ARCHITECTURE URBANISM CONSERVATION

Transcription

1 ARCHITECTURE URBANISM CONSERVATION PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ARMSTRONG CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY December 2012

2 MARK THOMPSON BRANDT ARCHITECT & ASSOCIATES INC. A R C H I T E C T U R E U R B A N I S M C O N S E R V A T I O N PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ARMSTRONG, OTTAWA CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Introduction Property Description Surroundings Heritage Resource Property Description Summary of Heritage Value as defined by Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Description of the Proposed Development Impact of Proposed Development on Identified Heritage Value: Summary Design or Physical Value Historical or Associative Value Contextual Value Opportunities for Mitigation Precedence & Limitations Conclusion Images Existing Conditions: Images of the Designated Property, 7 Hinton Street (OHA Part IV) Existing Conditions: Site Plan Excerpt of Proposed Re-development Site/Context Existing Conditions: Images of Proposed Re-development Site/Context A Appendix: Proposed Re-development Visual Documentation B Appendix: Statement of Cultural Heritage Value: 7 Hinton Ave., Ottawa C Appendix: Excerpts of "A History of 7 Hinton Ave D Appendix: Community Design Plan Excerpts E Appendix: City of Ottawa guide to preparing cultural heritage impact statements F Appendix: Province of Ontario Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Policies (2005) G Appendix: Author Qualifications H Appendix: Bibliography T F NELSON STREET STUDIO 102 OTTAWA CANADA K1N 7R5 MTBARCH.COM

3 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 2 1 INTRODUCTION This Cultural Heritage Impact Statement (CHIS) has been requested by the City of Ottawa to evaluate a proposed development at the corner of Armstrong Street and Hamilton Avenue North (3 Hamilton Avenue North, 233 Armstrong Street) in the Hintonburg neighbourhood. The proponents are Tega Homes, the architects are OPA Open Plan Architects Inc. and the planners are Lloyd Phillips & Associates Ltd. The proposed development is not within a Heritage Conservation District, however it is within 35 meters of a building designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (7 Hinton Avenue, originally Capital Wire Cloth Company Building). This Cultural Heritage Impact Statement is intended to evaluate the impact of the proposed development on 7 Hinton Avenue in a manner consistent with the City of Ottawa Official Plan section It includes: a description of the property, its surroundings, the affected Heritage asset and the proposed development; an evaluation of the expected impacts associated with the proposed developments on the affected Heritage asset; potential opportunities for mitigation to reduce the impact upon the heritage resource; and a conclusion. Full descriptions of the CHIS requirements, approved by Council on Feb. 22, 2012 are available at 2 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The proposed property re-development, by Tega Homes, is located within the city block bounded by Spencer St to the north, Parkdale Ave to the east, Armstrong St to the south and Hamilton Ave North to the east, excluding 229 Armstrong St. (commercial building) and 223 Armstrong St (Carleton Tavern) at the southeast corner of the site. Therefore the site is occupied by a group of buildings and additions with full frontages along Spencer Street and Hamilton Street North and partial frontages along Armstrong Street and Parkdale Avenue. The north existing building is a two/three storey amalgam of forms, primarily occupied by a self storage warehouse, while the other is a low one storey building housing a range of cultural and commercial uses. None of the existing buildings would be retained in the proposed redevelopment. Figure 1 Subject Property with surrounding context. Red represents proposed development property. Purple represents Part IV designated property (Courtesy Bing Maps) 7 Hinton Avenue, the former Capital Wire Cloth Company Building is directly across Hamilton St. from the proposed development site. An L-shaped portion of this property fronting Armstrong and Hamilton Streets is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and is owned by Metcalfe Realty. None of the properties within the proposed site have been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act and the surrounding district is not designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. 3 SURROUNDINGS The new development is proposed to be located within Ottawa's Wellington West neighbourhood area. This neighbourhood has traditionally featured a varied building stock including residential, commercial, industrial, civic and institutional. It is this varied nature that underpins the neighbourhood's character and its evolution. Industrial uses have largely been removed from Wellington West, but there are remnants of this use. One of the last buildings that traces its origins to industrial uses in this area is the former Capital Wire Cloth Company at 7 Hinton Street, to the west of the proposed re-development site. North of the property across Spencer Street are two

