roof and Aluminum Eavestroughs Figure 27: Missing Soffit Section along Front Elevation Page 61 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 31 Windows Both the ground and second floor dormer windows have been replaced with aluminum windows that may have similar glazing patterns (1over1) and operability as what is assumed to have been original double hung wood windows. The original wood window frames and sills on the ground floor may still exist and were capped in metal when the replacement windows were installed. Though no photographic evidence was found the upper sashes of these windows may have been arched on the exterior to suit the arched brick lintels and have flat heads within the interior to match the extant wood trim. Based on the size and age of a window transom above the sliding door to the rear wing it is possible that this window sash was repurposed when the original windows were removed. If this is the case the original windows may have had a 6 over 6 configuration. The original window and door openings are extant on both the ground and second floors of the main house. In the basement several of the windows have been infilled or repurposed to suit the integration of new electrical and mechanical services. Along the east elevation it appears that a previous opening, possibly a door to the basement was at one point infilled and the grade adjusted to suit. As compared to the adjacent basement wood lintel, an arched brick lintel can be seen above this infilled opening. Though interior modifications were made on the second floor to accommodate a bathroom and kitchen the contemporary infill wall was constructed to the north of the existing dormer window thereby keeping this opening intact. The exterior decorative trim to either side of the second floor dormers is generally intact though in need of restoration and possible recreation given the current condition of the wood. Figure 28: Ground Floor Windows Figure 29: Second Floor Dormer Window Page 62 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 32 Doors There are three entrances to the main house, each with an exterior screen/storm door and an inner door. Both the screen and inner door at the front entrance are wood and appear to be original or older. The inner wood door has double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of ceramic knobs and decorative hinges are present. Both doors appear to have been recently painted and could use some wood repairs in the future. The second set of doors to the current living room on the ground floor are currently closed and locked in situ. Both the exterior wood screen door and inner wood door are older, and it is assumed in need of wood repairs at the same time as the front doors. The third set of doors is at the kitchen/entrance to the ground floor apartment. The storm door is a contemporary aluminum door (appears to be fairly new) with an older wood inner door with an upper glazed panel and 2 solid bottom panels. At the second floor front gable a fourth exterior door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half and corresponding solid panels below matches the ground floor entrance door directly below. This door has a shuttered half round transom above with frosted/back painted glazing. Originally this door, off of the original central hall plan, would have provided access to the balcony atop the porch. Given that the door is still operable a contemporary metal railing has been added for safety. Generally, the hardware on the wood doors is older hinges with rim/box locks. Access to the rear wing, used as storage space, is thru a sliding solid wood door on the east elevation. An older door is fixed in place along the north/rear elevation. Figure 30: Exterior of Door at 2 nd Floor Gable Figure 31: Interior of Door at 2 nd Floor Gable Page 63 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 33 Figure 32: Exterior Transom/Shutter above Second Floor Door Figure 33: Interior of 2nd Floor Door Figure 34: Interior Transom and Decorative Trim Figure 35: Main Floor Door Page 64 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 34 Porches and Decorative Woodwork With the removal of the original front porch a small gabled roof above the entrance and wood deck were added at the front entrance. The remaining decorative exterior woodwork, inclusive of the detailing on each side of the dormer windows, the front round arched shutter and the decorative wood fascias between the lower and upper mansard roofs will need to be restored/repaired and painted in the near future to avoid additional damage and possible loss of the woodwork. Replacement of the woodwork, based on matching the original elements in terms of design and quality of the replacement wood, may be a more viable option if the existing elements have deteriorated to a point that restoration is not feasible. The retention of the original fabric is always the preferred option. Condition Assessment The building envelope is generally sound with recently installed new roofs, eavestroughs and downspouts. The older replacement windows appear still to be performing adequately though the condition of the adjacent woodwork and sills beneath the metal capping may be deteriorated and should be addressed in conjunction with future window replacements. There is a small masonry crack along the north east corner however it appears relatively minor in nature and could be addressed as future masonry repairs are required. Page 65 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 35 4.1.2 Interior Figure 36: Ground and Second Floor Plans Page 66 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 36 Though the house was converted into a duplex in the later 20th century (the date could not be confirmed) several of the original interior features are still intact with the central stair and hall simply blocked off from the ground floor and currently providing access to the second floor apartment. These infilled openings could be simply opened. Likewise, the introduction of contemporary closets and infill walls to create additional bedrooms, bathrooms and a second kitchen could be fairly easily removed. The second floor living room has an original or older closet (wallpapered) with a stove cover for a former stove pipe running out thru the chimney. Indicative of the Second Empire style the mansard roof allows for a highly useable second floor with high ceilings and alcoves at each window. It is assumed that the current low wall at the top of the stairs was introduced during the duplex conversion when a low handrail would not have met the code requirements. Although some of the finishes have been replaced some original features remain: x Central stair inclusive of ground floor newel post, handrail, treads, risers and stringers; x Interior wood paneled doors and hardware (inclusive of decorative hinges, rim/box locks and ceramic knobs); x Selective wood baseboards and wood trim around the window and door openings; x Wood wainscoting in the kitchen; andxWall and floor metal registers. Figure 37: Painted Stair Newel Post and Handrail Figure 38: Main Floor Central Hall Page 67 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 37 Figure 39: Second Floor Opened up for Living Room Figure 40: Main Floor Living Room Figure 41: Main Floor Bedroom No. 2 Page 68 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 38 Condition Assessment The interior is in fair condition indicative of a rented tenanted property. Figure 42: Typical Interior Wood Door Figure 43: Rim/Box Lock and Ceramic Knob Figure 44: Wall Register Figure 45: Interior Wood Trim Page 69 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 39 4.2 Setting The house is located on a prominent height of land with views overlooking Wellington St. both to the east and west and is encircled with a stone retaining wall.A concrete stair with a metal handrail, in relatively poor condition, leads from the street to a grassed area above. Remains of a former walkway to the front entrance are evident within the landscape but no longer exist. A newer deck is located at the front door and entrance to the 2nd floor apartment. Vehicular access off of Wellington St. is from a shared driveway with the apartment building to the east. Dense foliage/trees along the west property line obscure the visibility of the house from Michel Avenue and the neighbouring residential properties. A low chain link fence and small trees/shrubs extends along the north side and carries around the east corner where it ends for access to parking, adjacent to the kitchen entrance. Though no photographs of the original house were found archival research supports the notion that the house was purposely constructed on a highly visible corner on an important street in Aurora and that location remains intact today. Condition Assessment The overall condition of the site is fair, indicative of a rental/tenanted property. Though no evidence was found that confirmed when the stone wall was constructed it is an integral component of the site, even if solely to address the grade change, and should be repaired. At the same time the existing concrete stair, metal handrail and graffiti on the adjacent stone will need to repaired. The re-introduction of what is believed to be a former landscaped path/link from the house to the street would also contribute to the overall setting and appearance of the house. Figure 47: Concrete Stair and HandrailFigure 46: Siting of House above Wellington St. Page 70 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 40 Figure 48: View looking north along Machell Ave.Figure 49: View looking north along Driveway Figure 50: Rear Yard looking north Figure 51: Side/Rear Yard looking east Figure 52: View from House looking southeast Figure 53: View from House looking southwest. Page 71 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 41 5.0 HERITAGE EVALUATION OF THE RESOURCES 5.1 Preamble 58 Criteria for determining the cultural heritage value or interest of a property are listed in Regulation 9/06 made under the Ontario Heritage Act. These criteria are to assist municipalities in evaluating properties for designation under Part IV Conservation of Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. A property may be designated under Section 29 of the Act if it meets one or more of the criteria for determining whether it is of cultural heritage value or interest. The criteria are insufficient of themselves to make a comprehensive determination. Factors such as condition and integrity of heritage attributes as well as a community’s interest or value placed must also be taken into account. 