Heritage Character Evaluation of East Galt by Amanda Kloeze

HERITAGE CHARACTER of EVALUATION EAST GALT RECOMMENDATIONS OF METHODS OF CONSERVATION

2012

April 26, 2012 Janet Babcock, B.E.S., M.Sc., RPP MCIP Commissioner of Planning Services City of Cambridge

Dear Janet: Re: East Galt Heritage Character Area Student Projects Please find attached the results of the first of the subject project reports. In accordance with the January 2012 contract between the Heritage Resources Centre and the City of Cambridge the following items are hereby or will presently be delivered to the City: • Two separate reports exploring the issues of identifying, evaluating, regulating and conserving Heritage Character Areas as proposed in the Cambridge heritage Master Plan of 2008 • These reports include the results and interpretation of a door-to-door survey of the East Galt (Eastern Hill) area of the City conducted in March 2012 and consultation held with Cambridge citizens and officials in April 2012 • Statements of Significance for 30 City identified properties in accordance with the Ontario Regulation 9/06 documentation standard • Completion of City of Cambridge Architectural Assessment Reports for the same 30 properties It should be pointed out that the work contained in these reports is based on student work carried out as part of a senior undergraduate course in Heritage Planning which is an elective course in the School of Planning, University of Waterloo. While the work was supervised by me and the staff of the Heritage Resources Centre its primary role was a learning exercise and it is not offered as a professional undertaking. Nevertheless, it is hoped that the results will be of use to the City in its future deliberation on the implementation of the Heritage Master Plan.

Yours Sincerely

Robert Shipley PhD, MCIP, RPP CAHP

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • This report was drafted by students in the senior Heritage Planning Class at the University of Waterloo under the direction of Professor Robert Shipley and the staff of the Heritage Resources Centre • It is a study of the East Galt/Oaks Street/Eastern Hill neighbourhood of Cambridge • The area was evaluated as a potential Heritage Character Area as conceived in the Cambridge Heritage Master Plan of 2008 • The report focuses in part on a review of Planning Legislature within Ontario and the City of Cambridge plans and policies • A randomized survey of homeowners within the East Galt area was conducted in March 2012 (52 residents were interviewed): • Homeowners identified that the area has unique heritage attributes • The survey determined that there was a high degree of knowledge and appreciation of heritage among residents • There was an interest in conserving the special nature of the neighbourhood • The report will highlight threats and opportunities which are present within the East Galt community • The following recommendations will provided methods for heritage: conservation within the East Galt Study Area • The neighbourhood should be officially designated as Heritage Character Area under policies expressed in the City’s Official Plan and goals for conservation stated • There should be a Statements of Significance drafted for the East Galt Heritage Character Area based on Ontario Regulation 9/06 which will guide decisions during the review of planning applications • Various existing planning mechanisms can be used to accomplish the conservation goals including a Community Improvement Plan, Site Plan Control and Increased Density Provisions • Information regarding this study should be provided to residents and an Education Plan developed

TABLE CONTENTS of

Introduction Purpose of Report Research Methods Site Description

Background Historical Background Heritage Description

Heritage Review Buildings Other Study Area Buildings Streetscapes Perimeter Uses

1 8 8 9

2 10 11

3 12 22 24 26

Planning Policies & Development Tools

Provincial Policy Regional & Local Policy

28 30

Survey Research

Overview Methods Results Key Findings

Threats & Opportunities Opportunities Threats

Recommendations Neighbourhood Conservation Methods

References Appendices

34 34 35 41

6 42 43

7 44

8 9

A HERITAGE CHARACTER EVALUATION OF THE EAST GALT / OAK STREET NEIGHBOURHOOD WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF CONSERVATION METHODS CREATED FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE BY:

BROOKE ASTLES RON BEAN JOSHUA BUTCHER LAUREN FACTO VICTOR KLOEZE CALVIN OSTNER JEFF SANDERSON AMANDA SCHWINDT PRASHANNA VIVEKANANDA ZAC WATSON

