TO: CHAIR AND MEMBERS PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT … · districts allows municipalities to manage change and development within the area so as to ... heritage conservation districts,

Agenda Item # Page #

73 NEI bpIOZ-8295Chuck Parker

TO: CHAIR AND MEMBERSPLANNING_&_ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

FROM: JOHN M. FLEMINGMANAGING DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND CITY PLANNER

SUBJECT:CITY OF LONDON OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW

BLACKFRIARS/PETERSVILLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICTPLAN AND CONSERVATION GUIDELINES AND OFFICIAL PLAN

AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT DISTRICT

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MEETING ONTuesday,_April_29,_2014_not_before_5:30_p.m.

RECOMMENDATION

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the followingactions BE TAKEN with respect to the creation of a Blackfriars/Petersville HeritageConservation District:

(a) The proposed by-law attached hereto as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at theMunicipal Council meeting on May 6, 2014 to designate the Blackfriars/PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District (Schedule “1 “) under Section 41 .(1) of the OntarioHeritage Act and adopt the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan(Schedule “2”) under Section 41.1(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act

(b) The proposed by-law attached hereto as Appendix “B” BE INTRODUCED at theMunicipal Council meeting on May 6, 2014 to amend Section 13.3.5 (Implementation-Heritage Conservation District Plans) and Section 13.3.8 (Specific HeritageConservation Districts) of the Official Plan to identify, add a character statement andadd policies to include the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District andamend Chapter 13 (Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Policies) to add anew Figure 13-7 which all provide justification for establishment of the District andidentify important heritage attributes worthy of retention within the boundaries of theDistrict, and to adopt the Blackfriars/Petersville West Guideline Document pursuant toSection 19.2.2 of the Official Plan and add it to the list of Guideline Documents inSection 19.2.2. (ii) to evaluate future development on lands west of Wharncliffe RoadNorth within the study area but not included in the heritage conservation district; and,

(c) The properties identified in Section 3.1 of the Blackfriars/Petersville West GuidelineDocument to be listed in the City of London Inventory of Heritage Resources (theRegister) BE REFERRED to the London Advisory Committee on Heritage forconsideration of inclusion in the Register.

I PREVIOUS REPORTS PERTINENT TO THIS MATTER I1. Tuesday, April 23, 2013

2. Tuesday, May 7, 2013

3. Tuesday, May 14, 2013

4. Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Presentation to PEC

Planning Report to PEC on Options

Report to Special PEC Meeting

Notice of Appeal Report to PEC

1

_._

._.c

—.4

-

U1’7

-i:

i.,i

f.

I

-IL

_L

F,

-

.--

v

•4

—‘.-

*-

A’4-

-“-

A9enda Item # Page #

13 NEI bp/OZ-8295Chuck Parker

5. Tuesday, December 10, 2013 Report on Potential HCD Boundary to PEC

6. Tuesday, March 25, 2014 Report to PEC on Draft Plan and ConservationGuidelines

PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

To approve and implement the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District, the fifthresidential district in the City.

II RATIONALE II1. The recommended Heritage Conservation District meets the criteria for designation

under the Ontario Heritage Act and City of London Official Plan.

I I BACKGROUND IIHeritage Conservation Districts in the City of London

Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act (2005) enables municipal councils to create, by by-law, inconsultation with the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH), one or mote areas of amunicipality for designation as heritage conservation districts. Such a designation enables themunicipality to protect groups of properties that, collectively, represent a certain aspect of thedevelopment of the municipality considered worthy of preservation. The creation of suchdistricts allows municipalities to manage change and development within the area so as toprotect and enhance the heritage character there. Section 13.3 of the City of London OfficialPlan provides for the designation of heritage conservation districts in London under Part V of theOntario Heritage Act and provides some detail relating to the process that is to be followed forsuch designation. Under these policies four residential areas of London have been designatedas heritage conservation districts: East Woodfield (1993), Bishop Hellmuth (2003), Old EastVillage (2006) and West Woodfield (2009) and one commercial area Downtown (2012). TheWortley Village-Old South HCD is also currently in progress with expected completion in 2014.

The City’s Guideline document, Heritage Places (7993), identified Petersville as a potentialheritage conservation district. This report served as a guideline document to the 1989 OfficialPlan and identified a number of inner city areas which should be considered for potentialheritage conservation districts, consistent with policies in Section 19.2.2 (k) and 13.3 of theOfficial Plan and revised policies in the Ontario Heritage Act. One of the areas identified wasPetersville which comprised the east portion of the study area, east of Wharncliffe Road,particularily along the Thames River corridor. Some history, architectural history, urban design,land use and zoning justification was provided to justify its inclusion in the potential list.

In 1993 a more specific heritage study of the area was undertaken. The PetersvileNeighbourhood Project (Report to Council February 21, 1994) was largely a heritage/urbandesign study undertaking by various professionals in response to an invitation from Council andLocal Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC now LACH). It included a publicprocess and was largely supported by the neighbourhood. It was initiated in response to therecent approval of the East Woodlield Heritage Conservation District and development of theHeritage Places document. There were 57 recommendations made primarily to improve theaesthetics and facilities in the neighbourhood. There was no specific recommendation to createa heritage conservation district but recommendation #57 stated that;

2



“The City of London and the neighbourhood should declare a desire and commitment topreserve the character of the neighbourhood. This report should be used as a guide tofulfill the desire and commitment of the City and the neighbourhood to preserve thecharacter of Petersville.”

In 1999 the Potential Heritage Conservation District Priority List report was prepared byplanning staff for LACH’s review and addressed implementation of heritage conservationdistricts and the Heritage Places document. It was always intended that community groupswould initiate the HCD process and it was always anticipated that areas would move up anddown the priority list based on public interest. At that time the report listed Petersville as #13 onthe list. The list was intended to serve as a future priority list for Council consideration. Anypublic requests for changes to the priority were intended to be vetted through LACH andCouncil.

The BlackfriarslPetersville Heritage Conservation District Process

As with all heritage conservation districts in the City, this process was initiated by MunicipalCouncil in response to a neighbourhood request. Citizen concerns about recent developmentactivity in the community were outlined in a letter to Council. On April 23, 2013 PEC heard apresentation from the City Planner on the extent of development activity occurring in theneighbourhood. As a result on April 30, 2013 Council resolved;

15. That, the following actions be taken with respect to the verbal presentation fromthe Managing Director, Planning and City Planner and the Manager, DevelopmentServices & Planning Liaison and the communication, from K. and D. Rice, 2 Leslie Street,relating to Blackfriars community infill projects:

a) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back at the May 7, 2013meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the implementation ofan Interim Control By-law for the area;

b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back at a future meeting of thePlanning and Environment Committee with respect to the initiation of a City led rezoning ofthe subject area from a R2 Zone to a Ri Zone;

c) the request for a Heritage Conservation District BE PRIORITIZED on the list ofHeritage Conservation Districts that will incorporate heritage character design guidelines;

d) a public site plan meeting regarding the site plan application for 108 WilsonAvenue BE HELD;

e) a by-law BE INTRODUCED at the May 14, 2013 Municipal Council meeting, toamend By-law No. C.P.-1455-541, a by-law to designated a site plan control area and todelegate Council’s power under section 41 of the Planning Act, R.S. 0. 1990, c.P. 13 withrespect to an application for site plan approval submitted by Andrew Hines for theproperty located at 108 Wilson Avenue;

f) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult with representatives from theUpper Thames River Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources;

g) K. Rice, on behalf of area residents, BE GRANTED delegation status when theCivic Administration reports back to the Planning and Environment Committee on thismatter;

h) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to the Planning andEnvironment Committee with respect to establishing a requirement for a public site planprocess for any application where the proposed in fill development proposes a change in

3


13 NEI bplOZ-8295Chuck Parker

use and/or structure that is different from what currently exists on the site, regardless ofwhether or not the use is permitted under the current zoning; and,

i) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to include in the report noted in a) above,information relating to the recent court decisions regarding “Lodging House”uses. (2013-D04) (AS AMENDED) (15/9/PEC).

In response to the resolution, Planning staff submitted a report to PEC on May 7, 2013 and areport to LACH on May 8, 2013. Following a special PEC meeting on May 14, 2013 Councilresolved;

2. That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 6th Report of the LondonAdvisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) from its meeting held on May 8, 2013:

a) on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with theconcurrence of the Heritage Planner, the Blackfriars/Petersville Neighbourhood BEPRIORITIZED as the next potential Heritage Conservation District on the list ofpotential Heritage Conservation Districts (Heritage Places: A Description of PotentialHeritage Conservation Areas in the City of London, 1993);

b) a study of the Blackfriars/Petersyule Neighbourhood BE UNDERTAKEN for thepurpose of designating a heritage conservation district in accordance with the Termsof Reference appended as Schedule “B” of the staff report dated May 8, 2013; and,

c) subject to the approval of parts a) and b), above, the attached, revised, by-law todesignate the Blackfriars/Petersvllle Neighbourhood heritage conservation study areaBE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 14, 2073, todesignated a heritage conservation district study area for the Blackfriars/Petersyuleneighbourhood;

it being noted that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) reviewed andreceived a Report, dated May 8, 2013, from the Managing Director, Planning and CityPlanner, and heard a verbal delegation from G. Barrett, Manager, Policy Planning andPrograms, with respect to this matter;

Following the resolution Planning Staff started the process of hiring a consultant (Clause (b)) tocomplete both the Heritage Conservation District Background Study (Phase 1) and HeritageConservation District Plan and Conservation Guidelines (Phase 2). Five submissions of interestwere received in response to the Request for Proposals. Interviews and assessments were heldand Golder Associates were selected on August 1, 2013 to complete both the study and finalplan. The project team includes;

David Waverman Project Manager Golder Associates Ltd.Nancy Tausky Historian Tausky Heritage ConsultantsHillary Neary Researcher Tausky Heritage ConsultantsDon Loucks Heritage Architect 161 GroupMichael Gregoul Cultural Heritage Specialist Golder Associates LtdChristopher And reae Built Heritage Specialist Golder Associates LtdMarcus Letourneau Cultural Heritage Specialist Golder Associates LtdRebecca Robinson Landscape Architect Golder Associates LtdKyle Gonyou Cultural Heritage Specialist Golder Associates LtdGlenn Scheels Urban Planner GSP Group Inc.Andrew Morgan Urban Planner GSP Group Inc.

The City established the study area boundary for the consultant to review for possible HeritageConservation District status. The boundary is consistent with the area identified as thecandidate West London Special Policy Area which is consistent with the regulatory floodline(1937 flood event).

4

Agenda item # Page #


This study is being undertaken in a compressed timeframe, as the area is subject to a one yearlimitation on development (By-law No. LSP 3431-1 77) as the heritage study is underway. TheBy-law terminates on June 6, 2014.

An initial start-up meeting with the consultants was held on August 20, 2013. The first initiativewas the formation of a Steering Committee to work with the Consultant in the preparation of theBlackfriars!Petersville Heritage Conservation District Study and Plan. Steering Committeemembers include:

John Manness Member of LACHOliver Hobson/Wes Kinghorn Member of LACHJudy Bryant Ward CouncillorKevin Bice ResidentJan Delaney ResidentCharlene Doak- Gebauer ResidentLouise Tamblyn ResidentJoe McCarthy ResidentJulie Anne Baskette ResidentMike Bloxam Resident

On September 16, 2013 the first neighbourhood public meeting was held at St. GeorgesAnglican Church to introduce the consultants to the residents, to outline the process forcompleting the background study, to request information from area residents and to answer anyquestions. Approximately 35 people attended.

On October 30, 2013 a second neighbourhood public meeting, following notice to all propertyowners, was held with the community at St. George’s Anglican Church. This meeting provided astatus report from the consultants to the community and included the consultants’ preliminaryopinions and recommendations for a proposed HCD boundary. Approximately 50-75 peopleattended.

On November 29, 2013 a public notice was sent to property owners and on December 10, 2013a public meeting was held which involved the tabling of the Draft Blackfriars/Petersville HeritageConservation District Background Study and included a recommendation on a proposed HCDboundary. The Council resolution of December 17, 2013 states:

10. That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, thefollowing actions regarding the draft Blackfriars/Petersville Background Study BE TAKEN:

a) the proposed Heritage Conservation District boundary, as appended to the staff reportdated December 10, 2013 as Figure 2, BE ENDORSED and that a HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines be prepared for the area;

b) the draft Background Study BE RECEIVED, and circulated to the public, landowners,agencies, the Blackfriars/Petersville HCD Steering Committee and the London AdvisoryCommittee on Heritage for review and comment; and,

c) prior to final approval of the Blackftiars/Petersvllle Heritage Conservation District Plan, apublic information meeting BE HELD with the community to solicit input on the draft Planand Conservation Guidelines;

it being noted that a review of the current Residential R2 zone variation applied to propertieswithin the study area is underway to address issues related to intensification within areas thatare susceptible to flood events;

Since December 2013 the consultants have been preparing the Draft Plan and draftConservation Guidelines.

On February 12, 2014 the consultants held the third neighbourhood public meeting to introducethe draft Plan and Conservation Guidelines to the neighbourhood. Approximately 40-45 people

5



attended. A lively discussion ensued covering issues such as the need for an HCD west ofWharncliffe Road; if not, what approaches could be used to deal with development in the area;the use of individual designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and the degree of“firmness” of any Conservation Guidelines for the neighbourhood.

On Match 25, 2014 Planning and Environment Committee received the DraftBlackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan and Conservation Guidelines anddirected that they be circulated for public, agency and other City Department review.

On April 2, 2014 the consultants and Planning staff held an interactive public workshop whichconcentrated on the proposed conservation guidelines. Approximately 35 people attended.

The Public Process

In addition to the three neighbourhood public meetings and public workshop, a number ofindividual notices and Living in the City notices have been provided to the 1357 residents andthose within 120 metres of the study area boundary. Letters were sent October 17, 2013:November 29, 2013, January 31, 2014 and March 19, 2014 and Living in the City notices wereprovided October 23, 2013, November 22, 2013 and April 10, 2014. All reports and meetingmaterial is provided on the City’s website at http:/lwww.london.ca!business!PlanninqDevelopment/land-use-applications/Paqeslblackfriars-petersville-study.aspx. Planning staff, theward councillor and the consultants have also worked closely with the neighbourhoodassociation and any interested property owner.

Comments Received

All of the written and e-mailed comments are attached.

Comments were received from both residents, who want to protect and enhance the area andprevent out-of-scale development, and absentee landlords to want to protect their investmentand take full advantage of the existing zoning in place.

The biggest issue raised through the process was the extent of any proposed heritageconservation district. The consultants felt that the recommended boundary met the criteria in theOntario Heritage Act and the City of London Official Plan and could be defended based onthese criteria. Some residents on the west side of Wharncliffe Road felt they should be included.The consultants felt that the two character areas on west side of Wharncliffe Road didn’t quitemeet the criteria in the Ontario Heritage Act and could not be justified for inclusion.

Instead the consultants provided a document (Blackfriars!Petersville West Guideline Document)which included criteria for reviewing any applications or changes in the neighbourhood. Thesecriteria can be used to assess any change in the area. These criteria are just guidelines andrequire the co-operation of the landowner to comply.

The Purpose and Importance of the BlackfriarslPetersvitle Heritage Conservation DistrictPlan and Conservation Guidelines

Once the heritage value of the area has been established though consideration of criteria in theOntario Heritage Act, the Plan and Guidelines are intended to guide future changes in the areaby protecting and enhancing those elements which make it significant. Goals included in thePlan include;

1. To acknowledge, protect, and enhance Blackfriars-Petersvile’s cultural heritagevalue and interest including contributing heritage resources such as structures,streetscapes, landmarks and landscape features and understand the valuablecontribution they make to the area.

6


13 NE! bplOZ-8295Chuck Parker

2. To encourage the conservation of contributing heritage resources including buildings,landmarks, and other structures that contribute to the cultural heritage value of thedistrict.

3. To encourage the retention and maintenance of the area’s significant streetscapeand landscape features that contribute to the area’s cultural heritage value.

The Ontario Heritage Act considers heritage conservation as development. Heritageconservation is now understood as not just a curated collection of buildings; it is a managementframework that involves on-going investment and work. Indeed, there are many benefits toconserving cultural heritage, including:

• Heritage conservation fosters community revitalization;• Heritage conservation encourages cultural heritage tourism;• Heritage conservation enhances property values;• Heritage conservation creates jobs and develops skills;• Heritage conservation fosters a sense of place, encouraging distinct and attractive

areas for residents, workers, and visitors;• Heritage conservation enhances local cultural life; and,• Heritage conservation is sustainable.

A Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guideline provides strategies for fostering thecommunity’s cultural values and delineates important heritage attributes. The HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines emphasizes integration with municipal planningpolicies and processes, as well as providing opportunities to revisit and revise the HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines to address issues.

The designation of the Blackfriars/Petersvile area as a Heritage Conservation Districtdoes not stop or prevent change, planning policies and planning instruments (eg.Zoning) enforced by City staff and Council encourage, manage and shape change. Itsimply adds an extra level of consideration to any proposed change occurring in theneighbourhood.

Features of the Heritage Conservation District Plan and Conservation Guidelines

The Blackfriars/PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District Plan includes goals and objectives,principles, a review of municipal policies, new heritage conservation district policies, adescription of the heritage alteration permit process and a description of HCD implementingfeatures which include design guidelines.

Some of the highlights include:

• The recommended heritage conservation district applies to the east side of WharncliffeRoad North (except the newer commercial uses) and a strip of properties on the westside of Wharncliffe Road north of Mount Pleasant;

• Both the Kensington (Dundas/Riverside) and Blackfriars Bridges are included in theproposed HCD (see Figure 2 in the Plan);

• Separate policies are provided for Contributing and Non-Contributing HeritageResources;

• The conservation guidelines provide direction on roofs and roof accessories, chimneysand parapet walls, gables/dormers, soffits and fascias, exterior walls, cast stone andconcrete, wooden siding, stucco, porches and verandahs, doors and windows, shutters,awnings, foundations, decorative trim and details, paint and colour and utility and serviceconnections.

7



• The conservation guidelines also include hardscape (streets, off-street parking, signage,street furniture and street lighting) and softscape (residential trees, street trees andlandcaped and/or grassed boulevards) cultural heritage landscape conservation anddesign guidelines.

• In the Blackfriars/Petersville West Guideline Document two character statements havebeen prepared for properties west of Wharncliffe Road (one for the concentration of“Victory Housing” to the north and the other for the mixed housing area to the south).

One of the unique features of the Plan is Figure 3 which identifies on a map the propertieswhich are contributing and non-contributing to the heritage character of theBlackfriarsfPetersville neighbourhood. The Plan also includes policies for both types. Anotherunique feature of the Plan is that for the first time, it includes bridges, both the Blackfriars andKensington Bridge are within the boundaries of the HCD (see Figure 2 of the Plan).

The Heritage Character of Blackfriars/Petersville

Heritage Character Statement

The Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District has a long tradition as a suburbanlandscape within the City of London. Historically an independent village, the area has a historyof individual identity within London. The area’s heritage attributes illustrate the area’s heritagevalues.

From the earliest surveys and settlers, the Blackfriars-Petersville area has had an intimateretationship with the flood plain in which it resides. Home to some of the City’s richest alluvialsoil, the area has both benefitted and suffered as a result of its proximity to the North Branch ofthe Thames River. Initially settled by a small collection of individual families in the earlynineteenth century, the initial subdivision of properties and extensive surveyingresulted in the creation of some of London’s earliest suburban areas. Incorporated first asPetersville, later as London West and eventually annexed as part of London, the proposedBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District was home to the area’s working-class whosettled on the small lots within close proximity and danger of the river. The area’s earlysuburban settlers are most evident today by the various renditions and mixes of 1 and 1 1/2

storey Ontario cottage homes and similar styles spread throughout the narrow streets thathave survived the most destructive and fatal floods of 1883 and 1937.

Architecturally, the HCD exhibits a continuity of change based on a variation of working-classhousing that was built predominantly from the 1 880s to the 1930s. The majority of architecturalforms and styles are of the vernacular Ontario cottage style with various renditions and features.The homes within the HCD are reflective of modest, economical home building in the late-i 9thand early-2Oth centuries.

Amongst the modest residential dwellings remain a collection of landmarks that have continuedto be landmark features of the area. The Blackfriars Bridge has served as the earliest bridgedwater crossing into London from its western neighbours and later suburbs. Wharncliffe Road, aninitial highway for early settlers, served as an important link to settlements and for commerce inthe area. The former Empress Avenue School and St. George’s Anglican Church remain asinstitutional landmarks within the district. Labatt Park continues to operate as one ofthe oldest continually operating baseball grounds in the world.

The streetscape character is largely defined by long view sheds along narrow streets,terminating with a view of the Thames River dyke system and associated greenways andlandscapes. While the presence of mature street trees and grassed boulevards is inconsistent,there is an overall feeling of enclosure and maturity provided by the existing street trees andmatures trees within the front and back yards of residential properties, again heavily

8



reinforced by the backbone of mature vegetation along the river.

Overall, the streetscape is defined by swaths of consistent massing and set-backs of residentialdwellings, which gives the area a discernible rhythm and pattern as it is experienced along thestreetscape. This is noticeably different from the rhythms and patterns experienced withinadjacent streetscapes, such as along many parts of Wharncliffe Road, which give the area adistinct character. The Blackfriars Bridge, Thames River, and the numerous public greenspacesand parks that line the river and its dyke mark the arrival into the area, creating gatewayfeatures that further define its character.

