Amendment to the City`s Heritage Conservation

Transcription

City of Saint John
Special Common Council Meeting (Open Session)
4:00 p.m. Council Chamber, Lobby Level, City Hall
Monday, April 11, 2016
1.1
Recommendations – Amendment to the City’s Heritage Conservation Areas Bylaw – Irving Oil Limited Home Office Project – 30 King Square South
City of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
Monday, April 11, 2016
Committee of the Whole
1. Call to Order
Si vous avez besoin des services en français pour une réunion de Conseil communal, veuillez
contacter le bureau du greffier communal au 658-2862.
Each of the following items, either in whole or in part, is able to be discussed in private pursuant
to the provisions of subsection 10.(2)(4) of the Municipalities Act and Council / Committee will
make a decision(s) in that respect in Open Session:
3:30 p.m. 8th Floor Boardroom, City Hall
1.1 Legal Matter 10.2(4)(g)
CO
OUNCIL R
REPORT M&C No. M
Re
eport Date Meeting Date M
Se
ervice Area 2016‐97
7 April 08
8, 2016
April 11
1, 2016
Growth and Community pment Servicess Develop
His Worship M
H
Mayor Mel N
Norton and M
Members off Common C
Council SUBJECT: Re
ecommendattions ‐ Amendment to tthe City’s Heeritage Conservation Are
eas By‐law – Irving Oil Limited H
Home Officee Project –– 30 King Squ
uare South OPEN OR CLO
O
OSED SESSIO
ON This matter iss to be discu
ussed in open
n session of Common Co
ouncil. AUTHORIZAT
A
TION Primary Author Commisssioner/Dept.. Head Citty Manager Ja
acqueline Ha
amilton Jacquelin
ne Hamiltonn Jefff Trail RECOMMEND
R
DATION 1. That Council inittiate consid
deration of an amend
dment to tthe City’s Herita
age Conservvation Areas By‐law (thee “By‐law”), as recomm
mended in Attach
hment A of this report tto enable thhe Irving Oil Limited Hom
me Office Projecct (the “IOL P
Project”) to move forwaard in a timeely manner; 2. That C
Council adop
pt an expedited scheduule, as outlin
ned in this reeport, for consid
deration of tthe By‐law amendment; 3. Refer the recom
mmended By‐law amenndment to the City’s Heritage Development Boaard for advicce; and 4. Sched
dule a public hearing date d
of Apr il 28, 2016 at 5 pm in Council Chambers to en
nable Common Counccil to conssider the proposed amendment and
d proceed with adverrtising in accordance with the requirrements of tthe Heritagee Conservatioon Act. XECUTIVE SU
UMMARY EX
On March 29
O
9, 2016 the C
City was nottified that ann appeal had been filed
d with the Assessment A
and Planniing Appeal Board of New Brun
nswick (the “APAB”) re
especting th
he decision of the Cityy’s Heritage Developmeent Board to issue a Phase One approval for the IOL Pro
oject. This aappeal has eeffectively h
halted the IO
OL Project. G
Given the siggnificant unccertainty rellated to timeeframes for the APAB process, Cou
uncil directe
ed staff to provide ooptions to ffacilitate th
he timely co
onstruction of the IOL Project. This T
report presents a recommend
ded, site‐
sp
pecific amendment to the Heritage Conservvation Areass By‐law that would -2-
enable this Council to create certainty for the IOL Project to move forward in a timely fashion. PREVIOUS RESOLUTION At its meeting of April 4th, 2016, Council adopted the following resolution: RESOLVED that the City Manager be directed to return to Council at a special meeting at 4 pm on April 11, 2016 with a recommendation as to the means by which the City might facilitate the development in a timely manner of the Irving Oil Limited home office proposed for the southern side of King Square South. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT The recommend By‐law amendment supports delivery of Council’s priority related to Economic Health and will advance an important project for Council and the community. REPORT On March 29, 2016, the City received notice from the APAB that the decision of the City’s Heritage Development Board to issue Phase One approval of the construction of the IOL Project at 30 Kings Square South has been appealed. A Heritage Permit was issued by the Heritage Development Board for Phase One of the IOL Project on March 15, 2016 following careful consideration of the Heritage Development Board over the course of two meetings held on February 24, 2016 and March 9, 2016, respectively. The IOL Project received strong support from both staff and the Heritage Development Board. The Phase One approval considered conceptual design plans for the IOL Project and included approvals related to building height and massing, which addressed the following aspects of the project:  Setback of the development;  Relative side yard ratio;  Height of the Development; and  Height/width ratio of the facades. The detailed exterior design of the IOL Project was to be considered in a later phase once construction‐ready drawings were available for the IOL Project. The appeal has halted work on the IOL Project, as the Heritage Conservation Act limits construction until an appeal is heard and resolved. Further uncertainty is created as the APAB does not have established timeframes for appeals to be heard and decisions rendered. In recent experience, appeals have taken several months to a year to resolve. Such extended timelines, in our view, would pose significant risks to the IOL Project. -3-
