Agenda - Heritage Advisory Committee - 20190401Heritage
Advisory Committee
Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
7 p.m.
Holland Room
Aurora Town Hall
Public Release
March 25, 2019
Town of Aurora
Heritage Advisory Committee
Meeting Agenda
Date: Monday, April 1, 2019
Time and Location: 7 p.m., Holland Room, Aurora Town Hall
Appointment of Committee Chair and Vice-Chair
Recommended:
That a Committee member be appointed as Chair of the Heritage Advisory
Committee; and
That a Committee member be appointed as Vice Chair of the Heritage Advisory
Committee.
1. Approval of the Agenda
Recommended:
That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved.
2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof
3. Receipt of the Minutes
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of March 5, 2019
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019 Page 2 of 3
Recommended:
That the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting minutes of March 5, 2019, be
received for information.
4.Delegations
5.Matters for Consideration
1.HAC19-001 – Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
97 Wellington Street East
Recommended:
1.That Report No. HAC19-001 be received; and
2.That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
(a)That the property located at 97 Wellington Street East be removed
from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest;
(b)That in the event of a demolition application, the north elevation
stained glass window and all woodwork from the main interior
staircase from the ground to the upper floors be salvaged in
accordance with the Town of Aurora’s Architectural Salvage Program
Guide and re-used in any potential development on site; and
(c)That prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, future building
elevations be subject to Planning Staff approval or review by the
Design Review Panel to ensure that the design of any replacement
building is done sympathetically.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019 Page 3 of 3
2.HAC19-003 – Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad
Recommended:
1.That Report No. HAC19-003 be received; and
2.That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
(a)That the property located at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad be
removed from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage
Value or Interest;
(b)That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval 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; and
(c)That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval 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.
6.Informational Items
7.Adjournment
Town of Aurora
Heritage Advisory Committee
Meeting Minutes
Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2019
Time and Location: 7 p.m., Holland Room, Aurora Town Hall
Committee Members: Neil Asselin, John Green, Matthew Kinsella, Jeff Lanthier,
Hoda Soliman, Councillor Sandra Humfryes, Mayor Tom
Mrakas (ex-officio)
Members Absent: Bob McRoberts
Other Attendees: Councillor Wendy Gaertner, Councillor Rachel Gilliland,
Councillor Michael Thompson, Robin McDougall, Director of
Community Services, Adam Robb, Planner, and Linda
Bottos, Council/Committee Coordinator
Appointment of Committee Chair and Vice Chair
It was agreed that Councillor Humfryes act as Chair for the meeting, and that the Chair
and Vice Chair of the Committee would be discussed and appointed at the next meeting
on April 1, 2019.
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
Introductions were made around the table.
1. Approval of the Agenda
Moved by Neil Asselin
Seconded by Jeff Lanthier
That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved.
Carried
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 1 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 2 of 7
2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof
There were no declarations of pecuniary interest under the Municipal Conflict of
Interest Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.50.
3. Receipt of the Minutes
None
4. Delegations
(a) Michael de Rond, Town Clerk
Re: Advisory Committee Member Education and Training
Mr. de Rond presented an overview of the roles and responsibilities of an
advisory committee, committee members, the chair, and staff. He noted the
importance of an advisory committee as a tool for civic engagement and
highlighted various aspects of procedure, including the Town’s Procedure By-
law and the new Code of Conduct for Local Boards.
Moved by Neil Asselin
Seconded by John Green
That the comments of the delegation be received for information.
Carried
(b) Adam Robb, Planner
Re: Heritage Advisory Committee Update
Mr. Robb presented an update including the Committee’s role in preserving
the Town’s heritage resources, matters under the Ontario Heritage Act, 1990,
other research and advisory duties, and ongoing heritage projects in Town.
Moved by John Green
Seconded by Neil Asselin
That the comments of the delegation be received for information.
Carried
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 2 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 3 of 7
5. Matters for Consideration
1. HAC19-001 – Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 97
Wellington Street East
Staff introduced the consultant, Mr. Chris Pretotto of Cspace Architecture, who
presented a brief overview of the intent of the delisting request including the
demolition of the existing structure and construction of a new, two-storey office
building, designed sympathetically to the adjacent properties.
The Committee consented on a two-thirds vote to allow a member of the public to speak
to the item.
Mr. David Heard provided some historical background connected to previous
owners of the property and requested that the Committee consider ways to
incorporate elements of the existing structure, including the stained glass
transom, into the proposed new building.
The Committee expressed concerns regarding the Cultural Heritage
Assessment attached to the staff report and suggested that the Town perform
its own assessment. The Committee further suggested that there might be an
opportunity to incorporate the existing building into the proposed design. Staff
noted that the recommendation includes salvaging the stained glass window
and woodwork from the main interior staircase.
Motion to refer
Moved by Neil Asselin
Seconded by Matthew Kinsella
1. That Report No. HAC19-001 – Request to Remove a Property from the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 97
Wellington Street East, be referred back to staff for further assessment of
the property by the Heritage Evaluation Working Group and a report back
to the Committee at the April 1, 2019 meeting.
Motion to refer
Carried
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 3 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 4 of 7
2. HAC19-002 – Heritage Permit Application, 70-72 Centre Street East, File:
NE-HCD-HPA-19-02
Staff provided a brief overview of the report and background, noting that the
architectural features would be retained and the proposal is in keeping with the
Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District Plan.
The Committee inquired about various aspects of the proposed restoration and
materials, and expressed general support for the staff recommendations.
Moved by John Green
Seconded by Jeff Lanthier
1. That Report No. HAC19-002 be received; and
2. That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
(a) That Heritage Permit Application NE-HCD-HPA-19-02 be approved to
permit the restoration of the subject property and removal of the frame
garage as shown on the submitted plans; and
(b) That the property owner photodocument any original construction
revealed during the proposed restoration of the property; and
(c) That the property owner continue to seek guidance from Town staff
and the Heritage Conservation District Plan on the final selection of
detail elements visible from the street.
Carried
3. HAC19-003 – Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 1625-1675
St. John’s Sideroad
Staff provided a brief overview of the report and background, noting that a
Heritage Evaluation Working Group scoresheet had not been completed and
the heritage impact assessment determined that the property does not meet
the criteria for designation.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 4 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 5 of 7
The Committee discussed and inquired about various aspects of the property
including any options to designate the wood lot as a cultural landscape,
salvage the fieldstones and barn foundation, and pay homage to its pastoral
and equestrian history through the future design of buildings, fencing and
landscaping on the property.
Motion to refer
Moved by Matthew Kinsella
Seconded by Neil Asselin
1. That Report No. HAC19-003 – Request to Remove a Property from the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, 1625-
1675 St. John’s Sideroad, be referred back to staff for further assessment
of the property by the Heritage Evaluation Working Group and a report
back to the Committee at the April 1, 2019 meeting.
Motion to refer
Carried
4. HAC19-004 – Heritage Permit Application, 22 Church Street, File: HPA-
19-03
The Committee consented to consider Item 4 prior to consideration of Item 1.
Staff introduced members of the project team for the Library Square and
Church Street School House Addition project, including: David Leinster of The
Planning Partnership; Roland Colthoff and Thomas Nemeskeri of RAW Design
Inc.; and Philip Evans of ERA Architects Inc., who provided an overview of the
proposed Church Street School addition as part of the Library Square
redevelopment, and answered questions.
Moved by Neil Asselin
Seconded by John Green
That the consultants’ presentation be received for information.
Carried
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 5 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 6 of 7
The Committee inquired about various aspects of the proposed addition and
expressed concerns and suggestions regarding the roofline height and style,
external patina and massing of the building veil, building depth and stability,
water table, visual impact of all four sides, shadowing, and design of addition
more sympathetic to the existing building. The consultants acknowledged the
comments of the Committee and noted they will be taken into consideration.
Moved by Neil Asselin
Seconded by Matthew Kinsella
1. That Report No. HAC19-004 be received; and
2. That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
(a) That Heritage Permit Application HPA-19-03 be approved to permit the
addition to the subject property as shown on the submitted plans; and
(b) That the property owner photodocument any original construction
revealed during the proposed addition to the property; and
(c) That Planning staff continue to liaise with the Ontario Heritage Trust
and ensure the addition remains sympathetic of the heritage resource
through all phases of the development.
Carried
6. Informational Items
None
7. New Business
Staff advised that the process of establishing a Design Review Panel (DRP) is
underway, noting that DRP meetings will also be held bi-monthly, alternating with
the Heritage Advisory Committee meetings.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 6 of 7
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 Page 7 of 7
8. Adjournment
Moved by John Green
Seconded by Neil Asselin
That the meeting be adjourned at 9:16 p.m.
Carried
Committee recommendations are not binding on the Town unless adopted by Council.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Minutes
Page 7 of 7
Town of Aurora
Heritage Advisory Committee Report No. HAC19-001
Subject: Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
97 Wellington Street East
Prepared by: Adam Robb, Planner
Department: Planning and Development Services
Date: April 1, 2019
Recommendation
1. That Report No. HAC19-001 be received; and
2. That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
a) That the property located at 97 Wellington Street East be removed from the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest;
b) That in the event of a demolition application, the north elevation stained
glass window and all woodwork from the main interior staircase from the
ground to the upper floors be salvaged in accordance with the Town of
Aurora’s Architectural Salvage Program Guide and re-used in any potential
development on site; and
c) That prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, future building elevations
be subject to Planning Staff approval or review by the Design Review Panel
to ensure that the design of any replacement building is done
sympathetically.
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with recommendations from the
Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the request to remove the property located at
97 Wellington Street East from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage
Value or Interest.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 1 of 145
April 1, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Report No. HAC19-001
• The house on the property was constructed circa 1910 and can be described as
a 1.5 storey frame structure clad in stucco.
• A Cultural Heritage Assessment and Heritage Working Group Evaluation of the
property were performed and it was determined that the property does not have
sufficient heritage value for designation, but that two features are worth salvaging
– the north elevation stained glass window and all woodwork from the main
interior staircase from the ground to upper floors.
• The owner has submitted a conceptual site plan and elevations for a new 2
storey office development on the property.
Background
The owner of the property located at 97 Wellington Street East submitted an Application
to request that the subject property be removed from the Aurora Register of Properties
of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest on December 18, 2018.
Location
The subject property is located on the east side of Yonge Street between Larmont
Street and Berczy Street. It is approximately 120 metres west of the Aurora GO station
(See Attachment 1). The property is within the Aurora Promenade and is listed and non-
designated on the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
Provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act for the delisting process
According to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, a Municipal Register of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest may include properties that have not been designated under
the Ontario Heritage Act, but that the Council of a Municipality believes to be of cultural
heritage value or interest.
The principal implication of properties non-designated and listed on the Aurora Register
pertains to subsection 27. (3) of the Ontario Heritage Act where,
If property included in the register under subsection (1.2) has not been
designated under section 29, the owner of the property shall not demolish
or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the demolition
or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives the council
of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the owner’s
intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or to permit the
demolition or removal of the building or structure. 2006, c. 11, Sched. B,
s. 11 (2).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 2 of 145
April 1, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Report No. HAC19-001
The purpose of providing Council with 60 days to determine the Notice of Intention is to
provide time to determine whether or not the property should be designated under the
Ontario Heritage Act. According to subsection 27(1.3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, the
Council of a Municipality shall, before removing the reference to such a property from
the Register, consult with its Municipal Heritage Committee.
Analysis
History of the Property
The construction date of the house at 97 Wellington Street East can be readily
established. In 1903, the builder, George T. Browning, purchased the property. The
1904 fire Insurance Plan shows that the property was vacant. In 1910, the Aurora
Banner reported that Edward Johnston purchased the recently completed house. The
1914 Fire Insurance Plan also shows the existence of the house. Therefore, the house
was built in 1910. Interior casings also support the 1910 construction date.
Heritage Evaluation of the Existing Building
The Ontario Heritage Act provides criteria for determining cultural heritage value or
interest through Ontario Regulation 9/06. This Regulation requires that a building must
exhibit significant design/physical, associative, or contextual value to warrant
designation.
The House is a 1 ½ storey frame structure clad in stucco with a gable roof with the
gable facing the street. It has a one storey verandah extending around the north-west
corner of the House. It was designed in a vernacular interpretation of Edwardian
Classicism, although it lacks many of the details of that architectural style. It has been
altered, although the basic form, massing, fenestration and roof shape of the structure
remain intact.
Based on the applicant’s Cultural Heritage Assessment, the property at 97 Wellington
Street East does not have sufficient cultural value or interest as defined by regulation
issued under section 29 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act to warrant designation. The
house does not have significant design value or physical value having been significantly
altered; has only marginal historical or associative value being a modest work of the
Aurora builder, George T. Browning; and has only marginal contextual value.
The Heritage Evaluation Working Group also met to perform an objective evaluation of
the subject property on March 7, 2019 (See Attachment 5). The Evaluation Criteria for
assessing the cultural heritage value of buildings was developed by the Town in
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 3 of 145
April 1, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Report No. HAC19-001
consultation with its Municipal Heritage Committee. As per Section 13.3 e) of the Official
Plan, priority will be given to designating all Group 1 heritage resources.
The Evaluation found the subject property to score Group 3, with an overall rating of
38.9/100. The designation of the property would not be initiated by the Town unless it
was part of a historic grouping of significant heritage resources - which the property is
not. Therefore, the property is not considered a significant heritage resource, and only
has marginal heritage value.
Despite being deemed a non-significant heritage property by the Cultural Heritage
Assessment and Heritage Evaluation Working Group, it is noted that the north elevation
stained glass window and all woodwork from the main interior staircase from the ground
to upper floors of the property are worth saving as unique heritage features. These
items can be salvaged in accordance with the Town of Aurora’s Architectural Salvage
Program Guide and be re-used in any potential new development on site.
Neighbourhood Context
The Heritage Evaluation determined that the property is not part of an intact heritage
streetscape, as only one property to the east has heritage value.
The subject property also does not add any heritage value or cultural significance as
part of the Aurora Promenade.
Proposed Concept Plan
The owner wishes to remove the property from the Aurora Register as a non-designated
‘listed’ property with the intention of demolishing the existing structure on the subject
property to construct a new 2 storey office building (See Attachment 3).
Any replacement building on the property will be designed sympathetically, and it is
recommended that setbacks and height align with other adjacent buildings along
Wellington Street East and a gable roof be incorporated on the north portion of the
replacement building with the gable end facing Wellington Street.
Legal Considerations
None.
Financial Implications
There are no financial implications.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 4 of 145
April 1, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Report No. HAC19-001
Communications Considerations
No communication required.
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.
Alternatives to the Recommendation
1. Refuse the application and recommend that the property remain listed on the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
2. Refuse the application and recommend Designation under Part IV of the Ontario
Heritage Act.
Conclusions
A Cultural Heritage Assessment and Heritage Working Group Evaluation were
conducted on the subject property, determining that it does not have sufficient cultural
heritage value to warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The evaluations
recommended that the north elevation stained glass window and main interior staircase
design features be salvaged and re-used, and that the proposed elevations of any
replacement building be subject to approval from Planning Staff and/or review by the
Design Review Panel to ensure sympathetic redevelopment of the site.
It is recommended that 97 Wellington Street East be removed from the Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Location Plan
Attachment 2 – Cultural Heritage Assessment (2018)
Attachment 3 – Conceptual Site Plan
Attachment 4 – Heritage Inventory Information Sheet
Attachment 5 – Heritage Evaluation Working Group
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 5 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019Item 1 Page 6 of 145
Centre StreetWellington Street EastBerczy StreetLarmont StreetWalton DriveRailway / GO Transit LineLOCATION PLANMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Department, February 11, 2019. Base Data Provided by York Region.¯01020304050MetresHAC19-00197 WELLINGTON STREET EASTATTACHMENT 1SUBJECT LANDSHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 7 of 145
CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT
97 WELLINGTON STREET EAST
(PART LOT 55, SS WELLINGTON ST, PLAN 68A)
TOWN OF AURORA, ONTARIO
August 2018
Prepared for:
cspace architecture
Prepared by:
WAYNE MORGAN
HERITAGE PLANNER
North Elevation
1981 2018
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 8 of 145
CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT
97 WELLINGTON STREET EAST
(PART LOT 55, SS WELLINGTON ST, PLAN 68A)
TOWN OF AURORA, ONTARIO
August 2018
Prepared for:
cspace architecture
Prepared by:
Wayne Morgan
Heritage Planner
21 Land’s End
Sutton West, Ontario, L0E 1R0
Tel: 905-722-5398
e-mail: wayne.morgan@sympatico.ca
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 9 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page i
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The property at 97 Wellington Street East in Aurora is included by the Aurora Town Council in the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under the Ontario Heritage Act
(OHA). The property is listed, but not designated under the OHA. The owner through his agent
retained Wayne Morgan, Heritage Planner, to prepare this Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA) which
identifies, evaluates and assesses the heritage values on and near the subject property and recommends
whether it merits designation and any mitigating measures.
The property history was thoroughly researched and documented. The House was built in 1910 by
George T. Browning, an Aurora builder, as a speculative venture and sold to Edward Johnston, an
excise officer. In 1911, the House was sold to John Hutchinson, whose family owned it until 1932. It
was later owned by Hugh and Hazel Richards (1950 – 1987).
The property was documented in photographs and measured floor plan sketches. The House is a 1 ½
storey frame structure clad in stucco with a poured concrete foundation and a gable roof with the gable
facing the street. It has a one storey veranda extending around the north-west corner. It was designed
in a vernacular interpretation of Edwardian Classicism, but lacks many of that style’s details. It has
been altered, although the basic form, massing and fenestration of the structure remain intact. The
veranda has been reduced in length across the principal elevation and all windows, save a stain glass
transom, have been replaced with modern sash. The landscape consists of a small, grassed front yard
with a tree and a gravel parking pad, and a grassed rear yard enclosed by a board fence (partially) and
shrubs.
The property was evaluated for cultural heritage value using two approaches – criteria established by
provincial regulation under the OHA and a grading system unique to Aurora. It was determined that
the property does not have sufficient cultural heritage value using either approach to warrant
designation under the OHA, although two features are worth salvaging – a stained glass window and
the main interior staircase.
The cultural heritage values of adjacent and nearby properties were considered. The subject property
is not part of an intact heritage streetscape and its demolition would not adversely affect the cultural
heritage values of adjacent / nearby heritage properties provided that any replacement building be
sympathetically designed relative to those properties.
This CHA recommends that the Town of Aurora:
1. approve the removal of the property at 97 Wellington Street East from the Aurora
Heritage Register subject to the owner agreeing to:
i. salvage, in the event of a demolition application and in accordance with the
Town’s Architectural Salvage Program Guide, the north elevation stained glass
window and the main staircase; and
ii. design any replacement building sympathetically with adjacent properties
including in terms of setback, height and roof shape; and
2. accept this CHA as sufficient heritage documentation of the property at 97 Wellington
Street East should a demolition application be submitted for the property and require no
further heritage documentation of the owner.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 10 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page ii
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
PROJECT PERSONNEL
Wayne Morgan
Heritage Planner
Member, Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals
Member, Canadian Institute of Planners
Member, Ontario Professional Planners Institute
President, Community Heritage Ontario
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 11 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page iii
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT 2
2.1 Location 2
2.2 Ownership and Legal Description 3
2.3 Area Character and Physiography 3
2.4 Context – General Character 5
2.5 Context – Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties 5
3.0 HERITAGE POLICIES 6
3.1 The Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement (2014) 6
3.2 Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) 7
3.3 York Region Official Plan 7
3.4 Aurora Official Plan and Zoning By-law 8
3.7 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of
Historic Places in Canada 10
3.8 Municipal Heritage Status of the Subject and Adjacent/Nearby
Heritage Properties 11
4.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY 12
4.1 Development of the Area 13
4.2 The Subject Property 17
5.0 BUILT AND LANDSCAPE RESOURCE DESCRIPTIONS 23
5.1 House 23
5.2 House Interior 26
5.2 Landscape 28
5.3 Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties 28
6.0 HERITAGE EVALUATION 29
6.1 Introduction 29
6.2 Application of Provincial Criteria 29
6.2.1 House at 97 Wellington Street East 29
6.2.2 Landscape
6.3 Application of Aurora Criteria 33
6.4 Summary of Cultural Heritage Values 35
6.5 Statement of Cultural Heritage Values and Attributes 35
6.6 Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties 36
6.7 Heritage Policy Compliance 36
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 37
7.1 Conclusions 37
7.2 Recommendations 38
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 12 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page iv
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
SOURCES CONSULTED 40
APPENDICIES
A Property Survey
B Photographs – Context
C Maps
D Aerial Photographs
E 97 Wellington Street East House Exterior Photographs
F 97 Wellington Street East House – Floor Plan Sketches
G 97 Wellington Street East House Interior Photographs
H Landscape
I Property Ownership History
J Assessment Roll Information
K Ontario Heritage Act, Regulation 9/06
L Historic Photographs
M Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties
N Town of Aurora and Region of York Planning Document Maps
O Curriculum Vitae – Wayne Morgan
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 General Location Map [Source: Yorkmaps, 2018]. 2
Figure 2.2 Subject Site and its Context [Yorkmaps, 2018, image 2017]. 2
Figure 2.3
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.6
Figure 4.7
Aurora and the Subject Property in 1946 [Source: National
Airphoto Library].
Yonge Street in Aurora looking north, circa 1870. [Source:
McIntyre, 14]
The Grant Trunk Railway Station in Aurora, circa 1910.
[Source: McIntyre 116]
Historical Development of Aurora to 1971. [Source: Regional
Municipality of York, Historical Development, Insert]
John Mosley [Source: Aurora Museum & Archives]
Henry Quetton St. George [Source: Stamp]
South Side of Wellington Street East between Larmont and
Berczy Streets - Maps & Aerial Photographs 1853-2017.
Aurora Fire Insurance Plan, 1904, Revised to 1913.
4
15
16
16
18
18
19
21
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.3
Figure 5.4
House at 97 Wellington St E, East and North Elevations, 2018.
House, 97 Wellington Street East, Staircase.
York County Mouldings– 1910s-1920s [Source: Duncan, 159].
Front Yard, 97 Wellington Street East, 2018.
23
27
27
28
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 13 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page v
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.3
Table 2.1
Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 6.1
Table 9.1
LIST OF FIGURES
(continued)
99 (left) & 97 (right) Wellington St. E. 2018.
95-103 Wellington St E (above), 95 Wellington St E, 2013.
Aurora Heritage Evaluation Score Sheet for 97 Wellington
Street East.
LIST OF TABLES
Adjacent /Nearby Heritage Properties
Historical Timelines – 97 Wellington Street East (Part Lot 80,
Con 1 EYS; Pt Lot 15 ss Wellington, Plan 68A)
1911 – 1921 Census, Aurora – 97 Wellington St E., by
Household Head
Application of Heritage Criteria to the Resources at 97
Wellington Street East, Aurora
Policy Evaluation of the Proposal to Relocate the John S.
Millard House
page
32
32
34
5
17
21
30
49
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 14 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 1
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The property at 97 Wellington Street East in Aurora is listed by Aurora Town Council in the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. The property contains a
house that was estimated to have been constructed in 1910. The property owner is seeking to
have the property removed from the Register and intends to demolish the structure. Wayne
Morgan, Heritage Planner, was retained by cspace architecture on behalf of the owner to
prepare this assessment of the cultural heritage values of the property in its context in
accordance with the provincial and municipal policies and to make any recommendations
considered appropriate. The curriculum vitae for Wayne Morgan is contained in Appendix O.