Key Heritage Attributes

The key heritage attributes that illustrate and contribute to the cultural heritage value or interestof the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District include:

Architectural Attributes

• Various renditions of Ontario Cottage dwellings and similar styles;• Dwellings that have survived the 1883 and 1937 floods, respectively;• Modest, economical home building styles and techniques that are representative of the

area’s early working-class settlers;• Building characteristics common to the district including form, massing, type, scale, roof

pitches, and set-backs; and,• Architectural details including buff brick materials, keyhole windows and historic

fenestration, coloured and stained glass transoms, fanlights, London doors, porches,and bargeboard and gable detailing.

Streetscape Attributes

• Early historic suburban development patterns represented by the narrow internal streets,grids, walkable nature of the area, and survey types.

Landscape Attributes

• Proximity and historical relationship with the Thames River;• Long view sheds along the narrow streets that terminate with views of the Thames River

dyke system;• Associated greenways along the Thames River dyke system;• Enclosure provided by street trees and mature trees within the front and back yards of

residential properties; and,• Public greenspaces and parks.

Landmark Attributes

• Blackfriars Bridge• Labatt Park• Jeanne-Sauvé Public School (former Empress Avenue School)• St. Georges Anglican Church

These heritage, architectural, streetscape, landscape and landmark attributes provide the basisfor the establishment of the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District.

Land Use Designation and Zoning

The Low Density Residential designation in the Official Plan and zoning in the area has beenconsistent since the early 1970’s, allowing a maximum of two residential units. Thisneighbourhood had not experienced significant development pressure for multi-unit residences

9


13 NEt bpIOZ-8295Chuck Parker

as other similarily located neighbourhoods because further development is constrained by thepresence of a Provincial regulated floodplain where development is monitored by the UTRCA.However, in response to recent development trends, Council has given direction to review theOfficial Plan policies and the zoning applied to this area through a separate process and study.

Process for Implementing — Heritage Alteration Permits

After the Plan is approved and put in place the primary means of implementation is through theHeritage Alteration Permit process. This process has been in place since 1993 and has beenused for all Heritage Conservation Districts since East Woodfield. There is no cost involved buttypically it is reviewed by the Heritage Planner and LACH and comments are provided.Comments are relayed to the applicant/owner and in instances where there are disagreementsa report is prepared for Planning and Environment Committees review and then Councilapproval.

Heritage Alteration Permits are generally not required for repairs, painting and minor changesbut some determination is generally needed. Table 1 of the Blackfriars!Petersville HeritageConservation District Plan identifies what type of work requires a heritage alteration permit.The determination of the need for a Heritage Alteration Permit is to be determined by Council.However, the Heritage Planner generally reviews any proposal and prepares reports. In allprevious Heritage Conservation Districts the need for a Heritage Alteration Permit has beendetermined by Council but the City is currently considering the option of delegating authority tothe Heritage Planner. Planning staff already have Council direction to prepare a report relatingto delegation of heritage alteration permit approval.

Reason for separate BlackfriarslPetersville West Guideline Document

Through the preparation of the HCD Background Study the historic, architectural, visual, andplanning contexts evaluated across each sub-area indicated that a refined portion of the originalStudy Area warranted designation as a Heritage Conservation District. As a result, only subarea 1 (east of Wharncliffe Road North and the west side of Wharncliffe Road North north of Mt.Pleasant) was recommended for designation as a Heritage Conservation District by the Study.The HCD Study, however, did recognize that sub-areas 2 and 3 (see Figure 1 of the GuidelineDocument) have distinguishable characters. Because the challenges and concerns related toresidential intensification are present here, it appeared prudent to address the preservation ofthe character of these areas.

The consultants have provided guidelines for dealing with new development in these areas toenhance the architectural uniqueness of the two areas. It is staff’s recommendation that thisdocument be adopted as a guideline document under Section 19.2.2 of the Official Plan to beused to evaluate any changes occurring in these areas.

Recommendations

The Heritage Conservation District Plan includes a number of recommendations. Somecommentary by Planning staff is provided where needed. Other than the specific policies of thePlan they include;

1. Include the Blackfriars/Petersvile Heritage Conservation District in Sections13.3.5 and 13.3.8 (Specific Heritage ConservatIon Districts) of the Official Plan.

The recommended amendments are included in this report.

2. Continue to pursue the identification and designation of significant heritagestructures under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and apply the Heritage (HER)Zone to these structures where appropriate.

10


13 NEt bpIOZ-8295Chuck Parker

The consultants have not recommended buildings worthy of individual designation withinthe HCD because they wili be covered by Part V but have recommended buildingsworthy of individual designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act in theBlackfriars/Petersville West Guideline Document.

Process

3. The Heritage Planner should be an active review participant in the Official Planamendment, zoning by-law amendment, site plan approval, minor variance,consents, sign permit, public works and/or building permit processes within theboundaries of the Blackfriars/Petersville HCD.

4. The Urban Design Review Panel should use the heritage conservation guidelinescontained in the HCD Plan and/or Conservation Guidelines to review proposalswithin the District.

Zoning

5. The City of London should consider the development of form-based zoningregulations for the Blackfriars-Petersvile Heritage Conservation District bycreating a Special Policy Area. Such policies would be a point of reference forwhere other Official Plan policies make reference to character, form, size, scale,mass, and density and shall be used as the Neighbourhood Character Statementas intended by Official Plan poiicy3. 7.3..

6. Within the Blackfriars-Peters ville Heritage Conservation District, amend the R2and R3 zones such that:

i) Minimum front yard setback required is the average of front yard setbacksof dwellings on the same street block; and,

ii) Maximum permitted height is “7 metres or I Y2 to 2 storeys’a) Within the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District,

amend the CC and HS zones such that the minimum front yardsetback required is 0 metres; Within the Blackfriars-PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District,

b) amend the OC zone such that enlargements or additions to the mainbuilding are not permitted between the front lot line and theestablished building line; and,

c) Apply Heritage (HER) Zone overlay in the Blackfriars-PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District to properties designated under PartIV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

All of the recommendations will be evaluated through the completion of the Blackfriars/PetersvilleOfficial Plan/Zoning Study which is currently being undertaken.

Site Plan Control

7. To encourage the integration of new development with adjacent land uses,Council may require public notification and a public meeting at the Site Planapproval stage for applications for proposed development or site alteration withinthe Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District;

8. The Heritage Planner and Urban Design staff reviews should be required to ensurecompatible and appropriate development in accordance with the guidelines of theBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan;

9. A Heritage Impact Statement may be required at the discretion of the HeritagePlanner;

11



10. Elevations drawings should be required for all Site Plan applications to assess themassing, scale, appearance and design features of a proposed development orsite alteration;

11. Landscape plans may be required for site plan applications to evaluate the privateamenity space associated with new development.

Committee of Adjustment

12. The Committee of Adjustment shall consider severance applications where theresulting parcel size has a negative impact on the heritage attributes of theBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District and/or is not in keeping withthe adjacent protected heritage resources, recognizing that the general in tentof the applicable Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law are to support acontinuation of the prevailing lot fabric that has been established over time;

13. The creation of new lots or enlarging existing lots within Blackfriars-PetersvileHeritage Conservation District should be discouraged, unless resulting lot(s) areof compatible depth, width, and overall size and configuration as surroundingand/or adjacent lots;and,

14. A Heritage Impact Statement may be required at the discretion of the HeritagePlanner.

Urban Design.

14. When an Urban Design Brief is required in support of a Site Plan application, theproperty owners/authorized applicant shall have regard for the Design Guidelinescontained in Sections 8,9 and 10 of the Blackfriars-Peters yule HeritageConservation District Plan;

15. When an Urban Design Brief is required in support of a Site Plan application, theproperty owners/authorized applicant shall have regard for the City’s PlacemakingGuidelines as applicable;

16. Site Plan applications within the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage ConservationDistrict may be subject to review by the City’s Urban Design Peer Review Panelfor additional advice and input. The Peer Review Panel shall be consistent withthe policies and guidelines of the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage ConservationDistrict Plan when reviewing applications.

Demolitions

17. Any proposal for a permit under the Ontario Building Code that includes thecomplete removal of a building or structure located upon real property identifiedas having cultural heritage value or interest by the municipality under Section 27(1.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act (‘listed’ property) is considered as demolitionor removal under Section 27(3) of the Ontario Heritage Act and that suchapplications are required to adhere to the requirements of Section 27 (3), Section27(4), and Section 27(5) of the Ontario Heritage Act (which governs thedemolition and removal of a building or structure);

18. Any proposal for a permit under the Ontario Building Code that includes theremoval of a structural element (such as a wall) of a building or structure locatedupon real property identified as having cultural heritage value or interest by themunicipality under Section 27 (1.2) of the Ontario Heritage Act (‘listed’ property),and that this removal will result in the structure or building being unable to standwithout support, is considered as demolition or removal under Section 27(3) of the

12


13 NEI bpIOZ-$295Chuck Parker

Ontario Heritage Act and that such applications are required to adhere to therequirements of Section 27(3), Section 27(4), and Section 27(5) of the OntarioHeritage Act (which governs the demolition and removal of a building orstructure).

19. The demolition or relocation of contributing resources located withinBlackfriars/Petersyule Heritage Conservation District is strongly discouraged andwill only be permitted in exceptional circumstances;

20. All options for on-site retention of contributing resources must be exhaustedbefore resorting to relocation or demolition. The following alternatives must begiven due consideration in order of priority:

i. On-site retention in the original use and integration with thesurroundings;

ii. On-site retention in an adaptive reuse (see policies outlined inSection 6.11);

iii. Relocation to another site within the Heritage Conservation District;and,

iv. Relocation to another site within the City.

Open Space

21. A Tree Management Plan may be required for proposed development orsite alteration to the satisfaction of the Urban Forester to evaluate theimpacts on existing vegetation and promote conservation of maturehealthy trees as a heritage attribute of the Blackfriars-Petersyule HeritageConservation District;

22. Landscaping that complements the existing landscapes of the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District, screens parking areas andcontributes to the overall pedestrian quality and contributes to theneighbourhood’s urban forest is encouraged for all new development.Specific landscape elements will be governed by Site Plan Approvalrequirements.

23. Mature street trees are to be protected and preserved unless they present apublic safety hazard or are in a serious state of decline due to age ordisease. When removal of street trees is required, they should bereplaced with new trees of an appropriate size and species as determinedby the City of London Planning and Development Department and theUrban Forester;

24. The City is encouraged to implement a street tree planting program to fill ingaps that exist in the neighbourhood in order to enhance canopy coverage;

25. Landscaping that complements the existing landscapes of the district,screens parking areas and contributes to the overall pedestrian quality isencouraged for all new development. Specific landscape elements will begoverned by Site Plan Approval requirements;

26. The City is encouraged to adopt a heritage tree designation policy. Theprocess for the selection and designation of a heritage tree should becollaborative process between the Forestry Group, LACH, and theCity;

13



Public Works

27. Approvals for municipal works projects shall follow the Heritage AlterationPermit process as detailed in Section 6.6 of the Blackfriars-PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District Plan;

28. Retention of existing grass boulevards and street trees throughoutBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District is stronglyencouraged wherever repairs or improvements are made to roads,sidewalks or underground services. Should removal of street trees and/orboulevards be unavoidable as part of the infrastructure works, every effortshould be made to replace them upon completion of the work;

29. Existing road right-of-ways and widths ofpaved surfaces should not beincreased unless required for reasons of public health and safety or whereindicated in the Transportation Master Plan; for the provision of bike lanes(i.e. Riverside Drive as a connector route; and/or to support bus rapidtransit service along Oxford Street West);

30. City of London street signage for Heritage Conservation Districts should beimplemented by the City throughout the Blackfriars-Petersville HeritageConservation District, particularly along the bounding streetsand the public open space network along the Thames River.

31. Where applicable, the City will obtain a Heritage Alteration Permit for publicworks; it is the Heritage Planner’s discretion to require a HeritageAlteration Permit and/or a Heritage Impact Statement; and In addition to therequirements of the City’s Tree Conservation By-law (By-law No. C.P.-1466-249), the City of London shall give consideration to the identification andprotection of heritage trees in advance of any public works projects.

ImplementationlHeritage Alteration Permits

32. The City of London should create two distinct Heritage Alteration Permitapplication forms: 1) designations, and 2) alterations/demolitions;

The City currently has a heritage alteration permit process but there is a need to reviewit to discuss process, signing authority and application. Council has already provideddirection to review the process.

33. The City should develop an homeowners guide for residents and propertyowners that outlines the general goals objective and benefits of a HeritageConservation District, and provides a summary of the approval process;

34. The City should develop an information brochure and bibliography forresidents and property owners that provides more detailed informationrelating to restoration, repair and maintenance of heritage attributes inof protected heritage resource(s);

35. The City should consider providing an annual letter to property ownersoutlining their obligations under the Blackfriars-Petersville HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines;

36. Occasional workshops on heritage conservation, maintenance andrenovation should be organized in the Blackfriars-Petersvllle HeritageConservation District; and,

14


13 NE! bpIOZ-$295Chuck Parker

37. The City should explore partnerships with local heritage organizations andinstitutions to promote Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage ConservationDistrict.

38. The Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan andGuidelines should be reviewed by 2025.

PREPARED BY: SUBMITTED BY:

,

WJ. CHARLES PARKER, M.A. GREGG BARRETT, AICPMANAGER, POLICY PLANNING ANDSENIOR PLANNERPROGRAMSURBAN REGENERATION

RECOMMENDED BY:

,—

JOHN M. FLEMING, MCIP, RPPMANAGING DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND CITY PLANNER

April 4, 2014cp Icp

Y:\Shared\policy\Area-Community Plwis\PetersvilleBlackfriars Area\pIanningreportPLANHCDamendmentsapr2O1 4toPEC.docx

15



Bibliography of Information and MaterialsOZ-8295

Reference Documents:

Provincial

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Planning Act, RS.O. 1990..

Ontario Ministry of Culture. Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0. 18

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Provincial Policy Statement, March 1, 2005.

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Policy Statement, April 30, 2014

City of London

City of London. Official Plan, June 19, 1989, as amended.

West London District Plan, Consolidation, February 2, 1987

City of London. Official Plan, 1971, as amended

City of London. Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, May 21, 1991, as amended.

West London Area Improvement Plan, Match 1993

The Petersville Neighbourhood Project, February 21, 1994.

Heritage Places: A Description of Potential Heritage Conservation District Areas in the City ofLondon, 1994.

Great Near-Campus Neighbourhoods Strategy, 2008-2012

Correspondence:(all located in City of London File No. 13 NEI bp!OZ-8295 or as attached to report)

City of London Official Plan Review File 0-5231 — Special Policy Area in West London, 1997

18



Appendix “A’

Bill No. (number to be inserted by Clerk’s Office)2014

By-law No. L.S.P.-_

A by-law to designate a heritageconservation district known asBlackfriars!Petersville.

WHEREAS pursuant to Subsection 41(1)01 the Ontario Heritage ActR.S.O.1 990,c 0/18, the Council of the municipality may by by-law designate the municipality orany defined area thereof as a heritage conservation district;

AND WHEREAS pursuant to Subsection 41.1(1) of the Ontario Heritage ActR.S.O. 1990,c 0/18, the Council of the municipality may by by-law adopt a Plan for the heritageconservation district;

AND WHEREAS the Official Plan for the City of London contains policies relatingto the establishment of heritage conservation districts;

AND WHEREAS it is intended to designate the area defined by the by-law as aheritage conservation district;

The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the City of London enacts asfollows:

1. The area shown on Schedule “1” hereto annexed and forming part of this bylaw is hereby designated as a Heritage Conservation District.

2. The Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan, attached asSchedule “2” is hereby adopted.

3. This by-law shall come into force in accordance with Section 41 of TheOntario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, either on the day following the last day ofthe prescribed appeal period or as otherwise provided by subsection 41(10)of the Act.

PASSED in Open Council on May 6, 2014

Joe FontanaMayor

Catharine SaundersCity Clerk

First Reading — May 6, 2014Second Reading — May 6, 2014Third Reading — May 6, 2014

19




_H_


Schedule “2”

The Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District Plan

20



Appendix “B”

Bill No. (number to be inserted by Clerks Office)2014

By-law No. C.P.-1 284-

A by-law to amend Section 13 (HeritageResources) of the Official Plan for the Cityof London, 1989 to add theBlackfriars/Petersville HeritageConservation District.

The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the City of London enacts asfollows:

1. Amendment No. (to be inserted by Clerk’s Office) to the Official Plan for the Cityof London Planning Area — 1989, as contained in the text attached hereto and forming part ofthis by-law, is adopted.

2. This by-law shall come into effect in accordance with subsection 17(38) of thePlanning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13.

PASSED in Open Council on May 6, 2014.

Joe FontanaMayor

Catharine SaundersCity Clerk

First Reading — May 6, 2014Second Reading — May 6, 2014Third Reading — May 6, 2014

21



AMENDMENT NO.

to the

OFFICIAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF LONDON

A. PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT

The purpose of this Amendment is to recognize and add the Blackfriars/PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District to Sections 13.3.5 and 13.3.8 of the Official Plan for the Cityof London and to add the Blackfriars/Petersville West Guideline Document to Section19.2.2 of the Official Plan.

B. LOCATION OF THIS AMENDMENT

This Amendment applies to lands located within the Blackfriars/Petersville HeritageConservation District which is shown on the attached “Figure 13-7” in the City of London.

C. BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT

Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act (2005) enables Municipal Councils to create, by by-law,in consultation with the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH), one or moreareas of a municipality for designation as heritage conservation districts. Such adesignation enables the municipality to protect groups of properties that, collectively,represent a certain aspect of the development of the municipality considered worthy ofpreservation. The creation of such districts allows municipalities to manage change anddevelopment within the area so as to protect and enhance the heritage character there.Section 13.3 of the City of London Official Plan provides for the designation of heritageconservation districts in London under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and providessome detail relating to the process that is to be followed for such designation.Blackfriars/Petersville will become the fifth residential Heritage Conservation District in theCity of London.

The City’s Guideline document, Heritage Places, identified a number of possible heritageconservation districts in 1993. By Council resolution dated May 14, 2013 Council directedthat a Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District process begin. A consultantwas hired to complete both the Background Study and Plan. A Blackfriars/PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District Steering Committee was formed and consultations wereheld with the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH), landowners, agencies andother City departments and the public. Three neighbourhood public meetings and publicworkshop, a number of individual notices and Living in the City notices have been providedto the 1357 residents and those within 120 metres of the study area boundary. Letterswere sent October 17, 2013; November 29, 2013, January 31, 2014 and March 19, 2014and Living in the City notices were provided October 23, 2013, November 22, 2013 andApril 10, 2014. All reports and meeting material is provided on the City’s website athttp:!/www. london .ca/businesslPlanning-Developmentlland-useapplications/Pages/blackfriars-petersville-study.aspx. Planning staff, the ward councillorand the consultants have also worked closely with the neighbourhood association.

Throughout the process the LACH expressed its support for the establishment of aDowntown Heritage Conservation District.

The Purpose and Importance of the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage ConservationDistrict Plan

Once the heritage value of the area has been established though consideration of criteria inthe Ontario Heritage Act, the Plan and Guidelines are intended to guide any future changein the area by protecting and enhancing those elements which make it significant. Goalsincluded in the Plan include;

1. To acknowledge, protect, and enhance Blackfriars-Petersyule ‘s cultural heritagevalue and interest including contributing heritage resources such as structures,streetscapes, landmarks and landscape features and understand the valuable

23


13 NEt bplOZ-8295Chuck Parker

contribution they make to the area.

2. To encourage the conservation of contributing heritage resources includingbuildings, landmarks, and other structures that contribute to the cultural heritagevalue of the district.

3. To encourage the retention and maintenance of the area’s significant streetscapeand landscape features that contribute to the area’s cultural heritage value.

The Ontario Heritage Act considers heritage conservation as development. Heritageconservation is now understood as not just a curated collection of buildings; it is a managementframework that involves on-going investment and work. Indeed, there are many benefits toconserving cultural heritage, including:

• Heritage conservation fosters community revitalization;• Heritage conservation encourages cultural heritage tourism;• Heritage conservation enhances property values;• Heritage conservation creates jobs and develops skills;• Heritage conservation fosters a sense of place, encouraging distinct and attractive

areas for residents, workers, and visitors;• Heritage conservation enhances local cultural life; and,• Heritage conservation is sustainable.

A Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guideline provides strategies for fostering thecommunity’s cultural values and delineates important heritage attributes. The HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines emphasizes integration with municipal planningpolicies and processes, as well as providing opportunities to revisit and revise the HeritageConservation District Plan and Guidelines to address issues.

The designation of the Blackftiars/Petersvile area as a Heritage Conservation District does notstop or prevent change, planning policies and planning instruments (eg. Zoning) enforced byCity staff and Council do. It only adds an extra layer of consideration to any proposed change.

Features of the Heritage Conservation District Plan

The Blackfriars/PetersvilleHeritage Conservation District Plan includes goals and objectives,principles, a review of municipal policies, new heritage conservation district policies, adescription of the heritage alteration permit process and a description of HOD implementingfeatures which include design guidelines.