In an effort to bring forward a resolution, Council directed staff to investigate options to amend the By‐law at its meeting of April 4th, 2016 in order to facilitate timely construction and achieve greater certainty for the IOL Project. This report sets out a recommended approach to enable Council to consider an amendment to the By‐law through an expedited process that would enable this Council to consider and, if approved, enact an amendment to the Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law on May 2nd 2016. This would position this current Council to resolve the uncertainty occasioned by the appeal respecting the IOL Project. Policy Rationale Staff has initiated a review and analysis of options as they relate to an amendment to the By‐Law in view of Council’s direction of April 4th, 2016. Beyond the significant economic benefits of the IOL Project, there are sound urban planning rationales for Council to initiate an amendment to the Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law to advance the IOL Project: 1. The City’s Municipal Plan, PlanSJ, creates a new progressive policy context for the By‐law, which was adopted more than thirty years ago. PlanSJ embraces urban growth (building up and not out), directing significant new growth to the City’s “Uptown Primary Centre”, the employment hub for the greater Saint John area. The proposed IOL Home Office Project complements the “Uptown Primary Centre”; and will add critical mass and vibrancy to a vacant and underutilized property in the central core of the City. The Uptown commercial zoning for this area allows up to 60 metres in height and build‐out of the site as per the current proposal. 2. PlanSJ also introduces an urban design framework, with policies that encourage greater flexibility in the design of buildings to enable innovation in built form and heritage sensitive design without recreating heritage buildings. The IOL Home Office Project employs leading urban design principles, as reflected in the approved design plans. IOL’s world‐
class design team prepared a heritage brief to the Heritage Development Board demonstrating careful consideration of the heritage setting of the site, while supporting the next generation of heritage in Saint John. The proposal is consistent with the PlanSJ urban design policies, and places a particular focus on creating pedestrian oriented streetscapes along King Square South and Sydney Street. -4-
3. The Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law, adopted in 1982 and last reviewed nearly ten years ago, did not consider a building of this scale. The existing infill development standards are prescriptive in their current form and are designed to address smaller scale infill projects in a typical streetscape context. The standards apply City‐wide and do not respect the unique character of the City’s eleven heritage districts, nor are they able to reflect the uniqueness of individual building sites. There is the need for a holistic review of this Bylaw to align with the City’s urban focused Municipal Plan. 4. The IOL Project responds well to the heritage context and brings forward a context‐appropriate design for a prominent corner site within the City’s Trinity Royal Heritage District; notably the only commercial heritage district in the City. Historically, this area was the focus for office and commercial use in Saint John and new office construction would reinforce its historic past and bring much needed vibrancy to the district as a whole. 5. The proposed development is for a prominent site, located on the “front door” of Kings Square, a major open space which is framed by several heritage‐era buildings (up to 8 stories in height), some that wouldn’t meet many of the prescriptive standards of the current By‐law. The current infill development standards don’t adequately recognize the location of the site fronting on the Kings Square, which provides a unique perspective for experiencing the building’s massing and height. Other leading cities (e.g., Halifax’s Public Gardens, NYC’s Central Park, Boston’s Common) follow a well‐established urban design principle, directing taller building forms to frame major open spaces, creating a strong sense of enclosure for these important public spaces. This condition is not found elsewhere in the district, limiting further applications of this site specific standard. Recommended By‐law Amendment: Site Specific Infill Standards With these considerations, staff has developed a recommended option included in Attachment A of this report that proposes an amendment to Section 9 of the Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law to create a set of site‐specific infill development standards that reflect the uniqueness of the site and enable the high quality and heritage sensitive design that underscores the IOL Project for its prominent location at 30 King Square south. -5-
The proposed amendment would include a site specific “exception clause” to be inserted in Section 9 of the By‐law to exempt the IOL Project site at 30 King Square South from the current standards in Section 9 of the By‐law. This amendment will replace the existing infill standards with new contextual standards designed to reflect the conceptual design plans approved by the Heritage Development Board on March 9, 2016. The new standards address the following building design features: 