4 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 3 recently constructed connected buildings. One is an 8 storey masonry-clad condominium building and the other is an attached 3 storey office building. East of the proposed site across Parkdale Avenue is a range of storey residential structures. To the south of the proposed development is the Parkdale Market, Park and Field House, a primarily open space that houses seasonal markets, play areas, community facilities and passive green space. It is an area of the community that hosts cultural events and gatherings and serves somewhat as a focus for district arts groups. For example, the Art Park Arts Festival has been held annually here since HERITAGE RESOURCE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Capital Wire Cloth Company continuously operated on the site from 1912 to 1974 at 7 Hinton Avenue, located directly west of the proposed development. Its primary product, wire cloth, was used in the manufacturing of paper (Pulp and Paper industry), contributing to Ottawa's most important 19th and early 20th century industry. Ottawa's industrial uses have gradually been removed from the urban core including those in Wellington West, however limited physical remnants remain in this area. 7 Hinton Avenue is one of the last buildings in the area with industrial use origins and has been adaptively reused to house a range of office, commercial and light industrial uses. It is characterized by exterior elements including two and a half storey masonry construction, gable roof and regularly patterned segmentally arched window openings. Only the "L-shaped-plan" portions of the building (dating from ) fronting onto Armstrong Street and Hamilton Avenue are included in the designation Summary of Heritage Value as defined by Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Design or physical value: Early 20th century industrial building Two and a half storey (note: and one and a half storey) masonry construction Gable roof Regular pattern of segmentally arched window openings Historical or Associative Value: Connection to pulp and paper industry. Strategic location vis-a-vis related activities on Ottawa River Location in the former industrial hub of Hintonburg Contextual Value: Unique example of the industrial history in this neighbourhood Note: contextual value is noted in two different ways. Also, " as a rare remaining example of an industrial building in the Hintonburg neighbourhood. This area of Hintonburg was traditionally an industrial hub in Ottawa." (City of Ottawa Statement of Cultural Heritage Value 7 Hinton Avenue) Refer to Appendix for full Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest prepared by the City of Ottawa) 5 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development was reviewed as per concept renderings, drawings and plans, dated November 27, 2012 provided by OPA Open Plan Architects Inc. It contains 15,749 gross square meters and is defined by a 10 metre high podium, a 64 metre high tower (18 stories) at the corner of Spencer Street and Hamilton Avenue North, with 31 metre high blocks flanking the tower component. The proposed development occupies approximately 75% of the city block complete with setbacks as follows:

5 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 4 North side along Spencer St.: 1900 at podium; 2450 min. (above podium); 4015 max. (above podium) East side along Parkdale Ave.: 3740 at podium; 5820 min. (above podium); 8120 max. (above podium) South side along Armstrong St.: 1900 at podium; 3400 min. (above podium); 5900 max. (above podium) West side along Hamilton Ave. N.: 2900 at podium; 3565 min. (above podium); 5320 max. (above podium) This current design evolved through a number of iterations related to a series of discussions with City Staff. At the ground floor, the building is programmed with a mixture of retail and restaurant uses, while the second floor contains live/work lofts, recreational facilities and office condominium uses. All floors above the two-storey podium contain residential uses and their associated amenities and common spaces. The proposed development does not require any alterations to an individually-designated property (Part IV OHA) or a building in a designated district (Part V OHA). Summary of Images (more detail in Appendices): Proposed development Ground Floor Plan (Source: Tega Homes/OPA).

6 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 5 Birds-eye view of proposed development, looking southeast (Source: Tega Homes/OPA). Designated Heritage Building highlighted in red. Northeast corner of Hamilton Avenue and Armstrong Street, overall view, looking northeast Southeast corner of Hamilton Avenue and Spencer Street, looking southeast (Source: Tega Homes/OPA) Street view of northeast corner of Hamilton Avenue and Armstrong Street, looking northeast. (Source: Tega Homes/OPA). Designated Heritage Building to the left out of view

7 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 6 6 IMPACT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON IDENTIFIED HERITAGE VALUE: SUMMARY 6.1. Design or Physical Value Identified Heritage Value C of O SOR Early 20th century industrial building Two and half storey masonry construction Gable roof Regular pattern of segmentally arched window openings 6.2. Historical or Associative Value Identified Heritage Value C of O SOR Connection to pulp and paper industry. Strategic location vis-a-vis related activities on Ottawa River Location in the former industrial hub of Hintonburg Proposed Development Impact on Historic Place None None None None Proposed Development Impact on Historic Place None None 6.3. Contextual Value Identified Heritage Value C of O SOR Unique example of the industrial history in this neighbourhood Proposed Development Impact on Historic Place Limited. Proposed development continues shift in area's land use towards mixed use and higher density. Refer to conclusion. 7 OPPORTUNITIES FOR MITIGATION Massing: o Introduce secondary layer of differentiation expressing 3 major building components Materiality: o Consider using brick cladding at lower levels in a manner inspired by existing buildings in neighbourhood o Introduce subtle secondary materiality scale which responds to Ottawa industrial Heritage (i.e. wood or metal finishes) Scale variation/reduction: o Enhance definition of podium through a variety of means which may include: material finish differentiation, architectural differentiations, enhance podium termination, provide greater emphasis at ground level, setback masses above podium, provide greater visual separation between 3 major building components above podium Programming and Use: o Provide space for uses which enhance and reinforce uses contained within the Heritage property, to increase likelihood of long-term continued viability and use (Largely already accomplished through spatial use allocation within the proposed development) o Provide interpretation of the history of 7 Hinton and its heritage significance (likely through an official municipal/provincial plaque with explanatory text installed by Municipality) and submission to the Canadian Register of Historic Places

