That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, from its meeting held on February 12, 2020:
a) the Civic Administration BE ADVISED that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) supports the proposed Property Standards Amendment with respect to Vacant Heritage Buildings with the caveat that references to "vacant heritage building" be changed to "vacant Heritage Designated Properties"; it being noted that the LACH is interested in obtaining a list of current vacant Heritage Listed Properties; it being further noted that the presentation appended to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, from O. Katolyk, Chief Municipal Law Enforcement Officer, with respect to this matter, was received;
b) the following actions be taken with respect to the application, under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, seeking retroactive approval for alterations to the property located at 938 Lorne Avenue, within the Old East Heritage Conservation District:
i) the retroactive approval for the porch alterations and the approval for the proposed porch alterations at 938 Lorne Avenue, within the Old East Heritage Conservation District, BE PERMITTED with terms and conditions:
· all exposed wood be painted; and,
· the Heritage Alteration Permit be displayed in a location visible from the street until the work is completed;
ii) the retroactive approval for the roofing material change at 938 Lorne Avenue, within the Old East Heritage Conservation District, BE PERMITTED;
it being noted that the presentation appended to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, from M. Greguol, Heritage Planner, with respect to this matter, was received;
c) on the recommendation of the Managing Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking retroactive approval for alterations to roof of the property located at 1058 Richmond Street, By-law No. L.S.P.-3155-243, BE REFUSED; it being noted that the presentation appended to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, from K. Gonyou, Heritage Planner, with respect to this matter, was received;
d) on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking approval to remove the existing wooden windows and replace with vinyl windows on the property located at 40 and 42 Askin Street, By-law No. L.S.P.-2740-36 and Wortley Village-Old South Heritage Conservation District, BE REFUSED; it being noted that the presentation appended to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, from K. Gonyou, Heritage Planner and the verbal delegation from P. Scott, with respect to this matter, were received;
e) up to $100.00 from the 2020 London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) BE APPROVED for LACH members to attend the 13th Annual London Heritage Awards Gala on March 5, 2020; it being noted that the information flyer, as appended to the agenda, with respect to this matter, was received;
f) C. Lowery, Planner II, BE ADVISED that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) is not satisfied with the research, assessment and conclusions of the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) associated with the proposed development at 435, 441 and 451 Ridout Street North as the HIA has not adequately addressed the following impacts to the adjacent and on-site heritage resources and attributes:
· the HIA is adequate as far as history of the subject lands is concerned, however, insufficient consideration has been given to the importance of the subject lands and adjacent properties to the earliest beginnings of European settlement of London;
· the HIA gives inconsiderate consideration to the importance of the on-site buildings being representatives of remaining Georgian architecture;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration given to London’s Downtown Heritage Conservation District Guidelines (DHCD) and further efforts should be made in reviewing the proposal with the Eldon House Board;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration given to the impacts on surrounding neighbouring heritage resources (Forks of the Thames, Eldon House, Old Courthouse and Gaol); it being noted that the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (HSMBC) refers to impacts of the viewscape of the complex as a whole (which is highly visible from a distance) and the DHCD Guidelines state that the historic context, architecture, streets, landscapes and other physical and visual features are of great importance; it being further noted that the DHCD ranks the site as ‘A’ and ‘H’ which require the most stringent protection and new construction should ‘respect history’ and ‘character-defining elements’ should be conserved and it should be ‘physically and visually compatible’;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration to views and vistas associated with proximity between the new building and the existing on-site buildings (no separation); it being noted that the ‘heritage attributes’ of the Ridout Street complex include its view and position and the HIA gives insufficient consideration to the visual barrier to and from the Thames River and Harris Park; it being further noted that views, vistas, viewscapes and viewsheds are recognized as important heritage considerations in the statements of the DHCD and HSMBC documents and the designating by-law;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration to impacts of the proposed building height on both the on-site and adjacent heritage resources; it being noted that the proposed 40 storey height minimizes the historical importance of these buildings; it being further noted that the shadow study does not adequately address the effect on Eldon House, including its landscaped area, given that the development is directly to the south;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration to the potential construction impacts to on-site and adjacent heritage resources; it being noted that, given the national importance of the subject lands, it is recommended that Building Condition Reports and Vibration Studies be undertaken early in the process to determine the feasibility of the development;
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration to the transition/connection between the tower and the on-site and adjacent heritage resources; it being noted that the LACH is concerned that the design of the ‘base, middle and top’ portions of the tower fail to break up the development proposal and have little impact on its incongruity;
· the LACH is of the opinion that the use of white horizontal stripes on the tower structure does not mitigate the height impacts and the ‘curves’ detract from the heritage characteristics of the on-site and adjacent heritage resources, also, the proposed building materials, with the exception of the buff brick, do not adequately emphasize differentiations with the on-site heritage resources (notably the extensive use of glass); and,
· the HIA gives insufficient consideration to how the existing on-site heritage buildings will be reused, restored and integrated as part of the development proposal;
it being noted that the Working Group Report appended to the 3rd Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, with respect to the tower proposal at 435, 441 and 451 Ridout Street is included to provide further information; and,
g) clauses 1.1, 2.5, 3.1 to 3.6, inclusive, 4.1, 5.1 and 5.2 BE RECEIVED for information;
it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal delegation from M. Whalley, London Advisory Committee on Heritage, with respect to the above-noted matters.