Setbacks for development, including front and sideyards; Building massing and height; Building podium heights and step backs facing public streets; Roofline, and window openings; and Building facade treatment and materials. The new standards will provide a framework for the Heritage Development Board to approve subsequent phases of the IOL Project. The proposed By‐law amendment is included in Attachment A, in preparation for the By‐law approval process. These standards will create a framework for the site design and construction approvals; however variations may be subject to a subsequent By‐law amendment process. A further alternative to create greater certainty for the IOL Project would be to remove the site in its entirety from ambit of the By‐law, allowing only the standards in the Zoning By‐law, and Building By‐law to govern the construction of the IOL Project. A broader reform of the Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law’s infill development standards set out in Section 9 is needed to modernize the By‐law and bring it into alignment with PlanSJ’s vision for urban growth. This holistic effort is beneficial and should be pursued in conjunction with future neighbourhood planning for the Uptown / Central Peninsula. Pending available funding, this could be a priority project for 2017. Recommended Expedited Process The standard process to amend the City’s Heritage Conservation Areas Bylaw takes two months to complete. Given the urgency to advance the project, staff is recommending Council expedite the process as quickly as existing legislative timelines allow facilitating consideration of the amended bylaw within a three week timeframe. This process will involve a special meeting of Council. -6-
The process involves a number of mandatory steps, including: 