The study area contains lands and a building within part of Lot 15 in the portion of Plan 68A
on the south side of Wellington Street East, which is in Lot 80 in the first concession east of
Yonge Street (EYS) in the Town of Aurora. The study area is located on south side of
Wellington Street East between Larmont and Berczy Streets.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 15 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 2
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT
2.1 Location
The property is located in the Town of Aurora (originally Township of Whitchurch) in the
Regional Municipality (formerly County) of York, in Lot 80 in the First Concession EYS,
now part of Lot 15, south side of Wellington Street, Plan 68A, on the south side of
Wellington Street East between Larmont and Berczy Streets (Figures 2.1 and 2.2). The
property is bounded on the north by Wellington Street East, on the west by the east lot line of
Lot 14, on the east by a line running roughly through the middle of lot 15 and on the south by
a line running parallel to the south lot line of Lot 15.
Figure No. 2.1
General Location Map
[Source: Yorkmaps, 2018]
Figure No. 2.2
Subject Site and its Context
[Yorkmaps 2018, image
2017].
Subject
Property
Subject
Property
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 16 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 3
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2.2 Ownership and Legal Description
Currently the property is owned by:
BFKN Holdings Inc.
10899 Keele Street
Maple, Ontario L6A 0K6
The short legal description of property is:
part of Lot 15 on the south side of Wellington Street, Plan 68A as in instrument
R699660, Aurora.
Appendix A contains a survey of the property which is approximately 0.05 hectares (0.13
acres) or 506.3 m2 (5,449.9 ft2) in size. This survey has been placed within the context of the
property fabric of the area.
The subject property has been addressed by the municipality as 97 Wellington Street East.
2.3 Area Character and Physiography
As shown on the maps and survey (Appendices A & C), the subject property is relatively
level. It is in an area that generally slopes to the northwest draining into creeks feeding the
Holland River, which drains north to Lake Simcoe. No permanent creeks or watercourses are
on the subject property. The property is within an area that has been developed for urban
purposes since around the turn of the twentieth century. Yonge Street, to the west is,
historically, a major transportation route, while Wellington Street has served historically as an
important east-west route in the area.
The area character identified in the 1929 – 1930 topographic map (Appendix C) is also
illustrated in a 1946 aerial photograph (Figure 2.3) which shows the subject property near the
eastern edge of the Aurora urban area. The railway, one block to the east of the subject
property, served as the east limit of the Aurora urban area well into the 1970s. Factories
associated with the railway were located to the south of the subject property.
Since 1954, there has been little change in land uses in the area immediately around the
subject property when Figures 2.3 and 2.2 are compared. While some factories to the south
have ceased their original use, the structures continue in new uses. In general, the area retains
a low rise urban character.
Detailed aerial photographs of the subject property in 1927, 1946, 1954, 1970, 1999 and 2017
are found in Appendix D.
The property is located in the Schomberg Clay Plains physiographic regions1. The
Schomberg Clay Plain is described as:
1 Chapman and Putnam, pp 296 – 299 & 299 - 307.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 17 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 4
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Located near Schomberg, Newmarket, and to the north of Lake Scugog, the three
larger areas, taken together cover about 475 square miles, and are included
under the name of the Schomberg clay plains. In the first two areas the surface
under the clay is that of a drumlinized till plain. The smaller drumlins are
completely covered, but many of the larger ones escaped complete burial
although the clay may occur well up the slopes of the hills. The average depth of
in the immediate area the clay deposit seems to be about 15 feet … Since the
rolling relief of the underlying till plain has not entirely been eliminated these
areas are not so flat as many lake plains. …
.
Figure No. 2.3
Aurora and the Subject Property in 1946 [Source: National Airphoto Library].
Subject
Property
Yonge
Street
Railway
Wellington
Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 18 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 5
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2.4 Context - General Character
The subject property is within an area that remains urban in character (Figure 2.2).
As shown by the photographs in Appendix B, the properties surrounding the subject property
remain largely urban in character, with the predominant building type being house-form
structures. Some of these buildings have changed in use from residential to commercial.
Wellington Street is a heavily traveled, paved, wide, two lane arterial road with an urban
character – concrete curbs, buried storm drains and utility wires, and sidewalks on both sides
of the street. There are signalized intersections on Wellington Street at Yonge Street and at
Industrial Parkway. There is a level railway crossing 1 ½ blocks east of the subject site.
2.5 Context - Adjacent and Nearby Heritage Properties
Heritage resource properties near or adjacent to the subject property include one abutting and
six nearby. They are illustrated in Appendix M and listed below:
Table 2.1 Adjacent / Nearby Heritage Properties
Address Estimated
date built
Heritage Values – all house-form
buildings
Distance from 97
Wellington St E No. Name
99 Wellington St E C 1910 - 11 1 ½ storey, red brick veneer; Edwardian
Classicism; 1 storey front & side veranda. Abuts
91 Wellington St E C 1910
2 storey, brick veneer, Edwardian
Classicism; 1 storey front veranda.
30.4 metres; same side
of street – 1
intervening property
105 Wellington St E
Unknown –
between
1954 & 1970
1 storey, modern synthetic siding on a
concrete foundation; gable roof
30.6 metres; same side
of street – 1
intervening property
98 Wellington St E
Unknown;
possibly
1875
1 ½ storey, frame structure with modern
synthetic siding; ‘Ontario Cottage’ – centre
gable; symmetrical façade; veranda over
front door only.
38.7 metres; on
opposite side of street
104 Wellington St E Unknown 2 storey, solid brick structure; extensively
altered.
25.3 metres; on
opposite side of street
108 Wellington St E Unknown 2 storey, frame structure with modern
synthetic siding;
40.1 metres; on
opposite side of street
110
-
112
Wellington St E Unknown
1 ½ storey, frame structure with stucco and
modern synthetic siding; semi-detached
house – centre two storey projecting gable
in each semi; veranda between the
projecting gables
38.9 metres; on
opposite side of street
No other potential heritage properties were identified adjacent to or near the subject site.
95 Wellington Street East, which abuts the subject property on the west, is listed in the
Heritage Register but the original house was demolished and replaced by a new structure.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 19 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 6
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
3.0 HERITAGE POLICIES
3.1 The Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement (2014)
Although no planning application is being submitted at this time, this policy, which relates to
planning applications, is being considered relative to the possible demolition of the house at
97 Wellington Street East.
Section 2 of the Planning Act identifies “matters of provincial interest, which includes the
conservation of significant features of architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or
scientific interest.”2
Section 3 of the Planning Act enables the Province to issue Policy Statements on matters of
Provincial Interest. Section 2.6 of the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) (PPS) issued under
the Act addresses Cultural Heritage, states:
Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes
shall be conserved.
The PPS provides the following definitions to the italicized terms.
Significant means in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, “resources that
have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important
contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a
people.”
Built heritage resources “means a building, structure, monument, installations or
any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value
or interest as identified by a community, including Aboriginal community. Built
heritage resources are generally located on property that has been designated under
Parts IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, provincial and/or
federal registers.”
Cultural heritage landscape means a defined geographical area that may have been
modified by human activities and is identified as having cultural heritage value or
interest by a community including an Aboriginal community. The area may
involve features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites or natural elements
that are valued together for their interrelationship meaning or association. …
conserved means “the identification, protection, management and use of built
heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a
manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained under the
Ontario Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the implementation of
recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment and/or
2Ontario Ministry of Culture. Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, p 1.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 20 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 7
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
heritage impact assessment. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development
approaches can be included in these plans and assessments.”
This Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA) examined only section 2.6 of the PPS.
3.2 Ontario Heritage Act (OHA)
Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act enables a municipality to list and designate properties of
cultural value or interest after consultation with its heritage advisory committee, if one is
appointed. Section 27 of the Act requires the municipal clerk to keep a register of properties
of cultural heritage value or interest. Subsection 27.1 of the Act allows municipal councils to
include properties of cultural heritage value that have not been designated (listed properties)
on the register after the council has consulted with its heritage advisory committee.
The Provincial Government has established criteria for determining the cultural heritage value
or interest of properties through Regulation 9/06 (Appendix K).
Once a property is designated, demolition or alterations that may affect the heritage attributes
may not occur without municipal council approval. An owner may appeal Council’s decision
on an application to alter or demolish to the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal. Once a
property is listed in the municipal register under the Act, any application to demolish a
building on a listed property is delayed for 60 days from the date when Council is notified of
the intent to demolish, during which Council may pursue designation of the property.
3.3 York Region Official Plan
The Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of York (ROP) was adopted by Regional
Council on December 16, 2009 and approved by the Minister with modifications. The ROP
has been appealed in part to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Parts of the Plan have
been approved by the OMB. The Plan has also been amended in part by Regional Council
since 2009. The April, 2016 consolidated ROP has been reviewed for this report.
Section 3.4 of the ROP provides the following relevant cultural heritage policies:
3. To require local municipalities to adopt official plan policies to conserve
significant cultural heritage resources.
11. To require local municipalities to adopt official plan policies to conserve
significant cultural heritage resources and ensure that development and site
alteration on adjacent properties will conserve the heritage attributes of that
property.
With respect to policy 3, the Aurora Offical Plan (OP) contains policies for the conservation
of significant cultural heritage resource.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 21 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 8
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
With respect to policy 11, the Aurora OP has policies addressing the conservation of heritage
resources which are discussed below.
In the ROP, the subject property is designated ‘Urban Area’ and ‘Protected Countryside’ on
the Regional Structure Map (Appendix N). There are no additional policies in these land use
designations regarding the conservation of cultural heritage resources.
3.5 Aurora Official Plan and Zoning By-law
The Official Plan (OP) for the Town of Aurora was adopted in September 2010 and revised in
2015. The most recent version of the OP on the Town’s website was reviewed for this report.
In the OP, the heritage objectives and policies are contained in Chapter 13, Conserving
Cultural Heritage Resources. OP heritage objectives relevant to this project are:
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 view; and
Cultural heritage conservation policies of the Aurora OP relevant to this project are:
13.3 Policies for Built Cultural Heritage Resources
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;
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.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 22 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 9
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
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 Heritage Committee. The identification
and evaluation of cultural heritage resources must be based on the
following core values:
i. asethetic, design or physical value;
ii. historical or associative value; and/or,
iii. contextual value.
e) Priority will be given to designating all Group 1 heritage resources in
the Register and heritage cemeteries under the Ontario Heritage Act.
f) The Town will give immediate consideration to the designation of any
heritage resource under the Ontario Heritage Act if that resource is
threatened with demolition, significant alterations or other potentially
adverse impacts.
g) Council may adopt a Demolition Control By-Law to prevent the
demolition, destruction or inappropriate alteration of residential
heritage buildings.
h) Designated and significant cultural heritage resources in the Town are
shown in the Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Map.
n) In the event that demolition, salvage, dismantling or relocation of a built
heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape is found to be necessary
as determined by Council, thorough archival documentation of the
heritage resources is required to be undertaken by the proponent, at no
cost to the Town. The information shall be made available to the Town
for archival purposes.
o) The above-noted archival documentation must be prepared by a
qualified person and include at least the following as appropriate, or
additional matters as specified by the Town:
i. architectural measured drawings;
ii. land use history; and
iii. photographs, maps and other available material about the cultural
heritage resource in its surrounding context.
s) The Heritage Resource Area as identified on Schedule ‘D’ is considered
to be of primary significance to the Town’s heritage. Appropriate
planning tools shall be applied to the review and approval of any
proposed development within the area including site plan control.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 23 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 10
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Redefining or amending the Heritage Resource Area’s boundary shall
require Council approval.
The subject property is not identified as a designated heritage property nor is it part of the
Northeast Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District as shown on OP Schedule D. However
it is within an area identified as ‘Heritage Resource Area’.
The Aurora OP, Schedule A, designates the subject property ‘The Aurora Promenade’ while
OP Schedule B1, The Aurora Promenade Secondary Plan, designates the subject property
‘Downtown Shoulder’ (Appendix N). The purpose of that designation “is to protect and
reinforce the Area’s heritage ‘residential’ character and identity.” The designation is
predominantly residential with a potential for infill development sensitive to heritage
resources and adjacent neighbourhoods. The minimum and maximum building heights are
two and three storeys (Schedule B2), while the maximum lot coverage is 80%. The OP
policy 11.9 a) permits the use of density and height incentives to achieve, among other
matters, heritage preservation.
The Town’s Zoning By-law 2213-78 as amended3, zones the subject property ‘Promenade
Downtown Shoulder Special Mixed Density Residential’ (PDS4) permitting a variety of
residential and commercial uses with a maximum lot coverage of 35% (Appendix N). The
Zoning By-law does not have any additional heritage requirements.
.
3.6 Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada
In 2005, Parks Canada produced a set of standards and guidelines for the conservation of
historic places in Canada. These standards and guidelines are intended to identify best
practices in the management of heritage resources which include buildings, landscapes and
archaeological sites. The approach taken in developing the standards and guidelines was
informed by international charters for the conservation of heritage resources developed under
the auspices of ICOMOS, the international council on historic sites and monuments, a body
of heritage professionals which advises the United Nations Educational and Scientific
Committee.
In 2010, Parks Canada updated and expanded the document in a second edition.
In general the Standard and Guidelines seek to:
x preserve the heritage attributes of the historic places;
x ensure that restoration work is consistent with documentary evidence;
x ensure that alterations are reversible and do not create a false sense of history; and
x ensure that additions to a heritage place are distinguishable from the heritage character
of the place, yet sympathetic to that character.
3 Aurora By-law Number 5173-09.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 24 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 11
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
The Standards and Guidelines have been adopted as policy by the Town through policy 6.2.5
of the Town’s OP.
3.7 Municipal Heritage Status of the Subject and Adjacent/Nearby Heritage
Properties
The subject property, 97 Wellington Street East, is listed in the Aurora register of Properties
of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (January 2016). It has not been designated the Ontario
Heritage Act.
The one adjacent heritage property, 99 Wellington Street East, is listed in the Aurora Register
but is not designated. The six nearby heritage properties are listed in the Aurora Register but
are not designated under the Act.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 25 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 12
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
4.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY
In 1783, the chiefs of the Mississaugas agreed to sell to the British government a tract of land
stretching from Cataraqui near Kingston to the Etobicoke Creek along the north shore of Lake
Ontario. This acquisition of land was further clarified in a confirmatory treaty in an 1805
meeting with the Mississaugas.4 However, the Mississaugas continued to claim seven
townships south of Lake Simcoe. In an April 1923 treaty, the Ojibwas and Mississaugas gave
up rights to land between Lake Simcoe and Lake Ontario.5
Originally the subject property was within Whitchurch Township, which was established in
1792 as a municipal unit within the Home District. Whitchurch Township was named in
honour of the village of Whitchurch, Herefordshire in England, where Elizabeth Simcoe (wife
of Upper Canada Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe) was born. In 1851, the Home
District was divided into York, Peel and Ontario counties.6
In 1862, the village of Aurora was incorporated as a separate municipal unit from lands in the
Townships of King and Whitchurch. In 1880, Aurora was elevated to a Town.
In 1971 the Regional Municipality of York was created from the then County of York and
Aurora remained a Town, albeit with larger boundaries, within the new region. Aurora is
bounded by the Towns of Richmond Hill on the south, Whitchurch-Stouffville on the east,
Newmarket on the north and the Township of King on the west.
In 1794, Lieutenant-Governor John Graves Simcoe instructed Augustus Jones to layout
Yonge Street as a military road to provide access, via Lake Simcoe, to Georgina Bay. Also in
1794, Abraham Iredell laid out lots on either side Yonge Street, including within the Town of
Aurora, with the numbering of the lots starting with one at Eglinton Avenue in Toronto. In
Aurora, these lots start in the south at number 71 with the subject lands in lot 80 East Yonge
Street (EYS). The rest of the Township was surveyed by John Stegman in 1800. Land in the
Township, including along Yonge Street, was laid out in the ‘Single Front System’ dividing
the Township into concessions 1¼ miles apart, one west of Yonge Street and nine to the east.
The Township was further divided by seven sideroads 1¼ miles apart, running east and west,
north of, and parallel to, the boundary with Markham Township. Wellington Street is such a
sideroad. Each concession block was divided into five 200 acre lots between every two
sideroads, with the lot boundaries parallel to the sideroads.
The single front system was one of several township survey systems used from 1783 to
1815 for the settlement of southern Ontario.
The survey system imposed a settlement grid system on the land that persists to this day. The
resulting 200 acre Township lots were rectangular in shape and were frequently divided into
100 acre parcels often referenced as the west (or front) and east (or rear) half.
4 Champion, Isabel, 5.
5 McGillivray, Allan, 3.
6 Dean, W. G., plate 98.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 26 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 13
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
The subject lands are identified relative to this grid system as part of the west half of Lot 80,
Concession 1 EYS.
Selections from the Registry Office’s abstract index to deeds and mortgages for the subject
property are contained in Appendix I.
4.1 Development of the Area
The Larger Geographic Area and East Gwillimbury Township
In order to understand the development of the subject property, it is essential to place it within
the context of development of the larger area.
Chapman and Putnam, in their discussion of physiographic regions of southern Ontario, have
summarized the historical settlement and land use of the Schomberg Clay Plain, in which the
subject site is located, up to the 1960s.
Being associated with well-drained upland soils of drumlinized areas, such as the
Bondhead series, and being fairly easily accessible to colonization routes from
York, these clay plains were well settled and thoroughly cleared during the first
half of the nineteenth century. Little forest cover remains except in the wettest
places. Mixed farming was the rule with a dominance of grain in the cropping
program. The suitability of the land for wheat was such that for many years the
concentration of the crop was greater than in any other part of Ontario except the
clay plains of Kent and Essex. .. . All three areas have long been noted for the
raising of good beef cattle while in an earlier period sheep were also fairly
numerous. With the extension of paved roads these areas come with the range of
the Toronto milk shed and some of the farms became fluid milk suppliers.7
Initial European settlement of the Aurora area was stimulated by the development of Yonge
Street including the creation of lots adjacent to the street, settlement of those adjacent lots and
the clearing of Yonge Street. Five years later addition settlement was stimulated by the
survey of the rest of the Township and consequent availability of land for settlement. Yonge
Street had the dual purpose of developing the Aurora area through which it ran and serving as
a military road providing access to Lake Simcoe and then the upper area of the Great Lakes.
Yonge Street terminated originally at the Holland Landing. Initial clearing of parts of Yonge
Street was undertaken in 1795 by the Queen’s Rangers. Since subsequent clearing and
maintenance of Yonge Street was the responsibility of adjacent land owners, the
Government’s priority was to accelerate continuous settlement along Yonge Street. Therefore,
Crown and Clergy Reserves along Yonge Street were dispersed throughout the inner
concessions of Whitchurch Township and the lots bordering the Street were amongst the
earliest grants. As well, settlement duties were shortened to twelve months from the usual
two years.
7 Chapman and Putnam, p 298.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 27 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 14
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
In addition, the Governor of Upper Canada, John Graves
Simcoe, in a 1792 proclamation, offered free land grants,
subject to settlement conditions such as those for lots
adjacent to Yonge Street. This proclamation appealed to
Timothy Rogers who, after a preliminary exploration of
the area in 1800, led 40 families, many of whom were
Quakers (Religious Society of Friends), to settle in the
Newmarket area to the north in 1801. The offer of free
land was taken up by succeeding waves of settlers, some
of whom were Americans, such as Ebenezer Britton, who
were encouraged by earlier settlers to come north. Other
waves of settlers taking advantage of the offer of free land
included other American and British settlers. With the
clearing of forests and the production of agricultural
commodities, there was a demand for milling facilities.
Mills were sited on rivers and streams where water power
could be harnessed to run the operations. Mills, such as
the one constructed and operted by Charles and Robert
Irwin in Aurroa, often became the nucleus for the creation
of hamlets in the Township.
Whitchurch Township developed from subsistence farming in the early nineteenth century to a
wheat growing area in the mid-1800s. Wheat was the principal crop prior to 1870 occupying
about one quarter to one third of the cultivated land. Fall wheat planting predominated until the
1860s when spring wheat became more important. From the 1850s to the 1890s, there was a
consistent increase in the acreage of township land under cultivation. It was also in this period
(1853) that a railway was constructed from Toronto initially terminating at Aurora (east of the
subject property), providing easier access on the west side of the Township to Toronto and north
to Collingwood. Prosperous farm complexes, mature agricultural fields, numerous small grist and
sawmills on the many streams and creeks and a local road network characterized the landscape of
the area in the mid 19th century.
Ontario farmers turned to higher cost cash crops and animal husbandry in the 1870s. The
Whitchurch Township map in the Illustrated Historical Atlas depicts many established
farmsteads. It also shows that by 1878 another railway had been constructed serving the east side
of the Township. By the late nineteenth century agriculture in the township consisted of mixed
crops, livestock and dairy farming. In the early twentieth century the Metropolitan Radial
Railway was constructed along Yonge Street in Aurora, providing additional access for residents
in the west part of the Township, including the Aurora area, to Toronto in the south and to Lake
Simcoe in the north.
Town of Aurora
The town of Aurora, originally named Machell’s Corners, was a small cross-roads village
(Yonge and Wellington Streets) with a grist mill until the railway came in 1853.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 28 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 15
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
The town grew quickly, with new hotels springing up along Wellington Street East
near the station and new industries being created by the transportation facilities.
In 1859 the Aurora Agricultural Works opened its foundry on Wellington Street
West, providing employment for much of Aurora’s populace for over three-
quarters of a century. … Other businesses, many associated with the foundry,
opened over the next few years. Millers, carriage makers, a rope walk, … a
brewery, a cooperage, and potash works were all operating within a few years of
the coming of rail transportation.
… In 1856 the Mechanics Institute was founded and soon opened a library for the
use of the public. Education was organized circa 1822, and about 1840 the first
school opened on the west side of Yonge Street. … the Methodist built their new
frame church in 1855 … In 1857 a brick school was built on the north side of
Church Street … The first Anglican church was built in 1846 … The town also
boasted a Temperance Hall and a Rising Sun Masonic Hall.
In 1863 the village had been growing steadily for a decade, and the decision was
made to incorporate to allow the village to elect its own municipal council and
separate it from both the township of Whitchurch and King.8
After 1870, progress [in Aurora] was slower as fewer businesses opened up and
by 1880 some of the small factories had closed. The population increased at a
slow rate during the 1880’s with the census of 1891 establishing the population of
Aurora at 1,743.
… As it became more difficult to find housing in Toronto, Aurora along with other
centres in the Region, experience another period of rapid growth, its population
increasing from 5,000 to 11,000 during the 1960s.9
8 Whitchurch History Book Committee, pp. 41 - 43.
9 Regional Municipality of York, Historical Development, p. 10.
Figure No. 4.1
Yonge Street in Aurora,
looking north, circa 1870.
[Source, McIntyre, 14].
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 29 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 16
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
As shown in Figure 4.3, Aurora grew slowly into the 1950s
With the provision of large scale sewerage services, the construction of Highway 404 on the
east boundary of Aurora and GO train service, development in Aurora has accelerated during
the last thirty years.
Figure No. 4.3
Historical Development of Aurora to 1971
[Source, Regional Municipality of York, Historical
Development, insert].
Subject Site
Figure No. 4.2
The Grant Trunk Railway Station in Aurora, circa 1910, [Source, McIntyre, 14].