Some of the highlights include:

• The recommended heritage conservation district only applies to the east side ofWharncliffe Road North (except the newer commercial uses) and a strip of properties onthe west side of Wharncliffe Road north of Mount Pleasant;

• Both the Kensington (Dundas/Riverside) and Blackfriars Bridges are included in theproposed HOD;

• Separate policies are provided for Contributing and Non-Contributing HeritageResources;

• The conservation guidelines provide direction on roofs and roof accessories, chimneysand parapet walls, gables/dormers, soffits and fascias, exterior walls, cast stone andconcrete, wooden siding, stucco, porches and verandahs, doors and windows, shutters,awnings, foundations, decorative trim and details, paint and colour and utility and serviceconnections.

• The conservation guidelines also include hardscape (streets, off-street parking, signage,street furniture and street lighting) and softscape (residential trees, street trees andlandcaped and/or grassed boulevards) cultural heritage landscape conservation anddesign guidelines.

• Two character statements have been prepared for properties west of Wharncliffe Road

24



(one for the concentration of “Victory Housing” to the north and the other for the mixedhousing area to the south). (see Figure 2)

One of the unique features of the Plan is Figure 3 which identifies on a map the propertieswhich are contributing and non-contributing to the heritage character of theBlackfriars/Petersville neighbourhood. The Plan also includes policies for both types. Anotherunique feature of the Plan is that for the first time, it includes bridges, both the Blackfriars andKensington Bridge ate within the boundaries of the HCD.

The Heritage Character of BlackfriarsIPetersville

Heritage Character Statement

The Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District has a long tradition as a suburbanlandscape within the City of London. Historically an independent village, the area has a historyof individual identity within London. The area’s heritage attributes illustrate the area’s heritagevalues.

From the earliest surveys and settlers, the Blackfriars-Petersville area has had an intimaterelationship with the flood plain in which it resides. Home to some of the City’s richest alluvialsoil, the area has both benefitted and suffered as a result of its proximity to the North Branch ofthe Thames River. Initially settled by a small collection of individual families in the earlynineteenth century, the initial subdivision of properties and extensive surveyingresulted in the creation of some of London’s earliest suburban areas. Incorporated first asPetersville, later as London West and eventually annexed as part of London, the proposedBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District was home to the area’s working-class whosettled on the small lots within close proximity and danger of the river. The area’s earlysuburban settlers are most evident today by the various renditions and mixes of 1 and 1 1/2


Architecturally, the HCD exhibits a continuity of change based on a variation of working-classhousing that was built predominantly from the 1 880s to the 1 930s. The majority of architecturalforms and styles are of the vernacular Ontario cottage style with various renditions and features.The homes within the HCD are reflective of modest, economical home building in the late-i 9thand early-2Oth centuries.

Amongst the modest residential dwellings remain a collection of landmarks that have continuedto be landmark features of the area. The Blackfriars Bridge has served as the earliest bridgedwater crossing into London from its western neighbours and later suburbs. Wharncliffe Road, aninitial highway for early settlers served to be just as important to settlements and commerce inthe area. The former Empress Avenue School and St. George’s Anglican Church remain asinstitutional landmarks within the district. Labatt Park continues to operate as one ofthe oldest continually operating baseball grounds in the world.

The streetscape character is largely defined by long view sheds along narrow streets,terminating with a view of the Thames River dyke system and associated greenways andlandscapes. While the presence of mature street trees and grassed boulevards is inconsistent,there is an overall feeling of enclosure and maturity provided by the existing street trees andmatures trees within the front and back yards of residential properties, again heavilyreinforced by the backbone of mature vegetation along the river.

Overall, the streetscape is defined by swaths of consistent massing and set-backs of residentialdwellings, which gives the area a discernible rhythm and pattern as it is experienced along thestreetscape. This is noticeably different from the rhythms and patterns experienced withinadjacent streetscapes, such as along many parts of Wharncliffe Road, which give the area adistinct character. The Blackfriars Bridge, Thames River, and the numerous public greenspacesand parks that line the river and its dyke mark the arrival into the area, creating gatewayfeatures that further define its character.

25



Key Heritage Attributes

The key heritage attributes that illustrate and contribute to the cultural heritage value or interestof the Blackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District include:

Architectural Attributes

• Various renditions of Ontario Cottage dwellings and similar styles;• Dwellings that have survived the 1883 and 1937 floods, respectively;• Modest, economical home building styles and techniques that are representative of the

area’s early working-class settlers;• Building characteristics common to the district including form, massing, type, scale, roof

pitches, and set-backs; and,• Architectural details including buff brick materials, keyhole windows and historic

fenestration, coloured and stained glass transoms, fanhights, London doors, porches,and bargeboard and gable detailing.

Streetscape Attributes

• Early historic suburban development patterns represented by the narrow internal streets,grids, walkable nature of the area, and survey types.

Landscape Attributes

• Proximity and historical relationship with the Thames River;• Long view sheds along the narrow streets that terminate with views of the Thames River

dyke system;• Associated greenways along the Thames River dyke system:• Enclosure provided by street trees and mature trees within the front and back yards of

residential properties; and,• Public greenspaces and parks.

Landmark Attributes

• BTackfriars Bridge• Labatt Park• Jeanne-Sauvé Public School (former Empress Avenue School)• St. Georges Anglican Church

These heritage, architectural, streetscape, landscape and landmark attributes provide the basisfor the establishment of the Blackfriars!Petersville Heritage Conservation District.

D. THE AMENDMENT

The Official Plan for the City of London is hereby amended as follows:

1. Section 13.3.5 to the Official Plan is amended by adding the phrase Figure 13-7” afterthe phrase “Figure 13-6” and before the word “Council” in the second sentence.

2. Section 13 of the Official Plan for the City of London is amended by adding theattached Figure 13-7 Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District after Figure13-6.

3. Section 13.3.8 to the Official Plan is amended by adding a new section as follows:

“13.3.8. Blackfriars/Petersville”

The Blackfriars-Petersvitle Heritage Conservation District has a long tradition as a suburbanlandscape within the City of London. Historically an independent village, the area has a history

26



of individual identity within London. The area’s heritage attributes illustrate the area’s heritagevalues.

From the earliest surveys and settlers, the Blackfriars-Petersville area has had an intimaterelationship with the flood plain in which it resides. Home to some of the City’s richest alluvialsoil, the area has both benefitted and suffered as a result of its proximity to the North Branch ofthe Thames River. Initially settled by a small collection of individual families in the earlynineteenth century, the initial subdivision of properties and extensive surveyingresulted in the creation of some of London’s earliest suburban areas. Incorporated first asPetersville, later as London West and eventually annexed as part of London, the proposedBlackfriars-Petersville Heritage Conservation District was home to the area’s working-class whosettled on the small lots within close proximity and danger of the river. The area’s earlysuburban settlers are most evident today by the various renditions and mixes of 1 and 1 1/2


4. Section 19.2.2 (ii) of the Official Plan for the City of London is amended by adding thefollowing subsection;

) Blackfriars/Petersville West Guideline Document

27



OZ-82951 Chuck ParkerFigure 13.7

Blackfriars-Petersvi lie Heritage Conservation District

LJ U UU UUL

ORD SWFO5tE

OO0nUflO0faW00n

))

°a7°°

IIo? /°& Icz’ L ° /

Li

F ARTO N S

]

iUiI/ -, — —

Blackfriars-Petersville60 TO 120•• Heritage Conservation District

___________

29

UPPER THAMES RiVERCONSERVATION AUTHORITY

The ThamesA Canadian

Heritage River

‘Inspiring a Healthy Environment”

April 15, 2014

The Corporation of the City of LondonPlanning Division206 Dundas StreetLondon, Ontario N6A 4L9

Attention: Chuck Parker (sent via e-mail)

Dear Mr. Parker:

Re: File No. 13 NEI/OZ-8295 Possible Official Plan Amendments — BlackfriarsfPetersville HeritageConservation District Plan and Conservation Guidelines

The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on thefollowing reports:

1. Draft Btackftiars-Petersville Heritage conservatioii District Plan & Guidelines prepared by Golder Associates(February 2014)

2. Technical Memo — Btackftiars-Petersvitte StttdvArea Recommendations prepared by Golder Associates(February 25, 2014)

WEST LONDON FLOOD PLAIN AREA

The proposed Heritage Conservation District is regulated by the UTRCA in accordance with Ontario Regulation 157/06,made pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. The regulation limit is comprised of the RegulatoryFlood Plain associated with the Thames River in a potential Special Policy Area (SPA) known as the West London SPA.The UTRCA has jurisdiction over lands within the regulated area and requires that landowners obtain written approvalfrom the Authority prior to undertaking any site alteration or development within this area including filling, grading,construction, alteration to a watercourse and/or interference with a wetland.

The Blackfriars/Petersville neighbourhood is situated in the West London Flood Plain Area which is protected from theThames River by the West London Dyke. While the dyke protects this neighbourhood to the 100 year flood elevation, ifthe dyke was overtopped or failed during a flood event, large areas of this neighbourhood would be inundated with upto3 - 4 metres of flood water. The UTRCA manages upstream flows during flood events using a system of flood controlstructures and works with the City of London on the management of the West London Dyke. Even with these efforts, thearea is still at risk and for the purposes of flood plain management and for the interpretation of Provincial and UTRCAFlood Plain Policy, the land in the West London Flood Plain is considered to be floodway.

The West London! Blackfriars!Petersville neighbourhood is an existing viable community that is in the floodway and assuch, it could be deemed to be a Flood Plain Special Policy Area (SPA). Application for SPA status mtist be made by thelocal municipality and the proposed designation and guiding policies must be supported by the local ConservationAuthority and ultimately approved by the Minister ofNatciral Resources (MNR) and the Minister of Municipal Affairsand Housing (MMAH). The UTRCA and the City of London have disctissed SPA designation for the WestLondon neighbourhood in the past. As such the West London Neighbourhood has been identified as a ‘Candidate SPA”

1424 Clarke Road, London, Ont. N5V 5B9 ‘Phone: 519.451.2800 fax: 519.451.1188 Email: infollne(thamesriver.on.ca www.thamesriver.on.ca

UTRCA Commentsfile No.13 NEI/OZ-8295

in the City of London Official Plan and the City developed interim policies which were endorsed by the UTRCA. Weunderstand that the application package was submitted to the MNR in 1991 but the Province never approved the SPA forWest London. The UTRCA encourages the City to proceed with re-activating the application in order to obtain theformal approval of the Flood Plain SPA for West London.

In the absence of an approved Flood Plain SPA for West London, the UTRCA, in cooperation with the City of London,has followed Interim Policies for this Candidate SPA. These policies were originally developed in 1991 in anticipationof the pending Flood Plain SPA application process and allowed some flexibility. It was anticipated that these policieswould be implemented as the result ofa Flood Plain SPA review. It is noted that without these Interim Policies, all newdevelopment in the floodway would be prohibited in accordance with Provincial Policy. The UTRCA has expressedconcern over the extended period of time which these Interim Policies have been applied. It is important that policies toallow development that does not meet the minimum Provincial Standard receive the approval of the MNR and MMAHand UTRCA recommends that the flood Plain SPA for West London be pursued by the City.

DRAFT BLACKFRIARS-PETERSVILLE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN & GUIDELINES1. The Plan should include a greater emphasis that this proposed heritage conservation district (HCD) is located entirely

within the floodway of the Thames River, in a Candidate Special Policy Area (SPA). Its location within the floodplain is a key factor that influences potential improvements in this community. As indicated, the City of London andthe UTRCA are operating tinder an interim set of policies in anticipation of an approved SPA for West London.

2. Both Section 3.0 and 4.0 of the Heritage Plan should make reference to Section 3.0 Protecting Public Health andSafety of the Provincial Policy Statement which sets out the policies for natural hazards. Under the discussion ofHeritage conservation is development, a reference to public health and safety shottld be inclttded.

3. The Authority understands that the intent is to keep the HCD Plan and Guidelines separate from the land useplanning and policies for this area yet Section 5.0 deals with Mtinicipal Policies. As previously noted, werecommend that this section be revised to emphasize this neighbourhood/HCD’s location within the flood plain ofthe Thames River and based on the current policies, development opportunities are extremely limited.

4. Section 5.4.1 makes reference to creating a Special Policy Area for the HCD. Given that this neighbourhood hasbeen identified as a potential Special Polic Area with respect to flood plain planning, this terminology is confusing.We recommend that this term be replaced with Specflc Residential PolicyArea. This Section should also include areference to the policies in Section 15.6 of the OP which deals with Flood Plain Lands.

5. Section 5.5 Zoning By-Law should include a reference that the PPS does not permit the intensification of usethrough zoning in this neighbourhood.

6. Section 5.7 Severance and Minor Variances should indicate that the PPS does not permit lot creation andintensification of ttse through the minor variance process in this community. The London Consent Authority is theapproval body for severance applications.

7. Section 5.8 Bttilding Permits should also make reference to the fact that a Building Permit cannot be obtained untilsuch time as the necessary approvals have been obtained from the UTRCA through our Section 28 permit process.

8. Section 6.10 New Development makes reference to opportunities for infill development or limited redevelopmentwithin the Blackfriars-Petersville HCD. Again we caution that under the current floodway policies that the PPS doesnot permit development and site alteration within the floodway. The UTRCA has been operating under an interimset of policies in anticipation that the City would be successful in its pursuit of an approved SPA for thisneighbourhood..

9. Section 7.0 Heritage Alteration Permit Process, how do the approval processes for a Section 28 permit from theUTRCA and a building permit from the City of London Building Division fit into the Heritage Alteration Permit

2

UTRCA CommentsFile No.13 NEI/OZ-8295

Approvals flow Chart?

10. Section 7.2 Heritage Alteration Permit & Other Permits should also make reference to the UTRCA’ s approvalprocess under Ontario Regulation 157/06, made pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act.

11. Section 7.3 Emergency Repairs, if an Emergency Approval is required, we recommend that the UTRCA becopied on the approval of the necessary works.

12. Section 10.2.13 Fottndations includes a provision for the need to rebuild deteriorating foundation walls. Whilethe UTRCA will permit the replacement of fotmdations, we will not allow for the excavation ofthe foundation toestablish a living space or storage space. floodproofing measures including floodproofing the design of thefoundation are a critical element of our Section 28 approval process in West London.

13. Section 11.4 Parks and Open Space makes reference to the West London Dyke and the flood protection itprovided. As indicated, the West London Dyke continues to protect the Blackfriars-Petersville neighbourhoodand we recommend that the word provided be replaced with provides.

TECHNICAL MEMO - BLACKFRIARS-PETERSVILLE STUDYAREA RECOMMENDATIONS1. Section 1.0 Introduction notes that the policies and recommendations for the proposed HCD are intended to be

considered by City Staff City Cottncil andproperty owners when reviewing developmentproposals. We recommendthat and other approval agencies be added which would include the UTRCA which hasjurisdiction over this entireflood plain area.

2. We recommend that Section 3.4 Building Permits include the need for Section 28 approvals from the UTRCAbefore a building permit can be issued.

Thank yoti for the opportunity to comment. As indicated, the UTRCA If you have any questions, please contact theundersigned at extension 293.

Yours truly,UPPER THAMES RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY

Christine CreightonLand Use PlannerJB/CC/cc

Enclosure — Regulations Mapping (please print on legal size paper to ensure that the scales are accurate)

c.c. UTRCA — Jeff Brick, Co-ordinator of Hydrology & Regulatory ServicesMark Snowsell, Land Use Regulations Officer

3

repre

sanu

ban

orucy

vne9n

..

tR

egulationL

imit

9.gcccsc’s9

nrc

C’

r—cebprrt

rI$

rca

‘S

1’jd

Sanc

a-at

si

1$

rS

.,an

dw

itC

ab

09,9

15,r-

Legend

Road

L.baIs

(1:64K)

Assessm

ent

Parcel

Watercourse

-Id

ed

D0Q

SpecIal

Policy

Area

MN

RW

etlandU

nit(M

ay2011)

Evaluated

Wetland

(MN

R(

Unevaluated

Wetland

(UT

RC

A)

London

Hazard

FL

D2W

—R

erre

wiV

ae.

Suer

Slope

—T

oeE

zawor

-Sic

.,S

lop.

lop

otslo

pa

[]F

loodingH

azard

QE

rosionH

azard

::W

etlandInterference

Regulation

Lim

it

Ulackfliars-P

etersvilleS

tudyN

ea

Cleated

By

CC

Apr4

14,2014

ton

Lrtl

doped

nd

on

Ru.

nrap

01lradoboitn

.10

R.

15lt6

raider

OR

eg97014,

rwrn

doo

edoe

ofR

.zaird

itre

R.g

o01S

ntn

rutn

rayb,o

inU

TA

CA

Aw

iioia

aoph

oy

01ra

odn

B,nre

B,rC

r&0

100

aomFonda

or

lobule

0kmO

ron

up

on

An

efn

rrrab

on

.nd

200400

c.b

up.o

beA

noora

ladorc

.P

lea,.

_...o

ran

yth

arrv

nup

oaia,o

rlo

.nro

nA

e.fltO

ilnr.

orlo

nreto

npr,o

rded

Sasc

e..D

ali

wind

wid

e.Ito

raW

e,

me

Ordm

noU

nmE

Tof

1440441C

ow

an

,.,C

apyr-çti

SO

rWO

S.P

utt

to,C

lonto

,C

IAO

fw

iden

2A

erialP

tr040g$.phyC

op

yrN

Sm

Foil

tale

San

or-a

wirO

Aw

ilP

ftlourap

hy

Co

pn

lgtO

©2

0l0

So

w..’,

PrAdo,

tooC

hat

UPPE

RT

HA

ME

SR

IVE

Rm

etresC

opyright02014

LFTRC

A



Responses to Public Liaison Letter and Publication in “Living in the City”

Telephone WrittenlE-Mail

Kevin and Daphne Bice/2 Leslie StreetBarb MacQuarrieCindy WilsonMike HorleyBart StoroniaskiMarianne McCoy/22 Wyatt StreetR. ColinsBarb MarcelDaniella Horley/89 Wilson AvenueCharlene Doak-GebauorAlfredJeanne MasonCarmen Richter/i 3 Cummings AvenueJason Mychajluk/34 Warret Avenue,Simcoe —

owner 400 Oxford St. W and 35 St. AndrewTim Armstrong/i 8 Gower StreetPeter Stavrou (Princeton Properties)/i 16Chepstow Close,London-owner of 55 and 129Wharncliffe Road and 85 RiversideBob GoodenGehI Martin (Retro Properties)/i2 QueensQuay West. TorontoPaula Lombardi (Siskinds)/680 Waterloo St —

residents lawyerAlan R. Patton (Patton Cormier &Associates)/i5i2-i40 Fullarton St., LondonAllison Vickerd/8 Empress AvenueAngela GouletChristine Kelsey/6 St. Patrick StreetChris PehikeJoe Mc Carthy/i6 Moir StreetDavid Medcalf (Kirwin Fryday MedcalfLawyers/i 04-140 Fullarton St.Talbot Centre,LondonJulie-Anne Lambourn BasketteMike BloxamWilliam GudgeonLynne Deschamps/89 Riverside DriveMrs. Warner/Empress AvenueBob Morrison (Southside Construction)Terry Guest/i 86 Wharncliffe Road NorthAngela Van Niekerk, 147 Paul StreetDonald CornellLinda SimpsonFrank KellyServanne Woodward, 583 Ridout St. N.Mike Lasky, 240 Wharncliffe Rd N.Hans Jastrau, 53 Cavendish

16

Parker, Charles

From: Servanne WoodwardSent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 1:49 PMTo: Parker, CharlesSubject: Blacktriar heritage conservation district plan 13 NEI b/OZ-8295

March 27 2014

object: Blackfriars/Petersville heritage conservation district plan and conservation guidelines.

Dear Chuck Parker:

I believe that such a plan is sound and a good idea. I would like you to consider expanding to the blackfriarbridge so that the structure remains and I would like you to consider my home, 583 Ridout Street North and thefew more rows of houses such as those on Talbot St., Albert street and down to the museum as well.

Sincerely yours,Servanne Woodward

1

Parker, Charles

From: Donald Cornell -

Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 10:01 AMTo: Parker, CharlesCc: Donald Cornell;• ; ben billings; Bryant, Judy; Fontana, Joe;

Barber, Jim;Subject: RE: Blackiriars

Good morning Charles, thank you for your timely reply, my reasoning to write you, was that from the recent“mapping” sent to me by Blackfriars Assoc. did NOT show that the Blackfriars Bridge was encompassed. The“mapping” stops short at the western edge of the Thames River bank, unless I am mistaken? and does notcross, nor encircle the bridge? across the river. Am I wrong? As for hiring another “expert”, that will cost thetaxpayers many more unaffordable dollars, I am disapointed, we have more than enough staff at City Hall andindeed Provincial staff that are sufficiently skilled and qualified to carry out that process. Why, andWHO decides to hire EXTRA and OUT of OFFICE “help” that in this case is not needed, nor possibly evenR EQU IRE D.I have to assure you, that with the recent losses of good paying jobs within the City of London, the taxpayerscannot afford these foistings.Can ANYONE explain to me, and voters, the NEED to impose these expenses?What the heck has the enviroment has to do with SAVING the BRIDGE?Traffic is just diverted away from our residential area (as it should be) and allows residents to enjoy cleaner air(somewhat) and less noise pollution (much) and traffic congestion on the MINOR roads within the Blackfriarsarea., with the current closing of the bridge to any form of motorised traffic. GOOD JOB!!The City should upgrade, along with the Feds and Prov govts.the EXISTING main corridors, and not just“loading” traffic onto residential corridors that are “convenient”ANYWHERE in the City. That might engender “shovel jobs”, which will CERTAINLY improve our economy.Hiring over educated enviromentalists (few) does NOTHING for our economy, first they are more than likely“out of town” and secoundly thay don’t need the money as do working folks. Thats enough, thanks forlistening, please forward on..