Council initiation of the amendment process; Advertising for the public hearing; Heritage Development Board review and recommendation; Council public hearing; First and second reading of the By‐law amendments; and Third and final reading of the By‐law amendments. Fast Track process with this Council: The recommended process would comply with the above‐noted steps in an expedited schedule that would require Council to set a special meeting on April 28, 2016 for the required public hearing. Following the consideration of all public input, Council could be in a position to grant first and second reading to the By‐Law amendment on the same date. In this schedule, third and final reading is proposed for May 2, 2016. This approach meets all of the legislative timelines set out in the Heritage Conservation Act and positions this Council to consider approval of the IOL Project. The standard approval process would result in a public hearing on May 30, 2016 and third and final reading with the new Council on June 13, 2016. In summary, staff recommends that Council initiate the proposed By‐law amendment and expedited process to provide greater certainty for the IOL Project to move forward in a timely manner, creating an enduring heritage legacy for the City. SERVICE AND FINANCIAL OUTCOMES Moving forward with the recommended Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law amendment, as presented in this report, will support timely development aligned with PlanSJ’s vision for urban growth. INPUT FROM OTHER SERVICE AREAS AND STAKEHOLDERS The recommended Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law amendment and expedited process were vetted by Legal and the Clerk’s Office. Legal has prepared the text of the recommended By‐law amendment. ATTACHMENTS -7-
Attachment A: Recommended Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law Amendments – Site Specific Infill Standards for 30 Kings Square South Attachment B: Existing Section of the Heritage Conservation Areas Bylaw Infill Development standards -8-
Attachment A: Recommended Heritage Conservation Areas By‐law amendment to Establish Site Specific Standards for Infill Development – 30 King Square South Attachment “A”
BY-LAW NUMBER HC-1
A LAW TO AMEND THE SAINT
JOHN HERITAGE CONSERVATION
AREAS BY-LAW
Be it enacted by The City of Saint John in Common Council convened, as follows:
The Heritage Conservation Areas By-Law of The City of Saint John enacted on the ninth
day of October, 2007, is amended by:
1. Adding to Subsection 9(1) immediately before the words “Any development”, the words
“Subject to Section 9.1”.
2. Adding after Section 9 the following:
9.1(1) Section 9 does not apply to the erection of any building or
portion thereof upon one (1) or more of the parcels of land
identified by Parcel Identification (PID) Nos. 55178784, 55088595,
55184022, 55184014, 55184006, 55202923 and 00009522;
9.1(2) Any building or portion thereof erected upon one or more
of the parcels of land identified in subsection (1) shall comply with
the following provisions:
(a) any front yard setback shall not be greater than three (3)
metres;
(b) the side yard setback shall not be less than one (1) metre nor
greater than two and one half metres (2.5) metres;
(c) the maximum height shall not be greater than sixty (60)
metres, articulated by base, middle and top proportions as
shown on the plans attached hereto as Schedule “A”. The
building shall include at an elevation of fifteen (15) metres,
plus or minus ten percent (10%), an offset of a minimum of
one and one half (1.5) metres from the base façade;
(d) the façades of the building along King Square South and
Sydney Street shall be articulated with three vertical sections
through the use of a central recessed bay that is sympathetic
to the adjacent buildings along King Square South. The street
facing façades of the building shall be developed with
horizontal architectural detail reflecting the elevations of the
cornice lines of Imperial Theatre and Admiral Beatty buildings;
2
(e) window openings on the façades of the building shall be
consistent with the locations and proportions shown on the
plans attached hereto as Schedule “A”;
(f) the building shall have a flat roof sympathetic to the adjacent
buildings along King Square South;
(g) the building entrance on the King Square South façade shall
consist of three centrally located double doors with transom
windows and incorporate a canopy as shown on the plans
attached hereto as Schedule “A”;
(h) the building shall use high quality materials for the façades
and the exterior elements. High quality materials shall be
used for the base levels of the building, including but not
limited to, stone, masonry, and/or metal with anodized bronze
finish. Contemporary, manufactured materials, including