INTRODUCTION 1

PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this study is to review the study area in order to develop a variety of recommendations for methods of heritage conservations in the East Galt neighbourhood. As we will see later in this paper 100% of our survey respondents agreed that heritage preservation in their community was important to them. As each recommendation varied in it’s degree of historic conservation the most appropriate one may be analyzed and implemented to sustain this community into the future. Ultimately, this report aims to stabilize the residents, better maintain properties and prevent undesirable new developments within the existing neighbourhood. In addition to this, the report will also suggest a community boundary determined by tangible and nontangible elements. This boundary will help to improve the sense of community felt within and around the East Galt area in the hopes of bringing together residents and ultimately increasing the desire to maintain the unique characters currently found in the neighbourhood.

Figure 1.1 : Cambridge Geographical Context for East Galt Neighbourhood.

RESEARCH METHODS Data presented in this report was obtained from two methods; information pertaining to the perception and attitude towards the neighbourhood was collected during a door-to-door survey of residents, while background information and recommendations were concluded through secondary research methods. The door-to-door survey was completed on various times and dates by 20 fourth year University of Waterloo students. The study area contains approximately 600 residential dwellings 211 of which were surveyed, requiring each surveyor to visit 10 dwellings. Houses, which were contacted, were chosen randomly by counting every third house in the area. The survey used for the study was based on a previously created template and modified by the students with suggestions from Planners from the City of Cambridge. This survey was then sent to and approved by the University of Waterloo’s Office of Research Ethics. The secondary research used for the background information, policies and the development of recommendations came in the form of maps and heritage reports. Fire Insurance Plans and Historic maps of the site were found in the University of Waterloo’s Rare Books Collection and the Map Library, while the Cambridge Heritage Master Plan and Dilse Heritage Report were found both online and in hard copy. 8

SITE DESCRIPTION The East Galt neighbourhood is located in the southern end of the City of Cambridge within the former City of Galt. Downtown Cambridge is located just west of our site set along the Grand River making an aesthetics and desirable destination for surrounding residents. The study area can be seen in Figure 1.2. This predetermined neighbourhood boundary has been proposed by our client and proposed alternative options will be presented according to this report’s findings. The majority of the land within the site is consumed by low density, single detached, residential dwelling with pockets of alternative uses spread throughout the site; these include commercial, medium density residential and institutional use. Many of the buildings within the study area are constructed of fieldstone and granite exteriors. These materials are characteristic of the Galt area as they were popular building materials used by both Scottish and German settlers (Middleton, 2011). This trait is a good representation of Galt’s historic origin and differentiates the community from adjacent areas (Middleton, 2011). Surrounding the site are multiple land uses, which contribute to the East Galt neighbourhood’s livelihood and cultural success. Green space existing to the Westerly edge of the neighborhood is made up of two public parks. Centennial Park is a small 0.5 hectare space located on the North East corner of Main St and Spruce St (City Departments: Parks, 2012). Within the park are pedestrian pathways converging at Gore Tower, a pavilion that once sat atop the distinctive Gore Mutual Insurance headquarters. Soper Park is much larger and is primarily contained between the northern ends of Spruce St and Shade St. This park is comprised of more than 16 hectares with a variety of uses sustained within it, including floral displaces, tennis courts, baseball fields, benches and picnic spaces (City Departments: Parks, 2012). Furthermore there are multiple institutional uses throughout and surrounding the study area, made up of both religious and educational facilities. Finally Ainslie Bus Terminal can be found West of the site creating connectivity to other parts of the Region of Waterloo and throughout Southern Ontario.