Kind regards Donald and Shirley Cornell.

From: [email protected]:CC:[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]: RE: BlackfriarsDate: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:03:32 +0000

Good morning Donald. Both the Blackfriars and Dundas Street bridges ARE included within the draftBlackfriars/Petersville HCD Plan boundaries (see page 27 of the Draft Plan at http://www.london.ca/business/PlanningDevelopment/Iand-use-applications/Pages/blackfriars-petersville-study.aspx ). The Blackfriars Bridge has also beenindividually designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act since 1992.

1

Whether the bridge is used for v. Jes and/or pedestrians is a separate issue iich has not been decided by Council. Iunderstand that a consultant is in the process of being hired to do an Enviornmental Assessment fEA) of the Bridge. I willpass your comments along to them.

From:Sent: Saturdiy, March 22, 2014 4:01 PMTo: Parker, Ch”lesCc: i; Donald Cornell; ben billings;

— ntana, Joe; Bryant, JudySubject: Blackfriars

Mr Parker, May I ask why the Blackfriars Bridge is NOlincluded?If not, why not, and further can the bridge still be added?Next, we live on Blackfriars Street, and with the current closing of the bridge, we have been blessed withpeace and quiet and would like to see it kept that way.The bridge is a treasured North American antique, NEVER built for motorised / heavy traffic.Be SURE that to allow it to reopen in the future to motorised trafic will eventually destroy the bridge, withoutdoubt. It might take some time, BUT it will happen, and maybe with loss of life!! Anew bridge is certainly notthe answer. The community has the chance to incorporate the bridge as a walkway only, and to blend it withLabatt Park, landscape the thing with planters etc, paint it it Victorian colours, make it a small touristattraction that all the residents of London can be proud. Just look at what our big brother in London Englandhas done with his bridges!!!!Our City, year or so ago, allowed heavy duty commercialisation along Blackfriars Street!!!!!NOW, all of a sudden the social elite/chattering class want a heritage designation, which is fine, but wherewere they when a few of us fought a major developer? We did not hear from THEM, but now becausedevelopers may be threatening THEIR property values, they come out of the wood work!!, all of a SUDDEN,wanting a heritage designation, a move frankly that is to thwart the legal zoning process!! If they wanted aheritage designation so bad, why did they not apply MANY MOONS AGO?I do think though that the end product may well be avantageous to all residents, BUT< WE HAVE TO INCLUDETHE BRIDGE, if possible.Thanks for your time Donald and Shirley Cornell.

2

nParker, Charles

From: Angela Goulet - —

Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 4:34 PMTo: Parker, Charles; [email protected]; Menard, DonCc: kevin bice; pindler; Louise TamblynSubject: Feedback- Blackfriars HCDAttachments: Blackiriars Heritage Permits.pdf; Feedback_Pehl ke.pdf; Feedback_Kelsey.pdf;

Feedback_McCarthy.pdf; Steering commitee heritage permits comments.doc;PICO3-14FEB12 heritage permits comments.doc

Good afternoon,

Last week the Blackfriars Neighbourhood Association Steering Committee sentan email to our distribution list requesting feedback on Heritage Permitsrequirements.This resulted in some reasoned and thoughtful responses.

Please find attached a doctored version of the Heritage Permit chart. Thisadjusted chart reflected the Steering Committee’s vision and was to be used as astarting point for community discussion.Also attached are three emailed responses from Blackfriars residents, along withtwo attachments that were sent by Mr. Joe McCarthy with his emailed response.

The Steering Committee will encourage all residents of the area to attend the nextand last public meeting to discuss further their opinions on what type of changesto houses/properties should require Heritage Permits.

Thank you,Angela Goulet, on behalf of the Blackfriars Neighbourhood Association Steering Committee

1

+ Heritage Alterations Permits

Heritage Alteration Permit Required?

Type of Work Non ContributingContributing ResourceResource

New or addition

interior renovation No NoErection of a new building or structure on same property Yes YesAddition or major alteration visible from the Street Yes YesDemolition of an existing structure (Demolition Permit) Yes No

Erection of a small outbuilding not visible from the street and not requiring aNo NBuilding Permit

Relocation of an existing structure to another location Yes- No

Windows

Repalrofbrokenwindowpanestooriglnalspeclfications No NoWindow replacement, same material, size, and design No NoWindow replacement different material size or design No NoWindow open removal or addition, including skylight No NoShutter replacement, same material, size, and design No NoShutter replacement, different material, size, or design No NoShutter removal or addition No No

o1Ier IBI LI GSP Tausky Heritage 2.12.2014

Associates GROUP ConsultantsLondon

4Th


Heritage Alteration Permit Required?Type of Work Non ContributingContributing Resource

Resource

Doors

Door replacement same material size and design No NoDoor replacement, different material, size, or design No NoAddition of storm or screen door No NoDoor opening removal or addition No No

Root

Re-roofing same matenal and colour No No

Re-roofing, different material or colour No No

Alteration to roofline Yes Yes

PorchNerandah

Porchlverandah replacement, same materials, size, and design No No

porch/verandah replacement, different materials, size, and design No No

Porch/verandah removal or addition Yes No

GoIder IBI GSP Tausky Heritage 2.12.2014GROJP Consultants

London


Heritage Alteration Permit Required?Type of Work Non ContributingContributingResource

Resource

Siding, Soffit & Fascia, and Trim

Soffit and/or fasda replacement, same materials No NoSotfit and/or fascia replacement, different materials No No

Replacement of siding/cladding same material colour No No

Removalñnstallation of cladding/siding, different material, colour No NoReplication of decorative trim same matenal colour No NoDecorative trim removal or addition, different material, colour No No

Other Exterior Alterations

New or increased parking areas (especially front yard) Yes YesRepaving of existing parking area without expansion, same material No NoRepaving of existing parking area without expanslon different material No No

Addition or alteration visible from the street (e.g. solar panel) Yes YesChimney repenting same material design No No

Go1der IBI IGSP Tausky Heritage 2.12.2014

- Associates GROUP ConsultantsLondon

Bla

ckfr

iars

Her

itage

Per

mit

s

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

red?

Do

Isu

pp

ort

req’

mT

ype

ofW

ork

Con

trib

utin

gN

onC

ontr

ibut

ing

for

per

mit

?W

hyR

esou

rce

Res

ourc

eN

ewor

addi

tion

Inte

rior

reno

vati

onN

oN

oE

rect

ion

ofa

new

build

ing

orY

esY

esY

esst

ruct

ure

onsa

me

prop

erty

Add

itio

nor

maj

oral

tera

tion

visi

ble

Yes

Yes

Yes

from

the

stre

etD

emol

itio

nof

anex

istin

gst

ruct

ure

Yes

Yes

Ifth

ego

alis

tobe

isco

nsis

tent

wit

hth

ecu

ltur

alan

dso

cial

(Dem

olit

ion

Per

mit

)hi

stor

yof

the

area

,an

dpl

aces

valu

eon

the

ecce

ntri

city

and

dive

rsit

yof

the

area

then

“non

-con

trib

utin

g”re

sour

ces

shou

ldre

quir

ea

perm

itas

they

doin

fact

cont

ribu

teto

thos

efa

ctor

s.E

rect

ion

ofa

smal

lou

tbui

ldin

gno

tN

oN

oIf

itis

not

visi

ble

from

the

stre

et,

itdo

esno

tim

pact

the

visi

ble

from

the

stre

etan

dno

tbu

ilt

form

orap

pea

rance

ofth

est

reet

.T

here

are

oth

erre

quir

ing

aB

uild

ing

Per

mit

exam

ples

inth

isdo

cum

ent

that

qual

ify

whe

ther

the

alte

rati

onis

visi

ble

orno

t.A

ddit

iona

lly,

the

erec

tion

ofan

yst

ruct

ure

issu

bjec

tto

perm

itti

ngan

dm

inor

vari

ance

appl

icat

ions

alre

ady.

Rel

ocat

ion

ofan

exis

ting

stru

ctur

eto

No

No

Thi

ssh

ould

beli

mit

edto

relo

cati

onth

atta

kes

out

of,

oran

oth

erlo

cati

onin

tost

reet

view

.

Win

dow

sR

epai

rof

brok

enw

indo

wpa

nes

toN

oN

oor

igin

alsp

ecif

icat

ions

Win

dow

repl

acem

ent,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ial,

size

,an

dde

sign

Win

dow

repl

acem

ent,

diff

eren

tN

oN

om

ater

ial,_

size

,_or

_des

ign

Win

dow

open

rem

oval

orad

diti

on,

No

No

incl

udin

gsk

ylig

htS

hutt

erre

plac

emen

t,sa

me

mat

eria

l,N

oN

osi

ze,

and

desi

gnS

hutt

erre

plac

emen

t,di

ffer

ent

No

No

mat

eria

l,si

ze,

orde

sign

Shu

tter

rem

oval

orad

diti

onN

oN

o

D )

Bla

ckfr

iars

Her

itage

Perm

its

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

ted?

Do

Isupport

req’

mT

ype

ofW

ork

Con

trib

utin

gN

onC

ontr

ibut

ing

for

perm

it?

Why

Res

ourc

eR

esou

rce

Doo

rsD

oor

repl

acem

ent,

sam

em

ater

ial,

No

No

size

,an

dde

sign

Doo

rre

plac

emen

t,di

ffer

ent

No

No

mat

eria

l,si

ze,

orde

sign

Add

itio

nof

stor

mor

scre

endo

orN

oN

oD

oor

open

ing

rem

oval

orad

diti

onN

oN

o

Roo

fR

e-ro

ofin

g,sa

me

mat

eria

lan

dco

lour

No

No

Re-

roof

ing,

diff

eren

tm

ater

ial

orN

oN

oco

lour

Alt

erat

ion

toro

ofli

neY

esY

esP

orch

/Ver

anda

hP

orch

/ver

anda

hre

plac

emen

t,sa

me

No

No

mat

eria

ls,

size

,an

dde

sign

Por

ch/v

eran

dah

repl

acem

ent,

No

No

diff

eren

tm

ater

ials

,si

ze,

and

desi

gnP

orch

/ver

anda

hre

mov

alor

addi

tion

Yes

No

) )

Bla

ckfr

iars

Her

itag

eP

erm

its

) )

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

ted?

Do

Isupport

teq’

mT

ype

ofW

ork

Con

trib

utin

gN

onC

ontr

ibut

ing

for

per

mit

?W

hyR

esou

rce

Res

ourc

eS

idin

g,S

offi

t&

Fas

cia,

and

Tri

mSo

ffit

and

/or

fasc

iare

plac

emen

t,N

oN

osa

me

mat

eria

lsSo

ffit

and/

orfa

scia

repl

acem

ent,

No

No

diff

eren

tm

ater

ials

Rep

lace

men

tof

sidi

ng/c

ladd

ing,

No

No

sam

em

ater

ial

Rem

oval

/ins

tall

atio

nof

No

No

clad

ding

/sid

ing,

diff

eren

tm

ater

ial,

colo

urR

eplic

atio

nof

deco

rati

vetr

im,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ial,

colo

urD

ecor

ativ

etr

imre

mov

alor

addi

tion

,N

oN

odi

ffer

ent

mat

eria

l,co

lour

Oth

erE

xter

ior

Alt

erat

ion

sN

ewor

incr

ease

dpa

rkin

gar

eas

Yes

Yes

(esp

ecia

lly

fron

tya

rd)

Rep

avin

gof

exis

ting

park

ing

area

No

No

wit

hout

expa

nsio

n,sa

me

mat

eria

lR

epav

ing

ofex

isti

ngpa

rkin

gar

eaN

oN

ow

itho

utex

pans

ion,

diff

eren

tm

ater

ial

Add

itio

nor

alte

rati

onvi

sibl

efr

omN

oIt

hink

anex

cept

ion

shou

ldbe

mad

esp

ecif

ical

lyfo

rso

lar

the

stre

et(e

.g.

sola

rpa

nel)

pane

ls.

Itse

ems

inev

itab

leth

atgo

vern

men

tsu

bsid

ies,

tech

nolo

gica

lad

vanc

esan

dth

epe

ndin

g40

%in

crea

sein

hydr

ora

tes

will

mak

eso

lar

pane

lsa

feas

able

real

ity.

Par

tof

pres

ervi

nga

neig

hbou

rhoo

dm

ust

incl

ude

anal

low

ance

toup

grad

eto

new

tech

nolo

gies

soth

atbu

ildin

gsre

mai

nha

bita

ble

and

affo

rdab

le.

Isee

this

asbe

ing

inth

esa

me

spac

eas

repl

acin

gsi

ngle

pain

win

dow

sw

ith

trip

lepa

ne,

repl

acin

gw

ood

soff

its

with

vent

edal

umin

umso

ffit

set

c.C

him

ney

repo

inti

ng,

sam

em

ater

ial,

No

No

desi

gn

Bla

clcf

riar

sPlC

O3-

14Fe

b12

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

red?

Do

I support

Typ

eof

Wor

kC

ontr

ibut

ing

Non

Con

trib

utin

gre

q’m

for

Why

Res

ourc

eR

esou

rce

perm

it?

New

orad

diti

onIn

teri

orre

nova

tion

No

No

Ere

ctio

nof

ane

wbu

ildin

gor

Yes

Yes

Thi

ssh

ould

belim

ited

tone

wbu

ildi

ng/s

truc

ture

visi

ble

from

the

stru

ctur

eon

sam

epr

oper

tyst

reet

.A

ddit

ion

orm

ajor

alte

rati

onvi

sibl

eY

esY

esY

esfr

omth

est

reet

Dem

olit

ion

ofan

exis

ting

stru

ctur

eY

esN

oY

es(D

emol

itio

nP

erm

it)

Ere

ctio

nof

asm

all

outb

uild

ing

not

No

No

visi

ble

from

the

stre

etan

dno

tre

quir

ing

aB

uild

ing

Per

mit

Rel

ocat

ion

ofan

exis

ting

stru

ctur

eto

No

Thi

ssh

ould

beli

mit

edto

relo

cati

onth

atta

kes

itou

tof

,or

into

stre

etan

oth

erlo

cati

onvi

ew.

Win

dow

sR

epai

rof

brok

enw

indo

wpa

nes

toN

oN

oor

igin

alsp

ecif

icat

ions

Win

dow

repl

acem

ent,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ial,

size

,an

dde

sign

Win

dow

repl

acem

ent,

diff

eren

tN

oA

perm

itsh

ould

beno

tbe

requ

ired

tore

plac

ea

woo

dw

indo

ww

ith

mat

eria

l,si

ze,

orde

sign

am

ore

effi

cien

tde

sign

such

asvi

nyl,

orvi

nyl

wit

hfi

breg

lass

,si

ngle

pane

wit

hm

ulti

-pan

eet

c.N

orsh

ould

the

hom

eow

ner

bere

quir

edto

buy

non-

stoc

kw

indo

ws

for

exam

ple

that

repl

icat

e4,

6or

8gl

ass

lites

.Su

cha

requ

irem

ent

pres

umes

that

the

owne

rha

sun

lim

ited

fund

san

dm

aydi

ssua

deon

efr

omim

prov

ing

for

ener

gyef

fici

ency

.In

the

long

run

this

wou

ldac

tag

ains

tth

ego

alof

pres

erva

tion

ofth

ebu

ildi

ngas

aw

hole

.A

sci

ted

inth

eW

est

Woo

dfie

ldH

erit

age

plan

“An

old

buil

ding

rest

ored

and

renovat

edto

acco

mm

odat

eha

ppy

Ow

ners

will

bew

ellm

aint

aine

d,b

ette

rth

anm

any

mus

eum

s.”

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eO

ldE

ast,

Wes

tW

oodf

ield

orP

ropo

sed

Wor

tley

Vill

age

cons

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

sfo

rbu

ildin

gsra

nked

DW

indo

wop

enre

mov

alor

addi

tion

,ye

sN

oin

clud

ing

skyl

ight

Shu

tter

repl

acem

ent,

sam

em

ater

ial,

No

No

size

,an

dde

sign

Shu

tter

repl

acem

ent,

diff

eren

tye

sN

om

ater

ial,_

size

,_or

_des

ign

Shu

tter

rem

oval

orad

diti

onye

sN

o

) )

Bla

ckfr

iars

PlC

O3-

14Fe

b12

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

red?

Do

Isupport

Typ

eof

Wor

kC

ontr

ibut

ing

Non

Con

trib

utin

gre

q’m

for

Why

Res

ourc

eR

esou

rce

per

mit

?D

oors

Doo

rre

plac

emen

t,sa

me

No

No

mat

eria

l,si

ze,

and

desi

gnD

oor

repl

acem

ent,

diff

eren

tN

oT

his

shou

ldbe

qual

ifie

dan

dli

mit

edto

door

sor

igin

alto

the

built

form

,ha

vem

ater

ial,

size

,or

desi

gnno

tabl

ede

cora

tive

trea

tmen

tor

heri

tage

char

acte

r.To

repl

ace

ano

ndes

crip

tso

lidw

ood

entr

ydo

orw

ith

stee

len

try

door

issi

xor

Y2do

zen

the

othe

r.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eO

ldE

ast,

Wes

tW

oodf

ield

orP

ropo

sed

Wor

tley

Vill

age

cons

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

sfo

rbu

ildi

ngs

rank

edD

Add

ition

ofst

orm

orsc

reen

No

The

addi

tion

ofan

yst

orm

door

offe

rsim

prov

edpr

otec

tion

toth

ebu

ildi

ngas

door

aw

hole

asw

ell

asto

the

entr

ydo

or.

Whi

lea

stor

mdo

orm

aym

ask

orhi

dea

door

wit

hno

tabl

ede

cora

tive

trea

tmen

tor

heri

tage

char

acte

rin

the

short

term

,it

will

help

pres

erve

such

ado

orin

the

long

term

(see

Bis

hop

Hel

imut

hC

onse

ivat

ion

dist

rict

plan

guid

elin

espg

.12

).To

requ

ire

ape

rmit

beca

use

asit

was

opin

edat

the

Feb

.l2th

mee

ting

that

“usi

ngth

eug

lyst

orm

door

wit

hth

em

etal

base

onth

ebo

ttom

half

inst

ead

ofa

full

glas

sdo

or”

agai

npr

esum

esth

atth

eow

ner

has

unli

mit

edfu

nds.

We

forg

etou

rhi

stor

y;as

Kev

inB

ice

has

poin

ted

out

this

com

mun

ity

was

“tra

diti

onal

lya

wor

king

clas

sne

ighb

ourh

ood

ofm

odes

tm

eans

”,Is

ugge

stit

still

very

muc

his.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

elim

uth,

Old

Eas

t,W

est

Woo

dfie

ldor

Pro

pose

dW

ortl

eyV

illag

eco

nser

vati

ondi

stri

ctpl

ans.

Doo

rop

enin

gre

mov

alor

yes

No

addi

tion

) )

Bla

ckfr

iars

PlC

O3-

14Fe

b12

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

red?

Do

Isupport

Typ

eof

Wor

kre

q’m

for

Why

per

mit

?R

oof

Re-

roof

ing,

sam

em

ater

ial

and

No

No

colo

ur

Re-r

oo

fin

g,

dif

fere

nt

mate

rial

No

Thi

ssh

ould

be

quali

fied

and

lim

ited

toro

ofs

that

have

no

tab

ledecora

tive

or

colo

ur

treatm

en

tor

heri

tage

chara

cte

r,su

ch

ascedar

or

slate

.T

ore

quir

ea

heri

tage

perm

itto

repla

ce

bla

ckasp

halt

shin

gle

sw

ith

gre

en

asp

halt

shin

gle

sis

pedanti

c.

Under

no

cir

cum

stances

sho

uld

co

lou

rch

an

ges

requir

ea

heri

tage

perm

it.

(The

sele

ctio

nofpaint

colo

uris

ape

rson

alch

oice

of

the

ow

ner;

see

Bis

hop

Hel

lmut

hC

onse

rvat

ion

dist

rict

plan

pg.

12)

Sim

ilar

lya

heri

tage

perm

itsh

ou

ldnot

be

requir

ed

tore

pla

ce

roofi

ng

wit

han

arg

uab

lyb

ett

er

mate

rials

(i.e

.st

eel

inst

ead

of

asp

halt

)th

at

wil

lpro

tect

the

buil

din

gas

aw

ho

lefo

rb

ett

er

and

lon

ger

and

oft

en

mo

reatt

racti

ve.

Part

of

pre

serv

ing

aneig

hbourh

ood

mu

stin

clu

de

anall

ow

ance

toupgra

de

ton

ew

technolo

gie

sso

that

bu

ild

ing

sre

main

habit

able

an

daff

ord

ab

le.

An

das

poin

ted

out

inth

eW

est

Woodfi

eld

Heri

tag

epla

n“T

hew

ides

prea

daccep

tan

ce

of

asphal

tsh

ingl

es(a

spha

ltim

preg

nated

felt

with

ap

ro

tectiv

e

granular

sto

ne

surface)

prov

ided

alo

wco

st,

good

qual

ity

roofing

mat

eria

lfrom

about

1930

onw

ards.”