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 30 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 17
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
4.2 The Subject Property
Table 4.1 HISTORICAL TIMELINES – 97 Wellington Street East (Part Lot 80, Con 1 EYS;
Pt Lot 15, SS Wellington, Plan 68A)
Key Date Historical Event
1794 - 1800 Yonge Street and adjacent township lots surveyed
1805 Grant of land (Lot 102 - 210 acres) by Crown to Ebenezer Britton
1806 - 1836 Britton dies; land changes hands many times
1836 John Moseley acquires the west 79 acres of Lot 80 Con 1 EYS
1853 Railway comes to Aurora from Toronto; station 1 ½ blocks east of subject site;
John Moseley divides his land into building lots; Lot 15 vacant
1853 - 1894 Lot 15 changes ownership 5 times endings with James Scott; Lot vacant
1903 George T. Browning, builder, acquires vacant lot from Scott
1910 Browning builds house; sells lot to Edward J. A. Johnston
1911 Johnston sells house to John Hutchinson
1932 Jessie Grey, the mortgage holder, gains control of house from the Hutchinsons.
1950 Grey sells house to long term tenants, Hugh & Hazel Richards
1987 Richards sells house to David Ralph & Robert Browne
1991 Christl Friesl buys house from Raplh & Browne
1997 Lucia Palumbo & Michael Defilippis buy house from Friesle.
2018 BFKN acquires house
In 1805, Ebenezer Britton (1739 – 1806) acquired all 190 acres of Lot 80 EYS from the
Crown10. Ebenezer was an American from Massachusetts. Very little is known about
Britton. To secure ownership (the patent) of the Lot, Britton, unless he had provided service
to the Crown, would have had to fulfill settlement duties specified in the 1792 proclamation
including building and residing in a dwelling at least 16 feet by 20 feet, clearing a portion of
the Lot and opening and maintaining Yonge Street in front of the Lot. In 1806 Ebenezer
Britton died and he bequeathed his lands to relatives.
In 1816 Ansal Britton sold all 190 acres of Lot 80 to John Hartman.11 In 1827, Hartman sold
the west 80 acres of Lot 80 to John Wells12 who, in 1836, sold the west 79 acres, which
includes the subject site, to John Mosley13 ( ? – 1874)
10 Land Records, York Region, Lot 80, Con 1 EYS, Whitchurch Township, Patent.
11 Ibid, Instrument No. 2795.
12 Ibid, Instrument No. 3296.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 31 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 18
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Mosley realized that, with the arrival of the railway in 1853, there was a potential to create
and sell village building lots from his lands. Mosley hired a land surveyor to subdivide his
lands (Appendix C – 1853 and Figure 4.6). Lot 15, a parcel fronting on the south side of
Wellington between Larmont and Berczy Streets, was created. In the 1853 survey Lot 15 is
shown as vacant.
In 1853, John Mosely sold Lot 15 and other lands to Henry Quetton St. George ( ? – 1896) for
$1,350.14 Henry, the descendent of a French Royalist settler, resided on lands at the north-
east corner of Bayview Avenue and Bethesda Sideroad in Whitchurch Township15. Henry
purchased Lot 15 and other lands in the area as a speculative investment. In 1862, Henry sold
Lot 15 to James McGaffin for $300.16
In the 1871 Census, James McGaffin, age 46, was listed as a merchant who owned 6 acres of
land on which there were four houses17. Lot 15 is shown as vacant on the 1878 map
(Appendix C & Figure 4.6), although this map does not show all buildings. It is possible that
Lot 15 was vacant since its assessed value was only $350 in 1888 and 1891. However the
assessment roll also shows that there was a tenant on Lot 15 in 1888 and a vacant house in
1891. If there was a house on Lot 15 in 1891, it must have been a very modest structure.
13 Ibid, Instrument No. 3637.
14 Ibid, Instrument No .51556.
15 Stamp, Chapter 3. – French Aristocracy in the Highlands of York.
16 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.84447.
17 1871 Census of Canada, Town of Aurora, Schedule 1 (page 28) and Schedule 3 (page 6).
Figure No. 4.4
John Mosley
[Source, Aurora Museum
& Archives].
Figure No. 4.5
Henry Quetton St. George
[Source, Stamp].
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 32 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 19
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1853
1946
1970
1878
1913
2017
Figure 4.6 South Side of Wellington Street East between Larmont and Berczy
Streets in Maps & Aerial Photographs 1853 - 2017
Subject
Property
Subject
Property
Wellington Street Wellington Street
Wellington Street
Wellington Street Wellington Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 33 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 20
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
In 1892, James McGaffin sold Lot 15 and other lands to George L. Stevenson for $500.18 As
recorded in the 1891 Census, George Stevenson, age 69, was living in Aurora in a brick 2
storey house. His profession was listed as ‘saddler’.19 He had served on the first Aurora
village council in 186320. He probably bought Lot 15, which was vacant or had a small
vacant house, as a speculative investment. In 1894, George sold Lot 15 and other lands to his
daughter, Mina Stevenson for $20021 who then sold those lands to James Scott for $310.22
In the 1901 Census, James Scott, age 57, was listed as a retired gentleman living in Aurora in
a brick house with his daughter. He owned 100 ¾ acres.23 Scott also appears to have
acquired Lot 15 for investment purposes. In 1903, Scott sold Lot 15 to George T. Browning
for $235.24
George T. Browning (1846 – 1926):
had been a highly respected resident of the town for 52 years. He was born at
Ashley, Hampshire, England in 1846. During his long life he was a building
contractor and most of the factories and many of the residences in the town and
district have been built by him. His relations with his employees were always
most cordial … Mr. Browning always took an active interested in municipal
matters and had served on the Council Board.25
The 1904 Fire Insurance Plan shows that the lot was vacant the year after Browning acquired
the property.
George Browning, who, in 1910, had recently completed construction of the Sisman Shoe
factory on Berczy Street, built the House on the west part of Lot 15, most likely as a
speculative venture, and sold it in that same year to Edward Johnston26.
Mr. E R Johnson who has secured the Snowball School has purchased the new
residence on Wellington street recently erected by Mr. T. G. Browing (probably
misprint – Browning) and will reside in Aurora.27
No architect has been identified in association with this building. In 1910 George Browning
was also listed in the Aurora Banner as the contractor for Mr. Lemon’s new dwelling on
Mosley Street and the skating rink at Pickering College in Newmarket.
18 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.2511.
19 1891 Census of Canada, Town of Aurora, Schedule 1 (page 28) and Schedule 3 (page 6).
20 McIntyre, 136.
21 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.2679.
22 Ibid, Instrument No. 2693.
23 1901 Census of Canada, Town of Aurora, Schedule 1 (page 10) and Schedule 2 (page 3).
24 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.3212.
25 Aurora Banner, July 3, 1926. Obituary.
26 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.3970.
27 Aurora Banner, August 19, 1910.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 34 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 21
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
The 1911 Census (Table 4.2) lists Edward Johnston, age 38, an excise officer, living in
Aurora. No information is provided in the 1911 census about the type of housing in which
the persons enumerated were living.
Table 4.2 1911 – 1921 Census, Aurora – 97 Wellington St E., by Household Head
Year Name Profession Age
Houses
Tenure # Material Storeys Rooms Families
1911 Edward Johnston Excise
Officer 38 nc nc nc nc nc 1
1921 Georgina
Hutchinson retired 51 o 1 Plaster
& Lath nc 6 1
Notes: nc- not collected, (o) – owner, (t) – tenant
After living in the house at 97 Wellington Street East for a little more than a year, Johnston
sold it to John Hutchinson28 a farmer from King Township who had moved to Town.
The 1913 Fire Insurance Plan (Appendix C & Figures 4.6
& 4.7) shows that the house purchased by Hutchinson was
‘rough cast’ (R. C. - stucco or plaster), had a veranda
extending across the front of the house and was ‘L’ shaped
in plan. The house is shown as ‘2’ storeys although
technically it is 1 ½ storeys. It was built close to
Wellington Street. The Insurance Plan also shows that that
the brick veneer house to the east, 99 Wellington Street
East, had been constructed by 1913.
In December 1916 John Hutchinson died and left the House to his wife, Georgina and son
George. The 1921 Census lists the House at 97 Wellington Street East as owner occupied,
plaster and lath and had 6 rooms. At the time Georgina was living with her son George, age
19, a baker’s helper.
A 1927 aerial photograph of the area (Appendix D – 1927) does not present a clear picture of
the House although it is visible in the photo.
28 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.4153.
Figure No. 4.7
Aurora Fire Insurance Plan,
1904, Revised to 1913.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 35 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 22
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
In 1929 George Hutchinson took out a mortgage for $1800 with John and Jessie Grey.29 In
1932 George defaulted on the mortgage and Jessie Grey acquired ownership of the property.30
Jessie Grey proceeded to rent, rather than reside in, the House. In 1933, the Assessment Roll
lists her tenants as George Yates, aged 34, and his wife. George was a shoemaker and
probably worked at the Sisman Shoe factory,
By 1940, the tenants in the House were Hugh Richards, age 50, and his wife. Hugh was also
listed as a shoemaker and probably an employee of the Sisman Shoe factory.
The 1946 aerial photograph (Appendix D & Figure 4.6) shows the House on the property,
although details are difficult to discern in this photograph.
In 1950, Jessie Grey sold the House at 97 Wellington Street East to her long-term tenants,
Hugh and Hazel Richards31. However the Richards rented the House to Jack Brown, a clerk,
and his wife.
Hugh Richards died in 1959; however his wife retained ownership of the property at 97
Wellington Street East until 1987, when she sold it to David Ralph and Robert Browne32.
The House is shown in a 1970 aerial photograph (Appendix D & Figure 4.6). The House
appears in its current form in 1970 – cross gable roof, “L” plan, west side veranda – although
there a short, one storey tail wing and a chimney on the east side.
Ralph and Browne sold the property to Christl Friesl in 199133 who then sold it to Lucia
Palumbo and Michael Defilippis in 199734. By 2002, the tail wing had been replaced by a
rear deck and the parking pad in front of the House was in use (Appendix D). The current
owner, BFKN Holdings Inc. acquired the property in 201835.
As of the site visit in June 2018, the House was vacant.
29 Land Records, York Region, Lot 15 ss Wellington Plan 68A, Town of Aurora, Instrument No.?.
30 Ibid, Instrument No. ?.
31 Ibid, Instrument No 10449.
32 Ibid, Instrument No 456296
33 Ibid, Instrument No 567268
34 Ibid, Instrument No R699660
35 Ibid, Instrument No YR2812660
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 36 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 23
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
5.0 BUILT AND LANDSCAPE RESOURCE DESCRITIONS
In June 2018, an on-site survey of the House and landscape at 97 Wellington Street East was
undertaken.
The following components of the property are documented in photographs and plans in:
- Appendix E – Photographs - House Exterior,
- Appendix F – Floor Plan Sketches
- Appendix G – Photographs - House Interior, and
- Appendix H – Photographs - Landscape.
The measuring stick that appears in some of the photographs is marked in one foot intervals.
5.1. House Exterior
The construction date of the House can be readily established. In 1903, the builder, George
T. Browning, purchased the property. The 1904 fire Insurance Plan shows that the property
was vacant. In 1910, the Aurora Banner, reported that Edward Johnston purchased the
recently completed house. The 1914 Fire Insurance Plan shows the existence of the House.
Therefore the House was built in 1910. Interior casings support the 1910 construction date.
The House, excluding the veranda, is setback between 5.64 and 5.89 metres (18.5 and 19.3
feet) metres from the north property line, which is close to the sidewalk. The House is a
single detached, one and one-half storey frame structure clad in rough cast (stucco). The
House rests on a poured concrete foundation, which is not visible from the exterior.
The plan of the House is a truncated ‘L’ with the rectangular section of the main part of the
House measuring 20’ by 28’ (Appendix F) and the southwest projection of the ‘L’ adding a
5’ by 14’ area to the House. There is no evidence of a tail wing to the House, although earlier
Figure 5.1
House at 97 Wellington Street East,
East and North Elevations, 2018
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 37 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 24
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
aerial photographs show that a small, one storey, gable roof shed was once attached to the
rear of the building (Appendix D).
The House is capped by a moderately pitched, cross gable roof, with the gable on the main
part of the House facing the street. The asphalt shingled roof has unadorned projecting eaves
with fascia and soffits clad in plain wood boards. Between the building wall and the soffit
there is narrow wood trim and on the gable ends, there is a narrow moulded board at the top.
There are no chimney stacks on the building, although an exterior stack once broke through
the projecting eave on the east side.
All window and rear door openings have modern sash and doors and are clad in modern
synthetic materials except for the upper part of the front ground floor window which has a
fixed stain glass unit and narrow wood mouldings. All window sash are single, fixed units
with applied muntin bars simulating 3 by 5 panes except as noted. The kitchen window has
one over one moveable sash and the ground floor front window has moveable casement units.
All window openings have lug sills. The typical window opening measures 2 feet by 5 feet.
North Elevation – This is the principal elevation. The ground floor (Appendix E) has a two
bay façade with a west side door and, on the east side, a window opening with a semi-
elliptical head. The upper part of this window opening has a fixed stained glass unit. The
wood door has three lower wood panels and a large upper glazed unit. The two upper floor
window openings are symmetrically arranged with the east opening directly above the ground
floor opening. The west upper floor opening is slightly to the east of the ground floor door.
A shed roofed, one storey veranda, with a low pitched end gable graces the west half of this
elevation and wraps around the west side of the House. The veranda roof is supported by
wood posts set on concrete capped brick piers. Modern railings and spindles have been added
to the veranda. The 1913 Fire insurance plan suggests that the veranda once extended across
all of the north elevation.
East Elevation – This elevation consists of blank wall except for one ground floor window
opening towards the south end and two narrow basement windows openings, the south one
directly below the ground floor opening. There is also evidence of the former exterior
chimney stack on the wall and on the break in the projecting eave.
South Elevation – On the ground floor of this elevation there is a modern French door on the
east side and a modern door opening on the west side. On the upper floor, there is one typical
window on the east side. A rear deck has been added to this elevation. There is no evidence
of the former shed that once was connected to this elevation.
West Elevation – This elevation, which is difficult to see because of the proximity of the
building at 95 Wellington Street East, consists of a portion of the one storey veranda that
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 38 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 25
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
extends around from the north elevation, and a vertical line of windows in the west projection
of the House – a typical window opening on the upper floor, the kitchen window with its one
over one sash on the ground floor and a narrow basement window. All window openings on
this elevation are aligned.
The following alterations have been made to the exterior of the House:
- Reduction in the length of the veranda on the north elevation, if the 1913 Fire
Insurance Plan is correct, to provide for a front yard parking pad;
- Addition of modern railing and spindles to the veranda;
- Replacement of all window sash with modern sash with fake muntin bars;
- Cladding of all window opening trim and sills will modern synthetic material;
- Removal of the exterior chimney and possibly an earlier interior chimney;
- Application of new stucco on top of wire mesh to all of the exterior;
- Removal of the rear shed;
- Addition of modern French doors and rear door on the south elevation; and
- Recladding the wooden shingled roof with asphalt shingles.
The basic height, massing, roof shape and fenestration of the House appears to remain intact
on all public elevations.
The earliest photograph of the House that could be found was taken in 1981 (Appendix L)
when the veranda was enclosed.
The architectural style of this House is a vernacular variation of ‘Edwardian Classicism’
(1900 – 1930):
The simplified but formal composition of the Edwardian house with an emphasis
on Classical motifs was indicative of the new direction architecture was to take in
the twentieth century. In contrast to the highly colouristic, complicated and often
eclectic compositions of the late nineteenth century, Edwardian Classicism,
through its balanced facades, simplified but large roofs, smooth brick surfaces
and generous fenestration, restored simplicity and order to domestic architecture.
… Generally, the Edwardian façade is highlighted by a frontispiece or portico
imaginatively derived from Classical tradition set against a monochromatic
smooth exterior brick finish. Tall chimneys are not decorated with enriched terra-
cotta panels. Spindles and carved brackets of verandas are minimalized in favour
of short colonettes and brick piers. Dormers remained popular, but their profile
reflected the simplified shape of the main roof and gone are the profusion of
finials and cresting from the ridges. The extended roof eaves are supported not by
carved or turned brackets but by plain elongated blocks or cantilevered brackets
similar to those used in the Regency and Italian Villa styles. Flat arches made
with bricks standing on end or massive but plain stone lintels span apertures. At
times, oversized, Classically inspired elements, such as keystone and voussoirs,
accentuate window and door surrounds. Contrasting stone trim or dressings may
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 39 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 26
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
also be used for watertable and string courses. Rather than wood panels, the
entrance door often is a full-length panel of clear glass having beveled or cut
pattern. When stained glass is employed, the designs are simpler and the colours
lighter than Victorian examples.36
Another source on Ontario architectural styles describes Edwardian Classicism as:
Edwardian 1900-1920 Simple, classical, balanced Edwardian style is a precursor
to the simplified styles of the 20th century
Form: Straight lines, square or rectangular
Storeys: 2+
Façade: Usually smooth brick with multiple windows
Roof: Flat in public and apartment buildings, hip and gable in
residences, heavy cornices
Windows: Sash, paned, usually 1-over-1, plain stone lintels. Key
stones and voussoirs on large buildings
Entrance: Usually with classic detailing, keystones, door in portico
or veranda37
Although the House fits within the time period and has some of the basic characteristics
discussed above such as large flat surfaces and a veranda with columns, it has few of the
details.
5.2 House Interior
The original room arrangement of the House appears to be intact on both the ground and
upper floors. Much of the original woodwork remains, including baseboards, door and
window casings and staircase, although all interior doors have been replaced with modern
doors.
Ground Floor - This floor consists of four rooms of similar size (the ‘Four Square’ plan).
Room 1 contains the hall and staircase. All of the original staircase remains intact (Appendix
G and Figure 5.2) as does the front door, door casings and baseboards.
36 Blumenson, p 166.
37 HPI Nomination Team, 18.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 40 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 27
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Although Room 1 has much of its original woodwork,
given that most of the plaster work in the House is
new, it is difficult to tell whether the opening between
Rooms 1 and 2 is original. However the mouldings on
this opening are skillfully done and in keeping with
the classical style of the House.
Room 2 contains new baseboards although the
window casings appear original. Again, given the
extensive new plaster work, it is difficult to tell if the
opening between Room 2 and 3 is original, although
the casings are consistent with the classical style.
Room 4, has been extensively redone and all
woodwork appears to be new.
Upper Floor – This floor consists of four rooms and a small hall.
On the Upper floor, the Rooms 1, 2 and 3 appear to
have retained their original baseboards and door
and window casings despite the new plaster work.
Room 4 has retained its original door and window
casings.
The style of door and window casings and
baseboards throughout the House are consistent
with the period when the House was constructed as
shown in Duncan’s documentation of York County
mouldings (Figure 5.3).
Figure 5.2
House, 97 Wellington Street East, staircase
Figure 5.3
York County Mouldings –
1910s – 1920s
[Source: Duncan, 159]
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 41 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 28
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Attic - In the attic, the roof framing is relatively simple with rafters nailed into a centre ridge
board and collar-beams nailed to some of the rafters.
Basement - The basement consists of one large space with a concrete floor, concrete
foundation walls and a cold cellar in the southeast corner. There is a low concrete buttress
around the outer limits of the basement walls. Floor joists, which are 7¾” x 2” on 2 foot
centres, are typical of the period. The ceiling height, at 5’ 5”, is low.
5.3 Landscape
The landscape around the House (Appendix H) consists of small grassed front yard with a
gravel parking pad on the east and the maple tree on the west side (Figure 5.4). There is a
narrow grassed side yard on the east side and a negligible west side yard. The rear yard
consists primarily of a grassed area with shrubs and a few trees on the east and south
boundaries. A new board fence forms the west boundary
Historic aerial photographs (Appendix D) did not indicate any different landscape treatment
for the House in earlier times.
.
5.4 Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties
The cultural heritage values of the adjacent / nearby heritage properties are listed in Table 2.1
above.
Figure 5.4 Front Yard,
97 Wellington St E,
2018.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 42 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 29
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
6.0 HERITAGE RESOURCE EVALUATION
6.1 Introduction
Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest of a property are specified in
Ontario Regulation 9/06 made under the Act (Appendix K). The criteria assist municipalities
in evaluating properties for designation. They are grouped into three categories – design or
physical value, historical or associative value and contextual value, which correspond to the
values listed Aurora Official Plan Policy 13.3 d. Under the provincial criteria, a property
must meet only one of the criteria to warrant designation. The Aurora Heritage Committee,
working with municipal staff, have used some of the same criteria to develop a grading
system to identify properties worthy of conservation. The Aurora system is considered in
Section 6.3 of this Assessment.
Other factors, in addition to the provincial criteria, should be considered in the conservation
of heritage resources. These include the condition of the resource, that is the extent of
deterioration in the attributes and fabric of a resource; and heritage integrity, that is the extent
to which heritage attributes (character defining features) remain in place. These additional
factors have been considered in this Assessment under both the provincial and municipal
systems.
6.2 Application of Provincial Criteria
In this report, the application of provincial criteria, in addition to consideration of condition
and heritage integrity, are based on a thorough examination of the property. They have been
applied to the House and landscape. Table 6.1 summarizes the evaluation. The following
discussion addresses each of the criteria.
6.2.1 House at 97 Wellington Street East - Cultural Heritage Value
Design or Physical Value:
i. Example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method
Summary - The House at 97 Wellington Street East is not a rare, unique,
representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or
construction method.
Rarity – There are many examples of the Edwardian Classicism architectural
styled, single detached, frame dwellings in Aurora. In addition, there are a
number of stucco or rough cast dwellings in the Town. Therefore the House is
not a rare example of its style, type, expression, material or construction
method.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 43 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 30
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Uniqueness - The House is not one of a kind in Aurora – it echoes the house
immediately to the east in architectural style.
Representation – Blumenson describes the Edward Classicism architectural
style in section 5.1 of the Assessment. While the House has some of the basic
elements of this style, it lacks most of the details. Therefore, it is not a good
representation of the style; there are many better examples of it in Aurora.
Early Example – Although Blumenson has cited the Edwardian Classicism
style existing between 1900 and 1930, there are other examples in the Town of
this style as early as this House or earlier. The house to the east at 99
Wellington Street East is as early as this House and the Knowles/Readman
House at 15356 Yonge Street at 1907, is earlier. Therefore the House at 97
Wellington Street East is not a good early example of the architectural style.
Table 6.1 Application of Heritage Criteria to the Resources of the 97 Wellington
Street East, Aurora
Criteria
Resource
House Landscape
Design or Physical Value
i. Rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression,
material or construction method. No No
ii. Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit. No No
iii. Demonstrates a high technical or scientific achievement No No
Historical or Associative Value
i. Has direct association with a theme, event, belief, person, activity,
organization or institution of community significance No No
ii. Yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an
understanding of a community or culture No No
iii. Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder,
designer or theorist significant to a community * No
Contextual Value
i. Is important in defining, maintaining, or supporting the area character. * No
ii. Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings. * No
iii. Is a landmark No No
Condition / Heritage Integrity
i. Significant condition problems - No N/A
ii. Integrity – retains much of its original built heritage character - Yes N/A
N/A – Not Applicable; * - Marginal
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 44 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 31
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
iii. Display a high degree of craftsmanship
On the exterior, the House does not display a high degree of craftsmanship.
The builder, George T. Browning, constructed this House speculating that new
and expanding industries in Aurora would generate a demand for housing. He
did not build this House for a specific owner. As a result, the use of stucco and
the lack of ornate detailing did not demand craftsmanship.
Only on the interior, and then only with the staircase, is there any display of
craftsmanship exhibited in this House. However, such woodwork could be
purchased from millworks, such as Cane woodenware (William Cane & Sons)
in Newmarket, and installed in the House with limited workmanship.
iv. Demonstrates high technical or scientific achievement
The construction of this House does not demonstrate a high degree of technical
or scientific achievement.
Historical or associative value:
i. Direct association with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or
institution significant to Aurora.
The construction of this House is not associated with a theme, belief, person,
activity, organization or institution significant to Aurora.
