8.b. - 1 - City of Kitchener

REPORT TO:
City Council
DATE OF MEETING:
December 14, 2015
SUBMITTED BY:
Alain Pinard, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 x7319
PREPARED BY:
Leon Bensason, Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning,
519-741-2200 x7306
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
Ward 9
DATE OF REPORT:
December 2, 2015
REPORT NO.:
CSD-15-092
SUBJECT:
Listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street on the
Municipal Heritage Register as a Non-Designated Property
of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
____________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street be listed on the Municipal Heritage
Register as a Non-Designated Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest; and
That the motion included in Appendix ‘A’ to report CSD-15-092 respecting future
considerations of certain applications that might be made for 101 Glasgow Street
/ 149 Strange Street, be approved.
BACKGROUND:
On June 1, 2015 Council deferred its consideration to list 101 Glasgow Street / 149
Strange Street on the Municipal Heritage Register as a non-designated property of
cultural heritage value or interest to October 5, 2015. The deferral was approved in
order for staff to undertake further discussions with the property owner. On September
11, 2015 staff received correspondence from the planning consultant representing the
property owner requesting a further deferral, in order to allow more time to work on the
proposed wording of a motion that would be acceptable to all parties. Consequently on
October 5, 2015 Council further deferred its consideration to list the subject property on
the Municipal Heritage Register to December 14, 2015.
REPORT:
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street is a complex of industrial buildings designed in
the early Industrial Modernism architectural style. The buildings are situated on a 14.25
acre parcel of land generally located on the south west corner of Glasgow Street and
Strange Street directly north of the rail line in the Cherry Hill Planning Community.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
8.b. - 1
Cultural Heritage Value & Significance
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street is recognized for its design, physical,
contextual, historic and associative values. The design value relates to the architecture
of the factory building (101 Glasgow Street) and former administrative office building
(149 Strange Street). Originally known as the Dominion Tire factory, the building was
constructed in 1912-13 and is a rare example of an industrial complex built in the early
Industrial Modernism architectural style. The design value of the property relates in part
to the technical achievements represented in the materials and design of the factory
including: reinforced concrete, uninterrupted floor space, increased fireproofing and
natural lighting. The administrative office building constructed in 1919 is influenced by
the design and construction of the adjacent factory buildings in terms of the use of red
brick, concrete and dentil mouldings.
The historic and associative value of the property relates to its strong ties with the
rubber and tire industry and prominent industrialists including Talmon Reider. The
factory is also an excellent example of the work of one of the 20 th century’s greatest
architects, Albert Khan (1869-1942), who also designed the Kaufman Rubber Company
building locally. Contextually, the buildings contribute to the character of the Glasgow
and Strange Street streetscapes as well as the City’s warehouse district cultural
heritage landscape. The setting is noteworthy because the property is directly adjacent
to the railway, and the entire complex is considered to be a landmark within the Region
of Waterloo.
8.b. - 2
A more complete description of the cultural heritage value of the subject property and its
heritage attributes is provided in the Statement of Significance attached as Appendix ‘C’
to this report.
Image showing part of 101 Glasgow Street
Property Owner Initial Response to the Proposed Listing
Listing non-designated property on the Municipal Heritage Register is an important step
in identifying the City’s cultural heritage resources. It does not impose restrictions or
obligations with regard to obtaining a heritage permit or heritage approval to make
alterations. Listing on the Municipal Heritage Register does increase the amount of time
the City has to issue a Building Permit for demolition (60 days), and does have
implications when an application is made under the Planning Act, by enabling the City to
require the submission of a Heritage Impact Assessment and/or a Conservation Plan.
The subject property and factory building is currently used for industrial manufacturing
and warehousing purposes. The administrative building is vacant. The property owner
originally advised staff of their opposition to the proposed heritage listing, citing
concerns that listing the property could impose additional timeline or approval
requirements and result in a difficult operational environment that could frustrate the
current operation and growth of the business.
In light of Council’s deferral and the nature of the concern expressed by the property
owner, City staff suggested to the property owner that there may be merit in drafting a
motion for Council’s consideration that would see the property being listed on the
Municipal Heritage Register, but would also provide the property owner with greater
comfort in balancing heritage and employment activity interests. A similar approach was
8.b. - 3
used by the City of Toronto in regard to the Redpath Sugar Ltd. property, which is also
active in manufacturing and is listed on the Toronto Municipal Heritage Register.