There

fore

asasp

halt

shin

gle

sw

ere

not

likel

yto

hav

ebeen

use

din

the

ori

gin

alconst

ructi

on

of

mo

sto

fth

ebuil

din

gs

inP

ete

rsvil

le,

no

pro

tecti

on

under

aH

eri

tage

Desi

gnati

on

sho

uld

be

aff

ord

ed

.

AH

eri

tage

perm

itis

not

requir

ed

under

the

Old

Eas

t,W

est

Woodfi

eld

or

Pro

po

sed

Wo

rtle

yV

illa

ge

conse

rvati

on

dis

tric

tpla

ns

for

buil

din

gs

ran

ked

DA

ltera

tion

toro

ofl

ine

Yes

Yes

Porc

h/V

eran

dah

Porc

h/v

era

ndah

rep

lacem

en

t,N

oN

o

sam

em

ate

rials

,si

ze,

and

desi

gn

Porc

h/v

era

ndah

rep

lacem

en

t,Y

esy

es

dif

fere

nt

mate

rials

,si

ze,

and

desi

gn

Porc

h/v

era

ndah

rem

ov

al

or

Yes

yes

addit

ion

) )

Bla

ckfr

iars

PlC

O3-

14Fe

b12

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itR

equi

red?

Do

I support

Typ

eof

Wor

kC

ontr

ibut

ing

Non

Con

trib

utin

gre

q’m

for

Why

Res

ourc

eR

esou

rce

perm

it?

Sidi

ng,

Soff

it&

Fasc

ia,

and

Tri

mSo

ffit

and/

orfa

scia

repl

acem

ent,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ials

Soff

itan

d/or

fasc

iare

plac

emen

t,N

oT

his

shou

ldbe

qual

ifie

dan

dlim

ited

toSo

ffit

and/o

rfa

scia

havi

ngdi

ffer

ent

mat

eria

lsno

tabl

ede

cora

tive

trea

tmen

tor

heri

tage

char

acte

r.

Ahe

rita

gepe

rmit

shou

ldno

tbe

requ

ired

tore

plac

eSo

ffit

and/o

rfa

scia

wit

han

argu

ably

bet

ter

mat

eria

ls(i

.e.

vent

edal

umin

um)

that

will

prot

ect

the

buil

ding

asa

who

lefo

rbet

ter

and

long

er.

Par

tof

pres

ervi

nga

neig

hbou

rhoo

dm

ust

incl

ude

anal

low

ance

toup

grad

eto

new

tech

nolo

gies

and

mod

ern

build

ing

prac

tice

soth

atbu

ildi

ngs

rem

ain

ingo

odm

aint

enan

ce.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

elim

uth,

Old

Eas

t,W

est

Woo

dfie

ldor

Pro

pose

dW

ortl

eyV

illag

eco

nser

vati

ondi

stri

ctpl

ans.

Rep

lace

men

tof

sidi

ng/c

ladd

ing,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ial

Rem

oval

/ins

tall

atio

nof

No

Thi

ssh

ould

also

bequ

alif

ied

and

limite

dto

clad

ding

/sid

ing

wit

hcl

addi

ng/s

idin

g,di

ffer

ent

mat

eria

l,no

tabl

ede

cora

tive

trea

tmen

tor

heri

tage

char

acte

r.co

lour

Tore

plac

eth

em

uch

love

dw

hite

alum

inum

sidi

ngth

atco

vers

man

yco

ntri

buti

ngre

sour

ces

wit

hne

wvi

nyl

and/o

rco

lor

will

nei

ther

cont

ribu

teto

orta

keaw

ayfo

rth

est

reet

scap

e.

Und

erno

circ

umst

ance

ssh

ould

colo

urch

ange

sre

quir

ea

heri

tage

perm

it.

.(T

hese

lect

ion

ofpai

nt

colo

uris

ape

rson

alch

oice

ofth

eow

ner;

see

Bis

hop

Hei

lmut

hC

onse

n,at

ion

dist

rict

plan

pg.

12)

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

ellm

uth

cons

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eO

ldE

ast,

Wes

tW

oodf

ield

orP

ropo

sed

Wor

tley

Vill

age

con5

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

sfo

rbu

ildin

gsra

nked

DR

eplic

atio

nof

deco

rati

vetr

im,

sam

eN

oN

om

ater

ial,

colo

ur

) )

Bla

ckfr

iars

PlC

O3-

14Fe

b12

Her

itag

eA

lter

atio

nP

erm

itD

oIs

upport

Typ

eof

Wor

kR

equi

ted?

req’

mfo

rW

hype

rmit

?D

ecor

ativ

etr

imre

mov

alor

addi

tion

,N

oU

nder

noci

rcum

stan

ces

shou

ldco

lour

chan

ges

requ

ire

ahe

rita

gedi

ffer

ent

mat

eria

l,co

lour

perm

it.

.(T

hese

lect

ion

ofpai

nt

colo

uris

ape

rson

alch

oice

ofth

eow

ner;

see

Bis

hop

Hel

lmut

hC

onse

ivat

ion

dist

rict

plan

pg.

12)

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

ellm

uth

cons

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eO

ldE

ast,

Wes

tW

oodf

ield

orP

ropo

sed

Wor

tley

Vill

age

cons

erva

tion

dist

rict

plan

sfo

rbu

ildi

ngs

rank

edD

Oth

erE

xter

ior

Alt

erat

ions

New

orin

crea

sed

park

ing

area

sY

esY

esT

his

isre

dund

ant.

Bou

leva

rdpa

rkin

gal

lre

ady

requ

ires

am

inor

(esp

ecia

lly

fron

tya

rd)

vari

ance

appr

oval

and

isno

tpe

rmit

ted

inth

isne

ighb

ourh

ood

unde

rcu

rren

tzo

ning

.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ited

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

eilm

uth,

Old

Eas

t,W

est

Woo

dfie

ldor

Pro

pose

dW

ortl

eyV

illag

eco

nser

vati

ondi

stri

ctpl

ans.

Rep

avin

gof

exis

ting

park

ing

area

No

No

wit

hout

expa

nsio

n,sa

me

mat

eria

lR

epav

ing

ofex

isti

ngpa

rkin

gar

eaI

Par

tof

pres

ervi

nga

neig

hbou

rhoo

dm

ust

incl

ude

anal

low

ance

tow

itho

utex

pans

ion,

diff

eren

tm

ater

ial

upgr

ade

tone

wte

chno

logi

esan

dm

oder

nbu

ildi

ngpr

acti

ceso

that

prop

erti

esre

mai

nin

good

mai

nten

ance

and

usef

ulfo

rth

ein

tend

edpu

rpos

e;liv

ing.

Tore

quir

ea

perm

itto

upgr

ade

from

grav

elto

asph

alt,

asph

alt

toco

ncre

te,

conc

rete

topa

ving

ston

esis

not

cons

erva

tion

itis

stag

nati

on.

AH

erit

age

perm

itis

not

requ

ired

unde

rth

eB

isho

pH

ellm

uth,

Old

Eas

t,W

est

Woo

dfie

ldor

Pro

pose

dW

ortl

eyV

illag

eco

nser

vati

ondi

stri

ctpl

ans.

Add

itio

nor

alte

rati

onvi

sibl

efr

omth

eY

esY

esN

oIt

hink

anex

cept

ion

shou

ldbe

mad

esp

ecif

ical

lyfo

rso

lar

pane

ls.

Itst

reet

(e.g

.so

lar

pane

l)se

ems

inev

itab

leth

atgo

vern

men

tsu

bsid

ies,

tech

nolo

gica

lad

vanc

esan

dth

epe

ndin

g40

%in

crea

sein

hydr

ora

tes

will

mak

eso

lar

pane

lsa

feas

able

real

ity.

Par

tof

pres

ervi

nga

neig

hbou

rhoo

dm

ust

incl

ude

anal

low

ance

toup

grad

eto

new

tech

nolo

gies

soth

atbu

ildi

ngs

rem

ain

habi

tabl

ean

daf

ford

able

.I s

eeth

isas

bein

gin

the

sam

esp

ace

asre

plac

ing

sing

lepa

inw

indo

ws

wit

htr

iple

pane

,re

plac

ing

woo

dso

ffit

sw

ith

vent

edal

umin

umso

ffits

etc.

Chi

mne

yre

pain

ting

,sa

me

mat

eria

l,N

oN

ode

sign

)

from. Christine Kelsey t

to

iIe Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 448 PMsubject: Re: Feedback Request - Heritage Permits

Hi AngelaThanks for sending this information out- we missed the last meeting and Iam glad to have an opportunity for input.

I agree with most of the heritage alterations permit chart, regarding thedifferent permits needed for contributing and non-contributing resources.The only category that I question is the lack of need for a permit to replacea porch/veranda with different materials, size and design. In particular, adifferent size and design of porch could significantly alter the appearanceof a house, potentially as much as a small addition.

I hope there is also a plan to determine and clarify the elements ofpreferred character/design of new houses or additions in the area. Forexample, a new house on Argyle Street is listed on the map as a noncontributing feature. I assume it is listed as non-contributing because of itscharacter, rather than its age, since some other new houses in the studyarea are listed as contributing. It is a small house, but it has a largeattached garage, protruding out in front of the front entrance (“snouthouse”). I don’t know if that particular element lead the study team toconsider it non-contributing, but it is certainly the element that makes itlook out of place to my eye. It would be helpful to draft some guidelines tohelp residents with their plans for new homes and additions.

Thanks again for circulating the information,Christine Kelsey(6 Saint Patrick Street)

horn: Chris Pehikerepiyto: Chris Pehlke <‘-‘-‘—

t(.)dt: Fri7 Mar 7, 2014 at 4:40 PM

ubp:1: Re: Feedback Request - Heritage Permits

I am afraid I disagree with the list of Heritage guidelines asproposed by the Blackfriar’s steering committee on the groundsthat they are so unrestrictive that they effectively serve little tono purpose in defining a Heritage Conservation District. Thedistinction between contributing and non-contributing buildingsand indeed in defining what was and what wasn’t part (“VictoryHousing yule”, West of Wharncliffe) of the district was largelymade based on age and architectural form. The guidelines asproposed have went out of their way to avoid addressingarchitectural issues. Effectively any “Ontario Cottage”-styledhouse in the district could remove a centre placed “London door”with symmetrical windows arrangement and replace it with twosteel slab doors placed to the extreme sides of the facade (Doors— opening addition; Doors replacement with different materialsize design) and the entire centre portion replaced with floor toceiling plate glass (Windows replacement, size, design, openingaddition) all without requiring a heritage alternation permit. Thisis of course an extreme example unlikely to occur but my point isthat no alteration permit would be required under theseguidelines. At such a point would the building still be acontributing part of the district since it would then physically havean architectural form much more in keeping with the noncontributing structures? The purpose of the architecture controlsis to protect the features that lead to defining and non-definingstructures.

The committee has tried at great lengths to suggest that the

cultural basis of the neighbourhood’s relationship to the river andflooding is part of the guidelines for protection. Nowhere has anysuch relationship been addressed in their proposed guidelines.Prohibiting sandblasting brick walls to remove the flood stains orpreventing covering the brick with stucco could have addressedthat but are both permitted since again there’s absolutely nocontrols on changes to the trim or cladding materials.

It has also been suggested that the working class roots of theneighbourhood is what defines it as a historic district. However,again that’s not addressed nor is it probably all that defensible inmy mind since any neighbourhood anywhere typically developsaccording to a certain socio-economic cohort of purchasers. Thisis true even in new developments today. High-end gated homestypically cluster together as do new developments that cater to aless affluent buyer (town homes, subdivisions of smaller homesetc).

It would appear that the Steering committee feels that they wanta Historic district designation but nothing imposed upon them tocreate that sense of urban uniformity to a district. Historicdistricts can and do often command higher property values andattract tourism but that is because there are controls in place toprotect the visual characteristics of the neighbourhood andpreserve the features unique to the neighbourhood worth comingto see. If the neighbourhood consensus is truly that all they wantto do is restrict the size and shape of buildings, then that doesn’tdefine a historic district but rather should be done through zoningprocess setting larger side-yard, front yard setbacks, maximumbedrooms, density, parking sizes, green space requirements, etcunder the zoning act.

I am perfectly comfortable with the creation of a Heritage districtfor the neighbourhood, however these guidelines as proposedstrike me as being so unrestrictive that there is no tangibledefining feature for the district. Without features distinguishing itfrom any other neighbourhood not designated (including theareas west of Wharnclife that were excluded) it becomesincreasingly indefensible to any sort of challenge.

1mm: — — .-

to: 1date: Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:19 PM

suhje Re: Feedback Request - Heritage Permits

Good evening Angela,

Thank you for distributing this to the Community Association and also Isuspect, for collecting, reviewing and summarising the feedback forpresentation to the Heritage Committee.

I have attached 2 documents. The first one is the feedback on the HeritageAlteration Permits prepared by the Steering Committee.

The second is the feedback on the Heritage Alteration Permits that waspresented by the consultants at the February 14th meeting.

I think that the 2nd document may prove useful to support and justify thevision presented by the Steering Committee.For the alterations that would require a Section 42 (heritage) permit aspresented by the Heritage Consultants that I do not agree with I havemade comments on why I do not support the requirement. But perhapsmore germane, I point out where other Conservation Districts do notrequire a permit for the same alteration.

For example none of Bishop Hellmuth, Old East, West Woodfield orProposed Wortley Village conservation District Plans require permits forsuch trivial alterations as replacement of Soffit/fascia or for re-paving ofparking surfaces with different materials. In fact parking surfaces are evennot mentioned in the other District Plans tables of alterations that do or donot require a permit.

Also of note is that the 3 conservation District Plans issued in the last 10years (Old East, West Woodfield & Proposed Wortley Village) designatewhen a Section 42 (heritage) permit is required not just by the type ofalteration but also but the Heritage Ranking of the individual building. TheHeritage Ranking of every building; both contributing and not contributingis detailed in the district maps.

The Heritage rankings are defined as

Group A (properties of major heritage significance) & Group B (properties

of importance)• Pteviously designated under OHA or listed as significant by LACH. Is a

fine example of architectural style. Exhibits unique qualities ordetails. Is a well maintained example of modest architectural style.Age of building contributes to heritage value. A significant event,person or story is associated with the building.

Group C (of value as part of the environment)• The form and massing of the building belonged to a historical family of

buildings. Is a good example of a modest design representing thearea or repeated in many locations.

Group D (properties of no heritage significance)• Original heritage qualities have been irreversibly lost or covered .The

original design is lacking architectural character to contribute to thearea.

In the Old East, West Woodfield & Proposed Wortley Village plans GroupD buildings are exempt from nearly all heritage permit requirements expectfor a few of, but not all the major alterations (new building, demolition).

It is concerning that the Heritage consultants to not appear to bepresenting a vision or plan consistent or comparable to precedent in otherthe districts.

While The Heritage Act specifically states that no property in aconservation district shall be altered without a permit, and that districtplans must detail which minor alterations do not require a permit, it is voidof specifics.

So despite the City Planner declaring that “there will be no vote, this is nota popularity contest” somewhere between the Heritage Act and a finalDistrict Plan, discretion and negotiation is required.

RegardsJoe McCarthy16 Moir St.

Parker, Charles

From: Menard, DonSent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:01 PMTo: Waverman, David; [email protected]: Parker, CharlesSubject: “petersville’ name

Hi folks,

I’ve just had a brief conversation with Mrs. Warner, who lives on Empress Avenue. She was unable to attend last night’smeeting but wanted to know where the name “Petersville” came from and why are we using it. I explained its originsbut she still wanted it on record that she is opposed to its use going forward as it makes us sound like we live in somesmall hick village.

She feels less strongly about “Blackfriars” and could probably live with that.

With respect to the potential district, while she has some concerns she is resigned that it may be the only way to stopthings from getting worse.

I guess we should add her to the contact list even though I don’t have a phone number or email address.

Not sure if you want to get into this but perhaps we might raise the name question somewhere along the road in thenext few weeks. We never did do this in Wortley Village-Old South in a formal sense if I recall.

Maybe, if we want to avoid Blackfriars, Petersville, Kensington, we can use “Bridgetown”.

Hope you are having a more peaceful day.

Don

1

Parker, Charles

From: Menard, DonSent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 3:36 PMTo: ‘Waverman, David’;Cc: Parker, CharlesSubject: FW: Tonight’s Meeting

Another one.

Chuck, guess we should add these to our contact list.

Don

From: - iJ On Behalf Of Mike BloxamSent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 2:56 PMTo: Menard, DonSubject: Fwd: TonightTs Meeting

Hi, Don,

More feedback on the proposed HCD.

Cheers,

Mike.

Mike Bloxarn

Forwarded messageFrom: Lynne Descharnps <

Date: 10 December 2013 15:34Subject: Tonight’s MeetingTo:’’

Hi Mike:

Just a quick word to send along my regrets that I am unable to attend tonight’s meeting, as I am an afternoon shiftworker.

I have read and I am happy with the draft report and the proposed Heritage Conservation District outlined in pink. Myhome is within this area © 59 Riverside Drive.

Please do not hesitate to relay that I am in favour of the heritage designation for the former villages of Petersville andKensington as proposed, and that I would rather have been able to attend this evening’s meeting in person.

Many thanks for your help and your ongoing efforts!

1

CheersLynne Deschamps

Lynne Deschamps, CHIMNACRS Coding SpecialistHealth Information and PrivacyLondon Health Sciences Centre

This information is directed in confidence solely to the person named above and may contain confidential and/orprivileged material. This information may not otherwise be distributed, copied or disclosed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately via a return e-mail and destroy original message. Thank you for yourcooperation.

2

Parker, Charles

From: Menard, DonSent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 11:50 AMTo: Nancy TauskyCc: Parker, CharlesSubject: FW: Blackfriars-Petersvilte Draft Study 7 Report to Planning and Environment Committee

Nancy,

For your information. The writer has given me permission to share this with you.

Don

From: ].A. BasketteSent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:42 PMTo: Menard, DonSubject: RE: Blackfriars-Petersville Draft Study / Report to Planning and Environment Committee

Hello Mr. Menard:

Thank you for including me in this information. I realize that I haven’t contributed to designating “west of Wharncliffe”with the Blackfriars initiative but I did want to point out a few facts about Charles Street particularly. As you know, myGreat Uncle, George Gibson, built 30 Charles Street in 1926, where he and his wife lived for a number of years. Prior tothat, he built (or had a hand in) building the duplex at 32 and 34 Charles and 31 Charles (maybe 29) where he plantedone of the oldest trees in London (early 1900’s). Big George was a ‘bricklayer” during the off-season of professional ball,along with his brothers). During the flood of ‘37 (?) the family was transported by boat to Central Ave where Farhipurchased and subsequently tote down George Gibson’s residence (30’s and perhaps early 40’s when George and Beckylived there).

What I can recall of Charles Street (through discussions with my Dad and Aunt and Grandmother) is that Big George builtthe duplex and 30 Charles, on a hill becacise the neighbouring area was flooded regularly and did serve as a dump for thearea (sparsely populated but still very close to the city center). This isn’t a good point historically, but when the area wascultivated and settled, the dump was moved to the area of Cavendish Crescent where they built the apartment buildingthat caught fire recently.

I recall stories of my Grandmother feeding transients who would find their way onto the back porch during thedepression. Apparently the earliest street cars used to go right down Charles Street and the transients would target thesparsely populated area in hopes of some sustenance. As a little girl, I still remember the “horse-drawn” milk deliveryservice and believe me, I don’t think I’m that old! The transients would perhaps come from running the train lines on theCP line at Oxford but I’m no historian and this was long before my time and prior to the great flood.

My Grandfather was a barber at the old Belvedere (now the Budweiser Center) so he had quite a business during thedepression and the Lambourn home was comfortable (with five kids —2 after the depression) and generous. My Dad didwant a plaque on the corner of Dundas and Talbot acknowledging the original site of James Lambourn’s Barber Shoppethat hailed “Shave and a Hair Cut —2 Bits” literally!

The oldest homes on Charles Street are probably 33 Charles (owned by Mr. Neff while I was growing up — exterior riverstone) and the duplex (32 and 34) and also the old “Wade” house directly behind my homes on Mt. Pleasant Ave. In fact,

there’s an historic photograph of the flo’b-of ‘36, depicting only the “Wade” house a/the huge Oak tree that was feldjust about 3 or 4 years ago on that property (it caused some serious damage to the adjacent house).

There were many shops on Wharncliffe near Dundas (now Riverside) when I was little, including a drug store, a bicycleshop, a butcher, Charlie Telfer’s Shell Gas Station, a drug store and dentist and doctor’s office. These shops were alongthe block where the Cowboy Club is now but that was originally the Royal Lion Restaurant when all the smaller placeswere torn down (early ‘70’s). That restaurant was so out of context and so is the Cowboy Club for whatever they call it).But the point is, it was a viable village for many residents and was conveniently ensconced with everything one neededwithin wallcing distance. About the only landmark that remains is the 3 Little Pigs which is now “Under the Volcanoe”.

Prior to 1962 or there abouts, there was a beautiful building on the south side of Charles Street, north of Edith, that wassome sort of meeting hall or place of worship (it did have a pipe organ) or it was a school or Convent or Monastery, andit was all torn down and 3 duplex buildings took its place (progress, development - they are all dumps at this point) andI’ve written to my Uncle (my only surviving relative who actually grew up there) as to what that building was. All Iremember is seeing the pipes from the organ exposed, with no walls surrounding it and all the bull dozers and muck andmess! It was a riot to play there but now it would have been a federal offence!!