8 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 7 Note on Parking Access: Typically, locating parking access directly across from heritage buildings is discouraged. It is noted however that the Heritage building's east elevation is monolithic in nature with limited access points thereby generating little pedestrian activity and therefore will not be significantly affected by proposed new traffic. On-going monitoring for urban wear damage to building envelope due to heavy traffic should be executed by 7 Hinton owners, which is typical for heritage buildings in urban areas. 8 PRECEDENCE & LIMITATIONS On a project-by-project basis, heritage conservation planning must consider related planning issues and broader Municipal objectives in order to be relevant and effective. When the design of a proposed development is evaluated, its merits are found by examining a matrix of elements and considerations. This evaluation is nontransferable on a pick and choose basis to another future development which may want to utilize some attributes, but not others. Note that this CHIS review mandate is strictly limited to reviewing for positive or negative impact the proposed redevelopment of this block may have upon the heritage designated property to its west, strictly as per the parameters of the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value (written for Designation by the City of Ottawa) and the Provincial and Municipal Guidelines for preparation of Heritage Impact Assessments. Refer to Appendices for these documents. Planning issues beyond this specific mandate will be dealt with separately. Heritage planning is an overall component part of community planning. Refer to Appendices for a brief review of the Wellington West Community Design Plan (CDP). 9 CONCLUSION The proposed re-development would occupy four streetscapes (approximately 75% of the city block) in Ottawa's Hintonburg neighbourhood, each of which possesses their own varied character. Most relevant to the current evaluation is the proposed Hamilton Avenue frontage which lies across from the east elevation of the Capital Wire Cloth Company Building (7 Hinton Avenue), a building designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. As this area continues to evolve from an industrial and residential neighbourhood to a mixed use neighbourhood the proposed development continues this trend and serves to potentially support the mixed-tenancy currently housed in the Capital Wire Cloth Company Building. As additional people are drawn to the area by the various uses proposed by the development under consideration, more people will be aware of the Heritage building. Protection of Heritage Value Physical Any development of the surrounding blocks around 7 Hinton, especially those with deep excavations and/or blasting, should provide ahead, a detailed methodology of measures to be taken to prevent potential harm to the designated building during construction. Monitoring with approved equipment/devices of this activity is recommended. Visual The former Capital Wire Cloth Company building is one of the last remaining industrial buildings in the industrial portions of the former industrial/residential neighbourhood. The industrial landscape of the district has been altered almost beyond recognition, as other uses from new residential to new commercial have eroded the imagery of an industrial past. The former Capital Wire Cloth Company building exists visually within the surrounding streetscapes as somewhat of an island of the previous industrial vernacular. It is not part of a Heritage Conservation District where a critical mass of like buildings or streetscapes form a visual memory, however tenuous, of an earlier-day neighbourhood.

9 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 8 Even still, previous development patterns for industrial uses were ad-hoc, with additions going up when a factory needed to grow. While newer developments tend to be less ad-hoc and more planned, it is important that they have a certain composition of multiple materials and forms, which the proposed new development does to an acceptable degree. It is also useful to have the forms of new developments in the neighbourhood address the lower scale of stillexisting buildings like the Capital Wire Cloth building. The proposed development does that with a clear expression of the podium level, and it is given distinctiveness from the towers. Beyond the podium scale, the height of distinct building forms above it, is not an important determinant of heritage value visual protection. The heritage integrity of the designated building will remain whether the adjacent new developments surrounding it are tall or short. In general, the proposed development has limited impact on the Heritage Values as defined by the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest established by the City of Ottawa. As such, it is important to understand that the mandate of this review is directly related to the impact upon the one OHA Part IV-designated building, not on the surrounding community as a whole. The value that the designated building brings to the community is this instance will not be negatively impacted by a tall building across the street, in our opinion. Impact on the surrounding community as a whole would be the subject of other planning reviews. Mitigation Opportunities Design development opportunities may be available to allow the proposed development to enhance the relationship between the proposed development and the Heritage building. The designers might consider exploring (within the design concept s parameters): Introducing a secondary layer of differentiation expressing 3 major building components Exploring opportunities to use brick cladding at lower levels in a manner inspired by existing buildings in neighbourhood while introducing a subtle secondary materiality scale which responds to Ottawa industrial Heritage Enhancing the podium's definition from the remainder of the proposal through a variety of means Provide space for uses which enhance and reinforce uses contained within the Heritage property, to increase likelihood of long-term continued viability and use (Largely already accomplished through spatial use allocation within the proposed development)

10 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 9 10 IMAGES Existing Conditions: Images of the Designated Property, 7 Hinton Street (OHA Part IV) Looking northwest from Parkdale Market, Park and Field House. The designated property is seen in the distance at corner of Armstrong & Hamilton Ave. (beige with blue-grey roofs). The subject site for proposed re-development is on the right. Closer view of same corner, showing the 2 components of the designated property: 2½-storey along Armstrong (south wing 1912 and 1919) to the left and the 1½-storey along Hamilton in mid-view (east wing, mid-1920 s). Holland Cross and Tunney s Pasture complexes are in background; the subject re-development site is at the extreme right. Close view of same corner, featuring the entire Armstrong façade, showing street relationship, 1980 s roofing, replacement windows and painted brick. Industrial vernacular: repetition, simplified forms, basic interiorexterior connections only, variety only from additive process (the 1½-storey mid-1920 s east wing addition on right).