The approach taken by the City of Toronto in regard to the Redpath Sugar Ltd. property,
establishes that heritage reviews of the subject property will be undertaken with the
mutual goals of conserving the property’s cultural heritage values while preserving and
enhancing the productive and competitive nature of the economic activity that occurs at
the site. Accordingly, the policy provides certain exemptions so long as the property
continues to be designated and used for active employment uses. Kitchener Planning
and Legal staff used the policy applied to the Redpath Sugar Ltd. property in Toronto, in
drafting a motion that provides similar considerations to 101 Glasgow Street / 149
Strange Street. Such motion, included as Appendix ‘A’ to this report, was prepared in
consultation and with the input of the property owner.
Recommended Motion
City staff took the following matters into consideration in drafting the recommended
motion to be considered by Council:



The nature of the concerns expressed by the property owner, and the current
use of the property for manufacturing and warehousing;
That the imposition of a 60 day delay for the issuance of a permit to demolish a
building or structure on a listed property is a legislated requirement under the
Ontario Heritage Act and cannot be waived;
That the City’s Official Plan does provide the ability and discretion to scope or
waive the requirement to submit a Heritage Impact Assessment and/or a
Conservation Plan.
The motion drafted by City staff in regard to the listing of 101 Glasgow Street /149
Strange Street is structured to provide clarification in regard to Council’s authority with
respect to applications proposing the demolition or removal of a building or structure on
the property; and applications proposing development, redevelopment or site alteration
on the property.
Applications proposing the demolition or removal of a building or structure
The purpose of the 60 day delay for the issuance of a Building Permit to demolish a
building or structure on a listed property is to provide Council with sufficient time to
consider designation under the Ontario Heritage Act as a means of preventing the
demolition. While the City does not have the ability to waive or alter procedures under
the Ontario Heritage Act, it can define the material and information that will be placed
before Council during the 60 day notice period.
Accordingly, the motion drafted by City staff states that where the owner of 101
Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street provides their notice of intention to demolish a
building or structure in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, whether such proposal
to demolish is submitted alone or in conjunction with other planning applications, any
8.b. - 4
report and recommendation made to Council by City staff will include discussion and
consideration of the following:




The mutual goal of conserving the cultural heritage values of the lands;
The importance of the productive and competitive nature of the lands and desire
to maintain the manufacturing and warehousing activities on the lands;
The condition of the building or structure proposed to be demolished; and
Public safety considerations.
Applications proposing development not involving demolition
With respect to development applications seeking site plan approval and that do not
involve demolition or removal of a building or structure, and where the application does
not entail a change of use from the current manufacturing and warehousing activity on
the property, the recommended motion states that the requirement to submit a Heritage
Impact Assessment and/or a Conservation Plan is waived. This provides the owner with
continued flexibility in regard to development that is related to manufacturing and
warehousing activity on the property, but provides the City with the ability to continue to
require such studies where development or redevelopment is proposed for another use
(e.g. an adaptive re-use of the building).
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the city’s strategic
vision through the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
No financial implications.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM – This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in
advance of the council meeting. Members of Heritage Kitchener were informed of the
recommendations made in this report at their meeting of December 1, 2015. In addition,
delegations who appeared at Council on June 1, 2015 in regard to the proposed listing
of the subject property have received a copy of this report and have been informed of
the Council meeting.
CONCLUSION:
City staff is of the opinion that the recommended motion to be considered in support of
the listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street provides an acceptable balance
that considers both the needs and desires of the property owner and the City’s
responsibility to conserve its significant cultural heritage resources.
8.b. - 5
A letter advising of the owner’s support of the listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149
Strange Street, conditional on Council’s approval of the motion included in Appendix ‘A’,
is attached as Appendix ‘B’ to this report.
REVIEWED BY: Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range & Policy Planning
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, Deputy CAO, Community Services Department
Attachments:
Appendix ‘A’:
Motion in Regard to the Listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149
Strange Street on the Municipal Heritage Register as NonDesignated Property of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
Appendix ‘B’:
Letter advising of the owner’s conditional support for the proposed
listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street.
Appendix ‘C’:
Statement of Significance for 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange
Street.