Another historic and timeless landmark that no longer exists was the Bethesda Hospital. My sister was actually bornthere and Dad received the call on a “balmy” February day in 1952, that my Mom had gone into labour and he hurriedhome (lie worked on the mail cars, sorting mail between London, Detroit and Owen Sound) that his wife and new babywere resting there. The building later became Marion Villa, home for the aged, and was subsequently trashed in theearly ‘SOs. We used to visit the elderly and sing Christmas Carols and were quite intrigued by the architecture. It wasamazing as I recall arid quite “spooky” at the same time. This land paved the way for Chartwell and they put that upbetween rain storms (what about the infrastructure to Charles St, Mt. Pleasant etc????) Ironically, we actually had Dadstay there for a week when his town house was snowed in before he passed away in 2010.

Well Mr. Menard, I have given you all that I can in terms of what would constitute heritage, west of Wharncliffe, but illhear from my Uncle, lie may be able to provide some insights into significant historical vicissitudes that have escapedme or I didn’t experience. I do know that 32 Charles Street was always the local “voting place” during Federal, Provincialand Municipal elections and I was ordered “out of site and just plain OUT” during these important elections. I also recallmy Great Uncle’s funeral “George Moony Gibson” when I was about 10 or so (1967), as a real significant occasion withthe baseball Commissioner in attendance, along with many fans and family. Big George was really worshipped by myDad and he inspired my Dad to think out of the box in so many ways. When I was a kid, I wanted to play professionalbaseball. I opted for playing trumpet (not traditional or accepted for so long for something women did but gettingthere). Big George took the family on adventures to Pittsburg and talked of all the places he’d been on his baseball tours,but London and the area were home to him and his wife Becky (McMurphy) and the rest out in Campbell Cemetery inKornoka. Our Dad’s sense of adventure peaked at 88 when lie took my sister and me on a cruise around South Americaon the Queen Mary II in the winter of 2009. What an adventure and what a wonderful life he lived, inspired by growingup on Charles Street.

Progress has eaten up much of the beauty already but I’m confident that a few barricades and bylaws can curtail acommercial development takeover. I certainly hope so and please feel free to share this with all concerned. Havingrecalled much of this, any initiative for preservation has long passed whereby development has won over anypreservation of heritage. Hopefully the battle can be won in the Blackfriars district, including Labatt parlc where BigGeorge is honoured there on a plaque.

Thanks and best wishes,Julie Anne Lambourn Baskette

2

680 Waterloo Street, London, ON N6A 3V8

IKESISKINDS LAWF R M

Delivered By Email

Jul 4, 2013

FILE NO, 64O643/plllpll

John M. FlemingMan o.ino. Director. Plannino. and CityPlannerCf it f LondonCity I lull. I HoorP 0 Bo\ 5035lonclon. Ontario f ft’\ 4 L)

Dear Mr. Fleming and Mr. Kokkoms:

Peter kokkorosDeputy Chief Building Official. ManagerBuilding PermitsCity of LondonCi iv Hail. 7h FloorP 0 l3ox 5035London. Ontario Ni,A 41 _t)

Re: Heritage Conservation Study BIackl’riars!Petcrsville Neighbourhood l)ursuallt tosection 40.1 of the Ontario fferittt,’e Act tot’ the 1)tI’P0SeS of designating one at.mare heritage conservation districts under section 10 of’ the Ontario Herittge Act(“Heritage Conservation Study”)

We have been retained by a resident of the Blackfriars/Pctersville Neighbourhood with respectto the above noted matter. Our client is an owner of a property located in theBlackliiars!Petersville area that has resided in the area lbr several years and has an interest inthe I leritage Conservation Study heino undertaken by the City of London.

I3y copy of this letter we are requesting that you advise us o1 any meetings both Ihrmal andintormat dealing with the Heritage Conservation Study: any requests for permits (building anddemolition) in the area: any heritage meetings relating to this matter: and, ask that we be keptup—to—date on the progress of’ the 1-leritage Conservation Study being undertaken by the City ofLondon (“City”). We also request that you notil’ us of any appeals received by the City of theby—law designating the heritage conservation study area.

Should you have any questions. please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.

Yours truly.

Siskinds LLP

/ / IPer: /:c-

Paula Lombardi

DIRECTTELEPHONE (519) 660-7878-FACSIMILE (519) 660-7679

HEAD OFFICETELEPHONE (519) 672-2121FACSIMILE (519) 672-6065 1 50-17133

London Toronto - Quebec City SISKINDS.com

From: Bartlett, Leah On Behalti Fontana, JoeSent: Friday, November 22, 2013 1:37 PMTo: Fleming, John M.Cc: Nelligan, Maggie; Bryant, Judy; Walsh, Jo-AnnSubject: FW: Blackfriars-Petersville Ontario Heritage Act

Action refer to City Planner.

Action — copy to Ward Councillor — for information.

Leah BartlettExecutive Assistant to the MayorOffice of Mayor Joe FontanaCorporation of the City of London519.661.2500 ext 4927Ibartlettlondon.ca

Ldfti, 11L;eri4ato n::t oflt.ct[nordi5OIbrO:edL a (rnruc{ hE?hl pefei dticxxres,o. 12rxtoanypr rortc xoyod LyttoCit;on&nev*kwethp7il€ge. har b ii-d tbundh titir+rrod ;ot iriarntrtlvt)arictt bytioOtaoLUtt

From: PeterSent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 6:04 PMTo: Fontana, JoeSubject: Blackfriars-Petersville Ontario Heritage Act

Dear Mayor,

I am the Property Manager for the properties located at 25 Riverside Drive, 55 Wharncliffe Rd. Northand 129 Wharncliffe Road North. Recently, the City of London has undertaken a study to determinewhether the Blackfriars-Petersville neighborhood should receive status under the Ontario Heritage Actas a heritage conservation district.

I have been authorized by the owners of the above noted properties to act as agent regarding theHeritage designation proposed by the City of London.

I am writing this letter in strong opposition to these properties being included inside any boundariesthat are deemed a heritage conservation district.

It is clear that the area in which these properties are located is not an appropriate area fordesignation. The area has no historical significance and further, is not in any way aesthetically pleasingand in fact is quite run down.

The proposed designation would do nothing other than preserve an area without any intrinsic heritagevalue while tying the hands of property owners who might otherwise be able to make improvementsto their properties.

In my recent discussions with residents of this area, it has become clear to me that the advancementthe heritage designation agenda is motivated by nothing more than area residents’ desire to curb thenumber of student houses in their neighborhood. Given the fact that it is, as noted, a very run downarea and thus affordable, and given its proximity to bus lines servicing the University of Western

2

Ontario, the neighborhoud in question makes an appealing loca for university students. While I

can understand why some residents may want to keep students out of their neighborhood, in my view

it is inappropriate to use legislation that was designed to protect property that has legitimate historical

value. The movement by local residents of Blackfriars-Petersville is an inappropriate use of provincial

legislation to achieve a desired end by restricting the rights of property owners to lease their

properties as they see fit.”

Yours truly,Peter Stavrou

3

Parker, Charles

From: Menard, DonSent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:58 PMTo: Parker, Charles;Cc: Peter -

Subject: FW: Blackfriars-PetersvilleStudy Area

Mr. Stavrou has had trouble getting his message to you so told him I would forward it.

Don

From: Peter [mailto: -

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:56 PMTo: Menard, DonCc:Subject: Blackfriars-PetersvilleStudy Area

Gentlemen,

Further to the meeting of October 30, 2013. After hearing all of the arguments by Golder and Associates andother consultants as well as members of the public that supported the restrictive and hampering conditionsthat will be placed upon them if the District designation is allowed to pass. A few home owners want to placethe entire quadrant under the Ontario Heritage Act to protect their interest. I would have written earlier but Iwanted to get the opinion of the owners on the east side of Wharncliffe Rd. and the north side of RiversideDrive and I can advise that everyone of those owners is opposed to the District designation status under theOntario Heritage Act.

I heard Golder and Associates and other consultants remarks and found them without merit. I heard Mr.Waverman say that if the District designation status is accepted it will bring prosperity to the area. I heard andsaw other members of his team show slides of homes with the sill of the door matching the height of thewindows, something that is not practiced today, stating this has historical significance. If these consultantstravel to the east end of the City, in particular the McNay St. area they would see more of these homes thanthat of Wharncliffe/Riverside area and in much, much better condition and older. And then we had anothermember of Goldér and Associates state that the Labatt’s baseball park should receive heritage conservationstatus under the Ontario Heritage Act. What utter nonsense.

And then I heard from the self interest individuals who want the District designation status for their selfinterest. Mr. Kevin Bice a steering member almost attacked another member of the public who did not wantthe District designation status. He stated that he has all his life savings in his home, SO DO ALL OF US. Hestated he wanted the community in which he resides to be a nice quite area, no students. Owners withstudent rentals should be controlled by the City of London Zoning and By-Laws NOT THE ONTARIO HERITAGEACT. And then at the end of the meeting I was approached by a lady who told me how would I like it if myneighbour sold his property to a Developer and the Developer put 5 bedrooms in the main floor and 5bedrooms on the second floor for renting to students. AGAIN I SAY THIS IS FOR THE CITY OF LONDON TOCONTROL UNDER THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONINIG AND NOT THE ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT.

In closing I reiterate my commts of my previous email. las well as all .. Me other owners I have spoken to am instrong opposition to the District designation of the properties previously provided to you as well as their propertiesbeing included inside any boundaries that are deemed a heritage conservation district and we will, lithe City passes thisDistrict designation bring this matter before the Ontario Municipal Board and beyond. Those individuals that want theDistrict designation are for self interest and self interest only. Absolutely nothing to do with heritage preservation orhistorical significance and further, certain areas are not in any way aesthetically pleasing and in fact quite run down.

The proposed designation would do nothing other than preserve an area without any intrinsic heritage value while tyingthe hands of property owners who might otherwise be able to make improvements to their properties, excluding thosefew individuals with self interests.

Be advised that the owners of the properties in the District designation will avail themselves of all legal recourses tooppose a heritage designation as is now proposed.

Yours truly,PRINCETON PROPERTIESManagement & Development Ltd.Peter Stavrou

2

Menard, Don

From: Todd BaileySent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 3:31 PMTo:Cc: Menard, DonSubject: Blackfriars - Petersville Study Area

Dear Mr. Waveniian,

Thank you again for your efforts last night providing your preliminary findings on the Blackfriars - Petersvillestudy area. I found the presentation educational, informative and (generally speaking) spot-on with respect toidentifying a micro region within the study area which would be more reflective of HCD designation. Onreflection of the open question period, I found that the public input very much reflected the uniqueness of thisai-ea itself. Thank you for fielding the many questions and comments in such a professional maimer.

The property I own is West of Wharncliffe, North of Oxford at 18 Gower Street. Being born and raised inLondon and wishing to preserve some of the uniqueness of London for my children (and hopefully theirs tocome), I would still be hard pressed at pointing to Gower Street as retaining any historical significance worthpreserving. I do believe however that there is a historical, cultural and architectural significance which shouldbe recognized and preserved within the Blackfiiars area — specifically the area between Oxford and Riversidewhich I believe should include the two or three blocks West of the river. I believe that anyone walking into thisspecific area would visually recognize immediately the uniqueness of the community regardless of theirknowledge towards its history. It is inarguably a micro-community which has survived and, in some cases,embraced generations of single family development, expansion and growth. The uniqueness of the buildingsranging in ages of five to hundred and fifly-five years old standing side-by-side tells many stories and is, what Ibelieve to be, a testament to London’s diverse history. Preserving one or two of these buildings would bepointless — it is the distinctiveness of this family neighborhood as a whole which holds the historicalsignificance.

Allowing multi-level student developments or similar building types to be established in Blackfriars will tearthe heart out of this unique community. It is my understanding that while the City does have Design Guidelinesfor the Blackfriars area, these guidelines are without teeth for enforcement — I believe it is the lack of politicalcommitment, and fortitude within the corporation of the City of London which has brought this community tothe position of seeking a HCD. it is unfortunate that such drastic action must be taken by this small communityto protect the integrity of our city. I applauded the assistance and direction that Mr. Don Menard, HeritagePlanner, City of London is providing to our community in this process to preserve such an important little pieceof London. It is my hope that the independent study which Golder & Associates presents to the city will besuccessful in establishing a HCD within the smaller designated portion of the Blackfriars district - as identifiedin your presentation last night.

Parker, Charles

From: carmen richter -

Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 12:05 PMTo: Parker, Charles; Menard, Don; [email protected]: Fwd: Blackfriars-Petersville Study - Meeting

Gentlemen,unfortunately we are not able to attend the meeting on Wednesday re: BlackriarsPetersville area, however would like our position noted regarding this matter. We are incomplete favour for having this neighbourhood designated heritage, considering itshistory and proximity, conceding the restrictions this designation would place on ourcommunity.Thanks for acknowledging our position,Sincerely,Carmen Richter13 Cummings AveN6H 136

Forwarded messageFrom: blackfriarsonthethaniesDate: Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 8:35 PMSubject: B lackfriars-Petcrsville Study - MeetingTo:

Neighbours,

Please be advised that a public information meeting has been called with regards to the heritage study. Themeeting is being hosted by the consultants who are performing the study that will detemilne whether theBlackfriars-Petersville neighbourhood should receive status under the Ontario Heritage Act as a heritageconservation district.

The consultants wish to bring forward their initial observations and recommendations to provide an opportunityfor public response.

Please attend to share your thoughts and hear what the consultants have discovered to date.

When: October 30, 2013, 7:00pm

Where: St. George’s Anglican Church, 227 Wharncliffe Rd. N.

If you are unable to attend, but wish to provide comments or receive information, please contact one of theindividuals below:

1

Menard, Don

To: Daniella Honey; Bryant, JudySubject: RE: 89 Wilson Aye, London Ont

Hello Daniella,

Thank you for your letter and pictures. I have been aware of this matter through direct contact with your father, Mr.Honey and have discussed this situation. At this point I can’t address the issue of moving forward with the completion ofthe dormer project but did want to correct two details in your letter for clarification. I am the heritage planner for theCity but I am not doing the heritage study. We have hired outside consultants to carry out this task, as we normally dofor our heritage conservation districts. As well, the by-law which has impacted your father’s property, along with theothers in the neighbourhood is in effect for only one year and is scheduled to end in June, 2014. We have also asked theconsultants to report back to us, and Council at an early date once they have done their initial assessment of the area todetermine if the study area should be or could be redefined pending the final outcome of whether a district is created ornot.

From: Daniella Honey ISent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 10:02 PMTo: Bryant, JudySubject: 89 Wilson Aye, London Ont

I am writing to you as a concerned resident of 89 Wilson Ave. As you may already be aware, the constructionof a dormer that was being undertaken at 89 Wilson Ave has been forcibly halted due to the existing by-lawpertaining to the heritage study currently being conducted in the Blackfriars area. As I understand it, no workrequiring a permit is allowed to be done on any house in the area for the next year and a half while the heritagestudy is being performed by Don Menard, the heritage planner for the city of London.

In addition to being a resident of the Blackfriars area I am also an archaeologist. Since 2002 I have beenemployed at D.R. Poulton & Associates Inc., a cultural resource management firm that conducts archaeologicalsurveys and excavations in southern Ontario. As an archaeologist, I completely sympathize with the need for aheritage study of the Blackfriars area, it is probably well over due. I will also be the first to defend anypreservation efforts of historic London areas. However, as a resident of a house that is in desperate need ofrepairs and renovations, I cannot fathom how no one has tried to reach a solution that allows both the heritagestudy and the construction on 89 Wilson Ave to continue with limited interruption.

In addition to being a resident of 89 Wilson Aye, I am also the daughter of the owner and landlord (MichaelHorley), and the sister of the tenant (Christopher Honey) who lives in the upper unit of the house. This entireincident has left all of us feeling very angry and frustrated. Worst of all, it has left my brother and his girlfriend(Katie Norman) without a home in which to live. Everyone who is responsible for the work being halted doesnot seem to care about the personal consequences that they have inflicted upon the tenants. No one seems to bewilling to work with us to find a solution, it seems that the only thing anyone is willing to do is threaten us withlegal action and homelessness.

In the next year and half, there will be residents in the Blackfriars area who need to have work done on theirhouses. Most likely there will not be many, but for those requiring work I think there should be an expeditedreview process that would enable them to declare their house as a non-heritage home and allow them to obtainany permit they might need. As an archaeologist who has done vast amounts of historical research I would evenbe willing to volunteer my services in order for these expedited reviews to occur in a timely fashion. Instead ofserving a PROCESS you should be serving the PEOPLE of this ward.

1

Work on the dormer has been halted at 89 Wilson Aye, and we have been ordered to return the house to itsformer condition under threat of legal action (regardless of the fact that it is possible to judge the heritage statusof this house without those drastic measures being enforced). However, we have also been informed by severalbuilding inspectors that the house does not meet current building codes and that we must continue with ourrenovations in order for the house to be livable and safe. My father, the owner of $9 Wilson Aye, is perfectlywilling to take on these renovations in order to protect and improve his house and investment, as well as thelives of his children. Unbelievably, you have told him, without exception, that he is not allowed to do thesethings.

89 Wilson was built in 1903 and an addition was added in 1928, with major renovations being done to both theinterior and exterior throughout the years since then. I do not believe it to be a heritage home, and I am sure ifthe heritage plaimer was willing to take the time to visit our house in person he would agree with thatassessment. If that were the case, all that would be left would be for you to issue a permit allowing for thenecessary renovations to take place in order to make our run-down and decaying house a truly wonderfulhome.

I would ask you to please reconsider your decision regarding the work being done at 89 Wilson Ave. Please letus continue with our desperately needed renovations so that we may improve our home and our lives, youcannot imagine how horribly inconvenient and burdensome this entire debacle has been to our family. I wouldalso ask you to please consider how this hugely restrictive by-law is negatively effecting the citizens of thiswonderful neighbourhood. A home is not an artifact to be locked behind glass in a nutseum, it does not exist instasis, it is an ever-changing and continuing piece of history, where people create memories and build livestogether. Please help and allow us to do so.

Thank you,

Daniella Horley

PS. I have attached pictures of $9 Wilson Ave and the dormer in question.

2

INTRODUCTION TO “PETERSVILLE STORIES”

This collection represents the stories of some of the residents of Blackfriars, the formervillage of Petersville. Many residents, you will see, have deep roots in this community. All,whether recently arrived or 5th generation like John E. Johnston, are extremely proud of thecommunity. Please read these stories carefully to get a fuller understanding of what a rich andunique neighbourhood Blackfriars is.

PETERSVILLE / BLACKFRIARS COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE

1. A. If you are longtime resident (over 15 years) of the Blackfriars area, how long have you livedhere? What is your family connection to this area?

I grew up in the BIGS area and went to Empress Public School. I have been very fond ofthe area since I was younger and chose the Blackfriars area as my home. It is the only area inLondon I ever wanted to live and to buy a house. NANCY MARTIN — ROGERS AVENUE

-moved to 7 Cummings in 1999 then bought 6 Napier in 2004-loved the convenience of being close to work and DT shopping plus love all the events in Harrispark

DINI AND TOM—6 NAPIER

We have lived in the Btackfriars areafor over 30 years. Jeffpttrchased his firsthome, 57 Wilson Ave., in 1982 after briefly renting an apartment next door. In 1986,we purchased 49 Wilson Ave. and lived therefor 18 years where we raised ottr twodaughters. Looking to move to a larger home, bitt not wanting to leave the area, wepurchased 4 cherry Street in 2004from Men’yn Elliott. Mr. Elliott lived at 4 cherryStreetfor over 50 years. In 2012, we purchased a dttplex directly across from its at 3cherry Street.

In short, Jeffand I have invested otcrselves, financially and emotionatty, to this area andhope to live here as long as Mr. Elliott. ERIN PEASE-4 CHERRY STREET

I have lived at 9 Leslie St. for 23 years LOUISE TAMBLYN — 9 LESLIE ST.

I have lived in this area for 33 1/2 years. I was newly married and transferred bymy company. Over the years we have done several major and minor renovationsto the property. At different points we considered moving, but the appeal of theBlackfriars neighbourhood could not be duplicated, so we stayed.LINDA SENESHEN —4 LESLIE STREET

I have lived in this house for over 15 years.I chose this area because it felt safe and secure after a number of family losses and it gave me asense of belonging again. JOYCE ERENDS —66 BLACKFRIARS ST.

25 years this March. NANCY LEPPAN —45 WILSON AVE.

We have lived at 71 Wilson Av since Oct 1974 - 39 years this fall. Our connection Iguess you could say is that it is where we chose to live our lives. We raised twodaughters in this neighbourhood. They made friends who have parents of their ownstill living in the area. Our youngest daughter is still best friends with a girl she started

pre kindergarten with at St. Joseph’s school and her Mom still lives on Molt St. Thiswas our children’s neighbourhood. They still come here because we are still here. Forus it has been the kind of neighbourhood we knew and grew up in when we were kids.The type of neighbourhood where parents stayed to live out their lives and theirchildren came back to in order to be with their parents, were they are comfortable.They come to celebrate holidays and birthdays and for Sunday dinner. Ourgrandchildren have also enjoyed this neighbourhood during their growing up periodbecause they have been brought here to do the same things that their moms did aschildren. We are talking about the enjoyment of two generations of one family.JoAnne has her own family and still tells friends that this is her neighbourhood. Shewants to keep the house in the family as she can’t imagine anyone else living here. It isour house. All the stories about the two girls growing up are centered on theBlackfriar’s area. They speak of what they did, who they played with , where theyplayed, games, parties, school and all it entailed, playing football with the boys in themiddle of the street (you could back then), riding bikes are the things they remember.And they were always outside playing. It was safe for them to go to Harris Park at 10and 12 years of age but only to feed the ducks. Not too close to the water. There are alot of family memories to enjoy from living in this area.DIANNE AND RANDY SILVERTHORNE —71 WILSON AVE.

