Detailed Comments and…

Detailed Comments and Questions – Ontario Heritage Act

Section 1(2) – Define demolition and removal within the OHA and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit.

Section 26.0.1 – The ‘prescribed principles’ should be made available on the Environmental Registry of Ontario for comment (more than 30 days) prior to being proclaimed. Once proclaimed, the ‘prescribed principles’ should be added to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit.

Section 29(1)(a) – Is Ontario Regulation 9/06 still the prescribed criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest?

Section 29(1.2) – The 90-day timeline to issue a Notice of Intention to Designate (NOID) after a prescribed event only aligns with the timeframe to review Zoning By-law Amendments. The 90-day timeline does not meet the statutory timeframes for the review of Official Plan Amendments and Plans of Subdivision, which is 120 days. The OHA should be amended to align with the Ontario Planning Act timeframes and added to the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit.

Section 29(1.2) – If a property is not designated within 90 days of the prescribed event, does that prohibit future proposals to designate (e.g. if file is closed and owner supported designation, a new owner also supports designation, and more than 90 days later a request to demolish is submitted for a listed property resulting in Council wishing to proceed with designation to protect the building from demolition, would the subsequent proposal be prohibited)? Clarification is required.

Section 29(13) – Concerned that notice of hearings is too vague. Update to clarify that the municipality, property owner, applicant, and appellants will be notified as well as a general notification such as in a local newspaper. Provide this clarification in the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit.

Section 30.1(1) – What are ‘prescribed modifications’? Define and/or provide examples within the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit

Section 30.1(2)(3) – How does this impact pre O.Reg. 9/06 designating by-laws? Clarify if this allows for old designating by-laws to be amended to comply with the current OHA and regulations with minimal process. Or are municipalities required to amend old designating by-laws? Provide clarification in the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit.

The Planning Act Regulations for Official Plan Amendments (O. Reg 543/06), Plans of Subdivision (O. Reg 544/06) and Zoning By-law Amendments (O. Reg 545/06) should be amended to have heritage resource information included under the required information and material to review.

The requirements for a complete application only apply to subsections 33 (2) and 34 (2) of the OHA, meaning that there are no requirements for a complete application for properties designated under Part V (heritage conservation districts). The requirements for complete application should also apply to district properties to ensure comprehensive submissions for those applications and consistent treatment of all designations. The OHA and the Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should be amended to require language related to complete applications for Part V (HCD) properties.

Section 32(5) – How does a municipality confirm receipt of a notice (e.g. registered mail, read receipt email, within ‘X’ days of regular mailing, etc.)?

Section 32(6) – How is an extension confirmed (e.g. Council resolution, legal agreement, etc.)?

Section 32(18) – What is the difference between a ‘prescribed event’ and a ‘prescribed circumstance’? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should provide further clarification.

Section 33(3) – What is the required process to confirm ‘other information or material that the council considers it may need’? Is the ‘other information or material’ required to be identified in a municipal delegated authority by-law that permits staff to process certain types of permits without the need for broader consultations with municipal heritage committees and Council? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should provide examples of ‘other information and material’.

Section 33(5) – How may Council notify the applicant (e.g. Council resolution, delegate to staff, regular or registered mail, email, etc.)? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should provide further direction.

Section 34(1) – What if a heritage attribute must be removed to accurately repair/restore/reconstruct? Does this now constitute a demolition and an application under Section 34 is required? If so, what does this mean for delegated authority as presently powers to delegate demolitions and removals do not exist? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should clarify.

Section 42(1)(3) – What is the distinction between ‘attribute’ and ‘heritage attribute’? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should define and/or provide examples.

Section 42(1)(4) – Why do all demolitions require a heritage permit in a heritage conservation district plan? Some heritage conservation district plans outline the types of work, including demolition, that may be undertaken without a heritage permit. The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should address demolition policies in heritage conservation district plans.

What is the relationship between a ‘prescribed event’ that commences on or before June 30th and a NOID that has not yet been considered and approved by Council on or before June 30th? Would the NOID be subject to the 90-day timeframe? The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should clarify transitions.

The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit should define and/or provide examples of ‘technical cultural heritage studies’.

Detailed Comments and Questions – Ontario Heritage Tool Kit

The Ontario Heritage Tool Kit guides are a critical tool to advance a common understanding of heritage conservation in Ontario. The City of Kitchener would like further opportunities to contribute and collaborate with the Ministry, Heritage Planners Network, and other Heritage Professionals in revising the guides beyond the formal ERO process that closes on June 30th.

Designating Heritage Properties
Page 10 – It is noted that the property owner and the municipality can agree at any time to extend the 90-day period or for the timeline not to apply with respect to the Planning Act applications. How is this agreement to be reached? Through a Council decision, formal agreement, signed letter and/or email?

Page 12-13 – It is noted that as part of considering objections to designations, that the municipality should establish public facing procedures. Does the Province have any guideline with respect to establishing these procedures for the purpose of consistency? These procedures should be outlined within the Tool Kit.

Page 14 – It is noted that the property owner and municipality can agree at any time within the 120-day period to extend the timeframe to pass a designating by-law. How is this agreement to be reached? Through a Council decision, formal agreement, signed letter, email?

Page 17 – For listing properties on the Municipal Heritage Register, are there different requirements for what is required to be publicly posted? There are privacy concerns with including the name and address of the property owner in a public-facing document.

Page 21 – It is now required that a designating by-law contain a site plan or scale drawing that identifies each area of the property that has cultural heritage value. This may be of concern when registering a by-law with the Land Registry Office.

Page 25 – Is it the expectation that each attribute that is listed within a designating by-law must reference design/physical, historic/associative, and contextual values? Clear and consistent guidance within the Tool Kit should be provided in this regard.

Page 39 – The Tool Kit identifies minimum provincial standards for what is to be submitted as part of a complete alteration application. Is it now required that any time additional information beyond the minimum requirements be formally identified through a by-law, Council resolution or Official Plan policy? Information requirements may differ based on the type and complexity of an alteration application. This should be further clarified within the Tool Kit.

Page 46 – The Tool Kit should include greater clarification as to what constitutes a “demolition” versus an “alteration” as different sections of the Act come into effect, and this may have implications for municipal delegated approval authority by-laws.

Throughout the document there is reference to regulation XXX/21. Is this a placeholder for regulation 385/21 or are additional regulations anticipated?

Heritage Conservation Districts
Page 44 – It is noted that municipalities can determine what is required as part of a complete application for alterations or demolitions within an HCD. The application requirements should be consistent with those of Part IV designating properties as municipalities generally keep one application form for a heritage permit. Application requirements for Part V properties should be noted within the Tool Kit.
 
Section 33 – Alteration Flow Chart
There is a missing arrow from the “OLT specifies terms and conditions” bubble that should be connected to “property can be altered in accordance with terms and conditions” bubble.

The “property can be altered in accordance with terms and conditions” bubble appears twice in this flow chart. There appears to be a redundant connection to these bubbles associated with appealing terms and conditions within 30 days.