1 Report to Rapport au: Built Heritage Sub-Committee

1
Report to
Rapport au:
Built Heritage Sub-Committee
Sous-comité du patrimoine bâti
and/et
Planning Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme
and Council
et au Conseil
April 29, 2014
29 avril 2014
Submitted by
Soumis par:
Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager / Directrice municipale adjointe, Planning
and Infrastructure / Urbanisme et Infrastructure
Contact Person
Personne ressource:
Michael Mizzi, Chief / Chef, Development Review Services / Services d’Examen
des projets d'aménagement, Planning and Growth Management / Urbanisme et
Gestion de la croissance
(613) 580-2424, 15788, [email protected]
Ward: RIDEAU-ROCKCLIFFE (13)
File Number: ACS2014-PAI-PGM-0121
SUBJECT: Application to alter 140 Howick Street, a property designated under
Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and located in the Rockcliffe Park
Heritage Conservation District
OBJET:
Demande de modification du 140, rue Howick, propriété désignée
aux termes de la partie V de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario et
située dans le District de conservation du patrimoine de Rockcliffe
Park
2
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Built Heritage Sub-Committee recommend that Planning Committee
recommend that Council:
1.
Approve the application to alter 140 Howick Street, according to plans
received from Robertson Martin Architects on April 14, 2014, subject to the
following:
a. Retention of the existing one-storey bay on the west elevation;
b. Retention of the Tudor half-timbering details on the west, east and south
elevations;
c. Retention of the mature tree in the front yard; and
d. Removal of the cedar hedge is limited to approximately 20 metres in front
of the house along Howick Street and retention of the remainder cedar
hedge along the west property line.
2.
Issue the heritage permit with a two-year expiry from the date of issuance;
and
3.
Delegate authority for the satisfaction of conditions as set out in
Recommendation 1 and other minor design changes to the General Manager,
Planning and Growth Management Department.
(Note: The statutory 90-day timeline for consideration of this application under
the Ontario Heritage Act will expire on July 13, 2014.)
(Note: Approval to alter this property under the Ontario Heritage Act must not be
construed to meet the requirements for the issuance of a building permit.)
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Sous-comité du patrimoine bâti recommande au Comité de l’urbanisme de
recommander à son tour au Conseil :
1. D’approuver la demande de modification au 140, rue Howick, conformément
aux plans reçus du cabinet Robertson Martin Architects le 14 avril 2014,
moyennant les conditions suivantes :
a. conservation de la baie d’un étage du côté ouest;
3
b. conservation du demi-boisage de style Tudor sur les côtés ouest, est et
sud;
c. conservation de l’arbre mûr dans la cour avant;
d. enlèvement de la haie de cèdres sur une vingtaine de mètres seulement
devant la maison, le long de la rue Howick, et conservation du reste de la
haie le long de la limite ouest de la propriété.
2. De délivrer le permis en matière de patrimoine, qui expirera deux ans après sa
date de délivrance.
3. De déléguer au directeur général du Service de l’urbanisme et de la gestion de
la croissance le pouvoir de vérifier si les conditions énoncées à la
recommandation 1 ont été respectées et d’approuver des modifications
mineures à la conception.
(Nota : Le délai réglementaire de 90 jours d’examen de cette demande, exigé en
vertu de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario, prendra fin le 13 juillet 2014)
Nota : L’approbation de la demande de modification aux termes de la Loi sur le
patrimoine de l’Ontario ne signifie pas pour autant qu’elle satisfait aux conditions
de délivrance d’un permis de construire.)
BACKGROUND
The property is located on Howick Street between Maple Lane and Mariposa Avenue in
the Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District (HCD). The property at 140 Howick
Street is a two-and-one-half-storey house clad in stucco that was constructed circa
1920. It is a representative example of an early 20th century revival style house in
Rockcliffe Park with elements of the English Cottage style including the jerkinhead roof,
overhanging eaves and half-timbering. It contributes to the overall character of Howick
Street and the Rockcliffe Park HCD. The property is surrounded by a large cedar hedge
and it features a number of mature trees (see Documents 1, 2, and 6).
