agenda - st. john's - may 9, 2017… · a. verbal update – hfnl letter west fire station 5....

AGENDA

Built Heritage Experts Panel

Tuesday, May 9, 2017 12:00 pm

Conference Room A 4th Floor, City Hall

2. Delegation

AGENDA BUILT HERITAGE EXPERTS PANEL MEETING May 9, 2017 – 12:00 p.m. – Conference Room A, 4th Floor, City Hall

1. Call to Order & Approval of the Agenda

a. Ron Peters – 2 Cook’s Hill – Renovations with Upper Deck

3. Adoption of the Minutes

a. Minutes of April 5, 2017

4. Business Arising

a. Verbal Update – HFNL Letter West Fire Station

5. New Business

a. Heritage Designation b. 40 Rennie’s Mill Road – Façade Renovations c. Advisory Committee Review Check In – BHEP Terms of Reference d. 57 Margaret’s Place

6. Date of Next Meeting

Date of Next Meeting – June 7, 2017

7. Adjournment

City of St. John’s PO Box 908 St. John’s, NL Canada A1C 5M2 www.stjohns.ca

Title: Renovations with Upper Deck

2 Cook’s Hill Date Prepared: April 18, 2017 Report To: Built Heritage Experts Panel Councillor and Role: Art Puddister, Chair, Planning and Development Committee Ward: 2 Decision/Direction Required: To seek approval for proposed renovations to 2 Cook’s Hill, as submitted. Discussion – Background and Current Status: The City received an application to renovate 2 Cook’s Hill. The property is located in Heritage Area 3 and zoned Commercial Central Mixed (CCM). The building is not designated as a Heritage Building. The renovations include an upper deck which will be visible from Cook’s Hill. The upper deck is not located on the roof but rather is supported by the side of the building (inside) as well as 6 in. by 6 in. posts to grade (outside). All portions of the deck, including the railing, will be located below the third storey eave of the front portion of the building. The upper deck will be located above the second storey peak of the rear portion of the building. Section 5.9.4, Heritage Area Standards (Table), of the City’s Development Regulations is attached for your review. The proposed upper deck does not obscure any original architectural features of the existing building and is located below the third storey eave of the front portion of the building. The deck is considered out of character with the Heritage Area Standards as it does face (is visible from) a public street, Cook’s Hill. The proposed upper deck is set-back from the street right-of-way. Section 5.9.4, Heritage Area Standards (Table), of the City’s Development Regulations enables out of character developments to be approved by Council. The proposed stairs and decks will clutter the alleyway and will be visible from Cook’s Hill. The neighbours will also be impacted visually, lose a sense of openness as well as a sense of privacy. However, the owner has the right to build a structure right to the property boundary line in the CCM Zone and the set back from the street will diminish the visual impact from the street. In light of the above, staff is recommending the application be considered with conditions. The renovations also include new windows along the front façade facing Cook’s Hill. It is recommended that the second storey window be changed to single hung windows with a central meeting bar to match the first and third floor windows. Wide trims should be installed on all windows and doors. Key Considerations/Implications:

1. Budget/Financial Implications – Not Applicable

2. Partners or Other Stakeholders – Not Applicable

DECISION/DIRECTION NOTE

Decision/Direction Note Page 2 2 Cook’s Hill

3. Alignment with Strategic Directions/Adopted Plans: Neighbourhoods Build our City; helping to maintain and position downtown as a distinct neighbourhood.

4. Legal or Policy Implications – Not Applicable

5. Engagement and Communications Considerations – Not Applicable

6. Human Resource Implications – Not Applicable

7. Procurement Implications – Not Applicable

8. Information Technology Implications – Not Applicable

9. Other Implications – Not Applicable Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed renovations to 2 Cook’s Hill be approved subject to the following:

1) That the underside of the upper deck be screend-in on the south and east sides with a partially opaque material such as, but not limited to, privacy plus lattice to a minimum of 0.6m above grade;

2) Exterior handrail and guard to have its vertical members installed between top and bottom rail. Face nailed balustrades typical of new home construction is not acceptable within the heritage areas;

3) All pressure treated wood to be painted or stained with solid colour stain. 4) That the second storey front façade window be changed to single hung windows (triple window)

with a central meeting bar to match the first and third floor windows; 5) That wide trims be installed around all windows and doors in keeping with the heritage

requirements; and 6) That the door styles be in keeping with the heritage requirements.

Prepared by/Signature: Arthur MacDonald, MCIP – Planner, Urban Design and Heritage Signature: Approved by/Date/Signature: Ken O’Brien, MCIP – Chief Municipal Planner Signature: Attachments: Heritage Area Standards Table Location Map and Photos Applicant’s Plans


Heritage Areas Standards Table

HERITAGE AREA 1 HERITAGE AREA 2 HERITAGE AREA 3

Decks and Balconies

Not permitted on a façade facing a public street unless an original feature of the structure - then original style of structure to be maintained.

May be permitted on a façade facing a public street where, in the opinion of the Inspector, compatible with period streetscape.

Same as Heritage Area 2

Roof Decks Not permitted unless an original feature of the structure.

May be permitted provided deck structure or any part thereof, does not extend above top storey roof line or obscure an original architectural feature and is not on a façade facing a public street.

Same as Heritage Area 2

NEW BUILDINGS AND MAJOR RENOVATIONS TO OUT OF CHARACTER BUILDINGS

Compliance with foregoing or comprehensive design package approved by Council.

Same as Heritage Area 1 Same as Heritage Area 1


2 Cook’s Hill – Location Map

BUILT HERITAGE EXPERTS PANEL MEETING April 5, 2017 – 12:00 p.m. – Conference Room A

Present Glenn Barnes NLAA, MRAIC, Chair Bruce Blackwood, Contractor Ken O’Brien – Chief Municipal Planner Michael Philpott, Heritage Foundation of NL Matthew Mills, Provincial Association of Landscape Architects

Rob Schamper - Plans Examiner/ Senior Building Inspector Garnet Kindervater, Canadian Homebuilders NL Sylvester Crocker, Manager of Technical Services Arthur MacDonald, Co-Lead Staff Member

Maureen Harvey – Legislative Assistant Stacey Corbett – Legislative Assistant Regrets: Mark Whelan, Architect – Fougere Menchenton Architecture Inc. Lydia Lewycky, Atlantic Planners Institute

Adoption of Agenda

The agenda was adopted as presented on a motion by Michael Philpott and seconded by Bruce Blackwood.

Adoption of Minutes – March 1, 2017

Moved by Matthew Mills; Seconded by Garnet Kindervater

That the minutes of March 1, 2017 be adopted with one change, Bruce Blackwood was not present at that meeting.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Decision Note dated March 8, 2017 re: Review of Sub-List of Modern Buildings

Staff was asked to review the potential of designating modern buildings. Staff initiated the review by considering a List of Modern Buildings submitted by Robert Mellin in 2010. During the Panel’s meeting of February 1, 2017, 32 buildings were reviewed and the Panel recommended contacting 29 of the 32 property owners to see if they would be interested in having their building/structure designated as a municipal Heritage Building/Structure. The Panel also wished to have additional buildings added to the list. A Sub-List of Modern Buildings was reviewed by the Panel on March 1, 2017. This report is a follow-up from this discussion. The Panel reviewed the Sub-list of modern buildings.