8.b. - 6
APPENDIX ‘A’
Motion in Regard to the Listing of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street on the
Municipal Heritage Register as Non-Designated Property of Cultural Heritage
Value or Interest
____________________________________________________________________
Whereas the owner of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street (“the Lands”) has
requested that Council enact clarification within its authority under the Official Plan and
Ontario Heritage Act with respect to the future consideration of certain applications that
might hereinafter be made with respect to the Lands if they are listed in the Heritage
Register:
(1)
Demolition or Removal of a Building or Structure
Section 27(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act requires sixty days notice to the
municipality in respect to the demolition or removal of a building or structure
on undesignated lands listed in the Heritage Register, during which the
municipality may consider the designation of the lands. While the City does
not have the ability to waive or alter the procedures under the Ontario
Heritage Act, it can define the material that will be placed before Council
during that sixty day notice period; and,
(2)
Development Applications
The City’s new Official Plan contains policies requiring the submission of a
Heritage Impact Assessment and/or a Heritage Conservation Plan when
development, redevelopment and site alteration is proposed that may impact
a cultural heritage resource, but also contains a section 12.C.1.28 that allows
the City to waive or scope these requirements. This requirement of the new
Official Plan is implemented by section B.7 of the City of Kitchener
Development Manual that requires the submission of a Heritage Impact
Assessment and/or Heritage Conservation Plan prior to site plan approval.
And Whereas the City wishes to provide clarification and assistance within the limits
allowed under items (1) and (2) above,
BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1.
Demolition
With respect to notice of the intent to demolish a building or structure respecting the
Lands made pursuant to section 27(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, whether submitted
alone or in conjunction with other applications, any report and recommendation to
Council by City Staff will include discussion and consideration of the following :
8.b. - 7
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
2.
The mutual goal of conserving the cultural heritage value of the Lands;
The importance of the productive and competitive nature of the Lands and
the desire to maintain the manufacturing and warehousing activities on the
Lands;
The condition of the building or structure proposed to be demolished; and,
Public safety considerations.
Development Applications Not Involving Demolition
With respect to development applications respecting the Lands seeking Site Plan
approval and that do not involve demolition of a building or structure, if the applicable
application does not entail a change of use from the current Manufacturing and
Warehouse Uses to any other use, the requirements of section B.7 of the City of
Kitchener Development Manual are waived.
8.b. - 8
APPENDIX 'B'
Via Email: leon.bensason@kitchener.ca
Our file: P-738-14
November 25, 2015
Mr. Leon Bensason, MCIP, RPP, CAHP
Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning
City of Kitchener, Planning Division
200 King Street West, 6th Floor
Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Bensason:
Re:
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street
Proposed Listing on the Municipal Heritage Register
AirBoss of America Corp.
Further to our recent discussions regarding the proposed listing of the above subject lands on the City’s
Municipal Heritage Register (MHR) as a non-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest, on
behalf of our clients, AirBoss of America Corp. (AirBoss), please accept this letter as our formal response
to the proposed Motion from the City of Kitchener.
It is our opinion that the drafted Motion is acceptable and would benefit our client by providing some
exemptions and greater assurance in regard to balancing heritage and employment activity interests. The
drafted policy appears to acknowledge the existing use that the property is being used for (manufacturing
and warehousing), while waiving the provision to require a Heritage Impact Assessment and/or
Conservation Plan where Site Plan approval (development approval) is being sought in support of such
use. In addition, the proposed policy ensures that Council is provided with information and considers
certain objectives in applying its discretion and authority relating to demolition or removal of any buildings
or structures.
We would like to thank the City of Kitchener for working co-operatively with us and our client AirBoss
towards achieving a Heritage listing that is acceptable to all parties. Our primary concern has been
implementing a balanced policy that reflects both parties’ interests. On the basis of the Motion prepared,
we believe that this is being achieved and therefore AirBoss supports the listing of the 101 Glasgow
Street/149 Strange Street properties on the Municipal Heritage Register.
Yours truly,
Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc.
Scott J. Patterson, BA, CPT, MCIP, RPP
Principal, Senior Planner
SP/ad
Copy:
AirBoss of America Corp.
8.b. - 9
APPENDIX ‘C’
Statement of Significance
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street
Municipal Address: 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street
Legal Description: Plan 431 Lots 7-10, Plan 377 Part Lot 492, 58R-9638 Part 1, 3, 4 and 17
Year Built: 1912-13 (main factory); 1912, 1913, 1919 (main office); 1920, 1946, 1947, 1953,
1964, 1965, 1969, 1975 (additions and accessory buildings)
Architectural Style: Early Industrial Modernism or “Daylight Factory” (original factory);
Vernacular with some elements of the Classic Revival architectural style (main office)
Original Owner: Merchant’s Rubber Co. Ltd.