We have lived in this area since 1987 (26 years). My spouse has lived in this area for 43 yearsand had attended Empress School. Our children both attended Empress. Our daughter currentlylives in this area as well. Other family members live in this area as well. All the amenities werewithin walking distance including our dentist, physician and banking. This made it very convenientPAUL SENUITA

I have lived on Cummings Avenue for 17 years and I decided to buy a house in theBlackfriars neighbourhood because of the historical importance of the neighbourhood andits proximity to the university. As a professor, I value the bike paths and the walkingpaths and the fact that the area is not dominated by students, as it is in sections of OldNorth. ERIKA SIMPSON - CUMMINGS AVE.

We have lived here 20 years. We were married at the church on Whamcliffe and Oxford and chose thisarea because there were a lot of families with children which made it an ideal location to raise a family.JIM A1iD TRISH HEISZ -15 ARGYLE STREET

Fraser and I have lived on Wilson Ave. for 20 years. We purchased 83 Wilson Ave., as ayoung married couple, in 1993. The house had been used as a rental, and we spent timeand money to improve the home. We started a family, 2 boys, and quickly out grew thehouse. But because we loved the neighbourhood so much, we spent a few more years inthe small house until we found a larger house in this area. We moved to 120 Wilson Ave.in 2007. There have been many benefits to raising our boys here in the Blackfriar’sneighbourhood: close to many parks, the river and green space, the bike path at our door.As a family we have enjoyed ball games at Labatt Park, hockey games and concerts at theJLC, fireworks and festivals.

We like the feel of community here, where we know our neighbours and look out foreach other. There have been many neighbourhood Christmas Parties, and summer BBQ’s

over the years. Many homes have front porches for socializing as people walk by.DEBBIE, FRASER, ALEX AND MACKENZIE FERGUSON - 120 WILSON AVE.

I have been a resident here for 25 years (May 1988). Moved here from Hunt Club area(55 Normandy Gdns.) to a smaller home which we restored (It is our retirement home). Iworked at John Labatt Corporate Office and the house was in a great location — so near towork — I was able to walk to and from work each day.MURIEL BOYD -1 CARROTHERS AVE.

My grandparents bought 2 Carrothers Ave. in 1903. They had nine children. Two of the boysbecame noted physicians in London. Dr. David Johnston was Chief of Surgery at VictoriaHospital. Dr. Bob Johnston was chief of orthopaedics at Veteran’s Hospital (now Parkwood).Both surgeons were well known. Patients came from many foreign countries to be treated bythem. The oldest son died in military hospital at the end of the First World War.

Almost all of the remaining family and their partners served in the Second World War.After the war, the family went on to become leaders in many fields, notably nursing andeducation, as well as medicine, with the addition of two more doctors to the family by marriage.

When I started Kindergarten at Empress school, I walked daily from 2 Carrothers Ave.You can see that I have a long connection to what was then called “West London”.

I eventually became the owner of the property. Over the years the two adjacent vacantlots were purchased. In 1980, the only other property on the South side of the street, Number 10Carrothers, was bought by a small builder who developed it into a rental property.

Over the next decade, the absentee owner of this property allowed it to become decrepitand it became a blight on the whole tiny neighbourhood. When it became unrentable, it wasoffered for sale and I purchased it. After repair, it was able to attract respectable residents, and ithas been a non-issue on the street for the last twenty-odd years.

The London Police Department was once located on Thames Street, at the rear of thepresent Health Unit. The close proximity attracted many police families to this neighbourhood.The Dundas street car stop was at the western end of the Dundas bridge, and steps from therewas ‘Link’s Booth”, which served hot dogs and hamburgs at all hours. JOHN E. JOHNSTON —

10 CARROTHERS

Our family has lived here for 65 years. My mother, 91, lives directly across from 96 Albion. Howis that reward for longterm good neighbor policy -- ask anyone. She has always been there tohelp. My sister has lived in the upstairs apartment for 20+ years. I have been here often and onwhile I was recovering from cancer, and then retraining. Our family has raised 7 kids 25grandchildren -- and I have lost track of great grandchildren and great great grandchildren fromthis house. We all attended school at Empress PS. This is our home -- a place where theneighbors depend on neighbors. My mother nursed her friend and across the street neighborvirtually back to life after her husband died suddenly. Now that neighbor nurses my mom throughher recovery from surgery and Altzheimers. We are devastated by the possibility of our familyneighborhood being turned into a student enclave -- there is too little parking on this street. Thenoise of the construction will rob my mother of peace in her last years of life.My parents came here at the end of the war to raise a family. My mother had lived at 74 Albionwith her patents. We still have connections with our neighbors who were children with my olderbrothers and sisters, one of whom lives in Nova Scotia! We hung out at the park -- West Lions itwas called then... now it’s Kinsman. We have attended ball games, and played ball games,watched the balloon festival from our back yard. We have enjoyed talking with neighbors whowalked up and down the street with pets, with children, with aging parents. We have celebratedbirths and commiserated deaths -- honouring the lives in between. My mother had students inour home as boarders but they were required to be respectful. They were not left on their own --

10 people to a dwelling (duplex, 2, 5 bedroom units). Finally this neighborhood had youngfamilies coming back. Two of the closest three neighbors to 96 Albion recently bought homesand rebuilt the entire inside structure, to prepare for family living. Building a duplex here would be

devastating.MAUREEN FORD —95 ALBION ST.

B. If you have been here for 15 years or tess, why did you choose this area to live in?

I chose to buy a house on Albion Street in 2010 because it is a quiet neighbourhood with a nicemix of young families, professionals, retired folks, and students - a very eclectic neighbourhoodthat is not unbalanced toward one “group” over another. Its proximity to downtown allows me towalk to many events, venues, and meetings in the downtown core, meaning I drive a whole lotless than when I lived in Byron. It is also an affordable neighbourhood with decently sizedhomes, perfect for the use of many types of families (single persons, families with children, retiredpersons, etc.) and renting availability. The proximity to so much park space and access to thewalking/cycling trails is also highly important.

This seems to be an ideal neighbourhood for where the city wants to go with a vibrant citycore: a kind of “suburb” of downtown (as we have very little commercial properties in the area)that permits single-family dwellings to exist so close to the core, where high-rises should becentred. MIKE BLOXAM — ALBION STREET

I purchased this house in 2000, from the family that built it in 1949. They raised their 5 children inthis typical post-war home, with 1100 square feet, 4 bedrooms, and one bathroom. We plan tolive here for the test of our lives, and have made significant renovations to ensure that the housewill be accessible to us as we age. We chose this area because of its proximity to downtown, theriver, the nearby walking path, the quiet streets, its history as a working class suburb of London,the fertile soil, and the newly opened Community Garden. Because it was zoned flood plain, wealso felt relatively secure that major rebuilding would not be permitted, particularly theconstruction of any high-rises or large apartment complexes.CHRISTINE KELSEY AND JOHN BROEZE —6 ST. PATRICK STREET

Even the house has a history.It is thought to be the first Hunt Club in town.It had a shoemaker with over $900 in stock, and a similar amount in supplies to make shoes.They lived in one half of the building.

Built around 1865, its two pin oaks are rare now. And growing into the house.They appear in a picture of the 1883 flood.

This floor plan and many like it in the area were designed to withstand floods by the smallbasement surrounded by air spaces under the outer rooms with air vents to keep them dry, manylong ago covered by new raised roadways. Water flowed around the basement rather than into it.

JOYCE ERENDS —66 BLACKFRIARS STREET

We moved to Albion St. in 2007. Instantly loved the quiet peaceful neighborhood. We love beingable to walk along the river as well as walk to the downtown and easy access to beautiful parks andwalking trails. I am a gardener, and thoroughly enjoy the love and care that people in this area put intotheir yards...I enjoy watching the flowers through the seasons. We enjoy checking out the BlackfriarsCommunity gardens while walking along the river. There is a good mix of ages with students, couples,young families, and older citizens sharing the neighborhood. It is a quiet, peaceful, and friendlyneighborhood and we would love to see it stay that way. DON AND MARILYN TOPPER

I purchased 77 Albion about 12 years ago. After walking around several different locations inLondon, this was the area that felt the most like home. It is close to downtown and close to theparks and bike paths. It has a great community feel to it.I have nothing against students but when I went for a walk in the Gunn Street area I felt so sad.Now it is new but what will it look like in a couple years. On Wharncliff some of the studenthouses look unfinished and there is always garbage around. One of my concerns is the loud

noise from the after party’s. The garbage, and our property values.I love my home and my neighbors and this area. It would be very sad to see the neighborhoodbecome like the Gunn area. GRACE HOEKSTRA —77 ALBION STREET

Just moved here in June 2011, but have had a life-long attraction to the areabecause of its proximity to the river. Proximity to the river and the walking trailalong it. There’s a ‘funky’, offbeat character to the area that I like.I’ve had a lifelong interest in architecture and have studied it extensively, with earlyCanadian domestic structures being a particular focus. Finding myself an OntarioCottage in Blackfriars was a dream come true.

JANE EBERHARD - 98 WILSON AVE.

I have lived here 9 years.I purchased my home here for the following reasons:-historic neighborhood-historic home with unique features-size of home and affordability of home-proximity to downtown-proximity to nature and trails-area seemed quiet despite some student rentals, however liked the fact that most rentals had only 3-4units ROXANNE LUTZ

Have lived here for $ years — THERESE KHIMASIA —15 ROGERS AVE.

We wanted to be able to access downtown without a car. We wanted low rise housing with notall buildings between us and the sky. We love being beside the river walkways. We wanted amixed neighbourhood, not a generic subdivision where everyone is similar. We loved thegardens and well-kept properties in the Blackfriars’ district. We like seeing young families in theirfirst houses. We like the fact that these houses are affordable and that rents in the houses andduplexes in the area are affordable. DAPHNE BICE — 2 LESLIE STREET

Well I rented an apartment at the cornet of Blackfriars and Napier for approxitmetly 4years, left for a couple then my partner and I purchased our first home together onCherry Street. Lived in that house for ablmost 7 years (fixed it up inside and out) andsold it to a young couple then purchased another house on Wilson. We love thisneighbourhood, the people in it and the feeling we get just walking around enjoying thrtrails and the river. We absolutely cannot see ourselves living anywhere else.LYNN LflWOSKI - 116 WILSON AVE.

My husband and I have called the Blackfriars area home for five years. For many years beforethat, we used to come for walks through the area, wishing one day we could live here. We lovecentury homes, and when we saw a quaint yellow brick century cottage come up for sale onWilson Ave., which needed restoration, we jumped at the chance to finally live in this area. Whenwe had completed working on this house, another century cottage came up for sale around thecorner on Leslie St. and it too needed a major make-over inside and out. We sold the WilsonAve. home to a couple who are also great supporters of the Blackfriars area. We have put a lot ofeffort and love into restoring these two homes and feel so fortunate to be able to live in such aunique and friendly neighbourhood.

We are avid supporters of the downtown, and frequent the Market, restaurants, pubs,library, to name a few, and the many great events held in Victoria Park and Harris Park eachSummer. We have great walking and biking available on the Thames River pathways. We cantake in a baseball game at Labatt Park, the oldest functioning ball diamond in the world. Howexciting is that! We have an organized neighbourhood Thames River clean-up every year in the

Spring - we care about our river and its wildlife. There is an annual Studio Tour which featurestwo artists in our area.

More importantly we have rallied as a community to show our deep concern in theproposed changes to Blackfriars. It will be a travesty for home owners, who have invested in theirhome and maintained them to the best of their abilities, to wake up to monster-like barrackshousing possibly ten unrelated and transient people who have no invested interest in ourcommunity. We will have to endure an increase in noise, a major increase in traffic and parkingproblems, with a reminder that the streets in Blackfriars are narrow and worse in Winter,problems with littering, and garbage sitting on the narrow boulevards blocking sidewalks.

We live on a flood plain which historically was farm land supplying the Covent GardenMarket with produce. There should not be an increase in density, and all efforts should be madeto maintain Blackfriars as a unique, affordable, historical, and community-oriented place to live.MARCEL & BARBARA GOU LET —5 LESLIE STREET

Andrew Walker and I have lived at 81 Wilson Avenue for 5 years. We chose this neighburhood for severalreasons: we are committed to living in the dowtown core of London, we fell in love with the potential inthe house and the garden and the history of London imbedded in them, and we saw the neighbourhoodas affordable, diverse, beautiful and a great place to “blend” our children in a happy home. We have agreat deal of history in ‘the hood, too. My Grandfather owned a grocery store where Cowboys nowstands. His business withstood the flood of 1937 and he went on to become a City Councillor and memberof the Fanshawe Dam founding committee. While Andrew and I were renovating our home my daughter,Meg Spindler wrote an essay on the flood of ‘37 and won the Lawson Literary Award for St. George’sPublic School. SUSAN JORY SPINDLER —81 WILSON AVE.

I have lived at 13 Empress Avenue for eight years.I selected the Blackfriars area to make my home for many reasons. Some of the more obvious are theclose proximity to so much that London offers in the downtown area, the river and stately bridge, thewaterfowl that congregate in my side yard, and the fact that the building bylaws were in place to keepthis neighbourhood a quaint, cottage community. The people that I live near and those who pass myplace over the course of a day are friendly, engaging, and often rather eclectic...it has turned out to be thebest reason for my choice! STEVE WALTERS — 13 EMPRESS AVE.

I arrived in London in 1995 after living in Asia, Europe and more closely, Montrealand Toronto. I have an understanding of neighbourhoods and what they can do.Within London I lived in the west end, and found its suburban character toostarched. As a physically fit individual, I often rode my bike throughneighbourhoods, looking for another location that would better suit my personality.Here is my bottom line: I have moved my family to the Blackfriar’s communitybecause of its small, neighbourhood feel, the low density housing nestled close to thedowntown, the proximity to the river system, and finally the charm of the Blackfriar’sbridge itself. That was the starting line. CARMEN RICHTER — 13 CUMMINGS AVE.

2. THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY: Briefly, please relate any stories, events orcharacteristics which you feel make this area unique.

Many of the houses in this area are low to the ground and close to the sidewalk. This, combinedwith the narrow streets and short blocks gives the whole district a “village” feel. Many of myneighbours have spent their whole lives in the house where they were born. They love strollingand having front-yard conversations with their neighbours.

I chose this neighbourhood for all the same reasons we are fighting to save it: close to downtownand walking paths; incredible sense of community; the river nearby -- with all of its wildlife; near ashopping mall with grocery store, library, pharmacy and many other amenities; very much an“artists’ area; lovely old homes with character and grace; and, for me, being a part of history

since my own house has been here since? 1845/1875. Nowhere in the City of London does itget better than this! NANCY LEPPAN —45 WILSON AVE.

As children we tobogganed down the (now impossibly) small hill at the end of Blackfriars. Welearned to fish at the rivet. There ate multigenerational families here. The Hessey’s down thestreet... we, the Fords. Until the recent death of Yarni Darnell, there was the Darnell family. Ourhouse was built and we were its first home owners. We added a second floor, then siding, thenthe cement driveway, then the outside stairway for the upstairs apartment lot my older sister, andthe double porch. So much invested here. The street is not built for dense housing. The street isnarrow. Please stop this development. It is disastrous.MAUREEN FORD —95 ALBION ST.

We just ate unique. We value the characteristics of Blackfriars and ate proud to be part of such agreat neighbourhood. When new people move in, we embrace what they bring to our communityand are happy to know that they too want to be a part of it. NANCY LEPPAN — 45 WILSON

There’s a distinctive culture in the community. People drop by to say welcome whenyou first move in; everyone seems to have an emotional connection with theneighbourhood and with their neighbours; people stop to talk when you meet themon the street and wave as you pass by their porch, where they might be sittinghaving a chat with another neighbour; everyone feels the attachment to area historyand to the river. JANE EBERHARD - 98 WILSON AVE.

Living in Petersville/Blackfriar’s has been enriching for all of us. We love the proximity to the river, the 5minute walk to the Market and having the bike path at our door. We have two dogs, Toby and Bennie.Toby, the elder statesman, is well mannered and much loved. He does his best to make up for Bennie whomakes a daily habit of taking himself for a walk, to visit all his human friends who feed and cuddle him -

some of whom actually have Bennie proudly featured on their Christmas cards.SUSAN JORY INTERIORS —81 WILSON AVE.

Yes, so then I moved here, intentionally looking for a place on one of the streetsabutting the river. And then came the best part of our discovery! Not only was thelocation, location, location PERFECT, but the neighbourhood and neighbours wereperfect too. On our street we have some rentals, and the tenants are quiet andrespectful of the fact that there are children, seniors and caring people living on thisstreet. The density of the rentals is low - one floor with one or two bedrooms, forexample in a one story house (the basement being another floor in which to live).Yes, there are students. But, there are no loud parties, no garbage left strewnaround to bring the character of the street down, no high traffic for eight months,then vacancy with over-run weedy garbage strewn yards for four.No, there is character. The neighbours here enjoy weekly get togethers at eachother’s houses. We speak to one another over our front porches (yes, front porches,which support community life!) We support each other when there is a need. Welook after each other’s houses, pets, and children, knowing there is an investment inthe neighbourhood. We marvel at the wild-life together (beavers, birds, and bats)over a beer at the end of the day.Really? If one were to ask me, an outsider to London with no extended family here,where I feel there is community and support, I would say ON MY STREET! And Iknow I am lucky... CARMEN RICHTER - 13 CUMMINGS AVE.

-the history of this area being one of the original boundaries of London, the flood, the beauty ofnature but in the heart of the core, plus life long residents

DINI AND TOM -6 NAPIER

The Blackiriars area is a close tight knit community within the larger urbanarea of London. We know all our neighbours not only on our street but also in thewider community. Neighbours socialize and look out for each other.

One example is the collaboration with our neighbour to landscape ourfront and side yards complete with pathways, Wiarton rocks and droughtresistant plants and grasses which attract butterflies, bees and hummingbirds.The neighbourhood residents take pride in their gardens and compare notes andexchange plants. Sterile paved yards to accommodate parking for overbuiltrooming houses do not fit into the neighbourhood.

Our home was built in 1876 and we, like many of the residents in the area,have researched the history of their homes and take pride in the history of thearea.

This is a quiet area within the city which is often called quaint.Many are loving pet owners. A few years ago, a local renter moved and

left her two cats to fend for themselves on the street. This was upsetting to allwho are devoted to the care of their pets.

Neighbours help each other - in the winter with snowblowing lanes andsidewalks, in the winter with cutting lawns if the owners are away, looking afterpets, collecting mail and much more.

These are some of the reasons the Blackfriars area is special.LINDA SENESHEN —4 LESLIE STREET

Throughout the years spent here we have seen this area have it’s ups and downs. Most recentlywe were glad that more owner occupied residents were living here. many homes were renovatedand the neighbourhood began to show great potential to have the same atmosphere as WortleyVillage. This is a great little niche adjacent to the downtown core.PAUL SENUITA

For many years there was very little residential turnover, as most owners could notimagine living anywhere else. An aging population and money to be made, especially on the twomajor streets, has introduced an element of transcience. Several of the smaller homes havebeen bought as “tear-downs” and replaced by tasteful modern homes in keeping with the feel ofthe area.

This small, mostly single family area is what I call a “hidden enclave”. There are manysuch intact neighbourhoods left in the city. It would be to the benefit of the whole city if a waywere devised to nurture and preserve these valuable assets from the grasp of those who seekonly a quick profit without regard for the long-term result of overcrowding and superintensification. The disastrous results of absentee ownership can quickly destroy anyneighbourhood. Buildings stand long after the original owners and purposes are gone. If thebuilding is not suitable for normal residential uses, it is difficult to repurpose. All too often theseabberations end up as abandoned or blighted stains on the neighbourhoods they helped destroy.To put the situation in another way, The Blackfriars Neighbourhood will likely always be adesirable place to live and raise a family, if it is not destroyed. The present pressure to providestudent dormitories may vanish with changes in the economy or different methods of instruction.If the kind of societal changes that I have witnessed over the last 60 years continue, thesepurpose-built tenements may be an albatross reminding everyone of the lack of vision andimpotence of the stewards of our city back in 2013.JOHN E. JOHNSTON —10 CARROTHERS AVE.