2 2017-03-01

2

It was recommended that only those that have agreed to be designated be considered at this time.

Recommendation Moved by Garnet Kindervater; Seconded by Matthew Mills That the following properties, if agreed upon by owners, be considered worthy of designation as Heritage Buildings and added to the previous list for consideration

1) 12 Rostellan Street – The Silver Residence 2) 77 Circular Road - Ewing Residence 3) Churchill Park:

18 Maple Street

11 Sycamore Place

8 Elm Place

6 Beech Place

7 Beech Place

37 Poplar Avenue

30 Poplar Avenue

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Decision Note dated March 28, 2017 re: City of St. John’s Heritage Charter

During the Built Heritage Experts Panel’s meeting of December 5th, 2016, the topic of how modern building applications are reviewed in the City’s Heritage Area was discussed. During the Panel’s meeting on February 1, 2017 the Panel reviewed a proposed Heritage Charter to help facilitate heritage application reviews. The Panel recommended that the Charter be revised to include definitions and illustrations to help in the decision making process. It was acknowledged that the Charter will not only help the City/Panel in their review but will also help the applicant identify the components of a heritage application submission. The Panel reviewed a revised draft of the Charter during its meeting on March 1, 2017. It was recommended that provisions be included to illustrate the inclusion of modern buildings in Heritage Areas as well as a provision related to front yard landscaping in keeping with the streetscape. A revised Charter was attached for consideration.

2 2017-03-01

3

It is intended that the Charter work in unison with the City’s future Heritage By-law and not as a substitute. It was noted that just prior to the meeting, Mark Whalen submitted an email with information that the Panel may want to consider in approving the Charter. It was agreed that the email be reviewed and if necessary, adjustments be tabled at the next meeting. The Panel agreed with the proposed Charter in principle and concurred with staff’s recommendation to forward to the Legal Department for review prior to introduction to the Planning & Development. Decision Note dated March 28, 2017 re: 33 Victoria Street, Upper Deck Garnet Kindervater declared a conflict of interest and left the meeting at 12:25 and returned after the discussion of this topic at 12:32. The City received an application from the owner of 33 Victoria Street to develop an upper deck on top of the second storey portion of the building facing Bond Street. All portions of the deck, including the railing, will be located below the third storey eave of the building. The building is not designated by the City as a Heritage Building. The property is located in Heritage Area 2 and zoned Residential Downtown (RD). Though the existing building will be extensively renovated including the addition of a third storey, the design is considered in keeping with the Heritage Area Standards except for the upper deck facing the street. Pursuant to Section 5.9.4, Heritage Area Standards

HERITAGE AREA 1 HERITAGE AREA 2 HERITAGE AREA 3

Roof Decks

Not permitted unless

an original feature of

the structure.

May be permitted

provided deck

structure or any part

thereof, does not

extend above top

storey roof line or

obscure an original

architectural feature

and is not on a

façade facing a public

street.

Same as Heritage

Area 2

2 2017-03-01

4

NEW BUILDINGS AND MAJOR RENOVATIONS TO OUT OF CHARACTER BUILDINGS

Compliance with

foregoing or

comprehensi

ve design

package

approved by

Council.

Same as

Heritage Area 1

Same as

Heritage Area 1

The proposed roof top deck does not obscure any original architectural features of the existing building and is located below the top eave of the third storey. The deck is considered out of character with the Heritage Area Standards as it does face a public street, Bond Street. The proposed deck is located on top of the two storey rear portion of the building and is set-back from the street right-of-way. Section 5.9.4, Heritage Area Standards (Table), of the City’s Development Regulations enables out of character developments to be approved by Council. In this particular case, the applicant intends to continue the narrow wooden clapboard to the top of the railing for the roof-top deck. This will minimize the potential visual impacts of the deck facing Bond Street. In light of the above, staff is recommending approval. It was advised that the owner should contact the adjacent property owner about the application to see if the changes would cause any impact on them.

Recommendation Moved – Bruce Blackwood: Seconded Michael Philpott It is recommended that the proposed development at 33 Victoria Street as submitted be approved subject to technical requirements being met.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Information Note dated March 27, 2017 re: City Retrofits of Buildings that Merit Designation

The City wishes to explore the ways and means of increasing the building stock of designated Heritage Buildings by purchasing, renovating, designating and selling buildings on the City’s List of Buildings that Merit Designation. This concept was referred to the Panel by the City Manager and the Deputy City Manager of Planning,

2 2017-03-01

5

Engineering and Regulatory Services. The concept is to review the existing List of Buildings that Merit Designation and determine if there are any available to be purchased at a reasonable price, internally gutted, ready for a buyer to retrofit for a new use, with the exterior restored and then designate as a Heritage Building prior to their placement on the real estate market. It is intended that only those buildings that are in bad shape or otherwise may be ripe for demolition be considered. The City wishes to explore this feasibility with the Panel to obtain their input and feedback on the proposal. The City’s List of Buildings that Merit Designation is attached for review. Discussion ensued with the Panel suggesting that caution should be exercised as a similar initiative many years ago was based on different times and a very different economy. Update on Richmond Cottage

The Panel was informed that the deadline for demolition of the above noted building is May 1st. However, it was noted that there is a potential purchaser who is in the process of evaluating an acceptable retrofit. Date of Next Meeting

Next meeting – May 3, 2017 Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:00 pm. Glenn Barnes, NLAA, MRAIC Chairperson


Title: Heritage Designation – Spring 2017 Date Prepared: April 18, 2017 Report To: Chair and Members, Built Heritage Experts Panel Councillor & Role: Councillor Art Puddister, Chair, Planning and Development Committee Ward: All Decision/Direction Required: That Council proceed with the required steps to designate the buildings listed below as Municipal Heritage Buildings. Discussion – Background and Current Status: On April 26, 2016 Council approved Directive R2016-0426/29 and directed staff to contact property owners of homes/buildings that merit designation as Municipal Heritage Buildings. The initial mail out of 92 letters (total of 97 properties) in September, 2016 resulted in nine (9) property owners agreeing to proceed with designation. A second round of mail-outs initiated in early 2017 resulted in seven (7) more properties agreeing to proceed with designation.

1) 68 St. Clare Avenue; 2) 90 Pleasant Street; 3) 355 Southside Road; 4) 3 Forest Road; 5) 3A Forest Road; 6) 27 Henry Street; and 7) 29 Henry Street.

A copy of their Statements of Significance with their Designation Ranking Sheet is attached for your review and consideration. Key Considerations/Implications:

1. Budget/Financial Implications: Costs associated with designation as well as their Heritage Plaques.

2. Partners or Other Stakeholders: The City will partner with the property owners to promote, conserve and enhance the City’s heritage resources.


Decision/Direction Note Page 2 Heritage Designation – Spring 2017

3. Alignment with Strategic Directions/Adopted Plans: A City for All Seasons: Support year-round tourism and industrial activity.