The Rockcliffe Park HCD was designated in 1997 for its cultural heritage value as an
early planned residential community first laid out by Thomas Keefer in 1864. The district
is also important for its historical associations with Keefer and his father-in-law, Thomas
MacKay, the founder of New Edinburgh and the original owner of Rideau Hall. The
picturesque nature of the village also contributes significantly to the cultural heritage
value. The Statement of Heritage Character notes that today the, “Village of Rockcliffe
4
Park is a distinctive community of private homes and related institutional properties
within a park setting.” (See Document 5.)
This section of Rockcliffe Park was developed following the First World War when the
land was severed from Keefer’s estate. The subdivision resulted in regularly-sized lots
in a relatively compact form for Rockcliffe Park on Sir Guy Carleton Street, Manor
Avenue, Howick Street and Minto Place between Maple Lane and Mariposa Avenue.
Most of the buildings date from the inter-war period until the 1950s. Built circa 1920, 140
Howick Street is one of the earliest buildings on the street.
This report has been prepared because alterations to buildings designated under Part V
of the Ontario Heritage Act require the approval of City Council.
DISCUSSION
There are three components to the proposed alterations at 140 Howick Street:
1. Demolition of the existing garage and existing one-storey addition at the rear of the
house and replacement with a new two-storey addition on the north and east
elevations.
4. Demolition and reconstruction of the existing sunroom on the south elevation.
5. Alterations to the facade of the historic building to remove the one-storey bay at the
front of the house, replace the stucco and remove the existing half-timbering and
add stone cladding at the ground floor.
Garage and Rear Addition
The existing garage was constructed in 1964 to replace a previous garage in the same
location and is sympathetic to the character of the existing house. There is also an
existing one-storey addition at the rear of the house that is proposed for demolition. The
proposal includes construction of a new, one and two-storey addition on a larger
footprint set back slightly from the front facade of the house. The garage portion of the
addition will be two-storeys with a jerkinhead roof to match the roof of the historic
building and the rear addition will be one storey with a hipped roof. The garage will have
a large dormer on the west elevation clad in cedar shingles.
Minor variances for side and rear yard setbacks are required to permit this addition.
Approval of the variances was granted by the Committee of Adjustment in April 2014.
5
Sunroom
The existing sunroom on the south elevation was constructed in 1964 to replace a
previous sunroom in the same location. The proposed sunroom is one-storey with a
hipped roof and clad in stucco.
Alterations to Facade
The most significant changes proposed for this building include changes to the facade
of the historic building. The existing building features coarse stucco with half-timbering
on the ground floor of the west, south and east facades. There is an existing one-storey
bay projecting from the front of the house with two windows and a recessed entryway
and a wooden canopy over the front door. The proposed alterations to the building
include demolishing the one-storey bay at the front of the house, removing all of the
half-timbering detail on the house, and removing and replacing the existing stucco. In
addition, the proposal includes adding three dormer windows on the front slope of the
roof, adding a new front door, transom and sidelights and a classically inspired portico.
The foundation level is proposed to be entirely clad in stone. Two new windows with
wooden shutters, sills and lintels are proposed on the front facade in place of the
existing one-storey bay.
On the rear facade a large two-storey bay window is proposed with wood panelling
between the first and second storeys. In addition, a small ground floor window is
proposed to be changed to a door with a larger window opening above. These
alterations require the removal of all of the half-timbering on the rear facade (see
Documents 3 and 4).
Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District Guidelines
The Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District Study contains guidelines for the
management of change in the district. The following guidelines related to buildings are
applicable to this proposal:
Section IV, Buildings
2. Any application to alter an existing building which is listed on the inventory of
Heritage Resources should be reviewed, with consideration of the impact of the
proposed alteration on the heritage character of the building and its setting.
Alterations should be recommended for approval only where the change protects
and enhances the existing historical and architectural quality of the building and
the site.
6
4. Any application to construct a new building or addition should be reviewed with
consideration of its potential to enhance the heritage character of the Village.