5.2 Application of Provincial Criteria: Regulation 9/06 Criteria 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method, Yes ii. Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, No or iii. Demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. No 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, Yes ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or No iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community No 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, Perhaps ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings No or iii. is a landmark Perhaps 58 Ontario Heritage ToolKit Page 72 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 42 5.2.1 Design Value or Physical Value i.is rare, unique, representative or early example of style, type, expression, material or construction method, The house is one of five remaining examples of the Second Empire Style of architectural design in the Town of Aurora. It is arguably one of the finest due to its location along a prominent street and its large lawn that surrounds the house (both key characteristics of the Second Empire Style). ii.displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, The house is a fine example of a small residence designed in the Second Empire Style with a mansard roof punctuated with dormers and elegant moldings surrounding the windows; however, the simple detailing is not indicative of a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. iii.demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific merit. No - not shown. 5.2.2 Historical Value or Associative Value i.direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, The property was owned by Alfred Love who built the house c.1883 and lived there until his death in 1943. Over his career, Love became increasingly involved in the community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and worked for the Town in this capacity well into the 20 th century. In addition to his work as the Magistrate, he performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. He served on the Public School Board as its Secretary from 1916 until 1941, only two years prior to his death. Love was deeply connected to the Town of Aurora and worked as a public servant for most of his life, prior to which he worked at one of the foundational industries of the Town, the Fleury Foundry, located on Wellington St. across from his house. ii.yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, No - not shown. iii.demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. No - not shown. Page 73 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 43 5.2.3 Contextual Value i.important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, The site supports the historical character of this neighbourhood within the “Old Town.” The house was constructed c. 1883 and is one of the remaining houses in the residential neighbourhoods that surround the main street. ii. physically, functionally, visually or historically is linked to its surroundings, No - not shown. iii.is a landmark. At one time - and even today - the house could conceivably have been a landmark due to its proximity to the commercial main street as well as its setting high above Wellington Street, the major west-east thoroughfare. 5.3 Overall Evaluation Summary 28 Wellington Street West meets the criteria for designation under Reg. 9/06 for design and historical value and perhaps for contextual value for its setting. The designation does not include the interior elements. Page 74 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 44 5.4 Heritage Integrity Building The house has moderate heritage integrity. The following alterations have been made to the exterior of the house and have diminished its overall integrity: x Removal of the front porch and second floor balcony; x Construction of guard rail at second floor balcony door; x Construction of contemporary gabled roof over front door and front deck; x Reduction in the overall height and capping of the chimney; and x Replacement of the existing windows with aluminum windows and capping of the adjacent woodwork and sills. Despite these changes/alterations the overall heritage character of the house remains largely intact and these changes are generally reversible. Given the importance of the house’s front elevation and its highly visible presence on Wellington Street the recreation of the removed porch would reinstate an essential heritage defining characteristic of the house. The porch could be recreated based on photographic evidence and the markings on the existing brick. The extant architectural features of the building envelope include: x Overall massing with main house and rear wing; x Fieldstone foundations of the main house; x Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar; x Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings; x Brick chimney (modified);x Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing; x Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides; x Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards);x Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; x Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; and x Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi-circular wood shutter (hardware if extant). Setting The extant heritage features of the setting include: x The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street; x The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and x The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. Page 75 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 45 5.5 Statement of Significance The property at 28 Wellington St. West in the Town of Aurora (“Town”) was constructed c. 1883. For nearly seventy years it remained the residence of Alfred Love. The building has design or physical value as a fine example of the Second Empire Style of architecture for small scale residences. This style is prominently displayed along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street. Its setting has changed little over the past century and a half, which makes it one of the finest of the five remaining examples of this architectural style in the Town of Aurora. The traits that are exemplified in the house include its mansard roof with a slightly sloped upper section and lower steeply pitched section, providing a useable second floor instead of an attic, dormer windows complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards), and its central brick gable complete with round-arched door opening to the former balcony atop a mansard roofed front porch. The building has historical or associative value due to its long connection with Alfred Love. Love had the house constructed and he lived there until his death in 1943. Over his career, Love became very involved in the local community and Town life. He served on the Town Council for one year in 1893, and then as the Trustee for the local high school. He was appointed a Justice of the Peace or Magistrate in 1896 and worked for the Town in the capacity well into the 20th century. In addition to his work as the Magistrate, he performed duties as an assessor and collector for the Town’s taxes. Love was noted in a county biographical record published in 1907 for his superb career as a public servant. He served on the Public School Board as its Secretary from 1916 until 1941, only two years before his death. Love was deeply connected to the Town of Aurora and worked as a public servant for most of his life, prior to which he worked at one of the foundational industries of the Town, the Fleury Foundry, located across from his house. The house has some contextual value because of its location within a block of the historic down town. At one time, the house’s location along Wellington Street would have made it a landmark because of the large lawn at its front and its high location across the street from the Fleury Foundry, one of the foundational industries of the Town in the late 19th century. The heritage attributes include: x Overall massing with main house and rear wing; x Fieldstone foundations of the main house; x Exterior yellow/buff brick walls with original mortar; x Arched and flat brick lintels and masonry openings; x Brick chimney (modified); x Mansard roofs with slightly sloped upper sections and lower steeply pitched sections on both the main house and rear wing; x Central brick gable on the front elevation inclusive of round arched 2nd floor brick opening and decorative wood trim (similar to dormer window wood surrounds) at the sides; x Dormer windows (windows themselves are not original) complete with decorative wood window surrounds (somewhat buttress-like shaped boards); x Front entrance wood screen door and inner wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; Page 76 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 46 x Second floor wood door with double arched glazed openings in the upper half with solid wood panels below. Original hardware inclusive of rim/box locks, ceramic knobs and decorative hinges; x Glazed semi-circular transom above second floor door complete with semi-circular wood shutter (hardware if extant); x The prominent height of the land with views to the site from Wellington Street and from the site to the east and west along Wellington Street; x The location and setback of the house from Wellington Street; and x The stone retaining wall and pedestrian access from Wellington Street. Page 77 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 