architectural pre-cast concrete panels, may be used for the
façades at levels above the base levels provided they have the
appearance of the materials used in the façades of the base.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the
said City to be affixed to this by-law the ______ day of _____________, 2016 and signed by:
_________________________________________
Mayor/Maire
_________________________________________
Common Clerk/Greffière communale
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Third Reading:
Première lecture:
Deuxième lecture:
Troisième lecture:
KEY PLAN
NO.
ISSUED FOR
DATE
01
30% SCHEMATIC DESIGN
2015/11/05
02
2015/12/07
03
04
HDB APPLICATION
2016/01/08
2016/02/12
PRELIMINARY DRAWINGS; DESIGN SUBJECT TO CHANGE UPON RECEIPT
OF TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY
CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK ALL DIMENSIONS ON THE WORK AND
REPORT ANY DISCREPANCY TO THE CONSULTANT BEFORE
PROCEEDING. THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION UNTIL AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY CONSULTANT.
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:
Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd.
144 Front Street, Suite 500, Toronto, ON M5J 2L7
T/416.977.5335 F/416.977.1427
MECHANICAL ENGINEER:
The Mitchell Partnership
285 Yorkland Blvd, Willowdale, ON M2J 1S5
T/416.499.8000 F/416.499.7446
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER:
Mulvey & Banani International Inc.
44 Mobile Drive, Toronto, ON M4A 2P2
T/416.751.2520 F/416.751.1430
PLANNING & LANDSCAPE:
B+H Architects
481 University Avenue, Suite 300, Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/ 416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
B+H Architects
481 University Avenue, Suite 300
Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
CLIENT :
Irving Oil Limited
10 Sydney Street, PO Box 1421
Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4K1
T/506.202.2000 F/506.202.3868
PROJECT :
PROJECT NUMBER :
1511085
DRAWING SCALE :
N.T.S.
SHEET CONTENTS :
NORTH / EAST CORNER
VIEW 3
15.11.05
SHEET NO :
A10-03
TRUE NORTH
2.0 m
45.3 m
2.1 m
KEY PLAN
STREET
ENTRANCE
PODIUM ROOF
BELOW
2.4 m
NO.
ISSUED FOR
DATE
01
2015/11/05
02
2015/12/07
03
04
HDB APPLICATION
2016/01/08
2016/02/12
MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE
TERRACE BELOW
PENTHOUSE
ROOF BELOW
EXISTING BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING
OPEN TO
BELOW
1.9 m
ELEVATOR MACHINE
ROOM ROOF
59.7 m
1.2 m
1.8 m
T/416.977.5335 F/416.977.1427
1.2 m
T/416.499.8000 F/416.499.7446
3.5 m
T/416.751.2520 F/416.751.1430
B+H Architects
3.7 m
LOWER LEVEL
ACCESS TO LOADING
5.2 m
N
T/ 416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
PODIUM LEVEL
ENTRANCE
EXISTING
BUILDING
B+H Architects
Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
CLIENT :
Irving Oil Limited
T/506.202.2000 F/506.202.3868
PROJECT :
PROJECT NUMBER :
1511085
DRAWING SCALE :
1:250
SHEET CONTENTS :
SITE PLAN
CONTEXT PLAN
15.11.05
SHEET NO :
A1-01
KEY PLAN
NO.
3750
13650
9300
13650
3750
DATE
01
2015/11/05
02
2015/12/07
03
04
HDB APPLICATION
2016/01/08
2016/02/12
2605
4370
4370
4570
5614
2717
ISSUED FOR
4370
T/416.977.5335 F/416.977.1427
T/416.499.8000 F/416.499.7446
56314
4370
4370
T/416.751.2520 F/416.751.1430
B+H Architects
6800
4800
1200
3600
SYDNEY
STREET
4370
4370
4370
4370
T/ 416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
B+H Architects
Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
CLIENT :
+/- 5 M
IRVING OIL LIMITED
+/- 5 M
Irving Oil Limited
T/506.202.2000 F/506.202.3868
PROJECT :
PROJECT NUMBER :
1511085
DRAWING SCALE :
1:200
SHEET CONTENTS :
NORTH
ELEVATION
15.11.05
SHEET NO :
A4-01
KEY PLAN
NO.
3525
3450
12300
9000
9000
12300
3450
DATE
01
2015/11/05
02
2015/12/07
03
04
HDB APPLICATION
2016/01/08
2016/02/12
3036
2775
4370
4370
4570
5614
2775
9000
ISSUED FOR
4370
T/416.977.5335 F/416.977.1427
4370
T/416.499.8000 F/416.499.7446
56314
4370
T/416.751.2520 F/416.751.1430
B+H Architects
4370
4370
4370
4370
CLIENT :
Irving Oil Limited
4800
4464
PROJECT :
3600
6800
2950
B+H Architects
Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
T/506.202.2000 F/506.202.3868
1200
5350
KING'S SQUARE SOUTH
PRINCESS STREET
T/ 416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
PROJECT NUMBER :
1511085
DRAWING SCALE :
1:200
SHEET CONTENTS :
EAST
ELEVATION
15.11.05
SHEET NO :
A4-02
KEY PLAN
NO.
ISSUED FOR
DATE
01
2015/11/05
02
2015/12/07
03
04
HDB APPLICATION
2016/01/08
2016/02/12
T/416.977.5335 F/416.977.1427
T/416.499.8000 F/416.499.7446
T/416.751.2520 F/416.751.1430
B+H Architects
T/ 416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
B+H Architects
Toronto, ON M5G 2H4
T/416.596.2299 F/416.586.0599
CLIENT :
Irving Oil Limited
T/506.202.2000 F/506.202.3868
PROJECT :
PROJECT NUMBER :