New construction should be recommended for approval only where the siting,
form, materials and detailing are sympathetic to the surrounding natural and
cultural environment.
5. New buildings and additions should be of their own time, but should also
harmonize with the existing cultural landscape. They should be sited and
designed so as to retain the existing topography. The use of natural materials
should be encouraged.
At the time of designation, a building-by-building evaluation was not undertaken by the
Village of Rockcliffe Park. Instead, certain buildings were identified as being significant
buildings in the village and added to the Inventory of Heritage Resources. However,
almost 20 years have passed since the designation of the Rockcliffe Park HCD and
heritage staff have been working to update the HCD study and plan and have, along
with local residents, completed the research and evaluation of every building in the
HCD. The property at 140 Howick Street is identified as a contributing building in the
HCD, so Guideline 2 above has been used to evaluate the proposal.
The proposed demolition and replacement of the existing garage, rear and sunroom
additions is appropriate as these additions were constructed in the 1960s and have little
heritage value. The size, scale and detailing of the proposed replacement additions are
appropriate to the character of the building.
The proposed removal of the existing half-timbering on the south, west and east
elevations, the demolition of the existing one storey bay on the front of the house and
the addition of a classical portico are not appropriate interventions for this building. The
existing building has heritage value as an early house on Howick Street, for its English
Cottage elements and for its contribution to the streetscape and removing those
character-defining elements and creating a more classical appearance will have a
negative impact on the cultural heritage value of the building.
The HCD study also has the following guidelines related to landscape:
Section V Soft and Hard Landscape
1. The dominance of soft landscape over hard landscape should be recognized as an
essential feature of the past history and present character of the Village.
7
2. The retention of existing mature trees and other significant plant material and hard
landscape features should be encouraged.
The proposal includes removal of two existing mature trees on the property and a
portion of the hedge facing Howick Street. The first tree proposed for removal is located
in the side yard, and its removal is necessary as it in very close to the proposed
sunroom addition. The second tree is located in the front yard where a new walkway is
proposed. The Department does not support the removal of this second tree, as the
proposed walkway could be reconfigured to allow retention of the tree. The Department
does not object to the removal of the cedar hedge in front of the house to allow the
house to make a stronger contribution to the streetscape, but as the guidelines
encourage the retention of significant plant material, it is not appropriate to remove the
hedge along the full length of the property on Howick Street.
Standards and Guidelines
The Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada were
adopted by Council in 2008 and are used to evaluate applications to alter. The following
standards are applicable to this application:
Standard 1: Conserve the heritage value of an historic place.
The scale and massing of the proposal conserves the overall value of the Rockcliffe
Park Heritage Conservation District but the alterations to the façade of the building
negatively impact the character of the historic building and the HCD.
Standard 11:Conserve the heritage value and character-defining-elements when
creating any new additions to an historic place or any related new construction.
Make the new work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and
distinguishable from the historic place.
The proposed additions are compatible with, distinguishable from, and subordinate to
the existing building. However, the proposed facade alterations do not conserve the
heritage value and character defining elements of the building.
Conclusion
The Department recommends approval of the proposed additions at 140 Howick Street
with conditions. It recommends that the proposed facade alterations be revisited in
order to preserve the key character defining elements of the building. In addition, the
Department does not support the removal of the hedge along the entire Howick Street
8
property line, and recommends that instead, only approximately 20 metres be removed
in front of the house itself. Finally, the Department does not support the removal of the
existing mature tree in the front yard.
Recommendation 2:
The Ontario Heritage Act does not provide any timelines for the expiry of heritage
permits. A two-year expiry date is recommended to ensure that projects are completed
in a timely fashion.
Recommendation 3:
The Department recommends that the authority to approve the satisfaction of the
conditions noted in Recommendation 1 be delegated to the General Manager, Planning
and Growth Management Department. In addition, minor changes to a building
occasionally emerge during the working drawing phase and this recommendation is
included to allow the Planning and Growth Management Department to approve these
changes.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no rural implications associated with this report.
CONSULTATION
Heritage Ottawa supports the application.