I have owned my home @ 59 Riverside Drive since 1999 (14 years) - no family connection - I have adopted

London as my home town. Raised in Toronto many years ago, London reminds me of what Toronto usedto be like. :-) I have owned my home @ 59 Riverside Drive since 1999 (14 years) - no family connection -

have adopted London as my home town. Raised in Toronto many years ago, London reminds me of whatToronto used to be like. :-)LYNNE DESCHAMPS —59 RIVERSIDE DRIVE

Everyday I walk over the Biackfriars bridge to work. When I cross it I like to think about all the historyconnected to it and love the fact that I can look down and see turtles, beavers, fish and many otherwildlife. When I’m gardening at home I love that every now and then I can look up and see a heron flyover on it’s way to the river. I like seeing my neighbor’s home improvements as they invest their time intoenriching our streetscape as well as their own homes. I like that although I may not know them really wellpersonally, many neighbors say hello when we see each other in the neighborhood, and when there arelocal emergencies people come out of their homes to see if they can help.In the summer we can hear concerts from our house if we go outside.Previously, when the church was still active on Btackfriars, we could heat their choir singing on Sundaymornings and it was a truly beautiful way to greet the day.The story of my house is quite interesting because I bought it from the daughter of an original residentwho’s family built many homes in the area. This house is said to have been washed off it’s foundation inthe 1937 flood and moved to the spot its in now, about a street over. While we found no tell-talewaterline outside there did appear to be water damage inside. I blogged about this recently, you are freeto reference anything you’d like from it. http://misstoricalfiction.wordpress.com/2013/04/22/the-history-of-a-house-why-it-matters! ROXANNE LUTZ

In fact, the only issues that I have had with this area have been generated by the houses nearby that arerental properties, particularly those with multiple tenants. If the residents aren’t disruptive, the unkemptand unsightly properties usually are. I am very much opposed to the proposed multi-bedroom units beingsqueezed into the neighbourhood and hope that those individuals who have been elected to stand up forthe Blackfriars community do the job that they were chosen to do...not let someone who does not live inthe area profit from our misfortune. STEVE WALTERS — 13 EMPRESS AVENUE

As an active person the area is a perfect location for using the path and park system. Iwork downtown so can easily walk to work and to the market to pick up groceries on my wayhome. The neigbourhood has a great, vibrant energy during any events held in Harris Park. Theneighbourhood benefits from the diveristy of the residents in the community, from older familieswho bought their starter homes here and still remain, to young professionals interested in smallerhomes close to downtown and students wanting to live close to the university. All of these peoplehelp make the community unique.For me, special occasions are celebrated at the Blackfriars Bistro which has been a part of thisneighbourhood for as long as I have been. NANCY MARTIN — ROGERS AVENUE

My main goal is to protect this building and its history.It has been expensive to maintain old sewers and waterpipes.As a very senior citizen, I can’t keep it as nice as I would like, but am trying.

Further incursion of new multiple person buildings will be a detriment to the community.With the out of community non-caring landlords it will become a slum area infested with non-interested students. JOYCE ERENDS —66 BLACKFRIARS

Jeffand Ifeel we have the best ofboth worlds. We work in the downtown, so it is a hugebenefit to reside so close to our workplace. There is a tremendous sense ofcommtinilyand pride in ownership here. We don ‘t want that destroyed.The Btackfriars area is steeped in history and has so many characteristics that make itspecial. The Thames River and recent development of the forks, Harris Park, LabattPark, bike paths, proximity to the downtown, eclectic mix ofresidents, quaint, affordablehousing, the list goes on. ERIN PEASE —4 CHERRY STREET

Definitely the heritage homes - most of the houses that do not have actual heritage designationshould be listed as such; in fact, the whole Blackfriars/Petersville area should be a designatedheritage zone similar to Woodfield or the proposed for Wortley/Old South.

Aside from architecture, I again go back to the eclectic mix of residents, and the fact that thereare many long-time residents mixed in with new families coming in and fixing up the houses, andadd in the student rentals. Engaging the students in the community would be a huge boon for thearea - make them feel like they are part of the neighbourhood. It would be even better if theywere living in existing homes that blend in with the area instead of apartment-style buildings.MIKE BLOXAM — ALBION STREET

Words to describe this area - diverse, eccentric, inclusive, historical. It’s very special to be soclose to the Thames River and to watch the change of seasons from the embankment. LOUISETAMBLYN —9 LESLIE STREET

Had a community garden plot here. LOVE the river and the community aspect of the area. Have anumber of friends here. Loved the simplicity of and modesty of the houses and the big trees—feltit was an urban paradise. Call our tiny house an urban cottage (though it is a an mull —less than1200 square feet on a plot that had been empty for years). Shopped around and waited for awhile before finding my “ideal home’ here. Wanted to be able to walk around the river and todowntown amenities once I retire and perhaps could not afford a car anymore. Thought that evenif I became physically challenged might wheely it to downtown by chair or scooter. Thought that Icould still be part of a good community---grew up in a village in S. Wales... .don’t want to live insuburbia! — THERESE KHIMASIA —15 ROGERS AVE.

The homes here speak of the origins of London and Petersville. The care and detail of the designof the homes never gets stale. Everyone on our one- block street had been to visit us in our newhome with wine or pie by the end of our first weekend here. We are a street level people whohelp each other and know each other. We like the fact that there are students in our midst as wellas children and older adults. DAPHNE BICE — 2 LESLIE STREET

Well Kevin I don’t think this can be briefer than I was above. There are too manythings flying through my brain right now to be brief. But I will give you what I feel andwhat I know. The river and the surrounding parks where as good for us as living in thecountry is for other families. The picnics in summer, the kite flying days of spring, theconstant feeding of the ducks, geese and sometimes the squirrels could not beignored. Having lots of open space to play Frisbee saved a lot of windows and carsfrom being damaged. Being able to do so many things in such close proximity to wherewe lived was almost unheard of for families in other neighborhoods. Woodfietd (isthat correct?) be darned. They had fancy heritage houses to preserve but we have away of life, a very special one, to preserve so it can be passed along to those whocome after us. It was and is still a working man’s (and woman’s) neighborhood. Werode, ran and walked the bike paths. The Balloon Fest brought us out each year. (Nowwe can walk to the Rock the Park if we are inclined). Our grown up daughter took herdad to a concert at the Gardens last week to hear a band they both love equally andthey did not have to go to Toronto. We still walk along the river as a family after a bigdinner. Why? Because we can, it makes us happy. We do it because the river iscalming. We do it to continue to enjoy the gardens we see in our friend’s yards and tostop and chat a bit. We are so happy to see the updates our friends are making totheir homes and what we have done ourselves. These buildings, that are old but have

so much character, are ones we all want to preserve in order to maintain thatcharacter and to do so for as long as possible. We become happy watching newfamilies coming into the area, bringing their young children here to give them thebenefit of a good, cohesive neighbourhood with all its special attractions. Somethingspecial is drawing them here. Is it the baseball park, the water park or the jet d’au arehere. The museum and gallery, Budweiser Gardens, fireworks, the Santa Claus parade,skating at Market Square and buying vegetables and flowers at the Market. Havingwonderful restaurants and lots of fine shopping almost outside our doors and best ofall, we don’t have to find a parking spot to do any of these things. Our generationappreciates the past and the special things that belong to the past precisely becauseof Blackfriars. Now our children and the generation they belong to are teaching theirchildren to appreciate the same things. For us, the Silverthorne family the past in thisneighbourhood has been our life. All the normal daily happenings and most of theimportant things for our family have taken place right here on Wilson Ave. We like ourneighbors and they like us and because of it we watch out for each other’s property.We enjoy passing the time of day with them and knowing there is always someoneclose who will make you laugh if you just step outside your door. We have nointention of moving any time soon and I think several people on this and surroundingstreets are of the same mind.

Therefore we want and need to preserve what wonderful things we have that shouldnever be allowed to be broken down and pulled asunder by one business person whois very obviously driven by greed, and his need for power. Power which he seemslucky enough to be garnering because of some city politicians with blinders on whoare too busy with their noses in their own forms of power mongering to see what isreally important to the people of the community who stand at the voting booths withtheir own little hammer of power. People whom I’m sure are just biding their time tomake a mad dash to the voting booths at the next election. At least they better aredashing. DIANNE AND RANDY SILVERTHORNE —71 WILSON AVE.

This city is struggling economically, there is no doubt. Do we have a vision for ourdowntown? For the adjacent communities? Our mayor claims he wants aninvestment in the downtown. Then support areas where people can live where thereis pride in the neighbourhood. This is what we have, and what we could continue tohave, if our city council supports us in our quest to prevent large development fordevelopment’s sake. Leave the large scale student housing where it belongs: in astudent housing neighbourhood close to schools. Not here: we are a community.Not just accommodation. CARMEN RICHTER - 13 CUMMINGS AVENUE

I find the area we live in really unique due to the heritage of the area and the historybehind it. I love the fact that we can walk around, look at the homes and see the watermarks from the flood of 1937. The old Ice House at the foot of the Blackfriars Bridge.Many of the homes in this area still contain the orginal lead stain glass. We love all theactivities that happen in Harris Park. Walking along the river and watching the Beavers,Geese and Ducks in the spring with their young.

LYNN LITOWSKI - 116 WILSON AVE

Part of my original interest was due to having viewed a National Film Board film on theneighbourhood which detailed the impact of the two floods. It featured Max Ferguson, afamous CRC announcer who had lived in the yellow brick house by the bridge and thishouse had flood marks on the basement, showing the height of the flood, which werefeatured in the film. I have also see the flood marks in the house when I tried to buy thathouse (which also has the oldest oak tree in London). Then I decided to buy my house,which is next to Blackfriar’s park. Since living in the neighbourhood, I have read a bookthat featured the park and has a picture of the neighbourhood on the cover whose title Ido not recall. As well, I have read a MA thesis that focused on the history of the area, as Iam a professor in Pol Science but also in History. I can’t recall the title but it detailed thehistory of Petersville. finally, I have researched a lot of the history of the area so thestory of Wilson Avenue and Leslie Street and the various candlemakers and shoemakersand so on is very valuable.

Building student housing on Wilson, Albion and Leslie streets will destroy the historicityof the neighbourhood and lead to an impersonal neighbourhood.ERIKA SIMPSON - CUMMINGS AVE.

We came to this area because of the history of the area. This was the original London.Residents and home owners take pride in the appearance of their homes and property. Itis unique — a beautiful setting by the river. A quiet neighbourhood with minimal traffic.Nature at its best! No apartment buildings. This was the Petersville Neighbourhood —

steeped in history with good pedestrian environment. It’s close to parks and downtown.Close to the river and wildlife. A safe area. It has small scale neighbourhoodcommercial areas and a very good mix of neighbours. This area is the best kept secret inLondon — Please preserve it! MURIEL BOYD -1 CARROTHERS AVE.

3. Any additional observations that might help give a more complete picture of the Blackfriars IPetersville neighbourhood.

It is like a miniature version of Wortley Village, just without the actual commercial strip (downtownis our commercial area, in essence). You wouldn’t see this type of development going on in thatarea, so why should Blackfriars be any different? The area north of Oxford Street alongWharncliffe has already been destroyed by making it a student-only zone. Students need to bemixed in with regular families, retired, singles, etc. (as already described), which is exactly whatwe have right now. We do not need to upset this balance, because it’s a slippery slope once oneor two duplexes go in that are single-purpose designed for temporary students.MIKE BLOXAM — ALE ION STREET

The neighbourhood is settled and quiet for the most part, as well as friendly, and I would hate to see itbecome another Fleming Drive! LYNNE DESCHAMPS —59 RIVERSIDE DRIVE

I have done quite a bit of research into recent and long past history of ‘WestLondon’, including combing through old city directories. (Where I was excited to findthe inhabitants of my house in 1880 but still haven’t found exactly when the housewas built) To me the very interesting thing was the occupations of the residents,

most of which are no longer occupations: eg teamster, drayman, huckster, spiceretc One artist. It was and still is, an unpretentious and very cohesive community.JANE EBERHARD - 98 WILSON AVE.

The Blackfriars area is a mixed residential area with single family or smallerduplex properties. Allowing large rooming house duplexes, which by theirpurposes will have a transient clientele, perhaps only staying there 10 months ata time will change the atmosphere of this neighbourhood. Spring and fall will seean influx of moving vehicles on our small streets as well as the leftover garbagefrom the moves.This will make it more difficult to attract permanent residents to the downtownarea. This is contrary to the cities plan to develop residential areas along thedowntown river area. Did the writers of the redevelopment plan to move city hail,develop the Forks of the Thames as well as the branches of the Thames includerooming houses as an incentive to live along these areas? Are we defeating theplan before it even gets underway? LINDA SENESHEN —4 LESLIE ST.

We are so delighted to be able to live in a home we love in a neighbourhood full of people who share ourbelief that friends and neighbours are worth fighting for. SUSAN JORY SPINDLER —81 WILSON AVE.

The homes here are built to last. The neighborhood is cute and close to some of Lon dons most naturalbeauty. The residents care and businesses such as the Blacktriars Cafe have been here for several years.ROXANNE LUTZ

- this is a quiet residential neighbourhood with close neighbours. Large housing complexes do notwork well and are more suited for busy avenues as Richmond st, wharncliffe rd and western rd.-we have many small children and home day cares the area and increased traffic flow is notconducive to keeping our children safe-we have invested a great deal of time and money into making out home unique and planning ongrowing old in this home. If students invade us, it will take away from our investments. Typicallystudents do not invest pride I the homes or areas of which they live as we have witnessed before.We already have groups of student yelling and singing and smashing beer bottles on their way tothe bars at 12am and on their way home at 3am just look at the frat house on ridout as a goodexampleI personally dead this and we were approached to sell our home but flatly declinedDINI AND TOM -6 NAPIER

At a time when the city is trying to bring people to downtown London it seems more than counterproductive to allow one develper or consortiium of developers to alter the nature of theneighbourhood - from a stable neighbourhood with a long and interesting history, full of families toone dominated by student boarding houses. One need only look at the neighbourhood to thenorth of Oxford St. to see a neighbourhood completely given over to student housing. Thestudents are not integrated into an existing area as they are and have been here for more than 20years - I think that the BIGS area is a Fleming Drive just waiting to happen. And we do not wantthat to happen in Petersville where people have been repairing, maintaining and improvinghouses which have been here for more than 100 years. LOUISE TAMBLYN —9 LESLIE ST.

Can walk to visit friends and the park; also festivals, the Art Gallery and so on. Lovewalking round the river with friends. ...can choose a one bridge, or two , and so on...

Can sit on the porch and enjoy a glass of wine. Can walk home from dinner with friends—even in the winter. Can grow my herbs, watch birds, chat, take a summer walk to a downtownpatio or restaurant. My spouse even walks to work.

The concentration of artists/writers! musicians is very high in Blackfriars—making it a

wonderful creative environment! Always people to share ideas with.We can make a smaller footprint with only one cat—and even leave it at home some of

the time. THERESE KHIMASIA —15 ROGERS AVE.

So far, there is a balance of students, families, retirees. We don’t want that balance to beinterfered with by the addition of 5 bedroom flats resulting in 10 bedroom boarding houses.

DAPHNE BICE —2 LESLIE ST.

We moved to London from Ottawa because we wanted to be near family so our girlswould get to know their relations. Randy was born and raised here and most of hisfamily was still here. Finding the type of neighbourhood we wanted took some time.We chose this area because it had pretty much all of what we were looking for. Singlefamily homes, other children in the neighbourhood, a Catholic church and school,playgrounds, different kinds of parks, bus routes, close to shopping and otherdowntown attractions and lots of the other types of businesses that make up aneighbourhood such as variety stores, post office outlet, drugstore, gas stations,family doctors etc. The river of course was a hit with our girls who were aged 2 and 5at the time although it was off limits as a place to go on their own until they were oldenough to respect it. Then they could feed the ducks and the geese anytime theywanted. How many kids in London get to do that? After a while the Hot Air Balloonfestival intrigued them for a few years until it disappeared. They grew up loving thisarea and still do even with the changes that have taken place over the years. We lostour school even though we fought that battle and ended up transferring our youngestto Notre Dame when St. Joseph’s finally closed. Eventually the Church closed and itchanged hands but at least both buildings are still standing and have a new purpose.And finally on a positive note, families are moving into this area and are refurbishingthe houses they are buying and moving into them and wanting to maintain theircharacter and charm because there are lots of us out there wanting to do so. Why inheaven’s name is a major developer allowed to march in under the wire in darkness ofour ignorance (not having been informed or asked to approve their plans I mean) andtake over what has never belonged to him. It’s the same as taking away a baby’scandy, because you are a big enough bully to be able to do it and no one is watchingyou. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Sorry for this outburst but I guess I am sensitive about our Blackfriars area. I cannotapologize for that I’m afraid. As I said before; it has been our life being here and willhopefully continue to be for a very long time.

I’ve said my bit; I don’t think there is much I can add. Well maybe no. Pleaseselect whatever few sentences you feel best gives you what you are looking for. I justcan’t make it shorter. DIANNE AND RANDY SILVERTHORNE —71 WILSON AVE.

The homes in this area are slowly being fixed up and restored. Behind the 80’s metalsiding are beautiful wood homes that have so much character. Once these homes are

gone there is no going back. The children of now as they grow up will have nothing tolook at to appreciate the rich heritage of this area.LYNN [ITOWSKI — 116 WILSON AVE.

In short, building short-tenn student housing on Wilson, Albion and Leslie streets willdestroy the historicity and integrity of our neighbourhood.ERIKA SIMPSON — CUMMINGS AVE.

To Mayor Joe Fontana and all members of the London City Council,

As members of the Blackfriars’ Community and concerned taxpayers, we would like animmediate opportunity to speak to council concerning imminent infill projects in ourcommunity. Because of the rapidly changing circumstances of these projects in ourneighbourhood, we feel that we need to be given this opportunity as soon as possible.

You received a long email on April 15th which outlined concerns we have about theimpending destruction of Blackfriars as a neighbourhood. I am attaching a copy of thatletter to this request.

While we are fully aware that the proposed infill project at 108 Wilson is in compliance,there is a great deal of evidence that suggests that there are immediate plans by thesame developer to create many more such projects in the neighbourhood in the nearfuture. If this kind of unchecked and incompatible infill proceeds, the Blackfriars’community will be erased in a few short months. We know that you support the conceptof vital and permanent neighbourhoods close to downtown. We cannot believe that wehave had no voice, have never been consulted, have had no input whatsoever in whatcould be our community’s irrevocable change.

Kevin and Daphne Bice2 Leslie Street

April 15th 2013

To the attention of my municipal government at London City Halt

My wife and I have been residents in the Blackfriar’s neighbourhood for 13 years.We purchased our home on Leslie Street because of its proximity to downtownand its strong feeling of community. Within a few months, this neighbourhoodwill be no more. Two weeks ago, our neighbours learned that the property at 108Wilson Ave. had been sold to a developer who intends to tear the small familyhome down and erect a 10 bedroom duplex designed for students and abackyard paved for at least 4 cars. Having students in our community is, in itself,not a problem since there are many students living in small apartments aroundthe area. However, since we found out about the sale of this property, we havesince learned that the same developer has bought a house a few doors away at12 Leslie Street as well as a number of other properties in the immediate area.The developer is aggressively pursuing the purchase of homes in the area andis said to be looking to acquire 5 more properties along Wilson Avenue. Thedeveloper is making it difficult for people to turn down his advances because heis offering very attractive terms and, in some cases, bonuses for leaving quicklyas well as making offers to help with moving expenses. I spoke to the womanwho has lived next to 108 Wilson for many years. She is listing her home tonightbecause she can’t stand the thought of living in the shadow of a boarding house.

It is clear then that this developer is not simply erecting one mote studentresidence in the area but has a much larger plan to create a whole studentdistrict in the Blackfriars’ Community. I am writing to you as an individualbecause we do not at the present time have a neighbourhood association sinceall of these developments have happened very quickly and seem to be movingahead at an alarming pace.

The area is zoned R-2 and therefore permits duplex housing as well as singlefamily homes. The current definition of a duplex allows up to 10 bedrooms whichstretches the limits of what most people think of as a duplex. I know that the Cityof London is considering changes to the current property bylaws fcf. By-Law No.Z.-1-122125 passed on July 24th last year) to restrict the current definitions. Iam also aware that you members of my municipal government are veryinterested in encouraging people to live, play and work downtown. Because ofthese factors, I know that you will be extremely concerned about the impendingchange to Blackfriars.

With the addition of multiple 10 bedroom rental housing units to ourneighbourhood, the community known formerly as Petersville will disappear.This will not be a gradual change or a slow integration of temporary andpermanent residents. This will be the wholesale destruction of an attractive,affordable and unique community. I imagine, with the new campus of FanshaweCollege opening in the fall, that the developer will want these units in place byAugust.

The development of Blackfriars as a student district is legal and evenencouraged by our current bylaws. This being the case, the developer needs nospecial permits or variances. The developer is not required to consult with oreven inform Blackfriars residents. We will wake up, perhaps as early astomorrow, to find bulldozers gutting our community.

We need your help. As longtime residents, as committed landowners, as proudmembers of this community we deserve, at the very least, some pause toconsider this plan. You are our elected representatives. We need to know whatyou think about this . Do you approve of this kind of development? At best, wewould like your intervention in order to find some acceptable way for thiscommunity to continue to exist.

Please do not pass this letter on to some other office to deal with. I can tellyou that there is a great deal of anger, frustration, despatation and bitternessalongside resignation and deep sorrow among the residents of Blackfriars. Welook across Oxford Street to the Saunby I Gunn / Irwin Streets area and see whatis coming here. There used to exist a community much like ours - small,unpretentious homes and well tended gardens. Children rode their bikes safelyon the street and grandparents waved to neighbours strolling by. Thatcommunity has been replaced by money-generating boarding houses filled withtemporary residents who vacate the neighbourhood and leave it deserted andquiet for four months in the late spring and summer. Is this what want forour city?

Kevin and Daphne Bice2 Leslie Street