Original Use: Rubber Manufacturing
Condition: Good
Description of Historic Place
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street is a complex of industrial buildings designed in the
early Industrial Modernism architectural style. The buildings are situated on a 14.25 acre parcel
of land generally located on the south west corner of Glasgow Street and Strange Street directly
north of the rail line in the Cherry Hill Planning Community of the City of Kitchener within the
Region of Waterloo. The principal resources that contribute to the heritage value are the
industrial buildings.
8.b. - 10
APPENDIX ‘C’
Heritage Value
101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street is recognized for its design, physical, contextual,
historic and associative values.
The design value relates to the architecture of the factory and office. The factory is a rare
example of an industrial complex built in the early Industrial Modernism architectural style. The
factory is also an excellent example of the work of one of the 20th century’s greatest architects,
Albert Khan (1869-1942). The original 1912-13 factory was four storeys in height, measured 700
feet by 90 feet, had a symmetrical façade, had a central entrance portico, had a free-standing
power house coupled with an office block at the rear and cost $1 million to build (Mavor, 2013).
Today, the factory buildings range in height and feature: flat roofline, including: cornice and
dentil mouldings; exposed concrete frame, including exterior columns; corner towers; red brick;
concrete details; windows and window openings, including steel sash windows with and without
concrete sills and lintels; and, entrance porticos. The factory buildings are in good condition.
The office building is influenced by the design and construction of the adjacent factory buildings
in terms of the use of red brick, concrete and dentil mouldings. The office building is three
storeys in height and features: flat roof; dentil mouldings; rectangular plan; symmetrical façade;
red brick, including decorative details; window openings with concrete sills and lintels; and, the
one-storey projecting entrances with flat roof, cornice, dentil mouldings, red brick and concrete.
The design value also relates to the technical achievements represented in the materials and
design, including: reinforced concrete, uninterrupted floor space, increased fireproofing and
natural lighting. The design also took into account future requirements for higher floor loads of
up to 350 pounds of pressure to the square foot (KW Record, 1967).
The contextual values relate to the continuity, setting and landmark status. The buildings
contribute to the character of the Glasgow Street and Strange Street streetscapes as well as
the City’s overall warehouse district cultural heritage landscape. The setting is noteworthy
because the property is directly adjacent to the railway. The complex is considered a landmark
within the Region.
The historic and associative values relate to prominent industrialists, the architect Albert Khan,
the Grand Trunk rail line, the rubber industry, and war efforts.
Talmon Henry (T.H.) Rieder along with Jacob Kaufman organized the Merchant’s Rubber
Company Ltd. in 1903, which was absorbed by the Canadian Consolidated Rubber Company
Ltd. and later referred to as the Dominion Rubber System. Berlin entered a competition to
attract the factory by offering $25,000 and a 10 year tax exemption (DeRuyter, 1991). The offer
required a vote, which was won and coincided with the declaration of Berlin as a city in 1912
(DeRuyter, 1991; Mavor, 2011, The Record, 1992). The company purchased 50 acres on
Strange Street in order to construct the four storey factory (DeRuyter, 1991). T.H. Rieder was
instrumental in attracting the Dominion Tire Factory to Berlin rather than other larger and more
developed cities such as Hamilton, London and Windsor (University of Waterloo, 2014). He
realized how the factory would contribute to his goal of establishing a residential neighbourhood
on farmland west of the factory based on the Westmount neighbourhood in Montreal (Fear,
2014). In addition, the site was located close to the downtown business core, other rubber
companies and directly adjacent to the Grand Trunk rail line. The proximity to the rail line
acknowledges the influence the railway had on early industrial growth and development (Judge,
1984).
8.b. - 11
APPENDIX ‘C’
Construction of the factory began on August 1, 1912 with T.H. Rieder overseeing the
operations (Judge, 1984). The factory was designed by the architect Albert Khan who is known
as the greatest industrial architect in North American history (Mavor, 2011). The factory was
built by Caspar Braun who was a prominent local building contractor (Kolaritsch et al, 1984-85).