As previously mentioned, the House was built as a speculative venture by
Browning and not for a specific client. Its construction is not associated with
any theme (other than the normal development of the community), belief,
activity, organization or institution.
ii. Yields information about our understanding of the community
The House does not yield, or have the potential to yield, information that
contributes to an understanding of Aurora or culture in Aurora.
iii. Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or
theorist significant to Aurora.
Architect/ Artist/Designer – No architect, artist or designer has been identified
in any documentary source in association with this House.
Builder – The contractor for the House was George T. Browning, a prominent
builder of factories in Aurora. He likely designed the House. He has some
significance to Aurora as a builder. However, the House at 97 Wellington
Street East is not a particularly good representation of his work. The house
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 45 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 32
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
immediately to the east at 99 Wellington Street East constructed for James
Waite in 1910-1911, probably by George T. Browning, is a better example of
his work and the Edwardian Classicism architectural style (Figure 6.1.
Contextual Value:
i. The House has marginal value in defining, maintaining and supporting the early 20th
century urban residential character of the area.
a. The House has marginal value within its context as shown in Figures 6.1, 6.2
and Appendix B – Wellington Street East, south side. Immediately to the west
of the House, a new building has been constructed that mimics the gable ends
of 97 and 99 Wellington Street East. However, prior to the recent construction
of 95, only 97 and 99 bore any similarities as shown in Figure 6.2.
Figure 6.1
99 (left) & 97 (right)
Wellington St E,
2018.
Figure 6.2
95 - 103 Wellington St E (above),
95 Wellington St E (right),
2013.
103 99 95 97
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 46 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 33
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
ii. The House is marginally linked to its surroundings:
The House is marginally linked physically, visually and historically linked to
its site since, with any house of its age, it has been on this site for 108 years.
iii. The House is not a landmark.
The House is not a landmark – it is not a point of reference in the landscape, it
is not visually prominent and does not serve as a significant terminus to any
view from a street.
Condition / Heritage Integrity
i. The House is in good condition
A detailed examination of the exterior and interior of the House did not reveal
any structural failures or significant conditions issues. The stucco cladding
was failing in spots but could be repaired and the basement had a high level of
humidity but little evidence of rot in the woodwork.
ii. The House has a moderate level of heritage integrity
Although there have been some alterations to the exterior of the House as
documented in section 5.1 above, it retains its original height, massing, roof
shape, type of cladding, fenestration and most of its veranda.
6.2.2 97 Wellington Street East - Landscape – Cultural Heritage Value
The landscape of 97 Wellington Street East, which consists of a grassed front yard with a tree
and gravel parking pad, narrow grassed side yards and a rear grassed yard bounded by a board
fence and shrubs, does not have any significant design, associative or contextual heritage
value. Documentary research and historic aerial photographs have not revealed anything
about the landscape that would suggest it has significant cultural heritage value
6.3 Application of Municipal Criteria
In July 2005, the Heritage Planning and Urban Design Division of the Planning and
Development Services Department produced the document Evaluation of Heritage Resources
in the Town of Aurora. The document was updated in March 2011. It provides a statistical
method, following the appropriate research of a property, of determining whether a property
merits conservation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Although it appears to be a staff
document that has not been endorsed by Town Council, this Assessment considered it in the
evaluation of 97 Wellington Street East, the results of which are shown in Figure 6.3.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 47 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 34
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Figure 6.3 Aurora Heritage Evaluation Score Sheet for 97 Wellington Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 48 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 35
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
The House at 97 Wellington Street East, which is in Old Aurora as defined in the Aurora OP,
had a total score of 41.7, placing it in Group 3. Group 1 is buildings worthy of designation
under the Act; Group 2 is buildings worthy of preservation; while Group 3 is “buildings
considered to be of moderate significance and worthy of documentation or preservation if of a
particular contextual value (e.g., part of a heritage streetscape).” The policies applicable to
buildings in Group 3 are:
The designation of the building pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act may be
supported with an approved restoration plan, but would not necessarily be
initiated by the Town unless part of an historic grouping such as an intact
heritage streetscape.
Retention of the building on the site is supported, particularly if part of an
historic streetscape.
If the building is to be demolished, a photographic record, measured drawings
and/or salvage of significant architectural elements may be required.
6.4 Summary of Cultural Heritage Values
Based on the above evaluations, the property at 97 Wellington Street East does not have
sufficient cultural value or interest as defined by regulation issued under section 29 (1) under
the Act to warrant designation. The House:
x does not have significant design value or physical value;
x has only marginal historical or associative value being a modest work of the Aurora
builder, George T. Browning; and
x has only marginal contextual value.
Further, the House has been evaluated using the Town staff’s evaluation scoring and been
determined to warrant retention only if it is part of an intact heritage streetscape. It is not part
of an intact heritage streetscape; only the building to the east of the House has cultural
heritage value.
6.5 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value and Heritage Attributes
Since the property at 97 Wellington Street East was not determined to warrant conservation
under the Ontario Heritage Act or the Town’s evaluation of heritage resources, a statement of
cultural heritage value was not prepared for the property.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 49 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 36
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
6.6 Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties Cultural Heritage Values
The heritage values of adjacent/nearby heritage properties were considered to determine
whether the House at 97 Wellington Street East was part of an intact heritage streetscape and
whether its demolition will adversely affect the heritage values of those properties.
The subject property is not part of an intact streetscape. On the south side of Wellington
Street, only one property abutting the subject property may have cultural heritage value – 99
Wellington Street East. 95 Wellington is a new building, while 103 Wellington is not listed
in the Register. The house at 91 Wellington Street, which has potential heritage value, is
somewhat further removed and separated from the subject property by an intervening non-
heritage property. On the north side of Wellington Street and across the street from the
subject property, 104 Wellington Street, although it has potential heritage value, has been
buried in later unsympathetic additions. The house at 108 Wellington Street East is setback
considerably from Wellington Street, in contrast to the other properties on the street, which
are close to the street.
The removal of the House at 97 Wellington Street East will not adversely affect the cultural
heritage values of any adjacent or nearby heritage properties, listed in Table 2.1, particularly
if any new building on the subject property is sited and massed sympathetically with adjacent
buildings.
6.7 Heritage Policy Compliance
Does removal of the property at 97 Wellington Street East offend any provincial or municipal
heritage policies?
The PPS 2014 requires that “significant built heritage resources and significant cultural
heritage landscapes shall be conserved.” The evaluation of this Assessment using provincial
and municipal criteria has determined that 97 Wellington Street East is not a significant built
heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape. It removal does not offend the PPS 2014.
Under the OHA, a municipal council may add or remove ‘listed’ properties of cultural
heritage value. Again, this assessment has shown that the subject property is not a significant
cultural heritage resource. Aurora Council may remove 97 Wellington Street East from the
Register based on the information contained in this Assessment.
Heritage policies in the Aurora Official Plan are based on the objective to “preserve, restore
and rehabilitate structures, buildings or sites deemed to have significant historic, …,
architectural or cultural significance …” This Assessment has determined that 97
Wellington Street East is not a significant heritage property.
Therefore removal of 97 Wellington Street East from the Aurora Heritage Register does not
offend or conflict with any provincial or municipal heritage policy.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 50 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 37
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The owner of an approximately 500 m2 (5,450 ft2) property on the south side of Wellington
Street East between Larmont and Berczy Streets in the Town of Aurora is seeking to have the
property removed from the Aurora Heritage Register. The owner intends to demolish the
building, although a demolition application has yet to be submitted. At this time, there is no
plan for a replacement building. The property at 97 Wellington Street East has been listed in
the Aurora Heritage Register by the Aurora Council under Section 27 of the OHA.
7.1 Conclusions
The historical development of the subject property was thoroughly researched. The existing
House and landscape were documented in photographs and measured floor plan sketches.
The House was built in 1910 by George T. Browning, an Aurora builder, as a speculative
venture and sold to Edward Johnston, who was an excise officer. In 1911, Johnston sold the
House to John Hutchinson, whose family retained ownership of it until 1932. It was later
owned by Hugh and Hazel Richards (1950 – 1987).
The House is a 1 ½ storey frame structure clad in stucco with a gable roof with the gable
facing the street. It has a one storey veranda extending around the north-west corner of the
House. It was designed in a vernacular interpretation of Edwardian Classicism, although it
lacks many of the details of that architectural style. It has been altered, although the basic
form, massing, fenestration and roof shape of the structure remain intact. The veranda has
been reduced in length across the principal elevation and all windows, save a stained glass
transom, have been replaced with modern sash. The landscape consists of a small, grassed
front yard with a tree and a grassed rear yard enclosed by a board fence and shrubs.
The property was evaluated using both criteria established by regulation under the Ontario
Heritage Act and an evaluation scoring specific to the Town of Aurora. It was determined
that the property does not have significant cultural heritage value using either methodology
and therefore does not warrant designation under the OHA.
The cultural heritage values of adjacent and nearby properties were considered. The property
at 97 Wellington Street East is not part of an intact heritage streetscape and its demolition
would not adversely affect the cultural heritage values of adjacent / nearby heritage properties
provided that any replacement building is sympathetically designed relative to those
properties.
7.2 Recommendations
Based on this Assessment, it is recommended that Town Council remove the property at 97
Wellington Street East from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest subject to conditions. These condition involve the salvage of some heritage features
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 51 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 38
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
from the House and the design of a replacement building sympathetic to design of adjacent
structures.
Recommendation –The Town approve, subject to conditions, the removal of the property at
97 Wellington Street East from the Heritage Register.
1. The Council of the Town of Aurora approve the removal of the property at
97 Wellington Street East from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest established under Section 27 of the Ontario
Heritage Act subject to the owner agreeing to:
a. The salvage, in accordance with the Town’s Architectural Salvage
Program Guide of:
i. The stain glass window on the north elevation; and
ii. All woodwork from the staircase from the ground to the upper
floors;
b. Any replacement building on the property be designed sympathetically
with adjacent properties, including a:
i. setback on the lot that aligns with adjacent Wellington Street East
buildings;
ii. height in the north portion of the replacement building no higher
than the average of the two adjacent Wellington Street East
properties;
iii. gable roof on the north portion of the replacement building with
the gable end facing Wellington Street.
Policy 13.3 n) of the Aurora Official Plan requires that, in the event of demolition of a
heritage structure, the proponent be required to provide through documentation of the
structure to the Town. It is recommended that this Assessment fulfills that policy.
Recommendation – This report be considered sufficient heritage documentation of the
property should a demolition application for 97 Wellington Street East be
submitted.
2. The Town accept this Assessment to be sufficient heritage documentation of
the existing House and landscape at 97 Wellington Street East should an
application for demolition be submitted to the Town and that no further
heritage documentation be required of the owner.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 52 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 39
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
SOURCES CONSULTED
Publications
Blumenson, John. Ontario Architecture A guide to Styles and Building Terms 1784 to the
Present. Fitzhenry & Whiteside. Toronto. 1990.
Census of Canada. Town of Aurora. 1871, 1891, 1901, 1911 and 1921.
Chapman, L. J.; Putnam, D. F. The Physiography of Southern Ontario. 2nd Edition.
University of Toronto Press. Toronto. 1966.
Dean, W. G., editor. Economic Atlas of Ontario. University of Toronto Press. Toronto.
1969.
Dieterman, Frank A., ed. Mississauga, the First 10,000 Years. Mississauga Heritage
Foundation. Mississauga. 2002.
Duncan, George W. J., York County Mouldings for Historic Interiors. The Architectural
Conservancy of Ontario Inc. Toronto. 2001.
Gentilcore, Louis; Donkin, Kate. Land Surveys of Southern Ontario, Supplement No. 2 to the
Canadian Cartographer, Vol. 10, 1973.
Gentilcore, R. Louis; Head, C. Grant. Ontario’s History in Maps. University of Toronto
Press. Toronto. 1984.
HPI Nomination Team, Ontario Architectural Styles. Heritage Resource Centre, University
of Waterloo. January 2009.
McIlwraith, Thomas. F. Looking for Old Ontario. University of Toronto Press. Toronto.
1997.
McIntyre, W. John. Aurora, A History in Pictures. The Boston Mills Press. Erin, Ontario.
1988.
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. Chapter 0.18.
Ontario Ministry of Culture. Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process. Queen’s
Printer for Ontario, Toronto, 2006.
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Policy Statement 2014,
Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, 2014.
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Toronto. May 2017.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 53 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 40
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ontario Regulation 9/06 made under the Ontario Heritage Act, Criteria for Determining
Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, January 25, 2006.
Parks Canada. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.
Second Edition. Ottawa. 2010.
Regional Municipality of York. Official Plan. Office Consolidation, April 2016.
Stamp Robert M. Early Days in Richmond Hill. A History of the Community to 1930.
Richmond Hill Public Library Board. Richmond Hill. 1991.
Town of Aurora. Assessment Rolls. Various years between 1888 and 1950.
Town of Aurora, Heritage Planning & Urban Design Division, Planning and Development
Services. Evaluation of Heritage Resources in the Town of Aurora. March 2011.
Town of Aurora, Heritage Planning Section, Development Planning Division, Planning and
Development Services. Architectural Salvage Program Guide. December 2017.
Town of Aurora. Heritage Register.
Town of Aurora, Official Plan, revised 2015.
Town of Aurora, Zoning By-law 6000-17 January 2018.
Whitchurch History Book Committee. Whitchurch Township. Toronto: Stoddart Publishing
Co. Limited. 1993.
Museums / Government Offices
National Airphoto Library, Ottawa.
Ontario Ministry of Government Services, Land Registry Office, York Region, 50
Bloomington Road, Aurora, Ontario.
Ontario Archives.
Town of Aurora, Planning Department, Jeff Healey, Planner.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 54 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Page 41
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Maps
Department of National Defence, General Staff, Geographical Section. National
Topographic System. Sheet No. 106, Newmarket, Ontario. Surveyed 1928. Scale
1:63,360. Ottawa, 1929.
Department of National Defence, General Staff, Geographical Section. National
Topographic System. Sheet No. 58, Markham, Ontario. Surveyed 1914. Reprinted
1930, Scale 1:63,360. Ottawa, 1930.
Goad, Charles Edward. Fire Insurance Plan, Aurora, 1913 (revision of 1904).
Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of York, Ontario. Miles & Co. Toronto. 1878.
Tremaine, George R., Tremaine’s Map of York County, Canada West, G. R. & G. M.
Tremaine, Toronto, 1860.
Websites
Town Park – A community Park – Aurora - http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/community-
stories_histoires-de-chez-nous/a-community-storybook_le-parcours-d-une-
communaute/story/creating-boundaries
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 55 of 145
Appendix A: Property Survey
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 56 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix A: Property Survey
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Property Fabric
97 Wellington Street East
Subject Property
North
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 57 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix A: Property Survey
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Property Fabric
97 Wellington Street East
Source: York Maps, 2017 Aerial view
Subject Property
North
Wellington Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 58 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix A: Property Survey
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
SURVEY
North
Source: Pearson & Pearson Surveying Ltd,
July 13, 2018.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 59 of 145
Appendix B: Photographs - Context
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 60 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix B: Photographs - Context 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Wellington Street East, north side, opposite subject property. Wellington Street East, south side between Larmont and Berczy Street; includes 97 Wellington Street East. 97 Wellington Street East Wellington Street East Wellington Street East Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 61 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix B: Photographs - Context 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner 99 and 103 Wellington Street East; buildings immediately east of 97 Wellington Street East. 95 Wellington Street East, building immediately west of 97 Wellington Street East. Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 62 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix B: Photographs - Context 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Relation of adjacent properties and rear yards to 97 Wellington Street East. [Source: Google Earth, 2016 aerial photo] Wellington Street East 95 97 99 103 Parking Parking Parking Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 63 of 145
Appendix C: Maps
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 64 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Patent Plan
North
Subject Property
97 Wellington St E
Wellington Street East
Bayview
Avenue
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 65 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner 1853 Subject Property 97 Wellington St E Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 66 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1860 – Tremaine
North
Subject Property
97 Wellington St E
Yonge
Street
Wellington Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 67 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1878 – York County Illustrated
Historical Atlas
CONTEXT
Subject
Property
97
Wellington
St E
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 68 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1913 Fire Insurance Plan
Subject Property
97 Wellington St E
House Barn
North
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 69 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix C - Maps
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1928 - 1914 National Topographic Map
Scale 1:63,360
Contour interval – 25 feet
CONTEXT
North
Subject Property
97 Wellington St E
Yonge
Street
Wellington Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 70 of 145
Appendix D: Aerial Photographs
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 71 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1927
Context
1927
Source – National Airphoto Library
Roll No. RA17-100
97
Wellington
Street East
North
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street
Train
Station
Shoe Factory
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 72 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1946
Context
1946
Source – National Airphoto Library
Roll No. A10105-087
North
Wellington Street East
Train
Station
97
Wellington
Street East
Larmont
Street
Shoe Factory
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 73 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1954
Source – York Maps
1954
Context
North
97
Wellington
Street East
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street
Train
Station
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 74 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1970
Context &
Property
North
1970
Source – York Maps
97
Wellington
Street East
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 75 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2002
Context &
Property
North
2002
Source – York Maps
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street
97
Wellington
Street East
Wellington Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 76 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix D – Aerial Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2017
Context &
Property
North
2017
Source – York Maps
Street
97
Wellington
Street East
Wellington Street East
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 77 of 145
Appendix E: House, 97 Wellington Street East
Exterior Photographs
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 78 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
North Elevation
East and North
Elevations
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 79 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
South and East
Elevations
East Elevation
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 80 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
South Elevation
West Elevation
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 81 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor Window,
North Elevation
North and West
Elevations
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 82 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Eave Detail,
North-East Corner
Front Door,
North Elevation
7’
6’ 8½”
2’ 9”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 83 of 145
Heritage Impact Assessment Appendix E –House
97 Wellington Street East Exterior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Typical Window
Ground Floor,
East Elevation
Veranda Post Detail,
North Elevation,
5’
2’ 11”
1’
4’ 3¼”
4’ 8”
7 ¾”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 84 of 145
Appendix F: 97 Wellington Street East - House –
Floor Plan Sketches
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 85 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix F – 97 Wellington Street East
97 Wellington Street East Floor Plan Sketches
Town of Aurora Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
2017 Aerial Photograph – Roof Plan
Source – Yorkmaps, 2018
North
South
East West
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 86 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix F – 97 Wellington Street East
97 Wellington Street East Floor Plan Sketches
Town of Aurora Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Exterior
14’ 7½”
28’ 2½”
5’
13’ 9”
18’ 8¼”
20’
25’ 1½”
North
4’ 10¼”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 87 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix F – 97 Wellington Street East
97 Wellington Street East Floor Plan Sketches
Town of Aurora Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Basement
Room 1
Room 2
Room 3
Room
Room
5
Room 6
Hall
Back
Hall
Garage
12’ 5”
26’ 6”
18’ 2”
23’ 5”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 88 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix F – 97 Wellington Street East
97 Wellington Street East Floor Plan Sketches
Town of Aurora Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
11’ 6½” 13’ 5”
6’ 8” 11’ 7”
13’ 7½”
11’ 6¾”
12’ 8”
11’ 7½”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 89 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix F – 97 Wellington Street East
97 Wellington Street East Floor Plan Sketches
Town of Aurora Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor Plan
13’ 7”
9’ 11”
7’ 11”
5’ 9”
8’ 4¼”
11’ 9”
12’ 9”
11’ 4”
12’ 9½”
12’ 1”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 90 of 145
Appendix G: 97 Wellington Street East House - Interior Photographs
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 91 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Basement
1. Cold Cellar – View north
from south wall.
2. Cold Cellar – View from
entrance to southeast corner.
Basement Floor Plan –
Photograph locations
1
2
3
5
4
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 92 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House 97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Basement 3. East & South Walls. 4. South & West Walls. Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 93 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House 97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Basement 5. View from the southwest corner looking to the north and east walls. Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 94 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
Ground Floor Plan Sketch –
Photograph locations
1. Hall – Front Door.
2. Hall – Staircase Railing,
Spindles and Newel Post.
2
1
2
6’ 9”
2’ 10”
4”
6”
5½”
3’ 5½”
7
6
3
4
5 8
9
10 11
12
13
14 15
16
17 18
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 95 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
4. Hall – View South from the Front
Entrance.
3. Hall – View North from the
South end of the Hall.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 96 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
5. Hall – Staircase.
6. Room 1 – West wall & opening to Hall.
7. Room 1 –
Pilaster on
opening to
Hall.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 97 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
8. Room 1 – South and West Walls.
9. Room 1 – North and East Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 98 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
10. Room 1 – Window on
North Wall.
11. Room 1 – Baseboard.
8½”
3 7/8”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 99 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground
Floor
12. Room 2 – North and East Walls.
13. Room 2 – South and West Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 100 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
15. Room 2 – West Wall and Entrance
to Kitchen (Room 3).
14. Room 2 – Window, East Wall.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 101 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground
Floor
16. Room 3 – East and South Walls
17. Room 3 – West and North Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 102 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Ground Floor
18. Room 3 –North Wall and Entrance to Hall.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 103 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
Upper Floor Plan –
Photograph locations
1. Hall – Staircase at the top
landing.
2. Hall – Staircase looking west.
oom 5 – View North to
Exterior Door.
1
2
3
8”
31”
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 14
15
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 104 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
3. Hall – View to the East End of the Hall from the top of the Stairs.
4. Room 1 – North and East Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 105 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
5. Room 1 –
South and
West Walls.
6. Room 1 – Door,
North Wall. 7. Room 1 – Window on West Wall.
7¼”
4”
4”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 106 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
8. Room 2 – West and North Walls.
9. Room 2 – East and South Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 107 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
10. Room 2 – Window and
Baseboard, South Wall.
11. Room 3 – Window and Baseboard,
North Wall.
12. Room 3 –
North and
East Walls.
9 ¾”
7¼”
4”
4”
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 108 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
13. Room 3 – South and West Walls.
14. Room 4 – East and South Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 109 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Upper Floor
15. Room 4 – West and North Walls.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 110 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Attic
2. View to the South from the opening to the Attic.
1. Attic – View to the North from the opening to the Attic.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 111 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix G – 97 Wellington Street East House
97 Wellington Street East Interior Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Attic
3. View of Roof Framing.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 112 of 145
Appendix H: 97 Wellington Street East
Landscape Photographs
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 113 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix H – 97 Wellington Street East Property
97 Wellington Street East Landscape Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Location Index to
Landscape Photographs
2017
Source – Yorkmaps
1 2
5 4
3
6
Wellington Street East
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 114 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix H – 97 Wellington Street East Property
97 Wellington Street East Landscape Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1. Front yard looking southwest from the northeast corner.