4. Legal or Policy Implications: Legal will draft a Designation By-law for each building for Council’s consideration.

5. Engagement and Communications Considerations: Not applicable.

6. Human Resource Implications: Not applicable.

7. Procurement Implications: Not applicable.

8. Information Technology Implications: Not applicable.

9. Other Implications: Not applicable.

Recommendation: It is recommended to proceed to designate the buildings listed above as Heritage Buildings by directing Legal to proceed with the drafting of a Designation By-law for each building for Council’s consideration at a future meeting. Prepared by/Signature: Arthur MacDonald, MCIP – Planner III, Urban Design and Heritage Signature: Approved by/Date/Signature: Ken O’Brien, MCIP – Chief Municipal Planner Signature: AMD/dlm Attachments: Proposed Statements of Significance Designation Ranking Sheet

G:\Planning and Development\Planning\2017\Built Heritage Experts Panel\BHEP ‐ Heritage Designation ‐ Spring 2017 ‐ April 18 2017(amd).docx

Statement of Significance

68 St. Clare Avenue

Formal Recognition Type

City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building

Description of Historic Place

68 St. Clare Avenue is a three storey semi-detached structure located on St. Clare Avenue, in St. John’s. The municipal heritage designation is confined to the footprint of the building.

Heritage Value

68 St. Clare Avenue was designated a Municipal Heritage Building by the City of St. John’s because of its aesthetic value. 68 St. Clare Avenue achieves aesthetic value because it is a good, surviving example of a semi-detached Second Empire style of architecture. Though the building shall been resided with vinyl siding and had its upper dormer altered it still retains the mansard style roof and two storey bay window projection typical of the Second Empire style.

Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive

#_________________________.

Character Defining Elements

All those elements that embody the Second Empire style, including:

polygonal bay windows; mansard roof; size, shape and fenestration of windows; and

right gable entrance with enclosed porch.

Location and History

Community St. John's

Municipality City of St. John's

Civic Address 68 St. Clare Avenue

Construction (circa) 1890’s

Style Second Empire

Building Plan Rectangular

Additional Photos


90 Pleasant Street Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place 90 Pleasant Street, built in 1882 for George E. Taylor, is a wooden two-and-a-half storey Second Empire style building with a pair of symmetrical two storey (three storey including basement level) three sided bay window projections with a central dormer window placed eloquently in the mansard roof. The designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value 90 Pleasant Street has been designated by the City of St. John’s for its aesthetic and historic value. 90 Pleasant Street is aesthetically valuable because of its architectural style. The symmetrical front façade with its pair of symmetrical two storey (three storey including basement level) three sided bay window projections with a central dormer window placed eloquently in the mansard roof is a classic example of a large Second Empire style home. 90 Pleasant Street is historically valuable because of its age and associations with previous occupants. Most notably was Mr. Henry V. Simms, Master Cooper, who purchased the property in 1902. He was an active member of the Prohibition committee in 1915 and became Vice President of the Master Coopers Association in 1917. The dwelling was passed on to his son William, also a cooper, upon Henry's death in 1947. The Master Coopers of St. John’s supplied the salt fish trade with barrels, casks, and drums, for the transport of fish to Europe and the West Indies. In the 1870’s, Coopers were the largest single trade in Newfoundland’s industrial sector. The local coopers demand for staves were the sole reason for the existence of some small saw mills in Trinity and Bonavista Bays. This house played a significant role as part of the national economy - the fishing industry. This area has lost its working class history including the barrel-making trade which has practically disappeared from living memory. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements All elements of the building that are reflective of its age, construction, and design in the Second Empire style, including:

mansard roof and returned eaves; bow windows and central dormer window; size, shape, decoration and placement of windows; original side entrance; window size and fenestration; and location, orientation, dimensions.




Civic Address 90 Pleasant Street

Construction (circa) 1882

Style Second Empire

Building Plan Rectangular square with rear addition

Additional Photos


355 Southside Road Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place 355 Southside Road is a two and a half storey semi-detached structure located on Southside Road, St. John’s NL. The Municipal Heritage Designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value 355 Southside Road has been designated a Municipal Heritage Building because of its aesthetical and historic values. 355 Southside Road achieves aesthetic value because it is a good, surviving example of a mid-19th century semi-detached wooden structure, built in the Victorian Bracketed style of architecture. This style is reflected in the steep peaked roof, first storey bay window and elaborate decorative balustrade and eaves brackets. 355 Southside Road is historical valued as the original owner, William Blacker, was a prominent planter, a very prosperous fisherman. In 1894 William Blacker sold the home to Frederick W. Knight. The present owner, Mrs. Emily Knight (the estate of) is the granddaughter-in-law of Frederick Knight. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements

All elements of the building's Victorian Bracketed design including:

2 ½ storey construction; steep gable roof; decorative eaves brackets and detailing under the gable end;

narrow wood clapboard; the placement, shape and size of windows; window and door trim; single dormer with gable pediment projection; side entrance veranda with scalloped wooden singles below windows; centralized clay pot chimney; first storey 3 sided bay window with brackets and roof top railing with balusters; and, size and dimensions of building.




Civic Address 355 Southside Road

Construction (circa) Between 1845 and 1871.

Style Victorian Bracketed

Building Plan Semi-detached – irregular with large rear attachment

Additional Photos


3 Forest Road – Devon Place Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place Devon Place is a wood and nogging, two and one half storey hip roofed house located at 3 Forest Road, St. John’s, NL. Built between 1843 and 1849, the home is a fine example of one of oldest homes in St. John’s built in the Classic Revival style. The designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value Devon Place, 3 Forest Road, has been designated a Heritage Building by the City of St. John’s because of its aesthetic, historical and cultural value. Devon Place has aesthetic value as it one of the finest domestic examples of Classical design in the City of St. John’s. At the time of its construction, this house would have been among the most magnificent in St. John’s. Even with the presence of numerous Classical design elements, Devon Place exudes an aura of elegance and refined simplicity, as its decorative facade is essentially regular and symmetrical. Devon Place also stands as a testament to the skill, craftsmanship and creativity of the city’s builders and tradesmen. Devon Place has historical value because of its age and association with several individuals who played key roles in the political, economic and social evolution of Newfoundland and Labrador. In 1843, merchant and politician William Thomas acquired a grant for a piece of land between Forest Road and King’s Bridge Road. By 1849, Noad’s map of St. John’s shows a home on this plot. Devon Place is therefore one of the older original buildings in this area to have survived the great city fires of the nineteenth century. Also of historical note is the changing ownership of

Devon Place by several influential residents of St. John’s. These men would help shape the political, economic and social development of both the city and the colony; for example, William P. Thomas, merchant and politician, James Murray, merchant, Robert J. Pinsent, Supreme Court Judge, Charles Bowring, merchant, Harry Duff Reid, Reid Newfoundland Company, Dr. Charles Howlett, dentist and mayor of St. John's, and Dr. Charles Hutton, Chief Medical Examiner for the province. Devon Place has cultural value as it stands as a physical reminder of an earlier time and place. The area of St. John’s in which Devon Place is located was developed in the early nineteenth century by the upper class, whose wealth was evidenced in the stately residences they had constructed away from the congestion of the downtown core. The original homes in the historic Forest Road area speak to the prosperity of the business and merchant elite in this small colony. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements All those original, exterior elements that embody the Classical Revival style of architecture, including:

number of storeys; hip roof; entablature on eave; pediment on left gable end; placement and style of pediment dormers; dormer window size, style, trim and placement; narrow clapboard; engaged columns on corners with carved Corinthian capitals; window size, style, trim and placement; size, style, trim and placement of bays on front and side facade; size, style, trim and placement of windows in front bays; engaged columns on front bay windows; entablature and decorative frieze with triglyphs on front bay windows; size, style, trim and placement of doors on side bays; size, style, trim and placement of windows in side bays; cut and leaded glass in side bays; moulded lintels on upper windows on left gable end; size, style, trim and placement of exterior doors; location of porch on front facade; fluted columns on front porch; entablature and decorative frieze with triglyphs on front porch; chimney style and placement; and dimension, location and orientation of building.