The Rockcliffe Park Residents’ Association supports the application.
Property owners within 30 metres of the subject property were notified of the application
by letter and offered the opportunity to provide written or verbal comments.
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR
Councillor Clark was circulated on the application and provided the following comment:
“I do not think this will materially alter the streetscape.”
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal impediments to adopting the recommendations outlined in this
report.
9
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are no risk management implications associated with this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no direct financial implications.
ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS
There are no accessibility impacts.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no environmental implications associated with this report.
TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS
Information Technology approved this report without comment.
TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES
HC4: Improve arts and heritage
APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS
The application was processed within the 90-day statutory requirement under the
Ontario Heritage Act.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location Map
Document 2 Current Conditions
Document 3 Site Plan
Document 4 Elevations
Document 5 Statement of Heritage Character, Rockcliffe Park HCD
Document 6 Heritage Survey Form
10
DISPOSITION
City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services, to notify the property owner
and the Ontario Heritage Trust (10 Adelaide Street East, 3rd Floor, Toronto, Ontario,
M5C 1J3) of Council’s decision.
11
Document 1 – Location Map
12
Document 2 – Current Conditions
13
14
Document 3 – Site Plan
15
Document 4 – Elevations
16
17
18
19
Document 5 – Statement of Heritage Character
Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District
Statement of Heritage Character
i)
Description
The Village of Rockcliffe Park is a planned residential community first laid out in
1864 by Thomas Keefer. It was created as a partial subdivision of the large estate
belonging to his father-in-law, Thomas McKay. Development occurred slowly, but in
1908 a Police Village was created, and by 1926 the Village of Rockcliffe Park had
been incorporated. The boundaries established in 1908 have remained intact, and
the present Village of Rockcliffe Park is a distinctive community of private homes
and related institutional properties within a park setting, still true to the spirit of
Keefer’s original vision.
ii)
Reasons for Designation:
The Village of Rockcliffe Park is proposed for designation as a heritage district
because of:

The significance of its original design intentions;

The continuity in its evolution;

The richness of its current urban condition;

Its relationship with its wide setting, and

The importance of its historical associations.
iii) Original Design Intentions
The Village of Rockcliffe Park is a rare and significant approach to estate layout and
landscape design adapted in Canada from 18th Century English precedents. McKay
had adopted this approach in his initial development of the estate, and the original
McKay villa and grounds survive as Rideau Hall, the estate of the Governor
General of Canada, on the western boundary of the village. When, in 1864, Keefer
advertised his Park and Villa lots for private residences, he focused on the
picturesque qualities of the scenery, and the importance of curving roads, extensive
plantings, and naturalistic settings as key features in any future development. Lots
were sold as components of the larger Estate, implying a cohesive landscape
20
approach- purchasers were enjoined from erected anything that would be
“inconsistent with the maintenance of the Estate as a park for private residences.”
Tree planning on road fronts was an immediate requirement on purchase, and
commercial and industrial uses were explicitly banned. This type of ‘suburban’ or
borderland development is also a reflection of a particularly North American
response to rapid industrialization and urbanization in the 19 th Century, with its
emphasis on healthy living in a rural or country setting.
iv) Continuity in Evolution
The Village of Rockcliffe Park today is a remarkably consistent reflection of the
ideas set out by Keefer. Although development of the residential lots has taken
place very gradually, the ideas of Estate management, of smaller lots as part of a
larger whole, of picturesque design, of residential focus, have survived as
controlling aspects of the Village’s form and character. This has been in part
somewhat fortuitous and unconscious- the cumulative effect of precedent and
example. The early estates such as the MacKay villa and Rockcliffe were followed
quickly by Birkenfels and Crichton Lodge, which in turn inspired smaller estates on
Buena Vista, Mariposa, and Acacia and later Crescent Road. These types of
properties continue to establish a Rockcliffe image, which is continually translated
by architects and designers into individual variations on the theme. The strong
landscape setting is able to embrace a rich diversity of lot and building sizes and
configurations.