T.H. Rieder remained as President and General Manager of the company from 1907 until 1920
(Kolaritsch et al, 1984-85). The official opening of the factory drew 6000 people, the equivalent
of one quarter of the combined population of Berlin and Waterloo (Fear, 2014). The first tire
was produced on January 6, 1914 (The Record, 1992).
In 1917 an integral part of the factory was opened, the Rubber Machinery Shops (RMS). Built
next to the factory for the express purpose of creating machines for use in the factory, the RMS
designed and manufactured machines for use in the rubber industry (and eventually many
others) at this location until 2009 (University of Waterloo, 2014). The diversity of products
manufactured by the RMS did not compare to any other factory of similar size in Canada
(Judge, 1984).
The 40,000 square foot office building commonly referred to as 149 Strange Street was built in
1919 and served as the company’s Canadian administration headquarters until 1986
(DeRuyter, 2000). The building was originally intended to be a two storey building with a
smaller footprint but was expanded due to the growing needs of the factory (The Dominion,
1919). The building contained: the cafeteria, a root cellar, a store room, a refrigerator, a
smoking room, and a reading room (The Dominion, 1919). In addition, 22 bedrooms were
provided for male employees on the third floor as an experiment because the space was not
immediately required for other purposes (The Dominion, 1919). In response to a housing
shortage, the company formed the Dominion Housing Company on November 13, 1919 to buy
land adjacent to the factory and construct homes for rent to employees (DeRuyter, 1991; The
Record, n.d., The Record, 1992). This also enabled employees to live close to work. Houses
went up on Agnes, Dominion, Gildner and Gruhn (The Record, n.d.).
The presence of the rubber industry led to Berlin (now Kitchener) receiving such names as the
“Akron, Ohio of Canada” (Judge, 1984) and the “rubber capital of the world” (Bloomfield, 1986).
The company contributed to the war efforts through research and manufacturing of products.
The company also contributed to the history of organized labour in the City and Canada. The
first contracts to be signed by a rubber company in Canada arose from the February 1939
strike involving workers at Dominion Tire (Judge 1984; The Record, 1992). In 1964, the
company became the largest tire factory in Canada (The Record, 1992). By 1966 the company
changed its name to Uniroyal and by 1986 the company merged with BF Goodrich to become
Uniroyal Goodrich (The Record, 1992). After producing 160 million tires the factory represented
the oldest tire factory in North America and the final day of work at the Strange Street factory
was December 18, 1991 (The Record, 1992; KW Record, 1993). Today the factory is owned by
AirBoss Rubber Compounding. According to their website, AirBoss Rubber Compounding
(2015) “is the single largest custom rubber mixing facility in North America, stretching out over 1
million square feet and employing almost 300 employees.”
Heritage Attributes
The heritage value of 101 Glasgow Street / 149 Strange Street resides in the following heritage
attributes:
8.b. - 12
APPENDIX ‘C’

All elements related to the early Industrial Modernism architectural style of the factory
buildings, including:
o Varied height of buildings and additions;
o flat roofline, including: cornice and dentil mouldings;
o exposed concrete frame, including exterior columns;
o corner towers;
o red brick;
o concrete details;
o windows and window openings, including steel sash windows with and without
concrete sills and lintels; and,
o entrance porticos.

All elements related to the Vernacular with some elements of the Classic Revival
architectural style of the main office, including:
o flat roof;
o dentil mouldings;
o rectangular plan;
o symmetrical façade;
o red brick, including decorative details;
o window openings with concrete sills and lintels; and,
o the one-storey projecting entrances with flat roof, cornice, dentil mouldings, red
brick and concrete.
References
AirBoss Rubber Compounding. (2015). AirBoss Rubber Compounding, North American
Locations, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved on March 2, 2015 from
http://www.airbossrubbercompounding.com/locations/?doc=north_american_locations.
Bloomfield, E. (1986). Berlin’s Last Bonus: Or How Kitchener Became the Rubber Capital of
Canada. Waterloo Historical Socieity, 74: 6-22.
DeRuyter, R. (1991). Tire industry grew with Kitchener. The Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
DeRuyter, D. (2000). Uniroyal ex-head office on market. The Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
Fear, J. (2014). Last week’s picture: Dominion Tire plant opened 100 years ago. The Record:
Kitchener, Ontario.
Judge, M. (1984). The Contribution of Kitchener’s Rubber Industry During the Second World
War. Waterloo Historical Society, 72: 6-19.