Civic Address 3 Forest Road

Construction (circa) 1843 - 1849

Style Classical Revival

Building Plan Square

Additional Photos


3A Forest Road – Devon Place Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place 3A Forest Road is a wooden two storey house located at 3A Forest Road, St. John’s, NL known as part of the double dwelling of Devon Place located at 3 Forest Road. The designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value 3A Forest Road has been designated a Heritage Building by the City of St. John’s because of its aesthetic and historical value. 3A Forest Road has aesthetic value as it one of the finest domestic examples of Classical design in the City of St. John’s. It is attached to 3 Forest Road, Devon Place, with the presence of numerous Classical design elements. The combination of both properties provides an elegance to the streetscape and stands as a testament to the skill, craftsmanship and creativity of the city’s builders and tradesmen. 3A Forest Street has historical value because of its age and association with several individuals who played key roles in the political, economic and social evolution of Newfoundland and Labrador. In 1843, merchant and politician William Thomas acquired a grant for a piece of land between Forest Road and King’s Bridge Road. By 1849, Noad’s map of St. John’s shows a home on this plot. 3 Forest Street (Devon Place) and 3A Forest Street are a fine example of older original homes to have survived the great fires of the nineteenth century. The original homes in the historic Forest Road area speak to the prosperity of the business and merchant elite in this small colony. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements All those original, exterior elements that embody the Classical Revival style of architecture, including:

number of storeys; narrow clapboard; window size, style, trim and placement; size, style, trim and placement of front porch entrance; entablature on eave particularly above the front porch entrance; pair of fluted columns on either side of the front porch entrance; cornerboards and trims; moulded lintels on lower first storey windows; and dimension, location and orientation of building.




Civic Address 3A Forest Road

Construction (circa) 1843 - 1849

Style Classical Revival

Building Plan Square

Additional Photos


27 Henry Street - Julia Baird House Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place The Julia Baird House located at 27 Henry Street, St. John’s is a fine example of Victorian style architecture. The designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value The Julia Baird House located at 27 Henry Street has been designated a Heritage Building by the City of St. John’s because of its aesthetic and historical value. The Julia Baird House has aesthetic value as it one of the finest domestic examples of Victorian Bracketed architecture in the City of St. John’s. The Julia Baird House has historical value because of its age and association with the Hon. Moses Monroe. The house was built on the old Samuel Bulley estate. Bulley founded the firm of Job Brothers in 1730. In 1893 the property was deeded to the Hon. Moses Monroe in trust for Julia Baird, his sister. Monroe was born at Moira, Country Down, Ireland, and came to Newfoundland in 1861. He was a member of the Legislative Council from 1886 until his death on May 19th, 1895. A monument to Moses Monroe, a noted local philanthropist, stands in Victoria Park. It was erected by voluntary contributions of all classes as a token of the respect and esteem in which Monroe was held. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements All elements of the building that are reflective of its age, construction, and design in the Victorian Bracketed style, including:

exterior decoration; narrow wood clapboard with scalloped shingle cladding; peaked dormer window projection from mansard roof with bracket dentils below and

detailed pediment above capped with a decorative finial; first floor decorative three bay window with rounded windows with dentils below a hipped

roof; peaked dormer window projection above front entranceway with bracket dentils below and

detailed hipped roof capped with a decorative finial; mansard roof; clay pot chimney; wooden door entrance with upper transoms with central rounded transom window and

sidelights with elaborate brackets and entablature; size, shape, placement and decoration of windows; decorative stringcourse between first and second floors with left side cornerboard; and size and dimensions of building.




Civic Address 27 Henry Street


Style Victorian Bracketed

Building Plan Square with rear ell addition

Additional Photos


29 Henry Street Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Registered Heritage Building. Description of Historic Place 29 Henry Street is a wooden two and one half storey mansard roofed row house built in the Second Empire (Victorian Mansard) style. The designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value 29 Henry Street has been designated by the City of St. John’s for its aesthetic value. 29 Henry Street is aesthetically valuable because it is a fine example of a row house done in the Second Empire (Victorian Mansard) style of architecture. The detailed dentils along the eave, the mansard roof and the rounded arched dormers are typical features of the Victorian Mansard style of architecture. The vertical alignment of the fenestrations provides a balance to the façade even though the dormers are centered in the mansard roof and off-set from the fenestrations. The detailing of the entrance door with a decorative lintel above the transom window as well as the decorative lintel above the first storey paired single hung windows provides a humble but elegant façade. Source: Designated at a regular meeting of the St. John’s Municipal Council held __________________, Council Directive #_________________________.

Character Defining Elements All elements of the building that are reflective of its age, construction, and design in the Second Empire style, including:

mansard roof; rounded arched dormers; detailed dentils along eave; narrow wooden clapboard with corner boards; main door, including transom with decorative lintel; size, shape, decoration and placement of windows; and building’s location, orientation and dimensions.




Civic Address 29 Henry Street


Style Second Empire (Victorian Mansard)

Building Plan Rectangular Plan (Center of 3 row houses)

Additional Photos


Title: 40 Rennie’s Mill Road, Façade Renovations Date Prepared: April 17, 2017 Report To: Chair and Members, Built Heritage Experts Panel Councillor & Role: Councillor Art Puddister, Chair, Planning and Development Ward: 2 Decision/Direction Required: To seek approval for renovations to the façade of 40 Rennie’s Mill Road, as submitted. Discussion – Background and Current Status: The City received an application for renovations to the façade of 40 Rennie’s Mill Road. The subject property is located in Heritage Area 1, located in the Residential Low Density (RLD) District and zoned Residential Low Density (R1). The building is designated by Council as a Heritage Building. A copy of the building’s Statement of Significance is enclosed for your review. The subject property is a recipient of a Heritage Financial Incentive Grant for repairs and replacements of all exterior trim and refurbishment of the front façade, replacement of the front concrete step as well as painting. According to the City of St. John’s Act a building designated by the council shall not be demolished or built upon nor shall the exteriors of the building or structure be altered, except with the approval of the Council. The applicant intends to maintain as much as possible the original features of the existing façade. The Character Defining Elements as outlined in the Building’s Statement of Significance will not be adversely affected. In light of the above, it is recommended that the request to renovate the façade of 40 Rennie’s Mill Road as submitted, be approved. Key Considerations/Implications:

1. Budget/Financial Implications: Not applicable.

2. Partners or Other Stakeholders: Not applicable.

3. Alignment with Strategic Directions/Adopted Plans: Values: Continue to do things better.

4. Legal or Policy Implications: Not applicable.



Decision/Direction Note Page 2 40 Rennie’s Mill Road




9. Other Implications: Not applicable. Recommendation: It is recommended that the request to renovate the façade of 40 Rennie’s Mill Road as submitted, be approved. Prepared by/Signature: Arthur MacDonald, MCIP – Planner III, Urban Design and Heritage Signature: Approved by/Date/Signature: Ken O’Brien, MCIP – Chief Municipal Planner Signature: AMD/dlm Attachments: Location Map and Streetscape Photo Submission Statements of Significance

G:\Planning and Development\Planning\2017\Built Heritage Experts Panel\BHEP - 40 Rennie's Mill Road April 17 2017(amd).docx

Decision/Direction Note Page 3 40 Rennie’s Mill Road

40 Rennie’s Mill Road – Location Map


40 Rennie’s Mill Road Formal Recognition Type City of St. John's Heritage Building, Structure, Land or Area Description of Historic Place 40 Rennie’s Mill Road, two and a half storey structure located on Rennie’s Mill Road, in downtown St. John’s. The municipal heritage designation is confined to the footprint of the building. Heritage Value 40 Rennie’s Mill Road was designated a Municipal Heritage Building by the City of St. John’s because of its aesthetic and historic value. 40 Rennie’s Mill Road achieves aesthetic value because it is a good example of a pre-1892 fire wooden structure, built in the Queen Anne style of architecture. The asymmetrical facade with modest exterior ornamentation is typical for this style of building. Windows placement with their vertical 2:1 orientation was typical of the style of architecture. 40 Rennie’s Mill Road achieves historic value because of its association with the Herder family. William James Herder was the founder of "The Evening Telegram" newspaper. After an apprenticeship with the weekly newspaper "The Courier" Herder bought the paper in 1879. He published the first edition of The Evening Telegram on April 3 of that year from his Duckworth Street, St. John’s press. Within one year demand for the daily newspaper increased from 400 four-page newspapers to over 2000 eight-page newspapers. Today the paper is run under the name "The Telegram" and is the oldest continuously published daily in the province. 40 Rennie’s Mill Road also achieves historic value because of its association with William James Herder’s three sons and daughter, all whom served in World War I. Elsie Herder was a member of the Voluntary Aid Detachment and served as a Nurse in field hospitals behind the lines from 1916-1918. Arthur, Hubert and Ralph Herder went “over the top” at Beaumont Hamel on July 1, 1916 with 800 fellow Newfoundlanders. After this battle 732 Newfoundlanders either lay dead,

wounded or were presumed missing, a slaughter of almost unimaginable magnitude for a tiny Dominion of 250.000 people. Lt. Hubert Herder was among the dead; Brothers Arthur and Ralph were wounded. Arthur Herder returned to the front in 1917 and was killed by a Sniper at the Battle of Cambrai on December 1, 1917. Ralph Herder served from Gallipoli and was wounded yet again in 1918 and was discharged back to St. John’s. 40 Rennie’s Mill Road served as the Herder family home until 1977 when it was sold to John Austin. Source: City of St. John’s, Council Meeting held January 23, 2017 Council Directive No. 2017-01-23/24.

Character Defining Elements All those elements that encompass the Queen Anne style of architecture including:

asymmetrical front façade; two and half storey with a steep pitched gable roof design; narrow clapboard; window and door trim style; and window openings, dimensions and placement.




Civic Address 40 Rennie’s Mill Road

Construction (circa) Pre-1892

Style Queen Anne

Building Plan Rectangular with ell at rear

Additional Photos


Title: BHEP – Terms of Reference Date Prepared: February 24, 2017 Report To: Chair and Members, Built Heritage Experts Panel Councillor & Role: Councillor Art Puddister, Chair, Planning and Development Committee Ward: All Issue: To provide an up-date to the Built Heritage Experts Panel (BHEP) regarding the annual review of the Panel. Discussion – Background and Current Status: On February 6, 2017 Council approved the recommendations relating to the Advisory Committee Review Check In which was held on December 6th. In relation to the Built Heritage Experts Panel the following recommendations were approved.

• consider adding urban design to terms of reference; • consider working groups with other committees such as arts and downtown; and • involve committee in discussion of parks, open spaces, etc. as heritage and design go beyond buildings.

The attached Terms of Reference have been updated to reflect these decisions. Key Considerations/Implications:


2. Partners or Other Stakeholders: BHEP and the City

3. Alignment with Strategic Directions/Adopted Plans: Not applicable.

4. Legal or Policy Implications: Not applicable.




INFORMATION NOTE

Information Note Page 2 BHEP Terms of Reference



Conclusion/Next Steps: For information only – no further action required. Prepared by/Signature: Arthur MacDonald, MCIP – Planner III, Urban Design and Heritage Signature: Approved by/Date/Signature: Ken O’Brien, MCIP – Chief Municipal Planner Signature: AMD/dlm Attachment: Revised Terms of Reference

G:\Planning and Development\Planning\2017\Built Heritage Experts Panel\BHEP -BHEP Terms of Reference Info Note Feb 24 2017.docx

ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

Last updated: 2017-04-26 Page 1 of 10

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Experts panel name: Built Heritage Experts Panel

Reporting to: Planning and Development Standing Committee

Date of formation - expiration date: February 22, 2016

Meeting frequency: Monthly or as required in accordance with the agenda items

Staff lead: Chief Municipal Planner and Planner III – Urban Design and Heritage

Other staff liaison: Manager of Technical Services

Director of Planning and Development

2. PURPOSE

The Built Heritage Experts Panel provides expertise, opinion and perspective about built heritage, its protection

and designation in the City of St. John’s.

The Built Heritage Experts Panel will consider applications, proposals, reports and related items referred to it by

staff or Council.

It will make recommendations to Council, via the Standing Committee, on heritage matters including the

development and implementation of heritage policies, by-laws, strategies and programs applicable to the City.

Specifically the panel will:

Develop recommendations on built heritage designations.

Provide expert opinions on built heritage applications referred to it by city staff, standing committee or

Council.

Recommend best practices on built heritage and urban design.

Review heritage issues, including issues under the City of St. John’s Act and/or the Historic Resources

Act of Newfoundland and Labrador that may be referred to it by Council.

Identify for designation any area, building, structure or land as heritage.

Built Heritage Experts Panel recommendations to the Planning and Development Standing Committee of

council will occur in the manner defined by these terms of reference to best support City Policy. The Built

Heritage Experts Panel will prepare recommendations to the appropriate standing committee. The purpose of

the Built Heritage Experts Panel is relation to specific City policies, plans, and strategies is as follows:



Built Heritage Experts Panel Relationship to Strategic Plan:

Neighbourhoods build our city – maintain and position downtown as a distinct neighbourhood, develop

parks and places for people.

Responsive and Progressive – create a culture of engagement, identify and deliver on projects, strategies

and programs.