47 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The subject property at 28 Wellington Street West is located on Plan 36 in the Town of Aurora. The site is situated on the north side of Wellington Street at the corner of Wellington Street and at the southern terminus of Machell Avenue. The Town of Aurora’s Official Plan defines the site as part of the “Old Town.” 6.1 Conclusions The building has design or physical value as a fine example of the Second Empire Style of architecture for small scale residences. This style is prominently displayed along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street. Its setting has changed little over the past century and a half, which makes it one of the finest of the five remaining examples of this architectural style in the Town of Aurora. The building has historical or associative value because of its association with Alfred Love, a prominent local citizen who had the house constructed in 1883. After constructing the house Love and his family remained in the house until Love’s eldest daughter, Lois, died in 1951. The long tenure of the family in the original house and the association of the Alfred Love with the early administration of the Town and his extensive career as a public servant for the town connects the house to its associative value. The building may have contextual value because it supports the character of the “Old Town” in the neighbourhood located north and west of the intersection of Wellington and Yonge Streets that dates to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. It may be considered a landmark due to its prominent location along the main thoroughfare of Wellington Street in the Town and its proximity to the former Fleury Foundry located on the south side of the Wellington Street W. The property has moderate heritage integrity. Although the building has interior heritage attributes it is recommended that they are not included in the designation as the public will likely not have an opportunity to see them and their retention may limit the building’s reuse. 6.2 Recommendations .1 that Council designates the building envelope and setting of 28 Wellington St. West under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Page 78 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 48 7.0 REFERENCES 7.1 References Maps & Archives Aurora Museum & Archives Goad Fire Insurance Maps Library and Archives Canada – 1851, 1871, 1891, 1911, and 1921 census data Plan of Town Lots in Aurora, 1853 Tremaine Map, 1860 York County Atlas, 1880 York Region Maps and Spatial Data Municipal Town of Aurora, Official Plan 2015 rev., 87 Town of Aurora, Aurora Promenade Concept Plan, September 2010. Town of Aurora, Streetscape Design and Implementation Plan, January 2013. Philip Carter, Paul Oberst, and the Town of Aurora, Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan. 2006. __________ “Appendix C: A Short History of Old Northeast Aurora,” in Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District: The Plan. 2006. Books Johnston, James. Aurora: Its early Beginnings. Aurora Centennial Committee, 1963. Donald Kerr, editor. Historical Atlas of Canada – Volume III: Addressing the Twentieth Century 1891-1961.Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990. McIntyre, John. Aurora: A History In Pictures. 1995. Turner, Glenn. The Toronto Carrying Place: Rediscovering Toronto’s Most Ancient Trail. Toronto: Dundurn, 2015. White, Randall. Ontario 1610-1985 – A Political and Economic History. Toronto: Dundurn, 1985. Reports, Newspapers, and Other Sources The Aurora Banner The Newmarket Era The Toronto Globe Page 79 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 49 Brea Bartholet, “Aurora dumps heritage plan as Cookstown awaits OMB hearing” Innisfil Journal (May 23, 2014) accessed at: https://www.simcoe.com/news-story/4537379-aurora-dumps-heritage-plan-as-cookstown- awaits-omb-hearing/ https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/plaques/aurora-armoury https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aurora https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-imperial-bank-of-commerce http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-h https://www.torontocarryingplace.ca/about-the-trail https://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=7299 https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/plaques/aurora-armoury http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/pearson_lester_bowles_20E.html https://www.sharontemple.ca/children-of-peace https://www.auroramuseum.ca/ http://casostation.ca/ontario-simcoe-huron-railway/ https://www.doorsopenontario.on.ca/en/aurora/aurora-readiness-centre-bunker-former-cold-war- em https://www.yorkregion.com/community-story/1415452-history-of-aurora/ http://www.bretz.ca/GenWeb/html/bretz/narratives/4/ Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Ontario Architectural Style Guide (University of Waterloo) People Contacted Carlson Tsang, Town of Aurora Shawna White, Curator, Aurora Museum & Archives Page 80 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 50 7.2 Qualifications of Authors Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. is an OAA licensed architectural practice specializing in heritage conservation. SBA has six licensed architects, three of whom are members of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP), two LEED accredited professionals and a staff trained in the application of heritage standards and best practice. In 1988, SBA was retained to assist the Trustees of The Old Stone Church in Beaverton, Ontario to assist in designation and conservation of the 1840’s stone church which became a national historic site. Since that time SBA has worked on over forty recognized or designated heritage properties and many more listed or eligible to be listed buildings. SBA Follows internationally recognized preservation principles as inscribed in the charters, SBA’s involvement with projects range from research and documentation to production of Heritage Significance Evaluations, Building Condition Assessments, Intervention Guidelines, Conservation Master Plans, Feasibility Studies, Heritage Impact Statements, Building Conservation, Retrofit and/or Reuse and Monitoring and Maintenance Plans. This CHER was prepared by a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP), namely, Kelly Gilbride OAA, P.Eng., CAHP, LEED AP a partner of Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd. (SBA) and partner-in charge of heritage projects. Kelly’s architectural training is complemented by her building engineering degree. Shortly after joining SBA in 2001, Kelly became a partner and was able to work hand in hand with Jane Burgess and developed an expertise within the heritage field. Initially focused on built heritage conservation work, Kelly expanded her expertise to include heritage policy, conservation plans, impact assessments, and heritage evaluations and inventories. Kelly’s work with SBA has garnered multiple conservation and heritage awards. Julia Rady obtained her PhD in Canadian History from the University of Toronto in 2017. She has presented on her work to the Canadian Historical Association and the Canadian Society of Church History. She has worked as a historical consultant for the CBC, the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History, and Heritage Toronto, and she has published book reviews with Ontario History. She started working at SBA in 2017 assisting on historical research and writing for the firm’s heritage-related work. Page 81 of 142 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 28 Wellington St. West, Town of Aurora SBA No. 20048 Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Authors Page 82 of 142 Senior Heritage Consultant Kelly Gilbride OAA, P. Eng., CAHP, LEED AP Partner EDUCATION Bachelor of Architecture (Honours), 1991, McGill University Bachelor of Engineering (Honours), 1987, Concordia University PROFESSIONAL 2001 to date Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd., Toronto EXPERIENCE 1998 to 2001 White and Gilbride Architects Inc., Deep River 1997 to 1998 Turczyn White + Gilbride Architects, Pembroke 1996 to 1998 Kelly Gilbride Architect, Deep River 1991 to 1996 Greer Galloway Architects and Engineers, Pembroke PROFESSIONAL Ontario Association of Architects, OAA ASSOCIATIONS Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, PEO Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals, CAHP Canadian Green Building Council, LEED AP Kelly’s architectural training is complemented by her building engineering degree. Shortly after joining SBA in 2001, Kelly became a partner and was able to work hand in hand with Jane Burgess and developed an expertise within the heritage field. Initially focused on built heritage conservation work, Kelly expanded her expertise to include heritage policy, conservation plans, impact assessments, and heritage evaluations and inventories. Kelly is the managing partner in-charge of SBA’s Vendor of RecordContractsand,accordingly, is well versed in working with municipal, government and private clients on challenging heritage projects. SELECT HERITAGE PROJECTS (+ indicates award winning) Infrastructure Ontario – 2 Surrey Place, Toronto Strategic guidance and adaptive reuse study of property at 2 Surrey Place University of Toronto – Convocation Hall, Toronto Heritage Consultant for masonry cleaning at Convocation Hall Exhibition Place – McGillivray Fountain Restoration, Toronto Restoration of McGillivray Fountain at Centennial Square Infrastructure Ontario – Metro Court House and Osgoode Hall Disentanglement from Enwave District Steam Service, Toronto (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance, National Historic Site) Feasibility Study to develop options for Remote Boiler Plant and Heritage Impact Assessment Town of Richmond Hill – McConaghy Centre Cenotaph, Richmond Hill (Listed) Restoration of McConaghy Centre Cenotaph City of Cambridge – Old Galt Post Office Idea Exchange, Cambridge (Designated, National Historic Site) Heritage Architect