However, the continuity has also been provided by an active effort by overseers
and residents. In the early years, Thomas Keefer and his associates developed
special arrangements to control public and private initiatives as Trustees of the
MacKay Estate. Later this effort fell to the overseers of the Police Village and then
the councillors of the incorporated Village. Considerable energy has been spent by
every successive generation to manage development and change, through formal
and informal reviews and by a variety of by-laws, planning directives, and special
designations. In most communities such initiatives have focused on economic
development and minimum property standards; in Rockcliffe there is an
extraordinary effort to maintain the scenic qualities, the park setting, the natural
features and plantings, the careful informality of streets and services. This
continuity of vision is very rare in a community where development has occurred on
such a relatively large scale over such a long time period.
21
v)
Current urban condition:
The Village of Rockcliffe Park has combined public and private initiatives to create
an unusually rich urban landscape. The deliberately curved roads, without curbs or
sidewalks, and the careful planting of the public spaces and corridors, together with
the careful siting and strong landscaping of the individual properties, create the
apparently casual and informal style so integral to the picturesque tradition. The
preservation and enhancement of topographical features including the lake and
pond, the dramatic Ottawa River shoreline, the internal ridges and slopes, and the
various outcroppings, has reinforced the design intentions. The architectural design
of the residences and associated institutional facilities is similarly deliberate and
careful, but in the casual elegance and asymmetry of the various English country
revival styles which predominate throughout the Village. The generosity of space
around the homes, and the flowing of this space from one property to the next by
continuous planting rather than hard fence lines, has maintained the estate qualities
and park setting envisioned by Keefer. This informal elegance has been a
consistent theme throughout the long process of development from the mid-19th
Century to the present. There are relatively few examples of the strict neoclassicism that would suggest a more geometric ordering of the landscape.
There is also a set of community practices, intangible rituals that are both public
and private, which continue to make sense of this environment- individual and
collective outdoor activities, pedestrian and vehicular movement, areas of
congregation and encounter, areas of dispersal and isolation. The urban landscape
is also sustained by a variety of ongoing planning regulations, reflected most
particularly in the current Official Plan and related zoning by-law.
vi) Relationship with its wider setting:
The Village of Rockcliffe Park has an important and integral association with its
larger setting, as a result of patterns of historical development. With the Rideau Hall
estate there is a symbiosis that dates back to Keefer’s original vision of the village
set within the larger grounds of this original villa. With Rockcliffe Park, there is a
deliberate relationship again defined by Keefer, who saw the park as a natural
extension and highlighting of the village’s picturesque setting. This relationship was
further strengthened with the expansion of the park to the east, and with the
addition of the Rockeries. Beechwood Cemetery has also served as a compatible
landscape boundary to the southeast from the earliest period of settlement through
to the present. These various border areas create important gateways to the village,
22
and help establish its particular character. The views to and from the Ottawa River,
the Beechwood escarpment, and the other park areas are integral to the
picturesque quality of the Village. These extensions also form an integral part of the
Village’s environmental ecosystem. It is unusual to have the internal character of a
neighbourhood so strongly reinforced by adjacent land uses; it once again reflects
the foresight of the original planners.
vii) Historical Associations
The most important historical associations of the village as a whole are with the
MacKay/Keefer family, major players in the economic, social, cultural and political
development of Ottawa. The village today is a testament to the ideas and initiatives
of various key members of this extended family, and their influence in shaping this
key piece of Canadian landscape. Additional associations have occurred more
randomly throughout the history of the village, as people of regional, national, and
international significance have resided here and made this community their home
base. Such associations are in some ways more private than public, and are an
aspect of the village that is preserved more in the intangible continuities and oral
traditions of village life than in the stones and mortar of monuments and plaques.
There are also specific associations with individuals who, whatever their
prominence elsewhere, have made special contributions within the Village at a
public and private level. These people have been part of an unusual form of selfgovernance, which has blurred the lines between formal and informal participation
in the affairs of the Village.