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF G GU UE E LL P PH H -E ER RA AM MO OS SA A

HILLTOP DR

E PARK HILL RD

DU N

S LA

LAU RIS

AVE

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF W WO OO O LL W W II C CH H

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF P PU US S LL II N NC CH H

AVE

C C II TT Y Y O O FF K K II TT C CH HE EN NE ER R

S PR

RLY VE BE

E ST

WELLINGTON ST

COLBORN E ST

CAMBRIDGE ST

LINN W OOD

ING AVE

CU MM

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O OFF N NO OR R TT H H D DU UM M FF R R II E ES S

HTON

Legend

EL GIN

AINSLIE ST N

THORNE ST

ME CHAL

DICKSON ST

Heritage Character Study Area

ST N

PETTY PL

Parcels LOWE

COLN LIN

Official Plan Land Use

AV E

LL ST

Galt City Centre; Preston Towne Centre; Hespeler Village (See Maps 3, 4 and 5)

BALL AVE

Low / Medium Density Residential

L ST

High Density Residential OE ST

Blair Core Area

MIL

MO NR

OA K

Rural Residential RICH AVE AMBER

AINSLIE ST S

LUTZ ST

ST RIS

POLLO CK

H AR

OUR PL

ALTH LA NE

Future Urban Reserve Rural Prime Agricultural

VAL

ON WE

EY AV LOWR

COMM

Commercial Class 1

AVE

OR O SV EN GR

Commercial Class 4

MAIN

WARNOCK ST

Commercial Class 3

AY CATH

LA NE

Commercial Class 2

TON

Commercial Class 5

WE LL

ING

Business Industrial

HAL WH ITE

Employment Corridor

E L LAN ST

Industrial

PE CK

AR TH

BR UCE

ITE

Recreation, Cemetery and Open Space Natural Open Space System

ST S

EL GIN

LL ST

LOWE

AVE

RON

OLM CHISH

MCKENZIE ST

Prestige Industrial

CA ME

HAV

ILL ST

WALNUT ST RID GE

LOW

ST S

1:2,000

AV E

EA ST

PH ER

AV E

S AVE

GE R

OP E

TO CHRIS

R EY

SC RIM

ION

DU DH

Y 168 LANEWA

ESS CONC

MERS C HAL

MAPLE

ELLIO

TT ST

CENTRE ST

Figure 1.2 : Initial Proposed Neighbourhood Boundary

Disclaimer: This document is subject to copyright and may only be used for your personal, non-commercial use, provided you keep intact the copyright notice. The City of Cambridge assumes no responsibility for any errors and is not liable for any damages of any kind resulting from the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this document. The City of Cambridge does not make any representations or warranty, express or implied, concerning the accuracy, quality, likely results or reliability of the use of the information contained in this document.

Technology Services GIS Division Wednesday, February 1, 2012 9:08:17 AM G:\RestrictedGIS\Information Products\Planning\Mxd\JHoran_EastGalt_HCS.mxd - walkern

BACKGROUND 2

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The development of the area of what is now Galt began in 1784 when the British Crown gave the Native North Americans all land along the Grand River stretching six miles deep on each side of the river starting from Lake Erie (Gaiganov, 2008). The Natives led by their leader Joseph Brant had the land surveyed in 1791 and they divided it into areas for native reserves and large areas of land that they intended to sell to developers. 90, 000 acres of the surveyed land along the river were acquired by William Dickson in 1816 and were divided into North and South Dumfries (which at the time contained Galt). The purpose of this new settlement was to attract mainly Scottish settlers to Canada, which was successfully accomplished as Rev. William Wye Smith a Scottish settler wrote in a newspaper article, “On June 4th, 1837, I spent the day in Galt and had a good opportunity to see what the embryo of the city was like. Man! The Doric you heard on the streets then! Remember there was not a soul born in the place! All immigrants.” (Taylor, 1970, p.185). What is now Galt began as a settlement that was know as Shades Mill, this changed though in 1825 when the settlement was deemed large enough to receive a post office. The post office was named after the Scottish novelist and Commissioner of the Canada Company, John Galt and this name was eventually given to the whole settlement. In the late 1830’s Dickson’s settlement began to develop and successful industrial base that was know for its quality and a town developed that became known as “The Manchester of Canada”. The settlement kept growing steadily and eventually in January of 1850 Galt held its first election voting in six city councilors (Taylor, 1970). It wasn’t until the late 1960’s that Galt became the part of Cambridge that we know it as today (Gaiganov, 2008). During this time the government was exploring strategies to make municipal governments more effective, which resulted in more power being given to the County of Waterloo. The end result of this process was that the City of Galt would amalgamate with the towns of Preston and Hespeler to form what is modern day Cambridge.