A Culture of Cooperation – create effective City-Community collaborations

Applicable Legislation/City Bylaws:

City of St. John’s Act, Section 355

Any applicable City of St. John’s by-laws current or future

Other City Plans, Guides or Strategies:

St. John’s Heritage Areas, Heritage Buildings and Public Views Study, 2003

Downtown St. John’s for Economic Development Heritage and Preservation, 2001

Envision draft Municipal Plan (with specific reference to items involving – heritage, built heritage), 2014

Parks and Open Spaces Master Plan, 2014

City of St. John’s Heritage Building, 2015

Other Distinct Deliverables and Considerations:

The Panel will be consulted on any city public engagement processes where getting the perspective of

heritage experts is identified in a plan.

The Panel will support the development and ongoing review of a built heritage designation inventory.

The Panel will identify programming to support the goals of the Built Heritage Experts Panel’s work.

3. MEMBERSHIP AND COMPOSITION

3.1 COMPOSITION



The Built Heritage Experts Panel will be comprised of no more than 7 total members from the following

stakeholder groups:

3.1.1 Public Members

Committee Chair

Built Heritage Experts Panel will be chaired by a public expert. The Chair will be selected by Council upon

recommendation of staff drawing from the Panel’s membership. Additional selection criteria for Chair may be

applied for experts panels.

The public member chairing a committee will have responsibility for ensuring the committee carries out its work

as per the terms of reference.

Public Members

The Committee will be comprised of no more than 7 residents serving as public members. Public members are

volunteers and will receive no compensation for participation. Preference will be given to residents of St. John’s.

Public members must have certification, accreditation, affiliation and/or demonstrated expertise and experience

in matters of built heritage and/or cultural landscape.

The Panel will include at least one representative from each of the following categories:

Architect

Contractor

Historian/Archival Expert

Planner, MCIP

Landscape Architect

Other – Demonstrated Relevant Experience

Subcommittees: When deemed necessary, the experts panel may strike a working committee or subcommittee

to deal with specific issues or deliverables. Subcommittees must have at least one panel member. Composition

may also include other members of the public and organizational representatives. Subcommittees shall meet as

an independent group, reporting to the panel on specified meeting dates, or as deemed necessary by the

committee Chair or Lead Staff.

3.1.2 Staff and Council Members (Ex-Officio Members)

Lead Staff

A Lead Staff will be appointed to the Built Heritage Experts Panel by the appropriate City executive or senior

management. Other staff support/attendance may be requested by the Lead Staff where required.

City Clerk

The City Clerk will provide legislative and governance support to the experts panel.

Council

The spokesperson is Standing Committee Chair



3.2 LENGTH OF TERM

Public Member Experts

Unless otherwise indicated, the Built Heritage Panel term of appointment is two years. Recognizing the value of

experience and the need for continuity, incumbents who are willing to seek reappointment may signify their

intent to serve an additional two years, for a total of four years. In some cases members may be encouraged to

provide guidance, expertise and attend in a bridging capacity following the end of their term.

Cooling-off Period (Former City Staff and Council)

There will be a cooling-off period of two years for Council and Staff once they are no longer associated with the

City. Setting term lengths with a cooling-off period will promote gradual turnover, ensuring a constant balance

between new members and former staff or council.

Additional Considerations:

Public members may not serve on more than one experts panel at a given time.

Midterm Appointments: When an appointment is made which does not coincide with the beginning of a

term (i.e. to fill a vacancy) the partial term (i.e. less than two years) shall not count towards the maximum

length of service or number of terms on the Committee for the appointee.

Exceptions to the above terms are as follows: when an insufficient number of applications have been received; if

a particular area of expertise is indispensable and there are no other suitable replacements; if the experts panel

would suffer from a lack of continuity (i.e. more than half of all members are replaced at once); if directly related

to the Advisory Committee’s purpose as defined in its Terms of Reference.

4. ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND REPORTING

4.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

As a municipal Experts Panel, roles include:

Advising and making recommendations to standing committee(s) of council, in a manner that will support

City policy matters relevant to the pane defined Purpose.

Providing expertise specific to the mandate of the panel.

Working within given resources.

Consider working with other committees and/or working groups i.e. Downtown Advisory Committee and

Arts and Culture Advisory Committee

Explore opportunities to add value to parks, open spaces, etc. as heritage and design go beyond buildings.

Shared Member Responsibilities

Conduct

Members shall strive to serve the public interest by upholding Federal, Provincial and Municipal laws and

policies. Experts Panel members are to be transparent in their duties to promote public confidence. Members



are to respect the rights and opinions of other committee members.

Preparation

Meeting agenda and accompanying materials will be circulated electronically one week prior to all meetings;

members are expected to review all distributed materials prior to meetings. Alternate material distribution

methods to be made available upon request.

Agendas

Agendas to require focus with clear parameters for content and alignment with terms of reference/purpose.

Agendas will be finalized one week before meetings.

Items and accompanying material that are received after the agenda has been prepared and distributed (but

prior to the meeting) will be moved to the following meeting’s agenda at the discretion of the City Clerk.

All public members are to submit potential agenda items and related material to the Committee Chair and

Lead Staff person for consideration.

Attendance and Participation

Active participation in meetings is expected of all public members. “Active participation” may refer to both

meeting attendance and/or engagement. An effort should be made to attend meetings in person or remotely.

Members who do not actively participate in more than 3 consecutive meetings without justified absence may be

retired from the committee at the discretion of the City Clerk.

Members who wish to request a leave of absence for an extended period of time (3+ months) may submit such

a request to the City Clerk. Previously submitted applications may be used to fill temporary vacancies created by

approved leaves of absence.

Quorum – a quorum for meetings is considered to be 50% + 1 members in attendance.

Voting

City Staff are ex-officio and therefore non-voting.

4.2 MEMBER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

4.2.1 City Staff

Lead Staff

• To act as a liaison between the Built Heritage Experts Panel and the Planning and Development Standing

Committee on issues relevant to panel’s work.

• Lead staff will attend the Planning and Development Standing Committee when reports of the Built Heritage

Experts Panel are included in the agenda.

• Ensure the panel is informed about City policy, procedure and available resources in reference to specific

agenda items, and provide procedural and/or technical advice to assist the panel where appropriate.

• Request additional staff support/attendance at meetings as needed.

• To develop agendas in cooperation with the Chair and City Clerk’s Office for distribution.

• Incorporate input from the experts panel into ongoing City work where appropriate (e.g. projects, staff



updates, publications)

Other Staff Liaison

• The work of Other Staff Liaisons intersects the purpose of the experts panel and therefore they may be

required to participate.

City Clerk

• To be responsible for legislative functions related to experts panel’s operation, establishment, review, and

term amendments. This includes leading or supporting day-to-day panel activities such as the co-ordination

of meeting schedules and the external/internal distribution/posting of experts panel agendas and reporting

forms (i.e. meeting notes/minutes).

• Facilitate and support the recruitment and appointment process through assisting in the development of

“Notice of Vacancy” contents while ensuring all relevant forms and supporting documentation are

completed and received.

• In adherence with the terms of reference, the Office of City Clerk and Office of Strategy and Engagement will

oversee panel selection with input from relevant departments.