for Adaptive Reuse and Restoration Archdiocese of Toronto – Church of the Holy Name, Toronto Renovations and accessibility upgrades +St. Michael’s Hospital – Stained Glass Windows Restoration, Toronto Feasibility Study Restoration of Chapel Stained Glass Windows +Redemptorists of Toronto and Edmonton – Redemptorists’ Monastery, Toronto (Designated) Study to determine feasibility of conversion to self-contained residential suites Conservation of the building envelope, interior retrofit and accessibility improvements City of Toronto – Ward’s Island Waiting Shed, Toronto Feasibility Study Relocation and rehabilitation of the Waiting Shed City of Hamilton – Jimmy Thompson Memorial Pool, Hamilton (Listed) Feasibility Study to develop Heritage Intervention Guidelines City of Toronto – Alumnae Theatre, Toronto (Listed) Feasibility Study, Phases I, II and II Accessibility Renovations City of Toronto – Toronto Railway Museum, Toronto (Designated, Pt V) Restoration of Roundhouse Turntable Page 83 of 142 Kelly Gilbride +City of Hamilton – Dundurn National Historic Site, Hamilton (Designated, National Historic Site) ƒFeasibility Study to explore adaptive reuse of the outbuildings to augment the museum experience City of Toronto – Young Peoples Theatre, Toronto (Designated) Heritage Window Conservation Feasibility Study Conservation of Wood/Metal windows +City of Hamilton – Gore Park Fountain, Hamilton (Designated) Disassembly, restoration and re-assembly/conservation of Gore Park Fountain City of Toronto – Zion Schoolhouse Renovation, Toronto (Designated) Building Condition Assessment Renovation of Zion Schoolhouse +City of Hamilton – Gage Park Fountain and Watercourse, Hamilton (Designated) Restoration of historic masonry of fountain and watercourse Infrastructure Ontario – Lanark Perth Justice Facility Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Strategic Conservation Plan Infrastructure Ontario – Guelph Correctional Facility Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Strategic Conservation Plan Infrastructure Ontario – St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Site (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Demolition and Decommissioning Plan for site and sixteen heritage buildings Infrastructure Ontario – Thunder Bay District Courthouse, Thunder Bay ((Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Heritage Inventory and Evaluation of heritage fixtures, fittings, and furniture Infrastructure Ontario – Sir James Whitney School, Belleville (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Heritage Conservation Plan and Capital Plan for 96 acre Site and five Designated Buildings. Infrastructure Ontario – Century Manor, Hamilton Psychiatric Hospital, Hamilton (Designated) Adaptive Re-use Study Phase Two design development and construction documents and contract administration for roofing – Central Block +University of Guelph – Macdonald Institute, Guelph (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) +ƒRenovation to 1903 Italianate load bearing masonry building, reconstruction of Parapet, Terrace and Portico Renovation of MINS 300 Lecture Hall MINS 300 to an IT lecture theater while conserving the heritage elements +Ontario Realty Corporation – Whitney Block and Tower, Toronto (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Heritage Conservation Plan Maintenance and Capital Plan for all interior and exterior heritage features Ontario Realty Corporation – Three Properties on ORC Heritage Inventory, Markham (ORC Heritage Inventory) Condition Assessment for Adaptive Re-use of three properties SNC Lavalin/ProFac – W. Ross Macdonald School, Brantford (Designated) Sardarghar House: Repairs to front porch/rear porch and window restoration (heritage attributes) Intermediate and Deaf/Blind Residences:Notice of Violation-Liaison with authorities to protect heritage attributes SNC Lavalin – Stratmore Building, Cobourg (Designated) Building envelope conservation including of removal of Kenitex non-breathable coating Ontario Realty Corporation – Hamilton Psychiatric Institute, Hamilton Grove Hall: ORC Class EA Consultation & Documentation Report for steel window restoration Huronia Provincial Parks – Sainte Marie Among the Hurons, Midland (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) +ƒConservation of the Chapel and Reconstruction of Blacksmith Shop, Carpentry Shop and Palisade. Ontario Realty Corporation – Leslie M. Frost Centre, Haliburton (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance) Strategic Conservation Plan Cultural heritage inventory and evaluation of approximately 20 buildings as part of an ORC Class EA Ministry of Environment – Office Relocation to the Old Kingston Psychiatric Hospital Site, Kingston (Designated) Heritage Significance Study, Condition Assessment for Islandview Building (1880) and the Industrial Building Design and Feasibility Study for adaptive reuse of the buildings within a modern leading edge sustainable complex Page 84 of 142 Historian Julia Rady,PhD EDUCATION PhD, History, 2017, University of Toronto Masters of Arts, 2007, University of Toronto Bachelors of Arts (Honours), 2002, Western University PROFESSIONAL 2017 to date: Stevens Burgess Architects Ltd., Toronto EXPERIENCE PROFESSIONAL Canadian Historical Association ASSOCIATIONS Multicultural History Society of Ontario Toronto Preservation Board Julia has an academic background in Canadian history and has a special interest in heritage conservation and historical preservation, and the interpretation of Canadian sites of heritage significance. Since starting with SBA, Julia has provided assistance, research, and historical interpretations for the Town of Aurora, Toronto Water, Havergal College, Fort York Officers’ Mess, the Guelph Correctional Centre, the St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital Site, and the City of Cambridge Farmer’s Market. She has experience with qualitative and quantitative analysis of history, specialized research skills, and the ability to communicate historical ideas and facts in an accessible way to a variety of audiences. SELECTED PROJECTS: University of Toronto – University of St. Michael’s College, Toronto x Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports for the Kelly Library and Elmsley Hall 15 Properties along the main street, Town of Aurora Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports Poplar Villa, 15074 Yonge Street, Town of Aurora Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report “M” and “T” Buildings – Ashbridge’s Bay Water Treatment Facilities, Morrison Hershfield Historical Research and Analytical Narrative, and Reg. 9/06 Evaluation Water Treatment Plant, Centre Island, Morrison Hershfield on behalf of Toronto Water Historical Research and Narrative 20908 Leslie Street, East Gwillimbury Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 3824 Holborn Road, East Gwillimbury Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report 520 Bronte Road, Milton Historical Research and Narrative for Heritage Impact Assessment Queen’s Park Circle, Toronto - Pollination Garden Heritage Impact Assessment 78 Park Street East, Port Credit Heritage Impact Assessment 1775 Fifeshire Court, Mississauga Heritage Impact Assessment Fort Frances Judicial Complex. Fort Frances,(Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance), Strategic Conservation Plan Guelph Correctional Centre. Guelph, (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital, (Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan Chatham Judicial Complex, Chatham,(Provincial Heritage Property of Provincial Significance),Strategic Conservation Plan Page 85 of 142 Julia Rady SELECT OTHER HISTORICAL CONSULTATIONS / PROJECTS: Historical Consultant – Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History and Heritage Toronto Historical Commentator –CBC’s The Goods. “Worshipping,” an introduction for the SSHRC-funded website,www.wartimecanada.ca Various conference presentations –to the Canadian Society of Church History, the Canadian Historical Association, and the Political History Group. Dissertation –Ministering to an Unsettled World: The Protestant Churches in Early Cold War Ontario, 1945-1956.” Completed at the University of Toronto. Finalist - Three-Minute Thesis Competition, University of Toronto, 2017. Page 86 of 142 Municipal Address: _______________________________________________ Legal Description: _____________________ Lot: ______ Cons: _______ Group: Date of Evaluation: ________________ Name of Recorder: _____________ HISTORICAL E G F P TOTAL Date of Construction 30 20 10 0 /30 Trends/Patterns/Themes 40 27 14 0 /40 Events 15 10 5 0 /15 Persons/Groups 15 10 5 0 /15 Archaeological (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Historic Grouping (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Construction Date (Bonus) 10 /10 HISTORICAL TOTAL /100 ARCHITECTURAL E G F P TOTAL Design 20 13 7 0 /20 Style 30 20 10 0 /30 Architectural Integrity 20 13 7 0 /20 Physical Condition 20 13 7 0 /20 Design/Builder 10 7 3 0 /10 Interior (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 ARCHITECTURAL TOTAL /100 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL Design Compatibility 40 27 14 0 /40 Community Context 20 13 7 0 /20 Landmark 20 13 7 0 /20 Site 20 13 7 0 /20 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL /100 SCORE INDIVIDUAL OLD AURORA Historical Score X 40% = _______ X 20% = _______ Architectural Score X 40% = _______ X 35% = _______ Enviro/Contextual Score X 20% = _______ X 45% = _______ TOTAL SCORE HERITAGE BUILDING EVALUATION: SCORESHEET GROUP 1 = 70-100 GROUP 2 = 45-69 GROUP 3 = 44 or less :HOOLQJWRQ6WUHHW:HVW /RW3ODQ $XJ &DUOVRQ7VDQJ 20 15 0 20 30 13 0 27 7 20 20 GROUP 1 = 70-100 Page 87 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee No. HAC20-010 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Major Heritage Permit Application File HPA-2020-01 31 Catherine Avenue Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. HAC20-010 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding Heritage Permit