23
Document 6 – Heritage Survey Form
HERITAGE SURVEY AND EVALUATION FORM
Municipal
Address
140 Howick Street
Building or
Property
Name
042230043
Legal
Description
PLAN M33 LOT 82 TO
83 S PT;LOT 81
Lot
Block
Date of
current
structure
c.1920
Original
owner
possibly A.G.S. and Mrs.
Kathleen Griffith
Date of Original
Lot
Development
Additions
1964: Sunroom,
garage
Plan
24
Main Building
Prepared by: Brittney Bos / Heather Perrault
Garden / Landscape / Environment
Month/Year: July 2010
Heritage Conservation District name
Rockcliffe Park
Character of Existing Streetscape
This section of Rockcliffe was primarily developed following the First World War. The
land was acquired from the expansive Thomas Keefer estate (subsequently owned by
Clarke) and divided into evenly sized lots. Due to this planned development and
modest lot sizes, this section of Rockcliffe is one of the most uniform and compact.
These elements combined with the grid-like street configuration give this section of
the neighbourhood a “village within a village” character. For the most part, the
buildings in this section date from either the interwar period or the 1950s and thus
relate to one another in terms of their design, planning and setback. The landscape
elements within this area use the limited lot sizes to create a variety of small scaled
landscapes. The result is a multitude of related elements combining to enhance the
25
uniform qualities of this discernable section of Rockcliffe.
Howick Street is a small road that runs the length of one block north-south,
connecting Mariposa and Maple. The relatively flat surface gently inclines down
towards Mariposa at the north end. There are no sidewalks or curbs on the entire
length and therefore cars and pedestrians share the same roadway. The street is
lined with a variety of mature trees planted informally on the lots. The front yards
generally consist of lawn space dotted with gardens and cut by pathways. Therefore,
the landscape qualities of this street are characterized by its diversity of configurations
but uniformity of elements.
Character of Existing Property
This property is somewhat typical of the landscape of Howick Street. The front yard is
obscured by a cedar hedge running most of the property. There appears to be
primarily lawn space behind the hedge and a few large mature coniferous and
deciduous trees in the side yard. What can be seen closer to the house is a variety of
perennial plantings and ivy climbing parts of the garage. A straight driveway runs from
the street to the garage and a parallel path with steps leads to the front door. The
continuous cedar hedge separates this property from both its southern and northern
neighbours.
Contribution of Property to Heritage Environs
Landscape / Open Space
This property is partially typical of the overall landscape elements of Howick. Defined
by its diversity, Howick features a variety of landscape features unified by their
informal configurations and similar elements. This property contributes to the
characterization of these qualities; however, the tall cedar hedge creates a separation
from the street that is somewhat atypical of Howick.
Architecture / Built Space
This is one of the earliest developments on Howick street. Despite being from a
slightly earlier period and style, this building is consistent with its neighbours. Its
setback and property defining elements match with others on the street to form a
coherent and unified streetscape.
26
Landmark Status
This property is largely obscured by a tall cedar hedge defining the property line on all
sides.
Summary / Comments on Environmental Significance
The landscape features of this property are somewhat atypical and therefore break
with many of its neighbouring properties. Nonetheless, characterized by its diversity of
configurations but uniformity of elements, this property and others along the street
form a coherent streetscape, both in terms of their landscape and especially their
architecture.
Prepared by: Brittney Bos / Heather Perrault
History
Month/Year: July 2010
Date of Current Building(s)
c.1920
Trends
In the early to mid 20th century, there was an influx of families to Rockcliffe Park as a
result of higher-density development and crowding in downtown Ottawa. With its
scenic location and relative isolation from the city, the Village of Rockcliffe Park
became a fashionable neighbourhood, perceived to be a more healthy and peaceful
residential environment. This is one of the earlier developments on Howick Street.
In 1911, the Keefer Estate was divided into a subdivision called Connaught Commons
after the Duke of Connaught. The area was bounded by Lisgar Road, Mariposa
Avenue, Springfield Road, and Maple Lane. The prized apple orchard and extensive
greenery of the estate was presented as a selling feature to potential buyer. Most
purchased more than one 50-foot lot; this was done, at least in part, to accommodate
a septic tank. As sewers were installed, the extra lots were sold off as it became
possible to build on them.