11 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 10 View looking northeast to corner of Armstrong and Hinton, with main entry into designated property 7 Hinton. The designation excludes the lower flat-roofed 1-storey portion to the left. The designated building has a more recent accessible entry ramp and concrete planters at front. The subject proposed redevelopment property is off the view to the right. Close-up of segmental-arched windows, heavy sills, painted brick, exposed rafters, metal roofs and ventilators of designated building. Street view looking west along Armstrong of designated building. Looking across Hamilton Avenue from proposed redevelopment property, toward 6 Hamilton entry. Stark skyline and minimal street interaction characterize this historic industrial building now being used for office/light industrial.

12 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 11 View looking north up Hamilton Avenue toward Tunney s Pasture (highrise office building in background). East wing portion of designated building on left; proposed redevelopment site off image to right. View looking southeast along Spencer Street past the corner of Hamilton towards Parkdale (at left background). In right foreground, the flat-roofed portion is not part of the designated building. In middle foreground, the gabled 1½-storey portion of the building is part of the Part IV designation. The mid-background buildings are on the subject redevelopment property and are proposed for demolition. View looking south down Hamilton Avenue from Spencer Street of the north end of the east wing of the designated property. Flat-roofed portion to the right not designated.

13 HAMILTON AVENUE NORTH PARKDALE AVENUE MARK THOMPSON BRANDT ARCHITECT & ASSOCIATES INC. mtbarch.com CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY Existing Conditions: Site Plan Excerpt of Proposed Re-development Site/Context SPENCER STREET LEGEND Property Line ARMSTRONG STREET Note: 7 Hinton Avenue (OHA Part IV) is immediately west of the proposed development property across Hamilton Avenue North Site Survey provided by: Annis, O'Sullivan, Vollebekk, Lots 1156, 1158, 1159, 1160, 1161, 1163 and 1165 Registered Pan 157, City of Ottawa (Utility Information and Elevation Markers removed for clarity)

14 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY Existing Conditions: Images of Proposed Re-development Site/Context View looking north across Armstrong Street from Parkdale Market toward Carleton Tavern building on Parkdale corner (right) and Lulu & Coco building (center) which are not part of the proposed re-development site. Proposed re-development surrounds these 2 buildings on the rest of the block. 8-storey condo behind is in block to north of subject block. Designated property (7 Hinton) is beyond the image to the left. View looking south on Hamilton Avenue toward Parkdale Market with east wing of designated building at right. The multi-colour buildings at left are on subject redevelopment site, proposed for demolition. Various Hintonburg high-rise apartment buildings are in the background.

15 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 14 View looking southeast from the Parkdale Park Fieldhouse across the Park and Parkdale Market. These community amenities retain some symbolic sense of the industrial heritage of the area. High-rise apartment buildings in background, on Wellington Rd. View looking north toward proposed re-development site with Parkdale Fieldhouse in foreground and existing 8- storey condo north of site, in background.

16 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 15 View looking east on Armstrong with proposed re-development site on left and Parkdale Market on right. View looking further east on Armstrong from the Parkdale intersection, showing the finer-grained housing of the neighborhood, east of the subject area.

17 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 16 View to north up Parkdale with proposed redevelopment site to left. Carleton Tavern on left is not part of subject site and is to remain. 3-Storey building in mid-frame proposed for demolition, as part of proposed redevelopment. Views to west along Spencer Street. The subject re-development site is to the left, with 2 and 3-Storey buildings and smokestacks proposed for demolition. Existing 8-Storey condo to right. Existing Heritage Designated building (north tip of east wing) shows in mid-frame with gabled metal roof.

18 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 17 A APPENDIX: PROPOSED RE-DEVELOPMENT VISUAL DOCUMENTATION

19 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 18

20 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 19

21 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 20

22 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 21

23 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 22

24 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 23

25 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 24

26 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 25

27 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 26 View of southeast corner of Parkdale Avenue and Armstrong St., looking northwest from across street. Northwest corner of Hamilton Avenue and Armstrong Street, overall view looking northeast. Southeast corner of Hamilton Avenue and Spencer Street, looking southeast.

28 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 27 Overall view of northeast corner of Parkdale Avenue and Spencer St., looking southwest from across street. Overall view of southeast corner of Parkdale Avenue and Armstrong St., looking northwest from across street. Street view of southwest corner of Hamilton Ave. and Armstrong St. Designated Heritage building to the left out of view

29 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 28 Street view of northeast corner of Hamilton Avenue and Spencer St., looking southeast. Street view of northwest corner of Parkdale Avenue and Spencer St., looking southwest.