2. Front yard looking south east from the northwest corner.
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
Parking pad
Parking pad
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 115 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix H – 97 Wellington Street East Property
97 Wellington Street East Landscape Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
3. East side yard, view south from the sidewalk at Wellington Street East
4. East side yard, view north from the south end of the House
Parking pad
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 116 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix H – 97 Wellington Street East Property
97 Wellington Street East Landscape Photographs
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
5. Rear yard looking south from the deck of the House.
John S. Millard
Farm House
7. Rear yard looking north from the south end of the property.
Bathurst Street
House,
97 Wellington
Street East
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 117 of 145
Appendix I: Property Ownership History
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 118 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix I – Property Ownership History 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 119 of 145
Appendix J: Assessment Roll Information
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 120 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix J – Assessment Roll Information 97 Wellington Street East Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 121 of 145
Appendix K: Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 122 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix K – Ontario Heritage Act
97 Wellington Street East Regulation 9/06
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 123 of 145
Appendix L: Historic Photographs
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 124 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix L – Historic Photographs
97 Wellington Street East
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
1981 – Inventory of Buildings
Source: Aurora Archives
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 125 of 145
Appendix M: Adjacent/Nearby Heritage Properties
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 126 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix M – Adjacent/Nearby 97 Wellington Street East Heritage Properties Town of Aurora, Ontario Wayne Morgan August 2018 Heritage Planner 108 Wellington St E South Elevation Subject Property 110 - 112 Wellington St E South Elevation 105 Wellington St E North Elevation 104 Wellington St E South Elevation 98 Wellington St E South Elevation 99 Wellington St E North Elevation 91 Wellington St E North Elevation Wellington St E Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 127 of 145
Appendix N: Town of Aurora and Region of York
Planning Document Maps
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 128 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix N – Town of Aurora & York Region
97 Wellington Street East Planning Document Maps
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Regional Municipality of York
Official Plan
Part of Map 1, April 2016
Regional Structure
Subject property
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 129 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix N – Town of Aurora & York Region
97 Wellington Street East Planning Document Maps
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Town of Aurora Official Plan
Part of Schedule A – Structure Plan
Subject property
(approximate)
Wellington Street East
Larmont
Street Berczy
Street
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 130 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix N – Town of Aurora & York Region
97 Wellington Street East Planning Document Maps
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Town of Aurora Official Plan
Part of Schedule B1 –
The Aurora Promenade – Secondary Plan Area
Subject property
(approximate)
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 131 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix N – Town of Aurora & York Region
97 Wellington Street East Planning Document Maps
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Town of Aurora
Zoning By-law 6000-17, January 2018
Part of Map 5, Schedule “A” to the Zoning By-law
Subject property
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 132 of 145
Appendix O: Curriculum Vitae : Wayne Morgan
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 133 of 145
Cultural Heritage Assessment Appendix O – Curriculum Vitae :
97 Wellington Street East Wayne Morgan
Town of Aurora, Ontario
Wayne Morgan August 2018
Heritage Planner
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 134 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 135 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 136 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 137 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 1 Page 138 of 145
AURORA REGISTER OF PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL
HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST (Updated 2010)SITEAddress: 97 Wellington Street East
Former Address:
Legal Description: Lot 15 Registered Plan 68
STATUSCurrent Use:
Residential
Original use:
Residence
Heritage Status:Listed non-designated By-law No. & Date:
Official Plan:Zoning:R5
HCD:n/a Plaques:n/a
PHOTOGRAPHKEY MAP
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 139 of 145
AURORA REGISTER OF PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL
HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST (Updated 2010)ARCHITECTUREGENERAL INFORMATION:
Address: 97
Wellington Street E
Builder: George
T. Browning
Construction Date:
1910
Architect:
Architectural Style:
Edwardian
Classicism
Original Owner:
Edward
Johnston
Heritage Easement:n/a Historical Name:
GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
Floor Plan:Storey: 1.5
storey
Foundation Materials:
Exterior Wall Materials:
Roof Type: gable ended Windows: 3
Entrance: north Bays:
UNIQUE FEATURES:
Chimney (s):Special Windows:
Dormers:Porch/Verandah:
Roof Trim:Door Trim:
Window Trim:Other:
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 140 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 141 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 142 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 143 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 144 of 145
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 1
Page 145 of 145
Town of Aurora
Heritage Advisory Committee Report No. HAC19-003
Subject: Request to Remove a Property from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad
Prepared by: Adam Robb, Planner
Department: Planning and Development Services
Date: April 1, 2019
Recommendation
1. That Report No. HAC19-003 be received; and
2. That the comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the
following recommendations be incorporated into a report to General
Committee:
a) That the property located at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad be removed
from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest;
b) That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval 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; and
c) That as a condition of a future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval 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.
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with recommendations from the
Heritage Advisory Committee regarding the request to remove the property located at
1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad from the Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 1 of 80
April 1, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Report No. HAC19-003
•The property is considered a “Worker House Estate”, featuring a 2 storey brick
residence circa 1960, an equestrian complex circa 1960, a mid-20th century
plaster-clad one storey cottage, a late 19th Century bank barn (with significant
alteration), a post 1927 residence and coniferous and hedgerow landscaping.
•A Cultural Heritage Assessment and Heritage Working Group Evaluation of the
property were performed and it was determined that the property as a whole nor
any of the individual buildings possess sufficient heritage value as per Ontario
Regulation 9/06 (See Attachment 2 and Attachment 5).
•Despite not possessing significant heritage value, it is recommended that a
heritage plaque be erected and future streets be named commemorating the
equestrian history of the property, and that a Views Study be undertaken to
identify potential sightlines in and out of the 90-acre property, which is
considered one of the last open space view planes in Aurora.
•The owners have submitted a conceptual site plan for a new, approximately
23,000 metre squared office, industrial and retail development on the property.
Background
The owner of the property located at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad submitted an
Application to request that the subject property be removed from the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest on January 14, 2019.
Location
The subject property is located within the Aurora Northeast (2C) Secondary Plan Area
and designated primarily as Business Park 1 within the Town of Aurora Official Plan.
Combined as 1625 and 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, the 90-acre property is on the south
side of St. John’s Sideroad, bound to the west by Leslie Street and to the east by
Highway 404 (See Attachment 1). The property is not identified as a cultural heritage
resource as per Appendix II of the Aurora Northeast (2C) Secondary Plan.
Provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act for the delisting process
According to Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act, a Municipal Register of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest may include properties that have not been designated under
the Ontario Heritage Act, but that the Council of a Municipality believes to be of cultural
heritage value or interest.
The principal implication of properties non-designated and listed on the Aurora Register
pertains to subsection 27. (3) of the Ontario Heritage Act where,
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 2 of 80
April 1, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Report No. HAC19-003
If property included in the register under subsection (1.2) has not been
designated under section 29, the owner of the property shall not
demolish or remove a building or structure on the property or permit the
demolition or removal of the building or structure unless the owner gives
the council of the municipality at least 60 days notice in writing of the
owner’s intention to demolish or remove the building or structure or to
permit the demolition or removal of the building or structure. 2006, c. 11,
Sched. B, s. 11 (2).
The purpose of providing Council with 60 days to determine the Notice of
Intention is to provide time to determine whether or not the property should be
designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. According to subsection 27(1.3) of
the Ontario Heritage Act, the Council of a Municipality shall, before removing
the reference to such a property from the Register, consult with its Municipal
Heritage Committee.
Analysis
History of the Property
The subject property generally presents as two connected but distinct complexes,
comprising of 1625 and 1675 St. John’s Sideroad. The property has been historical
used as a farmstead (specifically to the west at 1625 St. John’s Sideroad), and also
featured an equestrian centre (the Nighswander Equestrian Centre operated recently at
1675 St. John’s Sideroad to the east). Since the 1970’s the property has remained
relatively unchanged.
Heritage Evaluation of the Existing Property
The Ontario Heritage Act provides criteria for determining cultural heritage value or
interest through Ontario Regulation 9/06. This Regulation requires that a building must
exhibit significant design/physical, associative, or contextual value to warrant
designation. Due to either significant alteration, deterioration, or the 20th Century dates
of construction, the Cultural Heritage Assessment determined that none of the following
characteristics of the property are deemed warranted for cultural heritage designation
under the Ontario Heritage Act (See Attachment 2).
Characteristics of 1625 St. John’s Sideroad include:
•a 2 storey post-1927 frame residence
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 3 of 80
April 1, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Report No. HAC19-003
•a late 19th Century bank barn (significantly altered and unmaintained)
•remains of an early 20th Century concrete silo or cistern
•an early 20th Century outbuilding with a mid 20th Century addition
•a detached mid 20th Century garage
Characteristics of 1675 St. John’s Sideroad include:
•a 2 storey, brick clad, circa 1960 residence
•a circa 1960 T-shaped equestrian complex
•a mid 20th Century, plaster-clad, 1 storey cottage
•a long laneway with flanked double rows of coniferous trees
•a double hedgerow between the residence and cottage
•open and rolling paddocks, pastures, and fields.
Also, according to the Cultural Heritage Assessment, none of these features are worth
preserving for incorporation into any future redevelopment.
The Heritage Working Group also evaluated the subject property and scored it Group 3,
with a ranking of 18.6/100 (See Attachment 5).
Despite not possessing significant physical heritage value, it is recommended that a
heritage plaque be erected and future streets be named commemorating the equestrian
history of the property, and that a Views Study be undertaken to identify potential
sightlines in and out of the 90-acre property, which is considered one of the last open
space view planes in Aurora.
Neighbourhood Context
The subject property is designated within the Town of Aurora Official Plan and Aurora
2C Secondary Plan as primarily ‘Business Park 1’, with portions of land also designated
‘Environmental Protection’. No development would be permitted on these Environmental
Protection lands. This delisting application will facilitate the Business Park use as
intended by the Town of Aurora Official Plan, and any environmental features present
on site would be protected through the Planning review process.
Proposed Concept Plan
The owner wishes to remove the property from the Aurora Register as a non-designated
‘listed’ property with the intention of demolishing the existing structures on the subject
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 4 of 80
April 1, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Report No. HAC19-003
property to construct a new multi-phase commercial, industrial, and retail ‘Business
Park’ development (See Attachment 3).
The Cultural Heritage Assessment evaluated the subject property against the criteria for
determining cultural heritage value or interest as outlined by the Ontario Heritage Act
(See Attachment 2), and the property was determined to not satisfy any of those criteria.
Therefore the concept plan, which seeks to demolish the extant structures, will not have
a negative impact on any cultural heritage resources or heritage attributes.
The Conceptual Plan further aligns with the objective of the Town of Aurora’s Official
Plan by adding a ‘Business Park’ use on the subject lands.
Legal Considerations
None.
Financial Implications
There are no financial implications.
Communications Considerations
No communication required.
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.
Alternatives to the Recommendation
1.Refuse the application and recommend that the property remain listed on the
Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
2.Refuse the application and recommend Designation under Part IV of the Ontario
Heritage Act.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 5 of 80
April 1, 2019 Page 6 of 6 Report No. HAC19-003
Conclusions
A Cultural Heritage Assessment and Heritage Working Group Evaluation were
conducted on the subject property, determining that it does not have sufficient cultural
heritage value or warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The delisting will
facilitate a new Business Park development on the property, which aligns with the
Town's Official Plan. The future redevelopment, through a Draft Plan of Subdivision and
Site Plan Application, will be subject to review by Planning Staff and/or the Design
Review Panel, as well as Council.
It is recommended that 1625-1675 St. John's Sideroad be removed from the Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.
Attachments
Attachment 1 -Location Map
Attachment 2 -Cultural Heritage Assessment (2018)
Attachment 3 -Conceptual Plan
Attachment 4 -Heritage Inventory Information Sheet
Attachment 5 -Heritage Working Group Evaluation Scoresheet
Previous Reports
None.
Pre-submission Review
Agenda Management Team meeting revie� on March 14, 2019
Departmental Approval
Lawrence Kuk, MCIP, RPP
Acting Director
Planning and Development Services
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 6 of 80
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 PLANHAC19-001625-1675 ST. JOHNS SIDEROADATTACHMENT 1SUBJECT LANDSHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 2 Page 7 of 80
December 12, 2018
Heritage Impact Assessment for 1625-1675 St. John’s
Sideroad, Aurora, Ontario
Prepared for: Humphries Planning Group Inc.
Prepared by: Chris Uchiyama, M.A., CAHPDDDDRAFT 1675 St.
red fo
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 8 of 80
Page ii
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Table of Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................... 1
2 Methodology................................................................................................ 2
2.1 Policy Framework......................................................................................... 2
2.1.1 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 .......................... 2
2.1.2 York Region Official Plan .......................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Town of Aurora Official Plan..................................................................... 4
2.1.4 Aurora Northeast (2c) Secondary Plan................................................... 9
2.1.5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans Guide (2016).. 9
2.1.6 Additional Guidance Material............................................................... 11
2.2 Background Research............................................................................... 11
2.3 Site Analysis ................................................................................................. 11
2.4 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.................................. 11
3 Introduction to the Subject Property....................................................... 12
3.1 Existing Protections, Designations, or Commemorations...................... 13
3.2 Background Research and Analysis........................................................ 14
3.2.1 Euro-Canadian Settlement..................................................................... 16
3.2.2 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad................................................................ 18
3.3 Existing Conditions...................................................................................... 25
3.3.1 Context .................................................................................................... 25
3.3.2 1625 St. John’s Sideroad ......................................................................... 27
3.3.3 1675 St. John’s Sideroad ......................................................................... 39
4 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.................................. 48
4.1 Findings........................................................................................................ 49 DRAFT.......
............
e, 201 ........
...........................................
....................................................... 4
Plan ....................
servatio
Material ..................................
............................................
.....................................
tion of Cultural Heritage Va
roduction to the Subject Property
ing Protections, Designations
Background Re
3.2.1 ro-Canadian Sett
3.675 S
3.3 Con
Context
1625
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 9 of 80
Page iii
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
5 Description of the Proposed Development or Site Alteration.............. 50
5.1 Proposed Development or Site Alteration.............................................. 50
5.2 Impact Assessment.................................................................................... 50
6 Mitigation Options, Conservation Methods, and Proposed Alternatives
...................................................................................................................... 52
6.1 Considered Alternatives............................................................................ 52
6.2 Mitigation Strategies.................................................................................. 52
7 Recommended Conservation Strategy ................................................. 53
8 Closure......................................................................................................... 53
9 Sources ........................................................................................................ 54
9.1 Legislation.................................................................................................... 56
Appendix A: Author Qualifications .............................................................................. A
Appendix B : Site Plan.................................................................................................... B
Appendix C : Town of Aurora Architectural Salvage Program Guide .................. C
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Location of 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad (Base map source: York
Region, 2018)..................................................................................................................... 1
Figure 2: 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad, current conditions (Base map source:
York Region 2018)........................................................................................................... 13
Figure 3: 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad, 19th century morphology......................... 20
Figure 4: 1927 Air Photo of property (NAPL, RA18, No.56)......................................... 21
Figure 5: 1929, 1935, and 1939 Topographic Maps showing Property (DND, 1929,
1935, 1939)....................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 6: 1954 Air Photo of Property (University of Toronto, 1954)............................ 23
Figure 7: Property Morphology, 1970, 1978, 1988 (York Region).............................. 24 DRAFTd Alte
........
...................
....................................
y ................................................. 53
................................53
..................
........................................
.................................................
........................................
of Aurora Architectural Sa
GURES
on of 1625 hn’s
gion, 2018)..........
Figure 2: 1625 1675 St. John’s S
York Region 2018)...................
Figure 5 St.
ure 4: 1927 Air Pho
: 1929, 19
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 10 of 80
Page iv
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Figure 8: 1625 St. John's Sideroad, current conditions (base map source:
YorkMaps, 2018).............................................................................................................. 27
Figure 9: 1675 St. John's Sideroad, building complex, current conditions (base
map source: YorkMaps, 2018)...................................................................................... 39
Figure 10: Proposed Site Plan (Ware Malcomb, 2018).............................................. 50
LIST OF PHOTOS
Photo 1: View from 1362 St. John's Sideroad, looking north-northwest towards
subdivision west of Leslie Street and north of St. John's Sideroad (CU 2018)......... 25
Photo 2: View of area north of subject property, looking northwest from Highway
404 along St. John's Sideroad (GoogleEarthPro, July 2018). .................................... 26
Photo 3: View along Leslie Street, looking south from St. John's Sideroad (subject
property on the left) (GoogleEarthPro, July 20184)................................................... 26
Photo 4: View of 1625 St. John's Sideroad from the base of the laneway, looking
south towards house (right) and barn (CU 2018)....................................................... 28
Photo 5: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, north façade (CU 2018).................................... 29
Photo 6: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, west (front) façade (CU 2018).......................... 29
Photo 7: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, west (front) façade, showing attached two-
car garage (CU 2018).................................................................................................... 30
Photo 8: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, south façade (CU 2018).................................... 30
Photo 9: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, east façade from along access road (CU
2018). ................................................................................................................................ 31
Photo 10: View of 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, rear (east) façade (CU 2018)........... 31
Photo 11: Barn, front (north) facade (CU 2018)......................................................... 32
Photo 12: Front (north) of barn, cistern/silo base on right (CU 2018) ...................... 33
Photo 13: Barn, east facade (CU 2018)....................................................................... 33
Photo 14: Barn, west facade (CU 2018)...................................................................... 34
Photo 15: Barn, south facade (CU 2018)..................................................................... 34
Photo 16: Barn interior (CU 2018).................................................................................. 35 DRAFT........
h-northwest tow
Sideroad (CU 2018)...
looking northwest from Highway
o, July ................................. 2
h from St. John'
4)............
deroad from the base of th
arn (CU 2018).........
orth façade (CU 2018).
n’s Sideroad, west (front)
. John’s Sideroad, west (front
(CU 20 .................................
St. John’s Sideroad, south faç
oto 9: 1625 St. John’s Sid
2018). ............................
Photo 10: View of 1625 St. John
Photo 11: Barn, front (
oto 12: Front (nort
3: Barn, e
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 11 of 80
Page v
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 17: Detail, barn interior (CU 2015)..................................................................... 35
Photo 18: Outbuilding, north facade (CU 2018)........................................................ 36
Photo 19: Outbuilding, east elevation foundations (CU 2018)................................. 37
Photo 20: Outbuilding, mid-20th century addition, west facade (CU 2018). ........ 37
Photo 21: Garage, north elevation (CU 2018)............................................................ 38
Photo 22: Garage, south elevation (CU 2018)........................................................... 38
Photo 23: View of 1675 St. John's Sideroad, from St. John's Sideroad at Highway
404 (GoogleEarthPro, July 2018)................................................................................... 40
Photo 24: 1675 St. John's Sideroad, circa 1960 residence (CU 2018)...................... 40
Photo 25: c.1960 equestrian complex, looking west (CU 2018)............................... 41
Photo 26: c.1960 equestrian complex (CU 2018)....................................................... 41
Photo 27: c.1960 equestrian complex, looking southwest (CU 2018)..................... 42
Photo 28: Treed laneway (CU 2018)............................................................................ 42
Photo 29: Formal circle in front of residence (CU 2018)............................................ 43
Photo 30: Paddocks and fields east of residence (CU 2018)................................... 43
Photo 31: Fields east of equestrian barns (CU 2018)................................................. 44
Photo 32: Cottage, north facade (CU 2018).............................................................. 45
Photo 33: Cottage, east facade (CU 2018)............................................................... 45
Photo 34: Cottage, south facade (CU 2018)............................................................. 46
Photo 35: Cottage, west facade (CU 2018)............................................................... 46
Photo 36: Cottage, interior. Note significant tilt of floor and walls. (CU 2018)....... 47
Photo 37: Cottage, detail of cladding (CU 2018)...................................................... 47
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Evaluation of Property, Ontario Regulation 9/06 Criteria........................... 48 DRAFTU 2018
.........
..........................
ohn's Highwa
.................................................... 4
0 residence (CU 20 4
west (CU 2018
ex .........
plex, looking southwest (CU 20
........................................
cle in front of residence (C
ocks and fields east of residen
elds east of equestrian barns (CU 2
ge, north facade (CU 201
Photo 33: Cottage, east fac
Photo 34: Cottage, south facad
Photo 35: Cottage, we
oto 36: Cottage, in
37: Cottag
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 12 of 80
Page 1
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
1 Introduction
This Land Archaeology Ltd. was retained by Humphries Planning Group inc. to prepare a
Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the property located at 1625-1675 St. John Sideroad in
the Town of Aurora, Ontario (Figure 1). The purpose of this HIA is to review the cultural heritage
value or interest (CHVI) of the property and to provide recommendations, with respect to
potential impacts on the property’s CHVI. This study will also outline the applicable local or
provincial planning and policy framework and identify any future work that may be required in
further phases of development to identify and mitigate potential negative impacts on cultural
heritage values (if identified).
This HIA was prepared by Chris Uchiyama, MA, CAHP (see Appendix A: Author Qualifications).
A site visit was undertaken on August 31, 2018.
The property is currently listed on the Town of Aurora’s Heritage Register as a non-designated
property under Section 27, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA).
Figure 1: Location of 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad (Base map source: York Region, 2018).AFTthe c
ns, wit
he app
work that m
al negative imp
ee Appendix A: Author Qualific
a’s Heritage Regis
age Act (OH
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 13 of 80
Page 2
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
2Methodology
2.1 Policy Framework
In Ontario, the Provincial Policy Statement 2014 (PPS), issued under s. 3 of the Planning Act,
provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and
development.1 When a municipality is undertaking land use planning decisions related to
development or site alteration, decisions must be consistent with the PPS.2 The PPS outlines that
“significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be
conserved” and “development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing
archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential unless significant
archaeological resources have been conserved”.3 In this instance, “Significant” means
“resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the
important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or
a people.”4 The PPS outlines that the resources and landscapes should be conserved through
their “identification, protection, management and use…..in a manner that ensures their
cultural heritage value or interest is retained under the Ontario Heritage Act.”5
The Ontario Heritage Act (“OHA”) is the primary legislation used by municipalities to conserve
cultural heritage resources. It enables municipalities to designate individual properties that are
of cultural heritage value or interest through individual designations (Part IV) or heritage
conservation districts (Part V).6 Properties are evaluated against the criteria set out in Ontario
Regulation 9/06 Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under the Ontario
Heritage Act which include design value, historical/associative value, and contextual value.
Designation is achieved through a municipal by-law which outlines a description of the
property, statement of significance explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the
property, and a description of the heritage attributes.
2.1.1 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017
The province’s 2017 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH Growth Plan) sets
out a number of policies relevant to the conservation of cultural heritage resources. Section
1.1 of the GGH Growth Plan identifies the importance of the conservation of cultural heritage
resources, stating:
As the GGH grows and changes, we must continue to value what makes this
region unique to ensure the sustained prosperity of Ontario, its people, and future
1 PPS 2014, Part I: Preamble.
2 PPS 2014, Part III: How to Read the Provincial Policy Statement.
3 PPS 2014, s. 2.6.1 and 2.6.2.
4 PPS 2014, s. 6.0, Definitions, at p. 49.
5 PPS 2014, s. 6.0, Definitions, at p. 40.
6 OHA,Part IV, s. 29.
use pl
decisio
e PPS.2
ge landscap
e permitted on land
ntial unless significant
is instance, “Significant” means
ural heritage value or interest for the
ding of the history o
andscapes sho
…..in a ma
ed u tario He
primary legislation used by mu
nicipalities to designate ind
h individual designatio
V).6 Properties are evaluat
or Determining Cultural H
clude value, historical/
eved a munic law
of significance explaining the c
ption of the heritage attrib
rowth Plan for the Greater Go
rovinc Growth Plan for t
t a number of policies relevant to th
of the GGH Growth Plan
ces, sta
e GGH ows an
nique to eDHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 14 of 80
Page 3
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
generations. While growth is an important part of vibrant, diversified urban and
rural communities and economies, the magnitude of growth that is expected over
the coming decades for the GGH presents several challenges:
…
• Urban sprawl can degrade the region’s air quality; water resources; natural
heritage resources, such as rivers, lakes, woodlands, and wetlands; and cultural
heritage resources.7
The GGH Growth Plan further indicates that “Our cultural heritage resources and open spaces
in our cities, towns, and countryside will provide people with a sense of place.”8 Stating in
Section 4.1 that:
The GGH contains a broad array of important hydrologic and natural heritage
features and areas, a vibrant and diverse agricultural land base, irreplaceable
cultural heritage resources, and valuable renewable and non-renewable
resources. These lands, features and resources are essential for the long-term
quality of life, economic prosperity, environmental health, and ecological integrity
of the region. They collectively provide essential ecosystem services, including
water storage and filtration, cleaner air and habitats, and support pollinators,
carbon storage, adaptation and resilience to climate change.9
And,
The GGH also contains important cultural heritage resources that contribute to a
sense of identity, support a vibrant tourism industry, and attract investment based
on cultural amenities. Accommodating growth can put pressure on these
resources through development and site alteration. It is necessary to plan in a way
that protects and maximizes the benefits of these resources that make our
communities unique and attractive places to live.