Events
Persons / Institutions
1923--: Hayman (Henry) and Helen Claudet. Hayman is listed as a Consulting
Engineer.
27
Summary / Comments on Historical Significance
The historical significance of this property is due to its age, constructed in c.1920, its
role in the earliest residential development of Howick Street during the early 20th
century.
Historical Sources
City of Ottawa File
Rockcliffe LACAC file
Edmond, Martha. Rockcliffe Park: A History of the Village. Ottawa: The Friends of the
Village of Rockcliffe Park Foundation, 2005.
Village of Rockcliffe Park Heritage Conservation District Study, 1997.
Village of Rockcliffe Park LACAC Survey of Houses, 1988
Carver, Humphrey. The Cultural Landscape of Rockcliffe Park Village. Village of
Rockcliffe Park, 1985.
Might’s Directory of the City of Ottawa
Prepared by: Brittney Bos / Heather Perrault
Architecture
Month/Year: July 2010
Architectural Design (plan, storeys, roof, windows, style, material, details, etc)
This 2 storey building is rectangular in plan with a side and rear extensions, and is
capped with a steeply pitched side gabled jerkinhead roof. There are overhanging
eaves on all sides. The main building is clad in stucco while the side garage addition
is siding. The upper storey of the front facade features three irregularly spaced but
matching rectangular windows divided into four sections by pronounced vertical and
horizontal mullions all with shutters. The lower storey projects from the main facade
and is covered by a hipped roof with a central front gable with exposed timbering. This
decorated front gable is centered above a doorway inset in the projection and
accented with a rectangular transom. On either side of the door, there are matching
rectangular windows divided into vertical threes by pronounced mullions. There is half
timbering around both windows configured in matching mirrored patterns. The north
extension is 1 ½ storeys, featuring a double car garage on the bottom and a shed roof
28
dormer with rectangular window on the upper. There is an interior stucco chimney on
the south portion of the main roof peak.
Architectural Style
Elements of Vernacular English Cottage (vertical multi paned windows, steeply
pitched roof with jerkinhead gables, overhanging eaves, and half timbering)
Designer / Builder / Architect / Landscape Architect
1964: Bolton, Chadwick, Ellwood, and Aimers Architects
Architectural Integrity
There is a large side extension to the north of the building; however, it matches well
with the original. All other additions are at the rear.
Outbuildings
Other
Summary / Comments on Architectural Significance
This is a good example of a mid 20th century residence within the 1911 subdivision of
the Thomas Keefer estate. Its architectural features, style, and character (specifically
its vertical multi paned windows, steeply pitched roof with jerkinhead gables,
overhanging eaves, and half timbering) relates this building to others in this
subdivision and along this street constructed in a similar style. This type of
architecture characterizes Howick and adjacent streets within the subdivision, relating
the buildings to one another.
PHASE TWO EVALUATION
ENVIRONMENT
CATEGORY
E
G
F
P
SCORE
1.
Character of Existing
Streetscape
2.
Character of Existing
Property
X
10/30
3.
Contribution to Heritage
Environs
X
10/30
X
20/30
29
4.
Landmark Status
X
0/10
Environment total
HISTORY
1.
40/100
E
Construction Date
2. Trends
3
G
F
P
SCORE
X
23/35
X
23/35
Events/
Persons/Institutions
X
0/30
History total
ARCHITECTURE
CATEGORY
46/100
E
G
F
P
SCORE
1. Design
X
27/40
2. Style
X
17/25
3. Designer/Builder
X
4. Architectural Integrity
0/25
X
3/10
Architecture total
RANGES
47/100
EXCELLENT
GOOD
GOOD
1908 to
1926 to
1949 to
1925
Phase Two Score,
Heritage1948
District 1972
Pre-1908
Category
Environment
40 x 45% = 16
History
46 x 20% = 9.2
Architecture
Phase Two Total Score
FAIR
47 x 35% = 16.45
41.65/100
POOR
After
1972