30 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 29

31 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 30 B APPENDIX: STATEMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE: 7 HINTON AVE., OTTAWA Prepared By City Of Ottawa (Heritage Survey and Evaluation Form prepared April 2010) Description of Property The Capital Wire Cloth Company, 7 Hinton Avenue is a two and one- half storey brick factory building built between 1912 and 1948, located in the Hintonburg neighbourhood of Ottawa. Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest The cultural heritage value of the Capital Wire Cloth Company factory lies in its design value as an example of early 20 th century industrial architecture, its historical associations with the pulp and paper industry, and its contextual significance as a unique example of the industrial history of this neighbourhood. The Capital Wire Cloth Company factory was built in phases from 1912 when the masonry building that faced east on Hamilton Avenue and stretched west towards Hinton Avenue was completed. As the market for wire cloth grew, the company added additional wings to the building with the final wing added in Circa 1919, the building was expanded to include the full length of the block of Armstrong Street between Hinton Avenue and Hamilton Avenue. In the mid-1920s, the building was further extended along Hamilton Avenue as far as Spencer Street. The main portions of the building along Armstrong Street and Hamilton Avenue are a good example of early 20 th century industrial architecture. Typical elements of this expression include the masonry construction, gable roofline with standing seam metal roof, and a regular pattern of window openings. The Capital Wire Cloth Company factory has heritage value for its historical associations with the pulp and paper industry in Ottawa. Wire cloth, also known as foundrinal wire, was a very fine gauge metal mesh. In the final stage of the paper-making process, the pulp mixture is poured through the wire cloth screen to separate the liquid from the solids. The solids remain on the wire cloth to be further processed into paper. The Capital Wire Cloth Company also has heritage value for its location in the former industrial hub of Hintonburg. The location of the factory was strategic given the pulp and paper activities on the Ottawa River. The Capital Wire Cloth Company factory has contextual value as a rare remaining example of an industrial building in the Hintonburg neighbourhood. This area of Hintonburg was traditionally an industrial hub in Ottawa. Heritage Attributes Those exterior elements of the building that embody its heritage value include: two and a half storey masonry construction gable roof regular pattern of segmentally arched window openings historic eight over eight fenestration pattern The L-shaped gable roofed portion of the building Armstrong Street and Hamilton Avenue is included in this designation. The sections attached to the north and west of the historic portion are not included in this designation. The interior of the building is not included in this designation.

32 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 31 C APPENDIX: EXCERPTS OF "A HISTORY OF 7 HINTON AVE. Prepared for Metcalfe Realty Company Limited, 1991 Hintonburg: Towards the end of the nineteenth century the village of Hintonburg was a quiet rural suburb, with a scattering of houses and small industries in a pastoral setting somewhat removed from the City of Ottawa. Speculation on this desirable but undeveloped land was inevitable, and in 1895 a large tract south of Wellington Street was purchased and subdivided by the Ottawa Land Association Co. Ltd., a consortium of regional entrepreneurs.during the first decade of the twentieth century, growth in the environs of Hintonburg continued at an irregular pace; railway and electric streetcar lines entered the district; hydro-electric service was introduced; and the village embarked on a disastrously expensive municipal waterworks which ultimately forced its union with the City of Ottawa in 1907.

33 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 32 Context: When first opened the factory building stood virtually alone, in the midst of bare and undeveloped fields to the north, east, and west. A block away, between Parkdale and Pinehurst Avenue stood an isolated forest grove, described as "thickly wooded ground -mostly pine". The nearest building was a grocer's on the site of the presentday Carleton Tavern. Hinton (named for the pioneer founders of the village) and Hamilton Avenues were merely lines on the map, not yet opened. Spencer Street was simply "proposed", and in a position slightly south of its eventual alignment.as the business grew it became necessary to expand the factory. During these years the character of the neighbourhood changed. The pine woods had been cut down for lots, and other factories including the now demolished Beach Foundry had been started up nearby. In 1918 additional lots were secured in order to consolidate the entire block under one ownership, and the title was transferred to the company. Capital Wire Cloth Co.: Construction of the first phase of the wire factory complex began in Fire insurance records indicate that in June of the year the building was still under construction.and by 1914 the company was listed in the City of Ottawa Directory as located at 2-4 Hamilton Avenue.Subsequent fire insurance atlas plates [Figure 2], revised shortly after 1912 to reflect the completed wire works, illustrated the factory as it existed during its earliest years: a two-and-one-half storey masonry structure, with a pitched metal-sheathed roof, and windows on all sides. The building's entrance was at the east side, on Hamilton Avenue. Along the Armstrong Street frontage the factory extended about two-fifths of its present length.small one-storey sheds were attached to the north west corner, where there was also a smokestack. Materiality: The western wall was clad in iron siding, presumably as a fire safety measure. In erecting the Capital Wire Cloth building, the factory's builders made use of a material that had recently arrived in Ottawa -the inexpensive silicalime brick, which had many applications in industrial, commercial, and occasionally residential, buildings. While it afforded strength and fire retardancy when laid in several thicknesses the lime bricks lacked the hard finish of clay. Their softer, more friable surfaces weathered quickly from rain, ice, and soot. Painting was really more than just a cosmetic solution to the weathering problem Although this kind of brick was sometimes tinted; the Capital Wire Cloth masonry is un-tinted grey. Wire Product: Wire cloth, called 'foudrinal wire' from its inventors the Foudrinaire Brothers of France, was used in the manufacture of paper from pulp. Essentially a fine-gauge metal screen, the cloth was dipped through the pulp mixture to strain the solids from the liquids, leaving paper. with extensive paper-making industries at the Chaudiere, Ottawa was well suited as a place to locate a mill supply business. As it was first constituted the Capital Wire Cloth Company began with J.R. Buchanan as President Evolution: a) 1919: Extensions moved the entrance to the west side of the building a garage was added, and underground gasoline storage tanks installed a north wing was constructed rear wing contained the heating plant, a carpentry shop, and a stock room. A forty-foot brick chimney stood to the side. b) Mid 1920 s: A second rear wing parallel to the first rear wing. A single storey pitched roof addition. c) 1948: Hinton Avenue stretching room square, concrete block extension was built. d) 1983: The old factory was sold to Metcalfe Realty Company Limited. Today it is.a new range of uses from light industrial to offices architecture is honest and undecorated - basic proportions and dignified rhythms which have withstood changing times and styles