Application File: HPA-2020-01 be referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Executive Summary This report provides the Heritage Advisory Committee with the necessary information for providing comments on Heritage Permit Application HPA-2020-10. The permit proposes the removal of an existing detached garage, and construction of a rear addition to the Reynolds House at 31 Catherine Avenue which is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act within the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District. Staff have no concern with the applicant’s proposal to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard because the structure does not contribute to the heritage value of the property. The proposed addition is not anticipated to generate any adverse impact on the streetscape character. The proposed architectural style, roof design and sidings of the new addition are considered compatible with the Reynolds House. Staff are concerned that the proposed addition exceeds the maximum depth permitted by the North East Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan developed to protect the historic building patterns in the historic neighborhood. Page 88 of 142 September 14, 2020 2 of 6 Report No. HAC20-010 Background 31 Catherine Avenue is located on the south side of the street, north of Wellington Street East and east of Yonge Street, within the North East Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District (see Attachment 1). There is an existing residential dwelling on the property constructed circa 1886, known as “the Reynolds House”. Parking is provided in a detached garage in the rear yard. Mature vegetation exists on the property including several large mature trees in the rear yard. The Reynolds House can be described as a 1 ½ storey structure with a front gable roof. The building is finished with brick cladding. The building features double-hung windows, including a 3-bay window on the front elevation and the east elevation. A pale-green wood corner verandah leads up to the front entrance, comprised of six wood columns and wood railings. The building is ordained in decorative trim under the gable roof, also colored in pale-green. Overall, the building appears to be an excellent example of Gothic Revival architecture and is considered a contributing building within the Heritage Conservation District. Heritage Designation In 2006, Town Council passed By-Law 4809-06.D to designate 31 Catherine Avenue under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as part of the Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District. Council also passed By-Law 4809-06.D to adopt the “Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan” as the document to guide the preservation, redevelopment of properties and streetscapes located within the boundaries of the District. 31 Catherine Avenue has been identified as a contributing property to the Heritage Conservation District. Previous Heritage Permit Applications On September 16, 2016, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA- 16-07 to allow the installation of a new double hung window on the west elevation of the structure, near the north-west corner of the building. On February 16, 2017, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA- 17-03 to allow the removal of existing vents underneath the front gable and side gable roofline on the front and west elevation, to be replaced with windows. The second component of the heritage permit was the installation of a new sunroof on the east facing roof. Page 89 of 142 September 14, 2020 3 of 6 Report No. HAC20-010 On June 15, 2017, the Town approved Heritage Permit application NE-HCD-HPA-17-07 to allow the installation of a new wood front door, removal of transom and replacement of the box window on the west elevation of the building. Proposed Alteration The owner is proposing to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard and construct a two-storey addition at the south east corner of the dwelling which includes a double-car tandem garage on the ground floor and a new bedroom on the second floor. The exterior wall will be finished with vertical board and batten siding. The addition will feature a gable roof that is similar in style to the main building. The new garage door will be made out of wood with horizontal panels. The proposed development will be subject to a zoning review to confirm compliance with the zoning by-law prior to the issuance of a building permit. Analysis Staff have no concern with the applicant’s proposal to demolish the existing detached garage in the rear yard because the structure does not contribute to the heritage value of the property. Based on historical aerial photos, the existing detached garage in the rear yard was constructed as early as the 1950’s. The garage does not exhibit any significant architectural value and is clearly distinguishable from the Reynolds House. There is no evidence to suggest that the garage contributes to the heritage value of the property. Staff do not anticipate that the proposed demolition of the detached garage will adversely affect the heritage integrity of the building. Also, given the detached garage has always been located in the rear yard away from the street, there will be minimal impact on the historic character of the streetscape. The proposed addition is not anticipated to generate any adverse impact on the streetscape character. The proposed architectural style, roof design and sidings of the new addition are considered compatible with the Reynolds House. Section 9.1.2.5 of the District Plan indicates that additions should be located to the rear or an inconspicuous side where they are not visible from the street. The proposed addition is located at the south-east corner of the main building, which is approximately 20 m (65.61 ft) from the street to help mitigate its visual impact from public view. Further, the existing mature trees at the front and along the east property line will provide screening to further reduce the addition’s presence on the street. Page 90 of 142 September 14, 2020 4 of 6 Report No. HAC20-010 Section 9.1.3 of the District Plan states that additions and alterations to an existing heritage building should be consistent with the style of the original buildings. Staff consider the proposed gable roof of the new addition to be compatible with the architectural character of the existing home. The roofline from the front is designed with a steep slope to help reduce its vertical massing to ensure it will not dominate the streetscape. The proposed wooden panel garage door, board and batten siding, and asphalt shingles are considered appropriate materials to be used in the neighborhood as per Section 9.8.1 of the District Plan. Staff are concerned that the proposed addition exceeds the maximum depth permitted by the North East Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan developed to protect the historic building patterns in the historic neighborhood. Section 4.2 of the District Plan provides that additions to existing buildings should be limited to a maximum depth of 16.8 m (55.11 ft) to ensure the protection of the historic building patterns in the neighborhood. An additional 2.1 m (6.88 ft) will be allowed for one-storey extension that is less than half the width of the house. The proposed addition will increase the total depth of the building to approximately 22.43 m (73.6 ft), where approximately 5.9 m (19.35 ft) is attributed to the one-storey extension at the rear for the second tandem parking space in the garage. Staff are concerned that the additional depth is not keeping with the established building pattern in neighborhood in which the District Plan seeks to maintain. Staff requested the applicant eliminate the one-storey extension, to be more in line with the guidelines of the District Plan. However the applicant would like to proceed with the application as submitted. Legal Considerations Under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, any developments or alterations that would potentially impact the heritage character of a property located within a Heritage Conservation District requires Council’s consent. This legislative requirement is implemented in the Town of Aurora through the process of a Heritage Permit Application, which is subject to Council’s approval in consultation with the Heritage Advisory Committee. Council must make a decision on a heritage permit application within 90 days after the notice of receipt is served on the applicant, otherwise Council shall be deemed to have consented to the application. Council may extend the review period of a heritage application without any time limit under the Ontario Heritage Act provided it is agreed upon by the owner. Page 91 of 142 September 14, 2020 5 of 6 Report No. HAC20-010 Financial Implications There are no financial implications. Communications Considerations The Town will use ‘Inform’ as the level of engagement for this application. There are five different levels of community engagement to consider, with each level providing the community more involvement in the decision-making process. These levels are: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate and Empower. Examples of each can be found in the Community Engagement Policy. These options are based on the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum and assist in establishing guidelines for clearly communicating with our public and managing community engagement. In order to inform the public, this report will be posted to the Town’s website. Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation N/A Conclusions While the applicant has incorporated various measures in the design of the proposed addition to reduce the impact on the Reynolds House and the streetscape character, staff are concerned that the proposed building depth is excessive within the context of the neighborhood. It is recommended that the proposal be amended to eliminate the one-storey extension at the rear in order to achieve a footprint that is more in scale with the historic building pattern of the Heritage District. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Drawings Page 92 of 142 September 14, 2020 6 of 6 Report No. HAC20-010 Previous Reports None Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on September 3, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Page 93 of 142 LOCATION MAP ADDRESS: 31 Catherine Avenue ATTACHMENT 1 SUBJECT LANDS Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Building Services Department, August 29 2019. Base data provided by York Region & the Town of Aurora. Air Photos taken Spring 2018, © First Base SoluƟons Inc., 2018 Orthophotography. 0 10 20 30 40 4 Metres Subject Property Page 94 of 142 x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x xxxx x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx TWO STOREY REAR ADDTION ONE STOREY GARAGE ADDTION NEWWOODEN DECK BASEMENT ADDITIONBELOW GRADE A1 SITE PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO "UUBDINFOU Page 95 of 142 NEW RECREATIONAL AREA UNEXCAVATED UP15 RISERS A2 BSMT FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 96 of 142 NEW 2 CARTANDEM GARAGE NEW WASHRM NEW LAUNDRY NEW CLOSET NEW DECK A3 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 97 of 142 NEW MASTERENSUITE NEW MASTER BEDROOM NEW WALK INCLOSET NEWROOF BELOW ATTIC SPACE A4 SECOND FLOOR PLAN 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 98 of 142 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA6 FRONT ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST. AURORA, ONTARIO Page 99 of 142 A7 REAR ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 100 of 142 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA8 SIDE ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIOPage 101 of 142 PROPOSEDEXISTINGA9 SIDE ELEVATION 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 102 of 142 ISSUED BY THE SURVEYORIn accordance withRegulation 1026, Section 29(3).THIS PLAN IS NOT VALIDORIGINAL COPYUNLESS IT IS AN EMBOSSEDLAND SURVEYORSPLAN SUBMISSION FORM2115903ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIOxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xA0 SURVEY 31 CATHERINE ST.AURORA, ONTARIO Page 103 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee No. HAC20-011 ______________________________________________________________________ Subject: Amendments to the Conditions of Delisting 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad Prepared by: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Heritage Planning Department: Planning and Development Services Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendation 1. That Report No. HAC20-011 be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments regarding amendments to the conditions imposed by Council on May 15, 2019 for the delisting of 1625- 1675 St. John’s Sideroad be referred to staff for consideration and action as appropriate. Executive Summary On May 15, 2019, 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad was delisted by Council from the Town’s Heritage Registry subject to several conditions that specifically apply to the future subdivision of the lands. The owner recently submitted an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application to develop a business park on the property. However, the lands are not proposed to be subdivided, therefore the aforementioned conditions are not implementable. The purpose of this report is to seek the Heritage Advisory Committee’s input on amending the conditions in a manner that are implementable for the current planning applications. Staff recommend the conditions be amended to apply to all “future development” of the property for greater flexibility in securing the heritage requirements previously imposed by Council. Background Combined as 1625 and 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, the 90-acre property is located on the south side of St. John’s Sideroad, bounded to the west by Leslie Street and to the east Page 104 of 142 September 14, 2020 2 of 4 Report No. HAC20-011 by Highway 404 (see Attachment 1). The property was previously listed on the Town’s Heritage Register, which contained an equestrian complex, a mid-20th Century plaster- clad cottage, a late 19th Century ban barn and a post 1927 residence. On May 15, 2019, the property was delisted from the Heritage Register by Council subject to the following conditions: 1. That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision for the proposed Business Park, the owner, at their expense, be required to name future streets and erect a heritage plaque commemorating the equestrian history of the property to the satisfaction of the Town; 2. That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision for the proposed Business Park, the owner, at their expense, prepare a Views Study to evaluate the potential for retaining any landscape sightlines present on the site; 3. That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision for the proposed Business Park, the owner provide a contribution to the Heritage Reserve Fund at an amount to be determined by Staff; and, 4. That as a condition of demolition permit issuance, the owner, at their expense, salvage and store the fieldstones from the foundation of the late 19th century barn for future re-use in the Town or as part of the future development on-site. On May 19, 2020, the owner submitted an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application to permit an industrial building, gas bar, office building and retail building on the subject property (see Attachment 2). The proposed development will be finalized through a site plan application. The owner will not be submitting a Plan of Subdivision application. As such, Condition 1-3 cannot be implemented as they only apply to a Draft Plan of Subdivision. Analysis Staff recommend the conditions be amended to apply to all “future development” of the property for greater flexibility in securing the heritage requirements previously imposed by Council. Given the subject property is not being developed in the form of a Plan of Subdivision, Conditions 1-3 need to be amended in order to secure the heritage requirements previously imposed by Council. Staff recommend the conditions be amended as follows: 1. That as a condition of approval of all future development of the property, the owner, at their expense, be required to name future streets and/or erect a heritage plaque commemorating the equestrian history of the property to the satisfaction of the Town; Page 105 of 142 September 14, 2020 3 of 4 Report No. HAC20-011 2. That as a condition of approval of all future development of the property, the owner, at their expense, prepare a Views Study to evaluate the potential for retaining any landscape sightlines present on the site; and, 3. That as a condition of approval of all future development of the property, the owner provide a contribution to the Heritage Reserve Fund at an amount to be determined by Staff. Legal Considerations N/A Financial Implications N/A Communications Considerations N/A Link to Strategic Plan The conservation of heritage resources supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in objective Celebrating and Promoting our Culture. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation N/A Conclusions Staff recommend the conditions imposed by Council for the delisting of 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad be amended to apply to all future development for greater flexibility in securing the heritage requirements previously imposed by Council. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Conceptual Site Plan Page 106 of 142 September 14, 2020 4 of 4 Report No. HAC20-011 Previous Reports Heritage Report HAC-19-003 – 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad Heritage Delisting Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on September 3, 2020 Approvals Approved by David Waters, Director, Planning and Development Services Page 107 of 142 Leslie StreetSt John's SideroadHighway 404Forest Grove CourtChouinard WayRoy Harper AvenueHighway 404Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Department, February 11, 2019. Base Data Provided by York Region.¯0 40 80 120 160 200MetresLOCATION PLAN1625-1675 ST. JOHNS SIDEROADATTACHMENT 1SUBJECT LANDSPage 108 of 142 67-2+1 66,'(52$' 5(*,21$/52$'1R +:<)8785(+:<,17(5&+$1*(215$03/(6/,(675((7 3+$6(,,)8785((;3$16,21$& *$667$7,21 1,& $&)8785(%86,1(663$5. &2 33( 5 9$/ /(< ( 67 $7( 6 ,1 & (;,67,1* $*5,&8/785$/ /$1'6 67 - 2+1 6 6 ,' (52 $' (;,67,1*5(6,'(17,$/ 0$77$0< $8525$ /7' (;,67,1*(19,5210(17$/3527(&7,21$5($ 0$77$0< $8525$ /7' 29(5$//6,7(3/$1 $29(5$//6,7(3/$1116725(<352326(',1'8675,$/6+(//%8,/',1*60 6) 352326('2)),&(%8,/',1*60 6) 352326('5(7$,/%8,/',1* 60 6) 352-(&7'$7$&$87,21 ,)7+,66+((7,6127[,7,6$5('8&('35,176W-RKQ V6LGHURDG 'HYHORSPHQW vaughan. ontario . L4K 5W9180 bass pro m ills dr ive . un it 103graph ics planningarch i tec tureinteriors p 905.760 .1221 f 905.248.3344civil engineeringWMA Inc.a bu siness name of.