10
Policies specific to cultural heritage resources are outlined in Section 4.2.7, as follows:
1. Cultural heritage resources will be conserved in order to foster a sense of place and
benefit communities, particularly in strategic growth areas.
7 Province of Ontario, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. 2017: 2.
8 Ibid: 2.
9 Ibid: 39.
10 Ibid: 40.
(footnote continued)DRAFTes; nat
ds; an
tage resources and
h a sense of place.”8 Stat
t hydrologic and na
cultural land bas
ble and no
resources are essentia
, environmental health, and
vide essential ecosystem servi
air and habitats, and supp
ence to climate chang
ontains important cultural herita
tity, support a vibrant tourism indus
enities. Accommodating grow
develop
t protects and maximizes
ommu unique and attrac
olicies specific to cultural heritage r
Cultural heritage reso
enefit communities,DHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 15 of 80
Page 4
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
2. Municipalities will work with stakeholders, as well as First Nations and Métis communities,
in developing and implementing official plan policies and strategies for the
identification, wise use and management of cultural heritage resources.
3. Municipalities are encouraged to prepare archaeological management plans and
municipal cultural plans and consider them in their decision-making.11
2.1.2 York Region Official Plan
York Region (the Region) sets out its cultural heritage policies in Section 3.4 of The Regional
Municipality of York Official Plan (the Regional OP), 2010 (2016 Consolidation). The objective
of the Region’s cultural heritage policy is “To recognize, conserve and promote cultural
heritage and its value and benefit to the community.”12 Relevant policies include:
3.4.1 To encourage local municipalities to compile and maintain a register of
significant cultural heritage resources, and other significant heritage resources, in
consultation with heritage experts, local heritage committees, and other levels of
government.
3.4.3 To require local municipalities to adopt official plan policies to conserve
significant cultural heritage resources.
3.4.6 To require that cultural heritage resources within secondary plan study areas
be identified, and any significant resources be conserved.
3.4.7 To encourage local municipalities to use community improvement plans and
programs to conserve cultural heritage resources.
3.4.11 To require local municipalities to adopt official plan policies to conserve
significant cultural heritage resources and ensure that development and site
alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage properties will conserve the
heritage attributes of the protected heritage property.
2.1.3 Town of Aurora Official Plan
The Town of Aurora Official Plan (OP) 2010 lays out the Town’s policies for the conservation of
its cultural heritage resources in Section 13. The objectives of the Town’s cultural heritage
policies are threefold:
a) Conserve and enhance recognized cultural heritage resources of the Town for the
enjoyment of existing and future generations;
11 Ibid: 48.
12 York Region, York Regional Official Plan – Office Consolidation: April 2016: 50.DRAFTon 3.4
onsolidation)
ve and promote
evant policies include:
le and maintain a register of
er significant heritage resources, in
age committees, a
to adopt official plan po
ces.
resources within secondar
urces be conserved.
ocal municipalities to use
serve cultural heritage resour
ire local municipalities to adopt o
ral heritage resources and en
cent land
tage attributes of the pro
Tow Official
e Tow cial Plan (OP
ultural heritage resources
s are th
erve and enh
ent of ex
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 16 of 80
Page 5
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
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 awareness of Aurora’s cultural heritage and involve the public in
heritage resource decisions affecting the municipality.
Relevant general cultural heritage policies include:
13.2 General Cultural Heritage Policies
a) Heritage planning is the joint responsibility of the Provincial Government, the Region
and the Town. An Advisory Committee, known as the Aurora Heritage Advisory
Committee has been established to provide advice to the Town Council on all matters
pertaining to heritage.
b) The Town may use the power and tools provided by the enabling legislation, policies
and programs, particularly the Ontario Heritage Act, the Planning Act, the
Environmental Assessment Act and the Municipal Act in implementing and enforcing
the policies of this section. These may include but not be limited to the
following:
i. The power to stop demolition and/or alteration of designated heritage
properties and resources provided under the Ontario Heritage Act and as set out
in Section 13.3 of this policy;
ii. The power to require a Heritage Impact Assessment and
Restoration/Conservation Plan for development proposals and other land use
planning proposals that may potentially affect a designated or significant
heritage resource or Heritage Conservation District;
iii. Using zoning by-law provisions to protect heritage resources by regulating such
matters as use, massing, form, design, location and setbacks;
iv. Using the site plan control by-law to ensure that new development is compatible
with heritage resources;
vi. Identifying, documenting and designating cultural heritage resources as
appropriate in the secondary and block plans and including measures to
protect and enhance any significant heritage resources identified as part of the
approval conditions…
c) The Town’s by-laws, regulations and standards shall be sensitive to the Town’s heritage
resources and may permit non-standard solutions in order to support the Town’s
objectives for heritage preservation. Specific measures may include, but are not limited
to reduced lot sizes, reduced setbacks and alternative parking requirements.
e) Landowner cost share agreements should be used wherever possible to spread the
cost of heritage preservation over a block plan or a secondary plan area on the basis
that such preservation constitutes a community benefit that contributes significantly to DRAFTcial Government, th
e Aurora Heritage Adviso
ice to the Town Council on all m
vided by the enablin
ge Act, the Pla
l Act in im
may include but not be lim
on and/or alteration of design
vided under the Ontario
o require a Heritage Impa
n/Conservation Plan for de
ng proposals that may potential
age resource or Heritage Conserva
oning b law provisions to pro
matters as use, ma
v.Using the site plan c
heritage resources
v ng, documenting
e in
d en
approval cond
Town’s by-laws,
es and m
for
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 17 of 80
Page 6
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
the sense of place and recreational and cultural amenities that will be enjoyed by area
residents.
f) Financial securities from the owner may be required as part of the conditions of site
plan or other development approvals to ensure the retention and protection of
heritage properties during and after the development process.
m) Lost historical sites and resources shall be commemorated with the appropriate form of
interpretation and may be a requirement of Site Plan approval.
o) Impact on the significant heritage elements of designated and other heritage
resources shall be avoided through the requirements of the Town’s sign permit
application system and the heritage permit under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Section 13.3 of the OP outlines policies specific to built heritage resources. Relevant policies
include:
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;
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.
The subject property is currently listed on the Town’s Register of Cultural Heritage Resources as
a ‘Listed’ (non-designated) property under Section 27, Part IV of the OHA. As stated in the
Town’s Register:
The Aurora Inventory of Heritage Buildings was compiled by the Local Architectural
Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC), now known as the Heritage Advisory
Committee between 1976 and 1981. On September 26, 2006, Aurora Town Council
officially added the properties noted in the Inventory to the Aurora Register of
Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest in conformity with the Amendments
to the Ontario Heritage Act in 2005.
The principal implication of properties being listed is outlined in Section 27 (3) of the
Ontario Heritage Act where owners are required to provide the Town at least 60
e appr
nd othe
he Town’s sign
Ontario Heritage Ac
lt heritage resources. Relevan
Heritage Resource
more of the
ct;
nt entered into under the O
al Historic Sites and Monume
Ontario;
he Council as having significant cu
ge resources, cultural her
e char and e cem
shall contain documentation, inc
statement of cultural heritage va
esignated properties. A suff
also be included. To e
Register shall be updated re
e subject property is currently listed
Listed’ed) p
’s Regis
Aurora Inventory o
vation Advis
e betw
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 18 of 80
Page 7
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
days’ notice in writing of their intention to demolish or remove a building or structure
on the property. This notice period allows Town Council to make informed decisions
and consult with the Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee regarding whether or not
a property requires designation under the Ontario Heritage Act in order to ensure
that the resource is appropriately conserved.
Section 13.3 (d) of the OP provides guidance for the evaluation of the cultural heritage value
or interest of properties, stating:
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 Heritage
Committee. The identification and evaluation of cultural heritage resources must be
based on the following core values:
i. asethetic [sic], design or physical value;
ii. historical or associative value; and/or,
iii. contextual value.
As they are consistent with the three core values outlined in the Town’s OP, Section 13.3 (d)
and the Town’s 2016 document Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans Guide,
the Criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act
laid out in Ontario Regulation 9/06 have been applied in this HIA.
Additional applicable policies include:
f) The Town will give immediate consideration to the designation of any heritage resource
under the Ontario Heritage Act if that resource is threatened with demolition, significant
alterations or other potentially adverse impacts.
g) Council may adopt a Demolition Control By-Law to prevent the demolition, destruction
or inappropriate alteration of residential heritage buildings.
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.
j) Alteration, removal or demolition of heritage attributes on designated heritage
properties will be avoided. Any proposal involving such works will require a heritage
permit application to be submitted for the approval of the Town.
Section 13.3 (k)of the OP outlines the policy of Council to require a HIA be prepared by a
qualified professional (see Appendix A for Author Qualifications) for “any proposed alteration,
construction, or any development proposal, including Secondary Plans, involving or adjacent
to a designated heritage resource to demonstrate that the heritage property and its heritage DRAFTcultura
e of the cultura
ultation with its Munici
ultural heritage resources m
al valu
and/o
e values outlined in the To
e Impact Assessments and C
age value or interest under th
een applied in this HIA.
ies includ
ve immediate consideration
ntario Heritage Act if that resourc
r other potentially adverse impac
dopt a Demolition Control B
appropriate alteratio
eritage resources will be p
and Guidelines for the Conserv
for the Protection and Enhanc
heritage protocols an
cultural heritage attrib
the core principles
ation, remova
es will be
lic
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 19 of 80
Page 8
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
attributes are not adversely affected.”
13 The HIA is required to outline migration measures
and/or alternative development approaches to lessen or avoid adverse impacts on heritage
attributes. Importantly, this policy outlines six (6) factors to be given due consideration in the
Town’s review of such applications, as follows:
i. The cultural heritage values of the property and the specific heritage attributes that
contribute to this value as described in the register;
ii. The current condition and use of the building or structure and its potential for future
adaptive re-use;
iii. The property owner’s economic circumstances and ways in which financial impacts of
the decision could be mitigated;
iv. Demonstrations of the community’s interest and investment (e.g. past grants);
v. Assessment of the impact of loss of the building or structure on the property’s cultural
heritage value, as well as on the character of the area and environment; and,
vi. Planning and other land use considerations.
Section 13.3 (m) and (n) outline the Town’s preference for retention of built heritage resources
in situ and requires that “All options for on-site retention of properties of cultural heritage
significance shall be exhausted before resorting to relocation.” Section 13.3 (m) provides
alternatives for consideration, in order of priority, as follows:
i. on-site retention in the original use and integration with the surrounding or new
development;
ii. on site retention in an adaptive re-use;
iii. relocation to another site within the same development; and,
iv. relocation to a sympathetic site within the Town.
Per Section 1.3 (n):
In the event that demolition, salvage, dismantling or relocation irrevocable
damage to a built heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape is found to be
necessary as determined by Council, thorough archival documentation of the
heritage resources is required to be undertaken by the proponent, at no cost to
the Town. The information shall be made available to the Town for archival
purposes.
Requirements for archival documentation to be prepared by a qualified professional are
outlined in Section 13.3 (o).
13 Ibid: 154.DRAFTge at
its po
s in which financ
nvestment (e.g. past grants);
g or structure on the property’s cult
of the area and environment; and,
or reten
n-site retention of properti
esorting to relo Sectio
priority, as follows:
original use and integration with th
in an adaptive
another site within the same dev
o a sympathetic site within the Tow
the event that demolition,
damage to a built heritage reso
necessary as determin Co
herit s req
he Town. The informati
poses.
for archiv
on 13
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 20 of 80
Page 9
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
In addition to general cultural heritage policies and policies related to built heritage resources,
this assessment considered the policies for cultural heritage landscapes outlined in Section
13.4. As the subject property is not listed on any inventory of cultural heritage landscapes,
Section 13.4 (b) was determined to be relevant to the current studies. It states:
i. Significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be designated under the Ontario Heritage
Act, or established as Areas of Cultural Heritage Character as appropriate.
In order to address this policy, the evaluation of the subject property (per O.Reg. 9/06)
considered not only individual structures and components, but the property and all of its
components as a potential cultural heritage landscape.
2.1.4 Aurora Northeast (2c) Secondary Plan
The Tow of Aurora Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 73, Aurora 2C Secondary Plan Area was
adopted by Council in September 2010 and approved by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB)
in September 2011. The subject property is located within this Secondary Plan Area, known
also as the Aurora Northeast (2c) Secondary Plan. The subject property is not included in
Appendix II, Cultural Heritage Resources.
The conservation of significant cultural heritage features and landscapes is identified in the
principles of the Secondary Plan. Policies related to cultural heritage are outlined in Section 5.0
Conserving Cultural Heritage Resources and Archaeology. Relevant Secondary Plan policies
have been addressed, above, in Section 2.1.3 of this report.
2.1.5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans Guide (2016)
The Town of Aurora has prepared a guidance document (the HIA guidelines) outlining the
objective, policy and legislative framework, and required content for HIAs submitted to the
Town. Section 3.3 of the HIA guidelines provides the framework for evaluation of potential
cultural heritage resources against O.Reg.9/06 criteria.
Per the HIA guidelines, the following contents are required:
i. An outline of the methods employed in the study (see Section 2 of this document);
ii. Description of the property and context in detail including all necessary surveys, maps
and plans (see Section 3 of this document);
iii. Description of the proposed development in detail (see Section 5 of this document);
iv. An outline of applicable planning and heritage policies, guidelines and resources
including (but not limited to):
a. The Planning Act;
b. Provincial Policy Statement, 2014;
c. Ontario Heritage Act;
d. York Region Official Plan;
e. Town of Aurora Official Plan;
f. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places; and
the O
ppropr
rty (per O.
the property an
3, Aurora 2C Secondary Plan Area w
oved by the Ontario
within this Secon
ubject p
eritage features and landsca
elated to cultural heritage
d Archaeology Releva
ve, in Section 2.1.3 of this
ssessm d Conservation Plan
has prepared a guidance docum
nd legislative framework, and req
he HIA guideli provides t
tage resources aga
e HIA guidelines, the following
i.An outline of the methods em
Des pro
and plans (see Sectio
scription of the pr
tline of appl
(but n
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 21 of 80
Page 10
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
g. The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. (see Section 2.1 of this document)
v. Description of the heritage status of the subject property and adjacent properties (see
Section 3 of this document);
vi. Historical research including (but not limited to):
a. Title search;
b. Tax assessment records;
c. Archival research (Aurora Historical Society);
d. County Atlas; and
e. Fire Insurance Plans. (see Section 3.1 of this document)
vii. Description of the subject lands with an analysis of cultural heritage landscapes,
archaeological sites, natural heritage sites and built heritage resources noting all
cultural features (including barns, accessory structures, fences, outbuildings, etc.) as per
the definitions found in Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 (see Section 3.2 of this
document);
viii. If the proposed development or site alteration has been determined to have no
adverse impact to identified significant heritage resources, the Heritage Impact
Assessment must outline the rationale for such a recommendation (see Section 7of this
document);
ix. A description of the identified heritage resources have [sic] been determined to be of
significant cultural heritage value or interest (see Section 4.1 of this document);
x. Evaluation of the identified significant resources in terms of the criteria as outlined in the
Ontario Heritage Act and Ontario Regulation 9/06 (see Section 4 of this document);
xi. A Statement of Significance for each significant heritage resource identified in relation
to Ontario Regulation 9/06 including a description of the significant heritage attributes
(see Section 4.1 of this document);
xii. A summary of the integrity and condition of identified heritage resources (see Section
3.2 of this document);
xiii. A detailed description of impacts of proposed developments on the identified heritage
resources noting the degree or severity of the impact (see Section 5.2 of this
document);
xiv. Recommendations for mitigation, conservation, and commemoration noting how these
recommendations will address the impacts that have been identified (see Section 6.2
and 7 of this document);
Note: Where an impact on a cultural heritage resource has been identified and the
proposed conservation or mitigative measures including avoidance are considered
ineffective, other conservation or mitigative measures and alternatives for the proposed
development or site alteration must be recommended.
xv. Recommendations regarding additional studies (e.g. Conservation Plans) (see Section 7
of this document); DRAFTent)
ural heritage landsc
heritage resources noting
ctures, fences, outbuildings, etc
ment, 2014 (see Section 3.2 of this
has been det
resource
ale for such a recomme
age resources hav c]bee
r interest (see Section 4.
fied significant resources in terms o
ct and Ontario Regulation
Significance for each signific
gulation 9/06 including a descrip
4.1 of this document);
the integrity and condition o
this document);
detailed description of im
resources noting the degree o
do
Recommendations fo
recommendations wil
nd 7 of this docume
ere an impa
nserv
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 22 of 80
Page 11
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
xvi. Recommendations for implementation and monitoring (see Section 7 of this
document);
Note: This is a schedule and reporting structure for implementing the recommended
conservation or mitigative or avoidance measures, and monitoring the cultural heritage
resource as the development or site alteration progresses.
xvii. Addendums, Appendices and References (works cited) (see Section 9 and Appendices
of this document);
xviii. Digital photographs with captions (provided on a data stick or disk).
2.1.6 Additional Guidance Material
Section 13.3 (i) of the Town’s OP requires that heritage resources be protected and conserved
in accordance with the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in
Canada (2010), the Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built
Environment (1983), and other recognized heritage protocols and standards. The Ontario
Heritage Toolkit – in particular the guides on Heritage Property Evaluation and Heritage
Resources in the Land Use Planning Process have – also informs the current study.
2.2 Background Research
In order to identify any value-defining historical associations and to better understand the
property within its broader context, a wide variety of sources (listed in Section 9) were
reviewed.
2.3 Site Analysis
A site visit was undertaken on August 31, 2018 in order to document the current conditions of
the property and its surroundings. A description of the property, images, and the findings of
the site visit can be found in Section 3.2.
2.4 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
As previously noted, the evaluation of the CHVI of the property involved a review of the land-
use history of the property, its current conditions, and current context. O.Reg.9/06 criteria were
applied to the evaluation. This assessment considered the property as a whole, as well as
individual components or structures. DRAFTection
tick or disk).
esourc nd con
e Conservation of Historic Places in
ction and Enhance
protoco and s
operty Ev
ess h orms th
rical associations and t
ontext, a wide variety of
aken on August 31 2018 in o
y and its surrounding
isit can be fou Sectio
4 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage
revious eva
ory of the property, it
the evaluation.
mponents o
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 23 of 80
Page 12
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
3 Introduction to the Subject Property
The subject property is located at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad in the Town of Aurora. It is an
approximately 89.94-acre parcel located in the west half of Lot 25, Concession 3, in the historic
Whitchurch Township, County of York (Plan 65R-36629).
The property is located on the south side of St. John’s Sideroad, bounded to the west by Leslie
Street and to the east by Highway 404 (Figure 1). Observed land use in the surrounding area is
transitioning from rural to suburban. 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad is located within the Aurora
Northeast (2c) Secondary Plan Area and is designated in the OP as Business Park 1, with an
Environmental Protection Area. A key physiographic feature of the subject property is Weslie
Creek - one of four major tributaries of the East Holland River - and its steep, treed valley which
run through the south half of the property (Figure 2). The topography of the subject property is
rolling and complex.
The subject property generally presents as two connected but distinct complexes, comprising
1625 and 1675 St. John’s Sideroad.
Key features of the smaller of the two complexes, 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, include:
x a two-storey, post-1927 frame residence;
x a late 19th century bank barn (with significant 20
th century intervention);
x remains of an early 20th century concrete silo or cistern;
x an early 20th century outbuilding with a mid-20th century addition; and,
x adetached mid-20th century garage.
Key features of 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, also known as the Nighswander Equestrian Centre,
include:
x a two-storey, brick clad, c.1970 residence;
x a c.1970, T-shaped equestrian complex;
x a mid-20th century, plaster-clad, one-storey cottage;
x a long laneway with flanked by double rows of coniferous trees, terminating at a formal
circle in front of the main residence;
x a double hedgerow between the residence and cottage; and,
x open and rolling paddocks, pastures, and fields.
An access road connects the two properties to St. John’s Sideroad and to each other.DRAFTd to th
n the s
s located
P as Business Pa
of the subject proper
ver - and its steep, treed va
e topography of the subject prop
ected but disti
omplexes, 1625 St. John’s Sid
enc
ignificant 20th century i
century concrete silo o
ry outbuilding with a mid
d-20th y ga
5 St. John’s Sideroad, also known
wo-storey, brick clad, c
a c.1970, T shaped equestria
a m tury, plaster-clad
x a long laneway with flanked b
circle in front of the m
a double hedgerow b
en and rolling pad
d conne
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 24 of 80
Page 13
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Figure 2: 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad, current conditions (Base map source: York Region
2018).
3.1 Existing Protections, Designations, or Commemorations
The property is not designated under Parts IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act. It is listed as a
non-designated property of the Town’s Heritage Register under Section 27, Part IV of the OHA.
The inventory sheet for the property, provided by the Town of Aurora, indicates that the
property was included on the Aurora Inventory of Heritage Buildings (the Inventory) compiled
by the Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee (LACAC) between 1976 and 1981. The Inventory
was adopted by Council in 1981. Following the 2005 amendments to the OHA, Council
adopted the Inventory – and all of its properties - as the municipality’s Aurora Register of
Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under Section 27, Part IV of the OHA.
The inventory form for the subject property identifies the listed property as 1675 St. John’s
Sideroad, and provides the following information:
x Construction date - c.1900 DRASt. John’s Sideroad, current cond
sting Protections, Design
proper esignated under
on-designated property of own
ventory sheet for the p
was included on th
ora Heritage Ad
by Counc
ento THeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 25 of 80
Page 14
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
x Architectural style – Worker’s House Estate Cottage
x Roof type – tin roof
x Windows – 6/1 sash
x Chimney - centre
No adjacent properties are known to have any cultural heritage protections or designations.14
The subject property is privately owned.
3.2 Background Research and Analysis
The subject property comprises Part of the west half of Lot 25, Concession 3 in the geographic
township of Whitchurch in the historic County of York, now within the Town of Aurora.
The cultural history of southern Ontario began after the retreat of the Wisconsin glacier. During
this archaeological period, known as the Paleo-Indian period (11,500-8000 BC)15, the climate
was similar to the modern sub-arctic; and vegetation was dominated by spruce and pine
forests. The initial occupants of the province, distinctive in the archaeological record for their
stone tool assemblage, were nomadic big-game hunters (i.e, caribou, mastodon and
mammoth) living in small groups and travelling over vast areas of land, possibly migrating
hundreds of kilometres in a single year.
During the Archaic archaeological period (8000-1000 BC) the occupants of southern Ontario
continued to be migratory in nature, although living in larger groups and transitioning towards
a preference for smaller territories of land – possibly remaining within specific watersheds. The
stone tool assemblage was refined during this period and grew to include polished or ground
stone tool technologies. Evidence from Archaic archaeological sites points to long distance
trade for exotic items and increased ceremonialism with respect to burial customs towards the
end of the period.
The Woodland period in southern Ontario (1000 BC–AD 1650) represents a marked change in
subsistence patterns, burial customs and tool technologies, as well as the introduction of
pottery making. The Woodland period is sub-divided into the Early Woodland (1000–400 BC),
Middle Woodland (400 BC–AD 500) and Late Woodland (AD 500-1650). During the Early and
Middle Woodland, communities grew in size and were organized at a band level. Subsistence
patterns continued to be focused on foraging and hunting. There is evidence for incipient
14 The property at 1588 St. John’s Sideroad was previously listed on the Register. The property
was evaluated in 2014 and found to not warrant designation under Part IV of the OHA (Town
of Aurora, 2014).