34 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 33 Notes added by MTBA for illustration purposes

35 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 34 Notes added by MTBA for illustration purposes

36 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 35 D APPENDIX: COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN EXCERPTS Wellinton West Community Design Plan (CDP) The identification and conservation of heritage resources in West Wellington CDP was identified in the CDP, with the result that 7 Hinton Avenue was designated under Part IV of the Heritage Act. 7 Hinton is included as part of a gallery in the CDP: "Snapshots of community heritage buildings" It should be noted that the proposed development could be seen to be counter to the aims of the CDP. o Excerpt of Proponent's response to CDP concerns: o TEGA has appealed the Official Plan Amendment and the zoning by-law amendment ( ) that are intended to implement the CDP. The appeal is based on the view that the amendments are not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and not in keeping with the intent and planned function of the Mixed Use Centre designation in the Official Plan. The amendments are, in effect, an attempt to create a hybrid of a Traditional Mainstreet built form, with highly restrictive land uses, in an area that has been planned as a high density, transit supportive, mixed use area. The height limits in the zoning for the CDP are 8 storeys, which is a mid-rise building. TEGA wants the zoning to permit 18 storeys on the north west section of the site, and 8 storeys with stepped setbacks on the rest. TEGA's approach for this development is to respond with a design that expresses the spirit of the CDP by concentrating the high building in the north west corner of the site and to keep the eight storey parts of the building closest to Parkdale Park and Parkdale Avenue, as per the intent of the CDP. The gross floor area of the proposed building is comparable to that permitted by the proposed zoning based on the CDP, so the issue with respect to heritage concerns is what, if any, is the impact of allowing part of the site to be 18 storeys, instead of all 8 storeys. The future built form context is important as well, because the 7 Hinton Avenue property allows for the transfer of density within the site, as an incentive to retain the heritage buildings. Please see Bylaw , page 6, MC16 subzone. You will see that the wording of the zoning applicable to 7 Hinton Avenue allows for the transfer of density, despite any maximum building height. The permitted FSI on the 7 Hinton zoning is 6.4. Excerpts from the CDP related to Heritage pages 14 to 17 inclusive of the CDP are included below:

37 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 36

38 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 37

39 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 38 Note: MTBA has added in 7 Hinton "Capital Wire Cloth Company Building" as a Part IV - designated building

40 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 39 EAPPENDIX: CITY OF OTTAWA GUIDE TO PREPARING CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENTS ( This guide was adopted by Ottawa Council, February Introduction This document has been prepared to provide clarity regarding the requirements of Cultural Heritage Impact Statements (CHIS) for those preparing them as a requirement of the City of Ottawa Official Plan. A Cultural Heritage Impact Statement is an arm's length, independent study to determine the impacts of proposed future development on cultural heritage resources. 2.0 When is a CHIS required? Section of the Official Plan has policies that outline when a Cultural Heritage Impact Statement (CHIS) is required. Generally speaking, the purpose of a cultural heritage impact statement is to evaluate the impact of a proposed intervention (alteration, addition, partial demolition, demolition, relocation or new construction) on cultural heritage resources when that intervention has the potential to: Adversely impact the cultural heritage value of properties designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA); Adversely impact the cultural heritage value of districts designated under Part V of the OHA. In addition: A CHIS may also be required for development applications adjacent to or within 35 metres of, designated buildings and areas; A CHIS may also be required for development applications adjacent to the Rideau Canal, the Central Experimental Farm, a national historic site, a federally designated (FHBRO) building, a building with a heritage easement, or a building on the heritage register. 3.0 Purpose of a CHIS Section of the Official Plan provides broad guidance regarding the content of Cultural Heritage Impact Statements, requiring that they: describe the positive and adverse impacts on the heritage resource or heritage conservation district that may reasonably be expected to result from the proposed development; describe the actions that may reasonably be required to prevent, minimize or mitigate the adverse impacts; demonstrate that the proposal will not adversely impact the defined cultural heritage value of the property, Heritage Conservation District, and/or its streetscape/neighbourhood. A CHIS is intended to provide an independent professional opinion regarding the impact of proposed developments on cultural heritage resources; it is not intended to form the City's professional opinion. Land use planning policies, and guidelines, such as those contained within Secondary Plans, Community Design Plans, the Official Plan and documents such as infill guidelines etc. are not addressed in a CHIS. When a CHIS is prepared in response to an application under the Planning Act, the impact of the proposed application on cultural heritage resources will be addressed.