(<3/$16,7(/(*(1'$WWDFKPHQWPage 109 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Memorandum Operational Services ______________________________________________________________________ Re: Tree Removal Permit Application – 53 Metcalfe Street To: Heritage Advisory Committee Members From: Sara Tienkamp, Manager, Parks and Fleet Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendations 1. That the memorandum regarding Tree Removal Permit Application – 53 Metcalfe Street be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee provide comment with respect to the proposed Tree Removal Permit Application for 53 Metcalfe Street. Background The subject property is listed on the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Tree Protection Bylaw 5850-16. Section 9 (1) (b) states: If a tree subject to an application is found by the Director to be a Heritage Tree, the Director shall not issue a permit unless the injury, destruction or removal is approved by Council following a review by the Town’s Heritage Advisory Committee. On August 19, 2020, the Owner at 53 Metcalfe Street arranged for the removal of a 45 cm Black Walnut tree. A concerned resident called the Town regarding tree cutting and Bylaw Services deployed an officer to the site. When the officer arrived, the tree company was actively removing the tree and approximately 40 percent of the crown of the tree had been removed. The Officer immediately asked for the work to cease, explaining that the tree was on a Listed Property and that its removal was not permitted, without the approval of a Tree Removal Permit by Council, after review by the Heritage Advisory Committee. Page 110 of 142 Tree Removal Permit Application – 53 Metcalfe Street September 14, 2020 2 of 2 The Town’s Forestry Technician attended site and has confirmed that the tree is in good health. While the tree has been aggressively pruned with the intention of removal, what remains is viable and structurally sound; however, it is not aesthetically pleasing and crown is unbalanced. On August 28, 2020, the Parks Division received a formal Tree Removal Permit Application from the owners of 53 Metcalfe Street. Included as supporting documentation are photos of the tree and letter explaining the desire to remove the tree, due to safety concerns for their children, home and property. The Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments on this application should be on based the impact on the heritage character of the neighbourhood, not the physical condition of the tree. Attachments Attachment #1 – Tree Removal Permit Application Attachment #2 – Letter from Property Owners & Neighbour Attachment #3 – Photo of Black Walnut Tree for Removal Page 111 of 142 $ $ $ $ #$ $ $ $ $$ ! $ #$ }ǠŰ8 Ǡ.ƫǠǠǠ.ŠǠǠ ` Ǡ ŝǠsǏ fǠÆÍ¿ÇǠ ŞǠǃ ǠǠ Ǡ8Ǡd(Ǡ ƗǠǠd)9Ǡ7ŭ?ō!ġřǠ Ǔ¹IǠ8!@ ǠǠAǠ tǠǠ .ũMǠ åƣŻjǠüĵ!(Ǡ6ǠA(ǠĂú¢ǠUOǠ-Ǡ÷ `!Ŏ Ǡæƌ:ǠsLjǠ-½OǠr ƕjǠœǠƥǔ Ê+Ȭ0À+0Ǡlj@,Ǡ0++0 Ʒ!ƬǠǠUŦ6ǠťǠr ėÐǠ -,TąĚǠ6Ǡ6ǠIǠ!ŧ @Ǡ ǠŷơǠza( (Ǡ ŪǠŹǠUvéTGvć®ǠYŜaǠĒǠƿÿYǠĤ NjǕ +2 E _ ) Ǡ9ÑǠ{Ǡ ǠǠ Ǡ ǠǠîś Ǡ8Ǡ ĘeǠ#6ǠIǠĠ(ƅǠě 02 FƽǠ ǠTƃƏǠGųǠ!Ǡ ǠǠâǠ Ǡ(ĶǠWǠA(Ǡ ǖfkǠǠdǠ`şǠ6ǠŔǠzŘ9ǠǗ q,X.ǠkǠƖǠ+ǠĞįǠǠ ǠaǠǠ űǠ ¯ Å2 F ǠǠ Į bǠĬÒǠ{ǠWǠ-+ǠǠ ĺǠ+ǠūǠ.ǠƇ b°Ǡ~ƎǠğ#ǠYǠĪǠĸǠ ǘǙǠ ǁſǠ*Ǡ ǠǠǠbǠ ƳǠǠƔ Ǡ SmǠ =ǠƩǠ! ƭǠWǠǠ ǠǠ!]ǠǠǠ Ǡ ǠǠĐ(OǠ#ļǠLJƸǠēǠĢǠĽǠ tǠǠ !]ǠǠǠ ŶǠŤ (ƦǠǠǠèůǠǠFǠǠāǠ-¼ǠóđǠ~Ø©ǚǠ uÄíǠSò-, Ë2 ; Ǡ @ǠĹǠ0ÓÃǠ±oǠŖ] ǠeǠDŽ ǠǠIǠƒ Ǡ eǠǠ Ǡ ² DǠ Ǡ 77ňǎ>Ǡ^ Ǡ ǠLK Ǡ Ǡ : Ǡ ďǠǠ7 K: Ǡ7 LƛǠ$7? ' Ǡ1 1ŇǠŨ %Ǡ HǠ|JǠ$5%Ǡ Ǡ ǠƲ Ǡ4QĜǠ$ Ǡ<1/ %ǠZǠ"K' Ǡ ' Ǡ' Ǡ3n5CǠǠ<Ǡ'Ǡ34ǠNǠŲǠ HǠ|fǠ$4%Ǡ# JǠ/ :Ǡ ? "njǠ Ǡ :ǠƹJǠ4¾Ǡ$ÌǠ<1/ %ǠZǠ")' #Ĩ ǠÎǠ' ǠRn5CǠŗǠñǠ'ǠR4Ǡ źƼK Ǡ'ǠL) Ǡ^Ǡ#/ Ǡ : ?Ǡ^ǠN Ǡ#/) "Ǡ$5%Ǡ Ǡ ǠƵǠ<Ǡƪ ǠĎ ǠR4ǠNǠLƍǠ Hy Ǡ$3%Ǡ Ǡ Ǡ JPǠ? > Ǡ ǠCQ1Ǡ$5QǠD1/%ǠZǠ") # Ǡ ' "Ǡ Ǡ3³5CǠ ŢyǠ$3%Ǡ Ǡ Ǡ PǠ<ǠN Ǡ"İ)> "Ǡ/ƊƨǠ")ƶ1 Ǡ H\Ǡ$3%ǠǠ Ǡ")> # "Ǡ/)Ƨ> Ǡ# čPǠ àþôDäßăǠDwê\GøÞĄ\wǠ -,E ǠǠǠ ń!#ǠƐƜÔ +,Ǡ [Ǡ.Ǡ; Ƥ;ƢǠ Ɓ¨Ǡõì¥Ǡ 02 E Ǡ; qm } ŮÕǠ Vªƺ [Ǡ=ǠGĭ *ǠxgǠû.Ǡ cMǠķǠ ƾBÖǒĉºǝãÚÛĦǠĊċ&&&&&&&&&&ǠČ S,E Ǡ8ǠĴǠxgǠhX=Ǡ ǠǠ É, VNJőĆ×Ǡ " ʼnBo¡§ǠÏ´áǠǠiBǠ ǠǠǠǠ Ǡ ĕ ƀŁŚǠƑƙ ǠǠ9 ǠXǠǠŅ *ǠgƘ ǠǠMǠƴhǞǠIJijǠ Œ ù Ǡ -»µï.Ǡ lǠǠ ǠǠƻǑƮǠ=ǠAǠ Ė ƋǠƓƚ ǠǀǠǠ9Ǡ_ǠŸ**ŃǠ A9 ŕǠţǠǠƝǠ īiB¶Ǡ ¦ĈǠ ç[Ǡ « öŊ¤ıǠ Ž Ǡ Á·ĀǠǂ ǠǠǠĔǠðņ ƄǠǠcpǠFǠ _ Ǡŋ@MƂ ƱǠĿƈǠDžǠŴǠ *8 ƯuƠ ǠǠ*Ǡ ŀ Ǡ*ǠǠlǠǍłǠǠǐž *ƆǠħcǠ ƉǠdž2ǟŏŐưĥĻŬģ Vp * ǠŵŌ ë¸Ǡ TTACHMENTPage 112 of 142 Page 113 of 142 Page 114 of 142 From: Jennifer Smith Sent: August 19, 2020 5:47 PM To: Tienkamp, Sara STienkamp@aurora.ca Cc: Kevin Purcocks ; Sunshine Matheson-Davies Subject: Tree Removal issue - 53 Metcalfe St Attention: Sara Tienkamp, Parks Manager, Town of Aurora Per our conversation, below is a statement related to the issue of the Tree Removal cease order on August 19, 2020. After a great deal of discussion and planning, we, the residents of 53 Metcalfe, Jennifer Smith and Kevin Purcocks, along with the support and encouragement of our neighbours at 51 Metcalfe (Patrick and Sunshine Davies) contacted an arborist to properly prune some large trees for safety and to promote healthy growth, and to safely remove a single tree based on our understanding of what is allowed in a 12 month period on our private property, and which has been causing us tremendous issues and hazards. The Town of Aurora web page states that: x Number of trees that can be removed from a private property in a 12-month period without obtaining a permit has been reduced to two (2) trees from four (4) trees. x A permit to be obtained prior to removal of a single heritage tree or a single tree in any heritage district as described by the Bylaw. Our tree is not a heritage tree, nor do we live in a heritage district according to the map on the same site. I have attached a picture of the website where the information was obtained. The tree being removed is an immature, approximately 15-20 year old, Black Walnut tree, that was here when we moved in 12 years ago, although it was quite a bit smaller. We preserved the tree throughout the home improvements that both sets of homeowners have done since that time. If I could have moved it to a better location, I would have. Our recognized love of the trees in our neighbourhood is even known by the town arborist with whom we have been working on an active succession tree planting plan, and is one of many reasons we moved into this vibrant, mature community. Despite our efforts with this particular tree, it's growth and location between the two homes at 53 and 51 Metcalfe, has become quite a nuisance, dangerous and very damaging to our properties. It's location so close to the homes, and over the driveway, pathway and common areas is simply not safe. As an environmentally conscious family (read "treehuggers"), I would absolutely not have even considered removing it otherwise. Below are some of the issues we have been dealing with as the tree has grown to its current size, and which likely even qualifies it as a "Hazard" tree. ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚϮ Page 115 of 142 1. The tree has become tightly wedged between the houses and we have had large branches resting on both roofs causing tearing and damage to the shingles, and more major damage to the eavestroughs. 2. Animals have easy access to our roof (as indicated above) and both homes have had repeated issues with animals in our attics (and walls). At 51 Metcalfe, they are currently dealing with a racoon infestation in their cupola and have had electrical wires chewed several times which has tripped the electrical breaker. They have concerns about the wires and the fire hazard that this presents and it was suggested that they remove all "access" to the roof as soon as possible as part of the "pest" removal process. 3. During the fall when the walnuts grow and ripen, they become very large and heavy. As it is still considered a "young" tree, the fruit is not as big as a baseball yet, which is the expected size of a mature tree, but they are often larger than a golf ball. They have dropped and hit our young children who play in the driveway, as well as a guest who was leaving our home. We have reason to believe the squirrels watch and wait for us and use us as target practice (this is meant to be a joke, but we have wondered....) 4. We believe that one of the walnuts cracked the windshield of a car parked in the driveway at 51 Metcalfe last fall. 5. We have overwhelming maintenance of our side door deck, walkway, and the driveway of 51 Metcalfe due to the staining caused by the walnuts when the animals break them open. 6. The children have been injured on the sharp jagged shards of the broken (and chewed) walnut pieces on the ground which require a regular massive cleanup effort. 7.The heavily leafed, smaller branches often plummet to the ground in this high traffic area which is hazardous to the children, residents and guests of both 51 and 53 Metcalfe. 8. As this tree continues to grow and mature, the root system will start to affect the foundation and drainage in our homes which already have water problems. We were shocked and surprised when Alan Chan from Town of Aurora By-Law Enforcement told our arborist to not only cease the tree removal, but also advised that we were not allowed to even trim or prune any of the other trees on our property! One of our mature trees has a branch that hits the vehicle of our neighbour at 51 Metcalfe EVERY time he pulls into his garage. We later learned that this statement made by by-law was erroneous, and the Town Parks arborist, Ian, came to our property to assess the situation, and to remove a couple of the branches in question from the other tree. We still have to reschedule a new (and very costly) visit with our privately hired arborist to return and complete the work that was not finished due to the cease order and erroneous comment made by By-Law. Having said that, we were not surprised that "someone" in our neighbourhood called By-law, which is why we made sure to check all of the information on-line at www.aurora.ca, and re-confirmed after what had happened next door at 55 Metcalfe when they were told to cease their tree removal. However, since we are not a heritage home as 55 Metcalfe is, our tree is not a designated Heritage Tree and we are not in Aurora's Northeast Heritage District, we should have full right to the removal of two (2)trees per year -- especially when you consider the very high taxes we pay to live where we do. Page 116 of 142 The fact that our house is evidently still "listed as heritage interest" (which I thought was no longer a "thing" after the vote a few years ago) should have no bearing on our ability as town taxpayers in this area to remove up to two (2) trees per year. I voted against the designation of our area as Heritage for many reasons and this is one of them. We have done a lot to our home and to our yard to make it livable for a suburban family after it had been separated into apartment units years ago. We have mature trees that need tending to on a regular basis (at a high cost), and occasionally, we need to remove the ones that are causing issues (also a high cost). I am a proud and active community member, homeowner and property owner in this town and have been for 18 years -- but most active during the last 12 since I have lived at 53 Metcalfe in the beating heart of our town. That being said, we would like to continue with the plan to