15 Chris Ellis and D. Brian Deller, (1990): 37 and Stewart, A.M., “Water and Land.” In Munson,
M.K. and Jamieson, S.M (eds.) Before Ontario: The Archaeology of a Province. McGill Queen’s
University Press. 2013: 24.DRAFTons or
25, Co n the ge
ow with rora.
the retreat of the Wisconsin glacie
an period (11,500
was domina
ce, distinctive in the ar
big-game hunters (i.e, carib
velling over vast areas of land
ogical period (8000 1000 BC) the oc
y in nature, although living
er territories of la ssibly
ge was refined during this period
ogies. Evidence from Archaic arch
and increased ceremoniali
period.
oodland period in southern On
sistence patterns, burial customs a
ottery making. The Woodla
le Woodland (400 BC–A
Woodland, commun
ontinued to be fDHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 26 of 80
Page 15
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
horticulture in the Middle Woodland as well as the development of long-distance trade
networks.
Woodland populations transitioned from a foraging subsistence strategy towards a preference
for agricultural village-based communities around AD 500–1000. It was during this period that
corn (maize) cultivation was introduced into southern Ontario. Princess Point Complex (AD
500–1000) sites provide the earliest evidence of corn cultivation in southern Ontario.
The Late Woodland period is divided into three distinct stages: Early Iroquoian (AD 1000–1300);
Middle Iroquoian (AD 1300–1400); and Late Iroquoian (AD 1400–1650). The Late Woodland is
generally characterised by an increased reliance on cultivation of domesticated crop plants,
such as corn, squash, and beans, and a development of palisaded village sites which
included more and larger longhouses. These village communities were commonly organized
at the tribal level; by the 1500s, Iroquoian communities in southern Ontario – and northeastern
North America, more widely – were politically organized into tribal confederacies. South of
Lake Ontario, the Five Nations Iroquois Confederacy comprised the Mohawk, Oneida,
Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca, while Iroquoian communities in southern Ontario were
generally organized into the Petun, Huron and Neutral Confederacies.
During this period, domesticated plant crops were supplemented by continued foraging for
wild food and medicinal plants, as well as hunting, trapping, and fishing. Camp sites from this
period are often found in similar locations (if not the same exact location) to temporary or
seasonal sites used by earlier, migratory southern Ontario populations.
When European’s first arrived in the general area in the early seventeenth century, the region
was something of a “no-man’s land” with no permanent settlements; Haudenosaunee territory
was primarily to the south though they hunted in lands to the north, and there were Huron-
Wendat villages north of Lake Simcoe. In the mid-to-late seventeenth century, the area
remained remote though there were several Haudenosaunee villages along the northern
shore of Lake Ontario, taking advantage of the Toronto Carrying Place Trail, such as
Ganatsekwyagon on the Rouge River and Teiaiagon at the mouth of the Humber River. In the
latter seventeenth century, the Algonquin-speaking Anishinaabeg (Mississaugas) began
challenging the Haudenosaunee for dominance of the area north of Lake Ontario and
Ontario in general, resulting in the abandonment of these Haudenosaunee villages. The
Mississaugas fell into negotiations with British authorities over a series of land purchases in the
latter eighteenth century.16
16 Archeoworks Inc., Stage 2 AA for the Detail design of St. John’s Sideroad from Leslie Street to Highway
404, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York, Ontario, (Newmarket, ON, 2017), 7.
(footnote continued)DRAFTnt Co
hern O
y Iroquoia
1650). The Late
tion of domesticated
palisaded village sites whic
ommunities were commonly organ
ties in southern Ont the
nized into tribal co
comprised th
munitie
on and edera
ops were supplemented by c
hunting, trapping, and
not the same exact
ier, migratory southern On
arrive ge ea in
a “no nd” w rman
south though they hunted in la
of Lake Sim emi
remote though there w
f Lake Ontario, ta advan
natsekw the Rouge River
tter seventeenth century, the Algo
lenging the Haudenosau
o in gen ting
as fell into negoti
enth century
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 27 of 80
Page 16
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
The subject property was believed, by the Crown, to be within the Johnson-Butler Purchase
lands. This treaty – also known as the ‘Gunshot Treaty’ was entered into in 1787, but contained
no description of the land it was meant to cover. An approximately 52,000 km2 territory was
subsequently covered by the Williams Treaties, which were signed by seven Anishinaabe
Nations and Crown representatives, in October and November 1923, to address lands that
had not been surrendered.17
3.2.1 Euro-Canadian Settlement
Yonge Street was completed 1796, connecting the Town of York to Holland Landing and
creating the boundaries of the County of York’s northern townships, including Whitchurch.18
John Stegman laid out the plan for the Township of Whitchurch around 1800, shortly after the
arrival of the first Euro-Canadian settlers.1920 The original boundaries of the Township of
Whitchurch varied from those in the twenty-first century, with the northern boundary marked
(as it is still) at Davis Drive, Yonge Street forming the western boundary, Stouffville Sideroad the
southern, and the eastern as it remains at Durham Road. The original boundaries included the
Town of Aurora, Stouffville, New Market, and what is known now as Oak Ridges.
21 Though the
date of naming for the township is unknown, it was John Graves Simcoe that picked
‘Whitchurch’ to commemorate his wife’s birthplace in Herefordshire.22
As in the case of many early land concessions by the Crown before settlement, one-seventh
was set aside for clergy reserves and an equal part for Crown reserves, but both were sold by
1820 and 1840, respectively.23 Early settlers came from a number of backgrounds, but the most
cohesive early group were Quakers from a variety of American locations initially lead by
Timothy Rogers from Vermont, who was offered a significant portion of land to make
settlement viable in Whitchurch.
24 Others included Hessians paid in land by the British
government, and still others were Mennonites who settled in the southeast and especially in
Stouffville.25 The first patents for land in the latter eighteenth century in Whitchurch Township
17 William Treaties First Nations, Maps of our Treaties. 2018
https://williamstreatiesfirstnations.ca/maps-of-our-treaties/ and Indigenous and Northern Affairs
Canada (INAC), Treaty Research Report, The Williams Treaties (1923). 2018 Accessed online at
https://www.aadnc-andc.gc.ca/eng/1100100029000/1100100029002
18 Barkey, Whitchurch Township,(Toronto, Stoddart Publishing, 1993), 40.
19 Miles & Co., Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Township of York, (Toronto, 1878), xv.
20 As second survey in 1869 redrew a number of lot lines (Mulvany and Adam, History of
Toronto and County of York, (Toronto, 1885), 145)
21 Barkey, Whitchurch Township,12.
22 Ibid, 14.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
(footnote continued)DRAFTdr
to Holland La
hips, including W
urch a shortly
bound ship of
ry, with the northern boundary ma
western boundary, Stouffville Sider
oad. The origina
own now a
wn, it was John Graves
s birthplace in Herefordshire
sions by the Crown before s
qual part for Crown rese
Early settlers came from a numbe
e Quakers from a variety
ermont, who was offered a si
Whitc Others included He
till others were Mennonites who s
atents for land in the latter e
DRlliam Treaties First Natio Maps o
tps://williamstreatiesfirstnations.ca/
nada (ese
//www c.gc
Whitchurch Towns
o., Illustrated Hi
urvey in 18
unty
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 28 of 80
Page 17
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
began in 1796. As with many other locations throughout Ontario, much of the land in the early
nineteenth century went unsettled after being allocated to United Empire Loyalists, who would
often hold onto their grants and sell them at a significant markup.
Settlement was shaped the region’s physiography, including the predominant Oak Ridges
Moraine and tributaries of the East Holland River, which ensured moist and very fertile land for
agricultural practices – essential to attracting settlement that was largely agriculturally based
over the course of the nineteenth century.26 Early on, a number of hamlets developed in the
area around key roadway intersections or streams/rivers that offered the potential for mill
power. Some of these include Vandorf, Bogarttown, Ballantrae, Pine Orchard, Bloomington
Gormley, and Bethesda.27 In her seminal work on the Township, Whitchurch Township, Barkey
speculates that the large number of early hamlets was due to poor transportation
infrastructure and routes and the difficulties settlers and traders encountered when moving
goods in, out of, and amongst the area.28 Nevertheless, settlement in Whitchurch quickly
picked up pace, and by 1842 the population was 3,836 according to Smith’s Canadian
Gazetteer. Smith described Whitchurch Township in the mid-nineteenth century as an “…old
settled township” that had “fine…well cultivated… beautifully situated” farms with “excellent
orchards attached…”.29 At the time, the Township had “four grist and thirteen saw mills”.30
Indeed, the major centres (Aurora, New Market, and Stouffville) of the Township grew large
enough to incorporate and were administratively separate.31
A major supplemental income to agricultural practices in Whitchurch Township, like much of
the Province, was the timber industry. Much of it served the concomitant growth of American
cities, especially after the restrictions on Crown Land lumber were lifted; later in the nineteenth
century, the timber industry in the Township would serve the railroads for fuel wood. Together,
these practices meant that the Township went from 35% wooded in 1850 to a meagre 7% in
1910 (regenerating by the 1990s to 22%).32 Of course, lumber harvesting practices also worked
to shape social life of many residents in Whitchurch Township. Comparatively speaking, the
Township received its first major rails quite early, with the Ontario, Simcoe, and Huron Railway
(later the Northern) arriving in Aurora in 1853 and even received its own localized rail in 1877 in
the form of the Lake Simcoe Junction, which began in Stouffville.33 These rails relied heavily on
the lumber industry, and as they became more common they radically affected the
26 Archeoworks Inc., Stage 2 AA, 10.
27 Barkey, Whitchurch Township, 16.
28 Ibid, 17.
29 Smith, Smith’s Canadian Gazetteer, 219.
30 Ibid.
31 Barkey, Whitchurch Township, 17.
32 Ibid, 21-22.
33 Ibid, 23.
(footnote continued)DRAFTd very
ely agri
amlets
red the pote
Pine Orchard, Bl
hip, Whitchurch Townsh
ue to poor transportation
nd traders encountered when mov
eless, settlement in W
836 according t
e mid-ninet
tivated… beautifully sit
e Township had “four grist an
Market,and Stouffville) of the
ratively separate.31
me to agricultural practices in Whitc
ber industry. Much of it se
the restrictions on Crown Lan
industry in the Township would se
ant that the Township went from
the 1990s to 32 Of cou
ocial life of many resid
p received its first major rai
r the N arriving in Aurora
e form of the Lake Simcoe Junction
lumber industry, and as tDorks Inc Stage
tchurch To
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 29 of 80
Page 18
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
topography and interconnectedness of Whitchurch Township in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries.
3.2.2 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad
King’s College received all 200 acres of Lot 25 in the 3rd Concession of the Township of
Whitchurch (now within the Town of Aurora) in a Crown Patent in January of 1828.
34 In 1847,
John Willson bought the eastern 100 acres of the lot and in April of 1862 King’s College sold the
western half, comprising the subject property, to Thomas Coates.35 Tremaine’s York County
Atlas clearly shows Thomas Coates occupied the property as early as 1860.
36 This map further
indicates that Coates had erected at least one structure at the northwest corner of the lot
where Weslie Creek and the concession road intersect (Figure 3).
Coates was a Quaker farmer born in 1815 according to the 1861 Canada West Census.37 The
census indicates that Coates and his wife Lydia were living in a one-storey frame house with
their seven children.38 Coates held the subject property well into the latter nineteenth century.
Miles & Company’s Illustrated historical atlas indicating he still occupied it in 1878, though the
map depicts no further structures
39 at the time (Figure 3).40 In 1892 Thomas Coates sold his
undivided interest in the 100 acres of the west half of Lot 25 to his son, Benjamin O. Coates.41
Benjamin Coates sold the 100 acres of the western half of Lot 25 in June of 1892 to James Hill,
shortly after acquiring the land from his father. Hill hung onto the land for 10 years until 1902
when he sold it to Annie E. Armstrong. Annie and her husband William R. Armstrong sold the
land to Frank P. Graham in 1910.42 Graham then sold the northwest 50 acres of the lot in 1922
to Albert and Ola Finney.43 The Finneys sold their portion of the property to Victor Sifton in July
1927 – the remaining portion of the property being sold by Frank Graham to Sifton in
September that same year. It was likely Sifton who constructed the extant residence at 1625 St.
John’s Sideroad, and possibly the small cottage north of the residence at 1675 St. John’s
Sideroad.
34 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, 1.
35 Ibid.
36 George Tremaine,York County Atlas, (Toronto, 1860).
37 Library and Archives Canada. Census Returns For 1861; Roll:C-1089-1090.
38 Library and Archives Canada. Census of Canada, 1881. Statistics Canada Fonds, Record
Group 31-C-1. LAC microfilm C-13162 to C-13286.
39 It is worth noting here that early maps contain somewhat of a bias in that land owners often
had to pay surveyors to represent structures on the drawings.
40 Miles & Co. Illustrated historical atlas of the county of York (Toronto, 1878).
41 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, 1.
42 Ibid, sheet 1.
43 Ibid.
(footnote continued)DRAFTof 18
2 King’s
remain
y as 1860.36
northwest corne
ure 3
o the 1861 Canada West Census.
e living in a one-storey frame house
perty well into the
g he still occ
40 In 18
e west half of Lot 25 to his s
e western half of Lot 25 in Jun
her. Hill hung onto the la
mstrong. Annie and her h nd W
1910.42 Graham then sol
y.43 The Finneys sold their po
portio e property being s
me ye as likely Sifton who co
possibly the small cottage n
DROntario Land Abstracts. York Regio
id.
rge Tre k Co
and Archives CanaDnd Archives CaDLAC micr
g he
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 30 of 80
Page 19
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
An air photo from 1927 (Figure 4) and a Department of Militia and Defence topographic map
from 1929 (Figure 5) show structures pertaining to the farmstead at 1625 St. John’s Sideroad
were located near the intersection of St. John’s Sideroad and Leslie Street.
44 In 193945 Sifton
sold the property to Whitchurch Investment Ltd. (Figure 5).
46 Although the topographic maps
provide limited detail pertaining to the structures, the 1927 air photo shows that a residence
was located in a similar position to that of 1625 St. John’s Sideroad; however, the 1927
residence appears to be an L-shaped farmhouse, suggesting that the extant house was built
shortly after the air photo was taken. The 1927 image also shows the square bank barn (no
concrete silo is visible) and a portion of the outbuilding west of the bank barn. None of the
structures associated with 1675 St. John’s Sideroad – including the small worker’s cottage –
had been constructed (Figure 4) – although the cottage does appear on the 1954 air photo of
the area (Figure 6). Given the extent of property development depicted on the 1954 air photo
– including the addition of the primary laneway to 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, flanked by double
rows of newly planted trees – it is likely that this structure was erected around this time to
support the use of the property, which appears to have been increasingly equestrian.
Whitchurch Investment held the property for almost two decades, until July 20, 1971 when
Carolyn A. Sifton (later Peter) bought all 100 acres of the western half of Lot 25.47 The 1970
shows new structures and features at 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, including the residence, the
large equestrian barn and double rows of trees along the laneway (Figure 7).
48 Following her
death, Carolyn A. S. Peter’s estate negotiated the transfer of her 100 acre property to Hegan
Peter in 1976, who over the following decades sold off portions in smaller lots.49 Notably, in
August of 1977, Hill N’ Dale – an equestrian company well-known for its horse breeding
50 –
began buying portions of the lot.51 By 1987, Hill N’Dale had purchased most of the original
western 100 acres, save some portions that had been divvied into smaller lots.52 Since the
1970s, the property has remained relatively unchanged (Figure 7).
44 Department of National Defense, Geographical Section. OCUL Scholars Geoportal.
Topographical maps, 1929-1939.
45 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, 1.
46 Ibid.
47 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, sheet 2.
48 York Region. York Maps; Images layer. Aerial photographs: 1970.
49 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, sheet 3.
50 Hill N’ Dale. Hill N’ Dale History.
51 Ontario Land Abstracts. York Region (65), Whitchurch; Stouffville, Book 236, sheet 3.
52 Ibid, sheet 4.DRAFTh
ver, th
extan
e square
he bank barn.
g the small worker’s c
does appear on the 1954 a
opment depicted on the 1954 a
675 St. John’s Sideroad, flanked by d
cture was erected a
ve been incre
for almost two decade
100 acres of the western ha
75 St. John’s Side ncludi
trees along the laneway (
ed the transfer of her
following decades sold o
ale –an equestrian compa
ns of th By 1 N’Da
save some portions that had bee
has remained relatively unchan
Dtment of National D
ical maps, 1929
nd Abstract
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 31 of 80
Page 20
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Figure 3: 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad, 19
th century morphology.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 32 of 80
Page 21Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ONFigure 4: 1927 Air Photo of property (NAPL, RA18, No.56)DRAFTTertHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 33 of 80
Page 22
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Figure 5: 1929, 1935, and 1939 Topographic Maps showing Property (DND, 1929, 1935, 1939).AFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 34 of 80
Page 23Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ONFigure 6: 1954 Air Photo of Property (University of Toronto, 1954).DRAFTToperty Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 35 of 80
Page 24
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Figure 7: Property Morphology, 1970, 1978, 1988 (York Region). AFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 36 of 80
Page 25
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
3.3 Existing Conditions
3.3.1 Context
The subject property is located at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad in the Town of Aurora. It is an
approximately 89.94-acre parcel located in the west half of Lot 25, Concession 3, in the historic
Whitchurch Township, County of York (Plan 65R-36629).
The property is located on the south side of St. John’s Sideroad, bounded to the west by Leslie
Street and to the east by Highway 404 (Figure 1). Observed land use in the surrounding area is
transitioning from rural to suburban (Photo 1 to Photo 3). 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad is
located within the Aurora Northeast (2c) Secondary Plan Area and is designated in the OP as
Business Park 1, with an Environmental Protection Area. A key physiographic feature of the
subject property is Weslie Creek - one of four major tributaries of the East Holland River - and its
steep, treed valley which run through the south half of the property (Figure 2). The topography
of the subject property is rolling and complex.
Photo 1: View from 1362 St. John's Sideroad, looking north-northwest towards subdivision west
of Leslie Street and north of St. John's Sideroad (CU 2018)AFTnded t
use in the su
675 St. John’s Sid
ea and is designated in
key physiographic feature o
butaries of the East Holland River -
f of the property (Fi po
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 37 of 80
Page 26
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 2: View of area north of subject property, looking northwest from Highway 404 along St.
John's Sideroad (GoogleEarthPro, July 2018).
Photo 3: View along Leslie Street, looking south from St. John's Sideroad (subject property on
the left) (GoogleEarthPro, July 20184). RAFoperty, looking northwest from
8). THeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 38 of 80
Page 27
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
3.3.2 1625 St. John’s Sideroad
The subject property generally presents as two connected but distinct complexes, comprising
1625 and 1675 St. John’s Sideroad.
Key features of the smaller of the two complexes, 1625 St. John’s Sideroad (Figure 8), include:
x a two-storey, post-1927 frame residence (Figure 8, #1);
x a late 19th century bank barn (Figure 8, #2);
x remains of an early 20th century concrete silo or cistern (Figure 8, #3);
x an early 20th century outbuilding with a mid-20th century addition (Figure 8, #4); and,
x a detached mid-20th century garage (Figure 8, #5).
Figure 8: 1625 St. John's Sideroad, current conditions (base map source: YorkMaps, 2018)FTure 8, #3);
additio (Figure
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 39 of 80
Page 28
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 4: View of 1625 St. John's Sideroad from the base of the laneway, looking south towards
house (right) and barn (CU 2018).
Residence
As described in Section 3.2.2, the residence at 1625 St. John’s Sideroad appears to have been
constructed by Victor Sifton sometime after he purchased the property in July 1927. The one-
and-a-half-storey frame residence is constructed on a rectangular plan with a side gable roof.
The structure is clad in vertical wood siding, with red brick cladding at the northwest corner –
running from the brick chimney on the north façade, across the bay window, terminating at
the recessed front entrance (Photo 5 to Photo 7). On the front (west) elevation, there are two
simple dormers on the second floor. A long dormer runs along the rear (east) elevation. An
attached two-car garage is located on the south (side) elevation (Photo 6 and Photo 10).
Review of air photos indicates that this was added between 1970 and 1978. Size and locations
of openings are irregular and there is evidence of significant intervention and replacement.DRASt. John's Sideroad from the b
arn (CU
ribed in Section 3.2.2, the r
ructed by Victor Sifto metim
d-a-ha e residence is c
e structure is clad in vertica
g from the brick chimn
ssed front entrance
mers on the sec
car gara
tos
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 40 of 80
Page 29
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 5: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, north façade (CU 2018).
Photo 6: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, west (front) façade (CU 2018).AFTaçade (CU 2018
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 41 of 80
Page 30
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 7: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, west (front) façade, showing attached two-car garage (CU
2018).
Photo 8: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, south façade (CU 2018).RAFront)façade, showing attachFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 42 of 80
Page 31
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 9: 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, east façade from along access road (CU 2018).
Photo 10: View of 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, rear (east) façade (CU 2018).
DRAFTaçade from along access roa
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 43 of 80
Page 32
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Barn
One of the key components of 1625 St. John’s Sideroad considered for its cultural heritage
value or interest, is the roughly 14m x 15m barn located south of the residence. The structure is
constructed on a rectangular plan with an aluminum gable roof. Its design makes use of the
existing topography, being one storey on the front (north) façade and two storeys at the rear
and sides (Photo 11 to Photo 15). The foundation of a mid-20
th century concrete silo or cistern is
located along the north façade (Photo 12). The structure is clad in horizontal wood cladding
and - although portions of the fieldstone foundation likely dating to the late 19th century are
extant along the front and side elevations (Photo 11 to Photo 14) – there is evidence of
significant intervention in the mid-20th century. This 20th century intervention includes a
complete rebuilding of the rear (south) foundation wall and the replacement and bracing of
interior beams and walls (Photo 15 to Photo 17).
Photo 11: Barn, front (north) facade (CU 2018).DRAFTo stor
concre
orizont
to the late 1
4)– there is evide
ury intervention include
and the replacement and bra
front (n
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 44 of 80
Page 33
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 12: Front (north) of barn, cistern/silo base on right (CU 2018)
Photo 13: Barn, east facade (CU 2018).AFTo base on right (CU 2018)
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 45 of 80
Page 34
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 14: Barn, west facade (CU 2018).
Photo 15: Barn, south facade (CU 2018).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 46 of 80
Page 35
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 16: Barn interior (CU 2018).
Photo 17: Detail, barn interior (CU 2015).
AFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 47 of 80
Page 36
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Outbuilding
A second, two-storey outbuilding is located immediately west of the barn. This outbuilding is a
simple, wood-clad, rectangular structure on a concrete foundation with a metal, gable roof.
Additions were added along the west and south sometime between 1927 and 1954 and there
is evidence of 20th century intervention for expansion, maintenance, and change of use
(Photo 18 to Photo 20).
Photo 18: Outbuilding, north facade (CU 2018).DRoto 18 FTchan
north facade (
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 48 of 80
Page 37
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 19: Outbuilding, east elevation foundations (CU 2018).
Photo 20: Outbuilding, mid-20th century addition, west facade (CU 2018).
AFTndations (CU 20
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 49 of 80
Page 38
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Garage
A small, one-storey, frame garage is located to the north of the two-storey outbuilding. It was
constructed on a roughly square plan, sometime between 1954 and 1970. The structure is
wood-clad, with a simple hipped roof (Photo 21 and Photo 22).