1511085
DRAWING SCALE :
N.T.S.
SHEET CONTENTS :
NORTH ENTRANCE
VIEW 1
15.11.05
SHEET NO :
A10-01
Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By-law
Page: 11
ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR RESTORATION
(XIII) Repair rather than replace character-defining elements from the
restoration period. Where character-defining elements are too
severely deteriorated to repair and where sufficient physical
evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the
forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same
elements.
(XIV) Replace missing features from the restoration period with new
features whose forms, materials and detailing are based on
sufficient physical, documentary and/or oral evidence.
STANDARDS FOR NEW (INFILL) DEVELOPMENT
9 (1) Any development, with the exception of demolitions, within the Heritage
Conservation Areas shall comply with the following regulations:
For the purposes of Section 9 the following definitions apply:
"neighbouring buildings or structures" means the existing
buildings or structures fronting upon the same side of the street or
streets and adjacent or most proximate to the development.
"side yard ratio" means the ratio of the width of the side yard
between the side lot line and the parts of the building or structure
nearest thereto, and the total width of the lot.
(a)
Where the setbacks of neighbouring buildings or structures
are uniform, the setback of the development shall conform
thereto.
(b)
Where the setbacks of neighbouring buildings or structures
are not uniform:
(i)
if the setback of one of the neighbouring buildings
or structures is the same as the setback of the
building or structure adjacent or most proximate to
it then the setback of the development shall conform
thereto; or
(ii)
if the setback of the neighbouring building or
structure on either side of the development is not
the same as the setback of those buildings or
structures adjacent or most proximate to it, then the
setback of the development shall conform to that of
either of the neighbouring buildings or structures.
(iii)
Page: 12
within the Douglas Avenue Heritage Conservation
Area, the setback for new infill development is to be
in alignment with the last building from the historic
period (1853-1940) to have occupied the site. The
Heritage Development Board or the Heritage
Development Officer may permit a different setback
where it is compatible with the appearance of and
rhythm of the historic streetscape. (By-law 93-241)
(c)
The side yard ratio on each side of a development shall
conform to the relative side yard ratios of either of the
neighbouring buildings or structures so as to maintain the pattern
of open and occupied spaces.
(d)
The height of a development shall not be less than 80
percent and not more than 120 percent of the average height of
existing buildings on both sides of the block within which the
development is located, regardless of age, except that:
(i)
additional height at no point shall be greater than 140
percent of the height of all buildings on both sides of the
block within which the proposed development is located,
and provided that no development shall interrupt a line
starting at a point 5 feet (1.5 meters) vertically above the
curb on the opposite side of the street and projecting past
the top of the roof cornice/parapet at the otherwise
maximum permitted 120 percent height calculated for the
proposed development; and
(ii)
if the proposed development is located on a corner lot, the
additional height between 120 percent and 140 percent
shall not interrupt a line as defined in (i) struck from 5 feet
(1.5 meters) above the curb of either street.
(e)
The height/width ratio of the facades of a development
shall not vary by more than 10 percent from the height/width ratio
of the facades of existing buildings constructed prior to 1915 and
not subsequently altered and located within the same block as the
development, fronting upon the same side of the street.
(f)
Notwithstanding paragraph (e), the Board may issue a
Certificate of Appropriateness for a building or structure proposed
for a parcel of land of a width greater than the average width of
building lots within the same block where such proposed building
or structure is too wide to comply with the height/width ratio set
forth in paragraph (e), provided that, the Developer shall
cosmetically divide the facade of such building or structure with
Page: 13
pilasters or other design techniques into sections or bays which do
conform to the required height/width ratio.
(g)
The allowable facade opening/wall ratio for the facade of a
development shall not vary by more than 10 percent from the
facade opening/wall ratio of the facades on existing buildings of
the same type or style constructed prior to 1915 and not