remove the remaining piece of the Black Walnut tree in question and would like to officially have my home at 53 Metcalfe Street, de-listed as a property of interest (which I thought had already been done) due to the problems that this seems to be causing with my ability to properly maintain the home in which I am so proud. I think our town needs to pick the appropriate battles that make sense for our taxpayer dollars. Sincerely Jennifer Smith & Kevin Purcocks Home-owners of 53 Metcalfe Street, Aurora ON L4G 1E5 cell: cc. Patrick and Sunshine Davies Homeowners of 51 Metcalfe Street, Aurora ON L4G 1E5 cell: Page 117 of 142 53 Metcalfe Street – 45cm DBH Black Locust Tree after pruning – August 19, 2020 ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚϯPage 118 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Memorandum Operational Services ______________________________________________________________________ Re: Tree Removal Permit Application – 126 Temperance Street To: Heritage Advisory Committee Members From: Sara Tienkamp, Manager, Parks and Fleet Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendations 1. That the memorandum regarding Tree Removal Permit Application – 126 Temperance Street be received; and 2. That the Heritage Advisory Committee provide comment with respect to the proposed Tree Removal Permit Application for 126 Temperance Street. Background The subject property is listed on the Town of Aurora’s Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Tree Protection Bylaw 5850-16. Section 9 (1) (b) states: If a tree subject to an application is found by the Director to be a Heritage Tree, the Director shall not issue a permit unless the injury, destruction or removal is approved by Council following a review by the Town’s Heritage Advisory Committee. In early June 2020, the owner at 126 Temperance Street contacted the Parks Division to inquire about removal of a dying locust tree from their property. The tree apparently was dropping branches and causing a safety concern for the resident and their children when in the rear yard. The Town’s Forestry Technician attended site to determine if tree was of immediate danger or an imminent threat. It was determined that the tree is in a state of decline, due to the extreme deep freeze temperature variance over the past couple years. This extensive dieback in the crown is due to ruptured cells in the structure of the limbs. The arboriculture field has observed this problem throughout out the Region of York. Page 119 of 142 Tree Removal Permit Application – 126 Temperance Street September 14, 2020 2 of 2 Staff advised the resident that the locust tree was alive and though in decline, staff could not authorize removal as it was not an immediate danger and the property is listed on the Town’s Registry of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Bylaw 5850 -16. The Owners were advised that their application for removal would need to proceed through the Heritage Advisory Committee as per the bylaw for review, followed by Council approval. On July 21 2020, the Parks Division received a formal Tree Removal Permit Application from the owners of 126 Temperance Street included as supporting documentation are photos of the tree, proposed replanting plan and letter explaining the desire to remove the tree. The Heritage Advisory Committee’s comments on this application should be on based the impact on the heritage character of the neighbourhood, not the physical condition of the tree. Attachments Attachment #1 – Tree Removal Permit Application Attachment #2 – Letter from Property Owners Attachment #3 – Photo of Locust Tree for Removal Attachment #4 – Replanting Plan Page 120 of 142 Attachment 1Page 121 of 142 Page 122 of 142 Page 123 of 142 Attachment 2 Page 124 of 142 Attachment 3 Page 125 of 142 Attachment 4 Page 126 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Memorandum Planning and Development Services ______________________________________________________________________ Re: Alterations to a Listed Heritage Property – 95 Metcalfe Street To: Heritage Advisory Committee Members From: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Heritage Planning Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendations 1. That the memorandum regarding Alterations to a Listed Heritage Property – 95 Metcalfe Street be received for information. Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to inform the Heritage Advisory Committee about a building permit application submitted on May 11, 2020 to increase the ceiling height of the second floor of the existing dwelling at 95 Metcalfe Street (see Attachment 1). 95 Metcalfe Street is a non-designated property listed on the Town’s Heritage Register. While the proposed work does not require a heritage permit under the Ontario Heritage Act, the subject property may become designated in the future and hence the application is being presented to the Heritage Advisory Committee for information. Background On May 26, 2020, Council endorsed a new approach to reviewing building permit applications for listed properties. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the property must be evaluated and scored by the Heritage Advisory Committee’s Working Group. If the property is received a high score, the Town will pursue designation under the Ontario Heritage Act and control building alterations through the regular heritage permit process. If the evaluation suggests that the property is not worthy of designation, the result would be reported to the Heritage Advisory Committee for information, and the applicant would continue with their building permit application. On June 3, 2020, Planning Staff met with the Heritage Working Group to perform an evaluation of the subject property (see Attachment 2). The property scored 39.4/100 Page 127 of 142 Alterations to a Listed Heritage Property – 95 Metcalfe Street September 14, 2020 2 of 2 which puts it in the Group 3 category, suggesting that it is moderately significant and worthy of documentation and preservation as part of an historic grouping but not designation. The Working Group had no objection to the alteration being proposed to the building. The property will remain listed pending completion of the comprehensive review of the Heritage Registry. On June 4, 2020, Staff circulated the evaluation results and the detailed building permit drawings to the Heritage Advisory Committee for information. No comments were received. On June 9, 2020, Staff indicated to the Building Division that there are no heritage concerns with the proposed alterations. The application is still under review by the Building Division. Attachments Attachment 1 – Drawings for Building Permit PR20190319 Attachment 2 – Heritage Evaluation by the Working Group Page 128 of 142 "UUBDINFOUPage 129 of 142 Page 130 of 142 Page 131 of 142 Page 132 of 142 Page 133 of 142 Page 134 of 142 Page 135 of 142 Municipal Address: _______________________________________________ Legal Description: _____________________ Lot: ______ Cons: _______ Group: Date of Evaluation: ________________ Name of Recorder: _____________ HISTORICAL E G F P TOTAL Date of Construction 30 20 10 0 /30 Trends/Patterns/Themes 40 27 14 0 /40 Events 15 10 5 0 /15 Persons/Groups 15 10 5 0 /15 Archaeological (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Historic Grouping (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 Construction Date (Bonus) 10 /10 HISTORICAL TOTAL /100 ARCHITECTURAL E G F P TOTAL Design 20 13 7 0 /20 Style 30 20 10 0 /30 Architectural Integrity 20 13 7 0 /20 Physical Condition 20 13 7 0 /20 Design/Builder 10 7 3 0 /10 Interior (Bonus) 10 7 3 0 /10 ARCHITECTURAL TOTAL /100 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL Design Compatibility 40 27 14 0 /40 Community Context 20 13 7 0 /20 Landmark 20 13 7 0 /20 Site 20 13 7 0 /20 ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXTUAL TOTAL /100 SCORE INDIVIDUAL OLD AURORA Historical Score X 40% = _______ X 20% = _______ Architectural Score X 40% = _______ X 35% = _______ Enviro/Contextual Score X 20% = _______ X 45% = _______ TOTAL SCORE HERITAGE BUILDING EVALUATION: SCORESHEET GROUP 1 = 70-100 GROUP 2 = 45-69 GROUP 3 = 44 or less 22 7 5 7 61 4 4 4 10 25 41 61 25 41 12.2 8.75 18.45 39.4 95 Metcalfe Street June 3, 2020 Carlson Tsang 3PLAN 68 PT LOTS 18 & 19 $WWDFKPHQW 20 0 0 5 7 4 0 0 0 7 7 GROUP 3 = 44 or less 27 7 Page 136 of 142 100 John West Way Aurora, Ontario L4G 6J1 (905) 727-3123 aurora.ca Town of Aurora Memorandum Planning and Development Services ______________________________________________________________________ Re: Ontario Barn Preservation Letter To: Heritage Advisory Committee Members From: Carlson Tsang, Planner, Heritage Planning Date: September 14, 2020 ______________________________________________________________________ Recommendations 1. That the memorandum regarding the Ontario Barn Preservation Letter be received. Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to inform the Heritage Advisory Committee about a letter received from the Ontario Barn Preservation that offers recommendations to better protect heritage barns across the Province. Background On July 21, 2020, the Town received a letter from the Ontario Barn Preservation, a non- profit dedicated to preserving, documenting and promoting heritage barns in Ontario. The letter is to provide local municipalities with insights on how to strengthen the protection of heritage barns, which includes: - Strategies to comply with the requirements of the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae (MDS); - Changes to the Provincial policy related to lot creation in prime agricultural areas. - Provide a zoning category for small lots that are sized to permit limited livestock, alternative and value-added agricultural operations; and, - Review building code requirements for converting a barn to a non-livestock building. Attachments Attachment #1 – Ontario Barn Preservation Letter Page 137 of 142 Attachment 1 Page 138 of 142 Page 139 of 142 Page 140 of 142 Page 141 of 142 Page 142 of 142