Photo 21: Garage, north elevation (CU 2018).
Photo 22: Garage, south elevation (CU 2018).s
ion (CU 2018).RAFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 50 of 80
Page 39
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
3.3.3 1675 St. John’s Sideroad
Key features of 1675 St. John’s Sideroad, also known as the Nighswander Equestrian Centre,
include:
x a two-storey, brick clad, c.1960 residence (Figure 9, #1 and Photo 24);
x a c.1960, T-shaped equestrian complex (Figure 9, #2 and Photo 25 to Photo 27);
x a mid-20th century, plaster-clad, one-storey cottage (Figure 9, #3);
x a long laneway with flanked by double rows of coniferous trees, terminating at a formal
circle in front of the main residence (Figure 9, #4 and Photo 28 to Photo 29);
x a double hedgerow between the residence and cottage (Figure 9, #5); and,
x open and rolling paddocks, pastures, and fields (Photo 30 and Photo 31).
Given the late-20th century date of construction of the majority of the landscape and its
components, the small cottage, north of the c.1960 residence is the focus of the physical
description below. It should be noted that the interior of the cottage was not accessed, due to
significant safety concerns.
Figure 9: 1675 St. John's Sideroad, building complex, current conditions (base map source:
YorkMaps, 2018)AFTo Ph
3);
es, ter
o 28 to Phot
e (Fig 9, #5); a
to 30 31).
majority of the landscape and its
residence is the focus of the physic
or of th ttage w
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 51 of 80
Page 40
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 23: View of 1675 St. John's Sideroad, from St. John's Sideroad at Highway 404
(GoogleEarthPro, July 2018).
Photo 24: 1675 St. John's Sideroad, circa 1960 residence (CU 2018).RAFTd, from St. John's Sideroad at
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 52 of 80
Page 41
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 25: c.1960 equestrian complex, looking west (CU 2018).
Photo 26: c.1960 equestrian complex (CU 2018).AFTking west (CU 201
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 53 of 80
Page 42
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 27: c.1960 equestrian complex, looking southwest (CU 2018).
Photo 28: Treed laneway (CU 2018).
oking southwest (CU 2018).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 54 of 80
Page 43
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 29: Formal circle in front of residence (CU 2018).
Photo 30: Paddocks and fields east of residence (CU 2018).AFTce (CU 2018).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 55 of 80
Page 44
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 31: Fields east of equestrian barns (CU 2018).
Cottage
The modest one-storey, plaster-clad cottage at 1675 St. John Sideroad was constructed
sometime between 1927 and 1954 – likely in the 1940s or early 1950s when the property
appears to have been developed as an equestrian centre, under the ownership of
Whitchurch Investments.
The interior of the cottage, could not be accessed during the site visit due to health and safety
concerns.
The modest, one-storey cottage appears to be of wood frame construction with plaster
cladding (Photo 32 to Photo 37). The structure is built on a roughly rectangular plan with a
gable roof – additions on either side have shed roofs. The roof is clad in metal. Openings are
rectangular, and irregular in form, size and location. Although the windows on the front (north)
elevation are six-over-one sash windows, the remaining windows appear to be of varying sizes
and ages. It is possible that the six-over-ones were reused from another source when this
modest cottage was constructed. The foundation appears to be concrete, and there does
not appear to be a cellar or basement. The structural integrity of the building has been
severely compromised and the floors and ceilings have visibly shifted (Photo 36).DRAquestrian barns (CU 2018)
rey, plaster-clad cottage at 167
27 and 195 the
o have been develope
urch Investments.
e inter age, could not
cerns
dest, on cott
Photo 3 o Pho
dditions o
irre THeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 56 of 80
Page 45
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 32: Cottage, north facade (CU 2018).
Photo 33: Cottage, east facade (CU 2018).
8).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 57 of 80
Page 46
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 34: Cottage, south facade (CU 2018).
Photo 35: Cottage, west facade (CU 2018).
18).
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 58 of 80
Page 47
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Photo 36: Cottage, interior. Note significant tilt of floor and walls. (CU 2018).
Photo 37: Cottage, detail of cladding (CU 2018).RAFTnt tilt of floor and walls. (CU 2
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 59 of 80
Page 48
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
4 Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
The property at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad was evaluated against criteria outlined under
Ontario Regulation 9/06 Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under the
Ontario Heritage Act. A summary of the evaluation is provided, below, in Table 1.
Table 1: Evaluation of Property, Ontario Regulation 9/06 Criteria
O.Reg.9/06 Criteria Criteria
Met
(Y/N)
Justification
The property has design value or physical value because it,
i. is a rare, unique, representative or early
example of a style, type, expression,
material, or construction method,
N
The subject property and its built and
landscape components do not
constitute rare, unique, representative or
early examples of any particular styles,
types, expressions, materials, or
construction methods, individually or as a
potential cultural heritage landscape.
All of the extant components are
vernacular, and are not attributable to
specific types or styles. With the
exception of portions of the bank barn
and barn at 1625 St. John’s Sideroad, all
of the structures and designed
landscape components post-date 1927.
Although portions of the outbuildings
appear to date to the late 19th century,
they were significantly altered in the mid-
20th century.
ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship
or artistic merit, or
N
The components that comprise the
subject property appear to have been
constructed using methods and
techniques which were common for its
age of construction and intervention and
do not meet this criterion.
iii. demonstrates a high degree of technical
or scientific achievement.
N
The modest design, decoration, and
methods of construction that remain are
consistent with mid-20
th century
vernacular construction methods and the
late 19th century outbuildings have been
subject to substantial intervention
throughout the 20th century. The property
does not meet this criterion.
The property has historical value or associative value because it,
i. has direct associations with a theme,
event, belief, person, activity, N The extant structures and components
do not appear to have any direct Dde igh d
or sci hievemDRAFT Justific
TTN
subject property and its built
ndscape components do not
constitute rare, unique, representativ
ear ples of any particular sty
types, expression
construction m
potential c
he exta
ar, and
specific types or
exception of p
and barn atFT
RAAFegree of cra
or Rartistic me
DRRRRDHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 60 of 80
Page 49
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
O.Reg.9/06 Criteria Criteria
Met
(Y/N)
Justification
organization or institution that is
significant to a community,
associations that would satisfy this
criterion.
ii. yields, or has the potential to yield,
information that contributes to an
understanding of a community or
culture, or
N
The property does not appear to have
the potential to yield information that
contributes to an understanding of a
community or culture.
iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or
ideas of an architect, artist, builder,
designer or theorist who is significant to
a community.
N
The builder/designer is unknown. The
property does not meet this criterion.
The property has contextual value because it,
i. is important in defining, maintaining or
supporting the character of an area,
N
The property and its components do not
define, maintain or support the character
of the surrounding area from a cultural
heritage perspective.
ii. is physically, functionally, visually or
historically linked to its surroundings, or N
The property at 1625-1675 St. John’s
Sideroad is not physically, functionally,
visually, or historically linked to its
surroundings.
iii. is a landmark.
N
1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad is not a
landmark and does not meet this
criterion.
4.1 Findings
Based on the review of background materials and review of the property’s design and
physical condition, the property at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad does not satisfy the criteria
outlined under Ontario Regulation 9/06 Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest under the Ontario Heritage Act (O.Reg.9/06). The property is not a good candidate for
designation under Part IV of the OHA. A summary of the evaluation is provided in Table 1. DRAFTt app
eld info
n unde
r culture.Ter/designer is unkno
erty does not meet this critTFTThe property and
define, mainta
of the surrou
eritage p FFFTAAFor N
perty a
Si s not p
visually, stor
surroundingsAAAFAFAFRAAFN
675 S
RARARAAARARARARAAAAof background materials and
property
under Ontario Regulation
st under the Ontario tage A
signation under Part IV of the OHA.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 61 of 80
Page 50
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
5 Description of the Proposed Development or Site Alteration
5.1 Proposed Development or Site Alteration
A Conceptual Site Plan is included in this document as Appendix B and below as Figure 10.
The proposed development of the property involves the west half of the subject property and
would result in the demolition and removal of all structures currently situated on the property,
as described in Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3, above.
The proposal includes plans for:
x a 213, 844 square foot industrial building with 199 surface parking spaces, fronting St.
John’s Sideroad;
x an office building with a footprint of 14,196 square feet and 46 surface parking spaces,
fronting Leslie Street;
x a retail building with a footprint of 20,641 square feet and 115 surface parking spaces,
fronting Leslie Street; and,
x a gas station at the southeast corner of St. John’s Sideroad and Leslie Street.
Figure 10: Proposed Site Plan (Ware Malcomb, 2018).
5.2 Impact Assessment
The assessment of potential impacts involved a review of proposed project activities and
design in as they relate to cultural heritage resources on and adjacent to the property.Droposed Site Pla
essm AFTubjec
uated
rface parking spaces, fron
quare feet and 46 surface parking sp
re feet and 1
ner of St. John’s Sideroad
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 62 of 80
Page 51
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Potential project-related negative impacts that were considered as part of this HIA include the
following seven potential impacts outlined in the MTCS Info Sheet #5 Heritage Impact
Assessments and Conservation Plans:
Destruction or removal of any, or part of, a heritage building, structure, or identified
heritage attribute.
Alteration of a building, structure or landscape in a manner that is not sympathetic or is
incompatible with the historic fabric and appearance.
Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the
viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;
Isolation of a building, structure, or feature from its surrounding environment.
Obstruction of views from or of a cultural heritage resource, landscape or attribute,
where the view has been identified as a heritage attribute.
Change in Use that results in the loss or deterioration of a heritage resource, landscape,
or attribute.
Land disturbances that result in damage to below-grade archaeological resources or
alteration of historical patterns or topography.
Given that the subject property has been evaluated against the criteria for determining
cultural heritage value or interest outlined in O.Reg.9/06 (see Section 4) and the property has
been determined to not satisfy those criteria. The development proposal, which seeks to
demolish the extant structures, will not have a negative impact on any cultural heritage
resources or heritage attributes.DRAFT is not
ge attr or chan
arden
ts surro
age resource, land
e attribute.
or deterioration of a he
age to below-grade archa
ography.
operty has been evaluate
or interest outlined in O.Reg
not s ose criteria. The de
nt structures, will not have a negat
attributes.
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 63 of 80
Page 52
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
6 Mitigation Options, Conservation Methods, and Proposed Alternatives
6.1 Considered Alternatives
As a general best practice for heritage conservation, minimal intervention should be the
guiding principle for all work.
This alternative essentially sees the retention of the residential structure in situ with a focus on
conserving the identified heritage attributes. Retention is generally the preferred alternative
with respect to structures of cultural heritage value or interest, in the absence other factors.
Evaluation of the retention option generally includes consideration of the physical limitations
for incorporating the former residence into any proposed new development. This includes
issues related to structural integrity, Building Code Compliance, and possible Designated
Substances.
In this case, the subject property and its components do not satisfy the criteria outlined in
O.Reg. 9/06 and this alternative has not been deemed appropriate.
6.2 Mitigation Strategies
As such no negative impact has been identified and no specific mitigation measures have
been identified.
re in sit
y the prefer
n the absence o
ideration of the physical lim
ed new development. This includ
ompliance, and possible Designate
o not satis
been deemed appropria
tified and no specific m
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 64 of 80
Page 53
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
7 Recommended Conservation Strategy
Based on the review of background materials and review of the property’s design and
physical condition, the property at 1625-1675 St. John’s Sideroad does not satisfy the criteria
outlined under Ontario Regulation 9/06 Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest under the Ontario Heritage Act (O.Reg.9/06).The property is not a good candidate for
designation under Part IV of the OHA. A summary of the evaluation is provided in Table 1.
As such no negative impact has been identified and no specific mitigation measures have
been identified.
Notwithstanding these findings, an opportunity to recover construction materials from the
extant barn has been identified and it is recommended that the proponent work with the
Town of Aurora to determine if these materials would be of benefit to the Town of Aurora and
might be salvaged and transferred to the Town through the Architectural Salvage Program
(see Appendix C).
8Closure
This report has been prepared by This Land Archaeology Inc. on behalf of Humphries Planning
Group Inc.. Any use of this report by a third party is the responsibility of said third party.
We trust that this report satisfies your current needs. Please contact the undersigned should
you require any clarification or if additional information is identified that might have an
influence on the findings of this report.
Christienne Uchiyama, M.A., CAHP
Heritage ConsultantDRAFT a goo
rovide
mitigation m
construction materials fro
that the proponent work with t
be of benefit to the Town of Aurora
ough the Architectu
and Archaeology Inc. on beh
rd party is the responsibility of
t needs. Please contac
n or if additional informati
of this report.
ienne ma, M.A AHP
eritage
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 65 of 80
Page 54
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
9Sources
Ancestry.ca
1940-1963 Canada, Voters Lists, 1935-1980 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com
Operations, Inc., 2012.
Archeoworks Inc.
2016 Stage 2 AA for the Detail design of St. John’s Sideroad from Leslie Street to Highway
404, Town of Aurora, Regional Municipality of York, Ontario.
Barkey, Jean
1993 Whitchurch Township. Toronto, Stoddart Publishing.
Department of National Defense, Geographical Section. OCUL Scholars Geoportal.
Topographical maps. http://geo1.scholarsportal.info/#r/details/_uri@=564032357&_add:true
Newmarket, Ontario. 1:63,360. Map Sheet 031D03, [ed. 2], 1929
Newmarket, Ontario. 1:63,360. Map Sheet 031D03, [ed. 3], 1935
Newmarket, Ontario. 1:63,360. Map Sheet 031D03, [ed. 4], 1939
Ellis, Chris J. and Deller, D. Brian,
1990 “Paleo-Indians,” In The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650, Chris J. Ellis
and Neal Ferris, eds., Occasional publication of the London Chapter, OAS Number
5, 1990: pp. 37-63.
Hill N’ Dale Thoroughbred Horses
2018 Hill N’ Dale History.http://www.hillndale.ca/history.html
Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC)
2018 Treaty Research Report, The Williams Treaties (1923). Accessed online at
https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100029000/1100100029002
Kalman, Harold
1994a A History of Canadian Architecture. Vol. 1. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
1994b A History of Canadian Architecture. Vol. 2. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Land Registry Office #65, York Region
n.d.Land Title Abstracts. Book 236. Whitchurch Township, Lot 25, Concession 3.
Library and Archives Canada (LAC)
1861 Census of Canada, 1861; Schedule A; Roll: C-1089-1090; Page: 58; Line: 1-9. DRAFTom Leslie
ntario
shing.
ection. OCUL Schola
o/#r/details/_uri@
3, [ed. 2]
ap Sheet 031D03, [ed. 3], 1
p Sheet 031D03, [ed. 4], 1939
In The Archaeology of So
s, eds., Occasional publica
37-63
ghbred Horses
istory.http://www.hillnda
DRous and Northern Affairs C
018 earch Report, The
aadn ndcDan, Ha
A History of Cana
story of C
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 66 of 80
Page 55
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
1881 Census of Canada, 1881. Census Place: Whitchurch, York North, Ontario; Roll:
C_13249; Page: 3; Family No: 15
Miles & Co.
1878) Illustrated historical atlas of the county of York, Toronto.
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport
2006 Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process. Toronto: Queen’s Printer.
2006 Heritage Property Evaluation: A Guide to Listing, Researching and Evaluating
Cultural Heritage Property in Ontario Communities. Toronto: Queen’s Printer.
Mulvany, C.P. and Adam, G. M.
1885 History of Toronto and County of York, Ontario: containing an outline of the history of
the Dominion of Canada, a history of the city of Toronto and the county of York, with
the townships, towns, villages, churches, schools; general and local statistics;
biographical sketches, etc., Volume 1.
https://archive.org/details/historyyork02unknuoft/page/n5
Munson, M.K. and S.M. Jamieson (eds)
2013 Before Ontario: The Archaeology of a Province. Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University
Press.
National Air Photo Library
1927 Roll Number: RA18; Photo No.: 56; Date: 1927-07-21
Smith, W.H.
1846 Canadian Gazetteer.Toronto: H&W Rowsell. Accessed online at
https://archive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smit.
Stegmann, John
1802 (revised 1857) Whitchurch Township.http://ontario.heritagepin.com/whitchurch-
township-in-york/
Town of Aurora
2010 Town of Aurora Official Plan.September 27, 2010.
https://www.aurora.ca/TownHall/Documents/Corporate%20Reports/Town%20of%20
Aurora%20Official%20Plan%202010.pdf
2014 Town of Aurora Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes.June 9, 2014.
https://www.aurora.ca/TownHall/Documents/2014%20Advisory%20Committees/Herit
age%20Advisory%20Committee/HAC2014-06-09%20Minutes.pdf
2014 Aurora Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest.DRAFTnto: Q
arching and Eva
Toronto: Queen’s Pr
tario: containing an outline of the h
e city of Toronto and
chools; general
ryyork02unknuoft/page
AFy of a Province. Kingston: M
r: RA18; Photo No.: 56; Date: 1
Gazetteer.Toronto: H&W Ro
ttps://archive.org/de
DRann, Jo
1802 Whitchurch To
ownDf Auror
own of Aurora
s://www.
%20
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 67 of 80
Page 56
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
2016 Town of Aurora: Architectural Salvage Program Guide.
Tremaine, George R.
1860 Tremaine’s Map of the County of York, Canada West. Toronto: C.R.& C.M. Tremaine,
1860. Accessed at Ontario Historical County Maps Project (University of Toronto)
http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/hgis/countymaps/york/index.html
William Treaties First Nations
2018 Maps of our Treaties. Accessed online at https://williamstreatiesfirstnations.ca/maps-
of-our-treaties/
York Region
2010 The Regional Municipality of York Official Plan. 2016 Office Consolidation.
https://www.york.ca/wps/wcm/connect/yorkpublic/0dc3cfc2-2e0f-49d2-b523-
dc7c14b08273/15001_yropConsolidation2016AccessibleMay42016.pdf?MOD=AJPER
ES
2018 York Maps. Aerial photographs: 1954, 1970, 1978, 1988, 1995, 2002, 2009.
9.1 Legislation
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18
Ontario Regulation 9/06: Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under
Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18
Ontario Heritage Act Ontario Regulation 10/06: Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage
Value or Interest of Provincial Significance under Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18. DRAFTyp FTml
Tstreatiesfirstn Tan. 2016 Office Consolidation.
/yorkpublic/0dc3cf b5FT2016AccessibleMaAFT1954, 1970, 1978, 1988,
riteria for Determining Cu
S.O. 1990, c. O
ct Ontario Regulation 10/06: Crite
Provincial Significance under On
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 68 of 80
A
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Appendix A: Author Qualifications
Christienne Uchiyama, M.A., CAHP is an Associate with This Land Archaeology. She is also
Principal and Manager of Heritage Consulting Services at Letourneau Heritage Consulting Inc.
and currently sits on the Board of Directors for the Canadian Association of Heritage
Professionals. Ms. Uchiyama is a heritage consultant with over a decade of experience in the
research and assessment of cultural heritage resources in Ontario. She is a member of the
Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals and graduated from the Heritage
Conservation Masters program at Carleton University. Her thesis focused on the identification
and assessment of impacts on cultural heritage resources in the context of Environmental
Assessment. Since 2003 she has provided cultural heritage planning advice, support and
expertise as a member of numerous multi-disciplinary project teams for projects across
Ontario. Her specialties include the development of Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports and
Heritage Impact Assessments.
Ms. Uchiyama has written or co-authored more than 100 technical cultural heritage reports,
including archaeological license reports, collections management materials, inventories,
cultural heritage evaluation reports, heritage impact assessments, and cultural heritage
landscapes policy documents. Throughout the course of these projects, she has developed a
thorough understanding of provincial evaluation and assessment methodologies, cultural
landscapes, provincial regulatory processes, historical research, and archaeology. Ms.
Uchiyama has a great deal of experience undertaking Cultural Heritage Evaluations under
both O.Reg.9/06 and 10/06. She has prepared Statements of Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest for dozens of properties. DRAFTage
of Her
de of
She is a m
from the Herita
esis focused on the id
in the context of Environme
age planning advice, support and
y project teams for projects across
of Cultural Heritage
more than 100 technic
s, collections management m
age impact assessments, and
t the course of these proje
ation and assessmen
ulatory processes, historic
deal of experience underta
d 10/06. She has prepared State
of pro
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 69 of 80
B
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Appendix B : Site Plan DRAFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 70 of 80
0.1 ACSAINT JOHN'S SIDEROADLESLIE STREETINDUSTRIAL BLDG 1FOOTPRINT: 213,844 SFCLR. HGT: 32' SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONFUTUREON-RAMPPHASE IIFUTURE EXPANSION41.83 ACRETAIL BUILDING B1,917.6SM (20,641 SF)OFFICE BUILDING A1,318.84 SM (14,196 SF)PROPOSEDGAS STATIONOIL CHANGER159.3 SQM(1714.7 SQFT)0.7 ACThis conceptual design is based upon a preliminary review ofentitlement requirements and on unverified and possiblyincomplete site and/or building information, and is intendedmerely to assist in exploring how the project might be developed.NORTH050 100 5001" =100200404SHEET4-DEC-2018TOR18-0085-00Conceptual Site Plan - PHASE ISaint John's Side RoadAurora, ON Canada1DRRRRRRARARRRRRAFTRAFTRAFTRAFTRAFTARARARRHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 2 Page 71 of 80
C
Heritage Impact Assessment: 1625-75 St. John’s Sideroad, Aurora ON
Appendix C : Town of Aurora Architectural Salvage Program Guide DRAFTHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 72 of 80
&RQFHSWXDO3URSRVDO6W-RKQ¶V6LGHURDGHeritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, April 1, 2019 Item 2 Page 73 of 80
$8525$5(*,67(52)3523(57,(62)&8/785$/
+(5,7$*(9$/8(25,17(5(67 8SGDWHG 6,7($GGUHVV 6W-RKQ¶V6LGHURDG(DVW
)RUPHU$GGUHVV
/HJDO'HVFULSWLRQ &21&(66,21 (3$57/27 DF 67$786&XUUHQW8VH 5HVLGHQFH2ULJLQDOXVH 5HVLGHQFH
+HULWDJH6WDWXV /LVWHG%\ODZ1R 'DWH
2IILFLDO3ODQ 5XUDO=RQLQJ 58 5XUDO
+&' 3ODTXHV
3+272*5$3+.(<0$3
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 74 of 80
$8525$5(*,67(52)3523(57,(62)&8/785$/
+(5,7$*(9$/8(25,17(5(67 8SGDWHG $5&+,7(&785(
*(1(5$/,1)250$7,21
$GGUHVV 6W-RKQ¶V6LGHURDG
(DVW
%XLOGHU
&RQVWUXFWLRQ'DWH & $UFKLWHFW
$UFKLWHFWXUDO6W\OH :RUNHU
V+RXVH(VWDWH
&RWWDJH
2ULJLQDO2ZQHU
+HULWDJH(DVHPHQW +LVWRULFDO1DPH
*(1(5$/'(6&5,37,21
)ORRU3ODQ 6WRUH\
)RXQGDWLRQ0DWHULDOV
([WHULRU:DOO0DWHULDOV
5RRI7\SH 7LQURRI:LQGRZV VDVK
(QWUDQFH %D\V
81,48()($785(6
&KLPQH\ V &HQWUH6SHFLDO:LQGRZV
'RUPHUV 3RUFK9HUDQGDK
5RRI7ULP 'RRU7ULP
:LQGRZ7ULP 2WKHU
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 75 of 80
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 76 of 80
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 77 of 80
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 78 of 80
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 79 of 80
Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 1, 2019
Item 2
Page 80 of 80