• The Office of the City Clerk will work with Lead Staff members to ensure new members receive orientation.

4.2.2 Public Members Chair

• The presiding officer of the Built Heritage Experts Panel will be referred to as "Chair.” An experts panel

member shall not serve as a Chair for more than three consecutive years except in extenuating

circumstances (see Term Limits).

• Uphold experts panel processes and functions in accordance with all terms presented, maintaining

productivity and focus. This includes ensuring committee members’ conduct themselves in a professional

manner.

• If appropriate, with support from the City Clerk and Staff Lead, the Chair will help build and coordinate a

work plan for the experts panel.

• Prepare and submit agenda items and accompanying materials to the City Clerk (i.e. act as a conduit for all

communications between public members and the City Clerk).

• Where appropriate, support the Lead Staff and/or City Clerk in fulfilling panel requirements related to

reporting processes (annual presentations, written reports, FAQ’s etc.).

• Assist in the development of content for Notice of Vacancy documents.

• Review experts panel terms of reference with City Clerk and Staff Lead at the end of each term and be

prepared to propose amendments as needed.

Public Members

Public members are expected to provide advice to support City decision making; applying, knowledge and

experience related to the mandate of the Panel in carrying out functions commensurate with its defined

purpose. Roles to include: active participation in meetings; representing professional designation to which they

belong in the community and engaging with residents and experts when appropriate.



4.2.3 Council

The Built Heritage Experts Panel reports to the Planning and Development Standing Committee.

The Chair of the Planning and Development Standing Committee is spokesperson.

In cases where an item on the agenda of the Built Heritage Experts Panel (as detailed in a given meeting

agenda) would benefit from having the Chair of the Planning and Development Standing Committee in

attendance, it will be the responsibility of the Panel Chair and/or Lead Staff to inform the Standing Committee

chair.

4.3 REPORTING

The Built Heritage Experts Panel shall report through the Planning and Development Standing Committee.

Standardized Reporting Process:

• The Built Heritage Experts Panel Lead Staff, Chair and City Clerk will work to complete an experts panel

reporting form following each meeting.

• The Lead Staff, or a designate, will submit Reporting Form contents, along with any other panel updates, to

its reporting standing committee as required. Following reporting to the standing committee, Reporting

Forms will be posted to the City of St. John’s website.

Notes:

The use of additional reporting methods is the responsibility of the Lead Staff and/or City Clerk, who will

seek assistance from the Office of Strategy and Engagement regarding communications. Additional

reporting will depend on the nature of a given advisory issue.

Council to be kept informed of committee activities through formal reporting and through the reporting

Standing Committee chair.

Public expert representatives will be encouraged to report to (i.e. maintain open communication) with their

respective affiliated professional organizations regarding the panel’s work.

5. COMMITTEE RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION

5.1 RECRUITMENT, VACANCIES, AND APPLICATIONS

Recruitment practices will be consistent for all experts panels. When new members are required a “Notice of

Vacancy” will be prepared by the City Clerk and distributed through City communication channels by the Office



of Strategy and Engagement. Additional communications opportunities may be identified by relevant

departments/panel members. This document will include general information regarding panel purpose, the

terms of reference and a link to the Application Form.

A vacancy on a panel occurs when a member resigns, vacates a position, or when their resignation is requested

by the Chair. Vacancies may occur at: the date of resignation; the date the member ceases to be qualified; the

date the Chair declares the position vacant due to lack of attendance or incapacitation.

All applicants must complete an Application Form which may be downloaded from the City website, or

obtained by visiting/calling Access 311. Applications will be made available in large print format upon request

and may be submitted electronically, via mail, by phone, or in person to the attention of the City Clerk’s Office.

5.2 ELIGIBILITY AND SELECTION

Eligibility

Appointments to City of St. John’s Built Heritage Experts Panel will follow Section 3. Membership and

Composition.

Selection Criteria

In addition to eligibility requirements, an applicant’s specific skills and experience will be important factors in

panel selection. While all who meet the Eligibility Requirements outlined are encouraged to apply, applicants

with demonstrated participation in groups or initiatives with goals relevant to an expert panel’s purpose will be

preferred. Some other considerations pertaining to general selection criteria include: past professional and

volunteer experience, ability to perform required tasks, and complementary skills, or competencies possessed.

Those who are selected to serve on City experts panel will be notified by email. A handbook and other relevant

information will also be provided to successful applicants.

6 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

The City of St. John’s recognizes that engagement between the City and its citizens is an essential component of

an effective municipal government. The City views public engagement as a process – one that facilitates

dialogue with the right people, using the right tools, at the right time, on subject areas of mutual interest.

In accordance with the City of St. John’s Engage! Policy, the role of the Experts Panel in the spectrum of

engagement will fall within the realm of “consultation.” As such, City of St. John’s experts panels will be based

on the principles of commitment, accountability, clear and timely information, and inclusiveness.

Experts panels are only one of the ways to engage with the City. Where applicable the City will consider the use

of other tools to gather perspectives and input. For more information on public engagement in the City of St.

John's or to find out how to get involved or learn about what's coming up, check out the engagement page on

the City’s website. You can also check out the City’s Engage! St. John’s online engagement platform and

connect with us on Twitter and Facebook.

http://www.stjohns.ca/policies.nsf/nwPolicyNum/12-01-01?OpenDocument&Click=%22

http://engagestjohns.ca/engage

http://www.twitter.com/cityofstjohns

http://www.facebook.com/cityofstjohns



7 OTHER GOVERNANCE

7.1 REVIEW OF TERMS

Taking into account recommendations from the Panel Chair, Planning and Development Standing Committee

Chair, the City Clerk and Lead Staff, the Panel will, at the first meeting of each year, review Built Heritage Experts

Panel Terms of Reference documents. The purpose of this review will be to ensure that the operations and

function of each panel are still aligned with its defined purpose. A review template will be used to maintain

consistency. Through this review process, amendments to the Terms of Reference will be proposed and

recommended to the Planning & Development Standing Committee.

7.2 MEETING AND SCHEDULES

Built Heritage Experts Panel will meet monthly or as agenda items are determined. Meetings will take place

before corresponding standing committee meetings. The exact frequency of the Built Heritage Experts Panel

meetings will be determined by the Chair, Lead Staff, and City Clerk.

Unless otherwise specified (generally one week prior to a meeting) Built Heritage Experts Panel meetings shall

be held at City Hall and shall be closed to the public.

7.3 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CONFIDENTIALITY

Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest refers to situations in which personal, occupational or financial considerations may affect

or appear to affect the objectivity or fairness of decisions related to the panel’s activities. A conflict of interest

may be real, potential or perceived in nature. Conflict of Interest may occur when a panel member participates

in discussion or decision-making about a matter which may financially benefit that Member or a member of

his/her family, or someone with whom the panel member has a close personal relationship, directly or indirectly,

regardless of the size of the benefit.

In cases where the panel agenda or discussions present a conflict of interest for a member, that member is

required to declare such conflict; to abstain from discussion; and remove himself/herself from the meeting

room until the agenda item has been dealt with by the Panel.