41 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY Contents of a CHIS A Cultural Heritage Impact Statement will provide: a. General Information Address of current property; Current owner contact information. b. Current Conditions/ Introduction to Development Site A location plan indicating subject property (map and aerial photo); A concise written and visual description of the cultural heritage value of the development site and/or the cultural heritage value of adjacent sites, noting whether the site has: a heritage easement, designation under Part IV or V of the OHA, inclusion on the "Municipal Register," designation as a "Recognized" or "Classified" building by the Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office, commemoration as a National Historic Site of Canada, or inclusion on the Canadian Register of Historic Places. Existing heritage descriptions should be included. A concise written description of the context including adjacent heritage properties and their recognition (as above); Digital images documenting all cultural heritage attributes; Site Plan showing lot dimensions as well as the location/setbacks of all existing buildings; Relevant information from Council-approved documents such as "Heritage District Plans" or "Heritage Guidelines." This information should include the guidelines contained within the "Heritage District Plans" and the "Heritage Guidelines" that apply to the proposed project. c. Background Research and Analysis Comprehensive written and visual research and analysis related to the cultural heritage value or interest of the site, including physical or design, historical or associative, and contextual value; A development history of the site including original construction dates, additions and alterations; Primary research material consulted may include relevant historic maps and atlases, drawings, photographs, sketches/renderings, permit records, land records, assessment rolls, city directories, etc; Secondary sources may include City of Ottawa Heritage Survey and Evaluation forms, FHBRO reports, Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada papers, Commemorative Integrity Statements, CHRP listing etc; Parks Canada's "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada," as approved by City Council in d. Statement of Significance A Statement of Significance identifying the cultural heritage value and heritage attributes of the cultural heritage resource(s). In many cases, this statement will be the Statement of Reasons for Designation or the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value that forms part of the designation by-law (Part IV buildings) or the description of the attributes of the heritage conservation district (Part V districts). In cases where this information is deemed to be inadequate or outdated, heritage staff will prepare a Statement of Significance to guide the CHIS. e. Description of the Proposed Development A written and visual description of the proposed development. f. Impact of Proposed Development An assessment identifying any positive and adverse impacts the proposed development may have on the heritage value of cultural heritage resource(s), as listed in Section 2, above. Positive impacts of a development on cultural heritage resources districts include, but are not limited to: restoration of building, including replacement of missing attributes; restoration of an historic streetscape or enhancement of the quality of the place; adaptive re-use of a cultural heritage resource to ensure its ongoing viability;

42 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 41 access to new sources of funds to allow for the ongoing protection and restoration of the cultural heritage resource. Adverse impacts include, but are not limited to: Demolition of any, or part of any, heritage attributes or features; Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance of a building; Shadows created that obscure heritage attributes or change the viability of the associated cultural heritage landscape; Isolation of a heritage resource or part thereof from its surrounding environment, context or a significant relationship; Obstruction of significant identified views or vistas within, from heritage conservation districts; Obstruction of significant identified views or vistas within, from individual cultural heritage resources; A change in land use where the change affects the property's cultural heritage value; Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource. g. Alternatives and Mitigation Strategies The CHIS must assess alternative development options and mitigation measures in order to avoid or limit the adverse impact on the heritage value of cultural heritage resources. Methods of minimizing or avoiding an adverse impact on a cultural heritage resource(s) include but are not limited to: Alternative development approaches that result in compatible development and limit adverse impacts; Separating development from significant cultural heritage resources to protect their heritage attributes including, but not limited to, their settings and identified views and vistas; Limiting height and density or locating higher/ denser portion of a development in an manner that respects the existing individual cultural heritage resources or the heritage conservation district; Including reversible interventions to cultural heritage resources. h. Other The CHIS will include a bibliography and a list of people contacted during the study. 5.0 Conservation Plan A Conservation Plan may be required. The applicant will be informed that a Conservation Plan is required early in the process. They may be required for projects involving complex sites with a number of cultural heritage resources. Conservation Plans must: Describe how the heritage value of a resource will be protected during the development process; Include a summary of conservation principles and how they will be used must be included. Conservation principles may be found in publications such as Parks Canada's "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada " and "Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Historic Properties," published by the Ontario Ministry of Culture. (Both publications are available online.); Recommend the conservation treatment category preservation, rehabilitation, restoration - appropriate to each resource of heritage value within the property, including the landscape; Outline how the cultural heritage resource[s] are to be managed after the completion of the project; A Conservation Plan must contain current information on the condition of the building and recommendations on its ongoing maintenance. These recommendations will be based on the "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada" as amended from time to time, and adopted City Council in 2008; A Conservation Plan may also contain guidance on the following, were appropriate: public access, signage, lighting, interpretation, landscaping, heritage recording, use.