KW Record. (1993). Goodrich site draws interest. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
KW Record. (1967). Talking business. KW Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
Kolaritsch, D., M. Horne and J. Campbell. (1984-85). Historic Property Report – Uniroyal Ltd.
City of Kitchener.
Mavor, S. (2011). Westmount: The tie that binds the twin cities: An illustrated history of
Westmount’s 100 years. Friesens Corporation: Altona, Manitoba.
8.b. - 13
APPENDIX ‘C’
Mavor, S. (2013). Rieder, rubber and romance: How Kitchener became the rubber capital of
Canada. 2013 Edna Staebler Research Fellow, Friends of the Joseph Schneider Haus
Museum, Joseph Schneider Haus: Kitchener, Ontario.
The Dominion. (1919). Dominion Rubber System cafeteria. Vol. XII, No. 1: The Modern Printing
Co., Montreal.
The Record. (n.d.). Talking business, company-built housing problem solved in 1916. The
Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
The Record. (1992). Tire plant milestones. The Record: Kitchener, Ontario.
University of Waterloo. (2014). Finding Aid: GA 217 Rubber Machinery Shops fonds. Special
Collections, University of Waterloo Library.
Photos
101 Glasgow Street (background) – Original 1912 Factory Building and 1947 South Annex
Addition & 149 Strange Street (foreground) – Administration Office
8.b. - 14
APPENDIX ‘C’
101 Glasgow Street – Detail of Original 1912 Factory Building
101 Glasgow Street – Original 1912 Factory Building
8.b. - 15
APPENDIX ‘C’
101 Glasgow Street – 1947 South Annex Addition
101 Glasgow Street (left) – 1947 South Annex Addition &
149 Strange Street (right) – Administrative Office
8.b. - 16
APPENDIX ‘C’
149 Strange Street – Administrative Office
8.b. - 17
APPENDIX ‘C’
City of Kitchener - Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluation Form
Address: 101 Glasgow Street
Period: 1912
Field Team Initials: LB / MD
Description: see also 149 Strange Street
DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE
Style
Is this a notable, rare or unique example of a particular
architectural style?
Construction
Is this a notable, rare, unique or early example of a particular
material or method of construction?
Design
Is this a particularly attractive or unique structure because of
the merits of its design, composition, craftsmanship or
details?
Does this structure demonstrate a high degree of technical
or scientific achievement?
Interior
Is the interior arrangement, finish, craftsmanship and/or
detail noteworthy?
Date: July 2, 2013
FIELD
TEAM
EVALUATION
SUBCOMMITTEE
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Notes: Field Team: need to verify if the structure demonstrates a high degree of technical or
scientific achievement; early example of day light factory (similar to Kaufman) with reinforced
concrete; 149 Strange Street is the administration building
CONTEXTUAL VALUE
Continuity
Does this structure contribute to the community or character
of the street, neighbourhood or area?
Setting
Is the setting or orientation of the structure or landscaping
noteworthy?
Does it provide a physical, historical, functional or visual link
to its surroundings?
Landmark
Is this a particularly important visual landmark within the
region, city or neighbourhood?
FIELD
TEAM
EVALUATION
SUBCOMMITTEE
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8.b. - 18
APPENDIX ‘C’
CONTEXTUAL VALUE
Completeness
Does this structure have other original outbuildings, notable
landscaping or external features that complete the site?
FIELD
TEAM
EVALUATION
SUBCOMMITTEE
Yes
Yes
Notes: Field Team: large lot; adjacent to railway; functional link to its surroundings
INTEGRITY
Site
Does the structure occupy its original site?
Alterations
Does this building retain most of its original materials and
design features?
Condition
Is this a notable structure due to sympathetic alterations that
have taken place over time?
Is this building in good condition?
HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE &
SIGNIFICANCE
Does this property or structure have strong associations with
and/or contribute to the understanding of a belief, person,
activity, organization or institution that is significant or unique
within the City?
Is the original, previous or existing use significant?
Does this property meet the definition of a significant built
heritage resource or cultural heritage landscape, as
identified in the Provincial Policy Statement under the
Ontario Planning Act?
A property or structure valued for the important
contribution it makes to an understanding of the history
of a place, an event or a people.
FIELD
TEAM
EVALUATION
SUBCOMMITTEE
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FIELD
TEAM
EVALUATION
SUBCOMMITTEE
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8.b. - 19