Confidentiality:

All Panel members are required to refrain from the use or transmission of any confidential or privileged

information while serving with the Built Heritage Experts Panel.



Staff Liaison Name:

Signature: Date:

Chair Name:

Signature: Date:

City Clerk Name:

Signature: Date:


Title: Belvedere Orphanage Fire Questions and Answers 57 Margaret’s Place

Date Prepared: April 28, 2017 Report To: Planning and Development Committee, and

Built Heritage Experts Panel Councillor and Role: Councillor Art Puddister, chair, Planning and Development Committee Ward: 2 Issue: Questions in the aftermath of the building fire at the former Belvedere Orphanage located at 57 Margaret’s Place. Discussion – Background and Current Status: These questions regarding the Belvedere Orphanage building after the fire in April 2017 were brought to Council by Councillor O’Leary. City Planning staff and Legal staff assembled the responses. The questions and responses are being referred to Council’s Planning and Development Committee and to the City’s Built Heritage Experts Panel at the request of Councillor O’Leary. Key Considerations/Implications:


2. Partners or Other Stakeholders: Not applicable.

3. Alignment with Strategic Directions/Adopted Plans: Not applicable.

4. Legal or Policy Implications: As stated in the responses.






INFORMATION NOTE

Information Note Page 2 Belvedere Orphanage Fire

Conclusion/Next Steps: For information. Prepared by/Signature: Ken O’Brien, MCIP, Chief Municipal Planner Signature:_____________________________________ Approved by/Signature: Jason Sinyard, Deputy City Manager, Planning, Engineering & Regulatory Services Signature:_____________________________________ KO’B/dlm Attachments: Question and Answer

G:\Planning and Development\Planning\2017\Planning and Development\Planning & Development - 57 Margarets Place - Belvedere fire questions- April 28 2017 (KOB).docx

Belvedere Orphanage building, 57 Margaret’s Place

These following questions (11) regarding the Belvedere Orphanage building at 57 Margaret’s Place were referred to the Planning and Development Committee and the Built Heritage Exerts Panel by Councillor O’Leary at the Public Meeting of Council on April 10, 2017. Staff responses are included below in italics.

1) Was the property insured? If not, why not especially when the development approval was given in 2016

for condos?

The Belvedere property and buildings are privately owned. The City does not own this property. It is not illegal to own property and not insure it. Insurance is for the benefit of the property owner. The City does not check to see if owners have property insurance. The City does not regulate or monitor property insurance. The City has no legal authority to regulate insurance. The City does not know if the property was insured.

2) Did the approved development entail the reuse of this Provincially Designated Heritage building or was

demolition envisioned and planned. If demolition was anticipated, was this public information? If so, why was approval sanctioned without any discussion? An application was made to the redevelopment the property into condominiums. The City approved the development application based on both buildings remaining in place. Demolition was not contemplated. The orphanage and convent buildings are also municipally designated.

3) In the approval process was there any consideration for the present owner's ability to complete the project successfully based on his previous track record and experience with the knowledge that this company is now in receivership and that it takes a while to get to that stage. Upon submission of a development application, the City does not investigate or evaluate the financial position of the applicant’s or owner’s “track record” as part of the process. There is no legal authority to request this information. It is the City’s understanding that the owner has made a proposal to creditors under the Federal Bankruptcy Act. Proceedings under the Act are generally public information. The City would have been made aware of these facts along with the general public. A proposal to creditors is not receivership or bankruptcy; it may or may not lead to bankruptcy.

4) I understand that the current owner's intent was to develop condos. If so, did the city weigh the

prospects of success given the current poor economic climate where there is a glut of condos on the market? If not why not? The City does not evaluate a development application in light of the wider market; that is the role of an applicant and property owner, not the role of a municipality. There was wording in the 1993 St. John’s Municipal Plan that referred to the City evaluating the market when dealing with rezonings and development. That wording was removed by Council, because Council felt that such a review should rest with an applicant. If a person or business wishes to spend or risk money in a development, that is the right of the person or business to do so. The City does not have the legal authority to make that determination.

Questions and Answers Page 2 Belvedere Orphanage Fire

5) Were there any types of guarantees put in place by the city to ensure successful follow through by the developer ie. development bond, schedule deadlines, insurance requirements, property tax implications, additional fees, penalty fines etc.? Consultants are required to provide as such, why not developers? If the development had proceeded, the developer would have been required to post securities for the work of the development at various stages according to the St. John’s Development Regulations. The development did not reach that point. When consultants have insurance requirements, penalty fees and so on, they are doing work for clients. When an applicant receives development approval, the approval is valid for 2 years, and may be extended (by decision of Council) for 1 additional year. If the development does not proceed during that time, there is no penalty levied by the City; the approval simply expires.

6) Does the city do credit checks on prospective developers & their partners to determine their financial

capability to complete large complex projects in this city successfully? If not, can we institute this? The City does not have the legal authority to require credit checks or other financial information from an applicant or owner on a development. That is a private matter. The City is not a lender and does not provide monies to owners to develop properties nor does it have the legal authority to do so.

7) Is proof of property insurance mandatory for vacant buildings where they pose a threat to life and

public safety? This should be a requirement. The City does not have the legal authority to require insurance on privately owned properties. The City does not regulate property insurance and has no authority to do so. In case of a threat to life or public safety, an insurance policy alone would not protect people. The City does regulate and enforce minimum property standards for residential and commercial property through the City’s by-laws such as the Residential Property Standards By-Law and the Commercial Maintenance By-Law.

8) Will the city be apprised of the police investigation into this recent fire and the current owner’s

bankruptcy situation? The St. John’s Regional Fire Department does not investigate the cause of fires, this is done by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. The RNC will provide information regarding the investigation to the SJRFD in due course. As for the current financial status of the owner, the City would only be given information that is publicly available or that the owner or legal representative consented to releasing.

9) Will the current property owner be back charged for the city's cost associated with fighting the blaze

and it’s clean up? Or will the public have to pay for the developer’s responsibility & negligence. The St. John’s Regional Fire Department does not charge property owners after fighting a fire. It is part of the cost of providing fire protection. To date, the outcome of the investigation or the cause of the fire is not known. It is premature and irresponsible to assign blame or legal liability to any party before the investigation is complete. Any City costs to secure the property such as fencing will be placed on the property’s tax account.

Questions and Answers Page 3 Belvedere Orphanage Fire

10) Will the city consider options like doubling property taxes on vacant buildings to force developers to

get serious about development in this city? Property taxation is determined by the City of St. John’s Municipal Taxation Act. There is no legal authority to tax different types of property at different rates except in accordance with the Act. The Act does not differentiate between occupied and vacant buildings.

11) How will council ensure that the property is suitably cleaned up after the fire without leaving another

fenced off disaster zone in the neighbourhood? The City will take steps to enforce its by-laws as referenced above. It will work with the owners of the property and any person that may be appointed under the Bankruptcy Act to deal with the property. In the event that the property is not properly remediated and there is a danger or hazard to the public, the City has the authority to remediate it and charge the costs of remediation to the tax account of the property.

agenda - st. john's - may 9, 2017… · a. verbal update – hfnl letter west fire station 5....

Documents