43 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY Process Notice that a CHIS is required will be given at the pre-consultation stage and applicants should wait until they are notified that a CHIS is required before retaining a consultant. When a CHIS is required for an application under the Ontario Heritage Act, that application will not be considered complete if the CHIS does not accompany the application. When a CHIS is required for an application under the Planning Act, that application will not be considered complete if the CHIS does not accompany the application. Upon receipt of the CHIS, heritage staff will review the document in order to ascertain that it is complete. If the CHIS does not meet City requirements as described above, the application will not be processed until the CHIS meets City standards. City staff reserves the right to require further information and analysis and will return it to the author with clear instructions regarding necessary changes. The CHIS is a public document and will be available for consultation. Notice that a CHIS is required will be given at the pre-consultation stage and applicants should wait until they are notified that a CHIS is required before retaining a consultant. When a CHIS is required for an application under the Ontario Heritage Act, that application will not be considered complete if the CHIS does not accompany the application. When a CHIS is required for an application under the Planning Act, that application will not be considered complete if the CHIS does not accompany the application. Upon receipt of the CHIS, heritage staff will review the document in order to ascertain that it is complete. If the CHIS does not meet City requirements as described above, the application will not be processed until the CHIS meets City standards. City staff reserves the right to require further information and analysis and will return it to the author with clear instructions regarding necessary changes. The CHIS is a public document and will be available for consultation. 7.0 Qualifications A CHIS is intended to provide an independent professional opinion and thus CHISs are to be prepared by a heritage professional, who is not the applicant. The qualifications and background of the person(s) completing the CHIS will be included in the report. The author will be a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals. 8.0 Glossary Adjacent For the purposes of this document, adjacent means contiguous to. Adversely impact A project has the potential to "adversely impact" the cultural heritage value of a project if it; requires the removal of heritage attributes, requires the destruction of a cultural heritage resource, obscures heritage attributes, is constructed in such a way that it does not respect the defined cultural heritage value of a resource. Built Heritage Includes buildings, structures and sites that contribute to an understanding of our heritage and are valued for their representation of that heritage. They may reveal architectural, cultural, or socio-political patterns of our history or may be associated with specific events or people who have shaped that history. Examples include buildings, groups of buildings, dams and bridges. Cultural Heritage Resources Includes four components: Built Heritage, Cultural Heritage Landscapes, Archaeological Resources, and documentary heritage left by people. Cultural Heritage Landscape Any geographic area that has been modified, influenced, or given special cultural meaning by people and that provides the contextual and spatial information necessary to preserve and interpret the understanding of important historical settings and changes to past patterns of land use. Examples include a burial ground, historical garden or a larger landscape reflecting human intervention.

44 CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT STUDY 43 F APPENDIX: PROVINCE OF ONTARIO CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGY POLICIES (2005) 2.6 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plan for Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process Heritage impact assessments and conservation plans as conditions of development and site alteration With regard to cultural heritage and archaeological resources, the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 issued under the authority of the Planning Act defines conserved as the identification, protection, use and/or management of cultural heritage and archaeological resources in such a way that their heritage values, attributes and integrity are retained. This may be addressed through a conservation plan or heritage impact assessment. To conserve a cultural heritage resource, a municipality or approval authority may require a heritage impact assessment and/or a conservation plan to guide the approval, modification, or denial of a proposed development or site alteration that affects a cultural heritage resource. To ensure implementation of a conservation plan, a municipality may require an owner to post a letter of credit, bond or certified cheque as part of the development approval process. This applies to all properties or geographic areas containing cultural heritage resources that are significant or valued for the important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people. (PPS, 2005). Properties and geographic areas include: all listed, inventoried, mapped heritage properties by local, provincial or federal jurisdiction(s); protected heritage property(s); newly identified cultural heritage sites which may need further evaluation; and areas that can be identified as having known archaeological sites or archaeological potential. Using tools such as heritage impact assessments and conservation plans, municipalities and approval authorities can further enhance their own heritage preservation objectives. A heritage impact assessment (or equivalent study) is a study to determine if any cultural heritage resources (including those previously identified and those found as part of the site assessment) or in any areas of archaeological potential, are impacted by a specific proposed development or site alteration. It can also demonstrate how the cultural heritage resource will be conserved in the context of redevelopment or site alteration. Mitigative or avoidance measures or alternative development or site alteration approaches may be recommended. For archaeological assessments, fieldwork must be undertaken by licensed professional archaeologists in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act and its regulations. (refer to InfoSheet #3 entitled Archaeological Resources and Areas of Archaeological Potential). A conservation plan (or equivalent study) is a document that details how a cultural heritage resource can be conserved. The conservation plan may be supplemental to a heritage impact assessment, but it is typically a separate document. The recommendations of the plan should include descriptions of repairs, stabilization and preservation activities as well as long term conservation, monitoring and maintenance measures. What is the content of a heritage impact assessment? A heritage impact assessment generally contains, but is not limited to the following information: 1. Historical Research, Site Analysis and Evaluation If the available identification and description of the significance and heritage attributes of the cultural heritage resource are inadequate for the purposes of the heritage impact assessment, or the cultural heritage resource is newly identified, research, site survey and analysis, and evaluation are required. An explanation of the