subsequently altered, and located within the same block as the
(h)
The dimensions of the windows in a development shall not
vary by more than 10 percent from the dimensions of the windows
in existing buildings of the same type or style constructed prior to
1915 and not subsequently altered, and located with the same
block as the development, fronting upon the same side of the
street.
(i)
The roof or roofs of a development in regard to their
direction, pitch and arrangement shall conform to those on existing
buildings of the same type or style constructed prior to 1915 and
not subsequently altered, and located within the same block as the
(j)
The size, shape and prominence of a porch, entrance
projection or doorway in a development shall be similar to those
found on existing buildings of the same type or style constructed
prior to 1915 and not subsequently altered and located within the
same block as the development, fronting upon the same side of the
street.
(k)
A development shall use traditional detailing and
traditional materials for its exterior facades in keeping with those
found on existing building or buildings of the same type or style
constructed prior to 1915 and not subsequently altered and located
within the same block as the development, fronting upon the same
side of the street. The Board may permit the use of contemporary
materials where their appearance is compatible with the
appearance of traditional materials and detailing.
When reviewing proposals to determine compatibility of
contemporary materials, the Board shall consider but not be limited
to the following:
Proposed construction assembly detailing and the degree
that proposed matches the appearance of the original;
Proposed cross-sectional profiles and the degree that
proposed matches originals;
Proposed texture and finish and the degree that proposed
matches the original;
Page: 14
When cost is used as a factor, then long-term operating and
life-cycle cost, as well as embedded energy, landfill impact,
employment generation and spin-offs shall be used rather
than short term capital cost.
9 (2) In the case where there is no existing building or structure located within
the same block as the development, the standards of this Section are deemed to
relate to a building or structure which is most proximate to the development.
9 (3) Mid-Block developments which do not front on any street or streets, are
exempt from the standards set forth in this Section.
Demolition, Removal or Relocation
10 (1) Subject to subsection (5) no building or structure within a Heritage
Conservation Area, or any appurtenances thereto, shall be demolished, removed
or relocated and no Certificate for such development shall be issued until,
(a)
such building or structure has been identified by the Board
as incompatible with the Heritage Conservation Area in terms of
the standards prescribed in section 8 and/or 9; or
(b)
the owner has made a publicly advertised Offer to Sell such
building or structure and the land pertaining thereto, for a period of
not less than six months, in accordance with the procedure set forth
in subsection 2 of this Section, and no contract has been made for
the sale of the property; or
(c)
the owner has listed for sale such building or structure and
the land pertaining thereto with a Multiple Listing Service® and
has entered into a contract thereto with a licensed real estate agent
or broker within the City for a period of not less than six months,
(the Listing Agreement), in accordance with the procedure set forth
in subsection 2 of this section, and no contract has been made for
sale of the property.
10 (2) The owner, who is making an Offer to Sell or who has entered into a
Listing Agreement for such building or structure shall:
(a)
Before publishing the Offer to Sell, file such Offer to Sell
with the Secretary and at his own expense, cause a Notice
of the Offer to Sell to be published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the municipality such Notice to
appear at least once a month for a period of not less than
six calendar months and ensure that the Offer to Sell is at a
price based on the real and true value of the property; or
(b)
Before entering into a contract with a Multiple Listing
Service® file such Listing Agreement with the Secretary

Amendment to the City`s Heritage Conservation

Transcription

Similar documents

family matters summer 2016 - Heritage Family Credit Union

Xero House

enREDo International Design Network

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

Heritage Committee Monday, November 16, 2015 7:00 p.m. Council

5 `S` Training Program at ABV-IIITM, Gwalior on 21.07.2016

4 star ALOE HOTEL, PAPHOS

From: Lee Sexsmith [mailto:hecubuspg@telus

loyola institute for ministry on-campus open house thursday, may 12