Figure 2.3 : East Galt in 1851

Figure 2.1 : East Galt Plots

Figure 2.2 : Dilse Report Map

Figure 2.4 : East Galt in 1867

HERITAGE DESCRIPTION The development of East Galt was intended to be an area that would house many of the wealthier residents of Galt. Some notable names of citizens that settled in this neighborhood include Robert Wilkins, James MacKendrick, William Crane, and Fred Mellish. Fred Melish, who lived at 200 Main Street was a Galt born architect. He had a very established career working on some of Cambridge’s most beautiful heritage buildings such as the Galt hospital, the Gore Mutual Insurance Company Head Office at Main and Ainslie, he two-storey section of the Galt Market Building, the Galt Fire Hall, and the Galt Carnegie Library (City of Cambridge, 2004). Another notable citizen that lived in East Galt was Robert Wilkins who was an established merchant in Galt and who was the owner of the Wilkins Block, which was constructed circa 1863. The pattern of development of East Galt started on the west side of the neighborhood on Spruce and Oak Street and continued east from that point. Development of the neighborhood started with the properties that lie on the brow or below the hill which were developed in the 1850’s and into the 1860’s. The next development in the East Galt neighborhood was the subdivision between Chalmers and Elgin street north; this development was started in the 1880’s. The last area of developed to take place in the East Galt area was the Lincoln and Lowrey Street development, which was built in the nineteenth century.

HERITAGE REVIEW This section of the report is an overall review of the existing physical character of the buildings and streets that are located within the East Galt/Oak Street Neighbourhood study area. Focus is on the current characteristics of:

• • • •

the existing residential buildings that make up the neighbourhood, particularly the houses the existing non-residential buildings of the neighbourhood the characteristics of the existing streets, landscaping and public spaces of the neighbourhood the perimeter uses of the neighbourhood

BUILDINGS STUDY AREA OVERVIEW The existing East Galt/Oak Street Neighbourhood is a residential neighbourhood consisting primarily of older single detached houses. Mixed within this dominant housing type, are a few older semidetached houses, a few houses that have been altered into apartments, a few houses that have been converted to commercial uses, newer houses, an apartment building, and an industrial building adapted for residential use. Within this neighbourhood, there are also a minor number of commercial and institutional uses, consisting of a few retail uses, a funeral home, two dental offices, a church and a Muslim academy. The commercial uses are located along the main traffic streets; Main Street and Concession Street. The institutional uses are located off the main streets. Properties located at perimeter or edge of the study area have a greater mix of uses consisting of two schools, the Gore Insurance Head office, a few older industrial buildings, apartment buildings, new townhouses, parks, and a variety of older and newer houses. Heritage-wise, the composition of this neighbourhood can be described as one of Cambridge’s/Galt’s oldest residential neighbourhoods consisting primarily of well maintained older single detached Victorian era, late 1800’s, and early Edwardian era, early 1900’s, of which these houses include a high diversity of architectural styles and a high concentration of old granite houses.

HOUSES This character review of the East Galt/Oak Street Neighbourhood study area concurs with the information included in the City’s 2008 Cambridge Heritage Master Plan, and the referenced Dilse’s 1981 heritage review document titled - A Remarkable Heritage – Programmes and Polices for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. In brief, the Cambridge Heritage Master Plan, and the Dilse’s document describes the heritage character of the neighbourhood’s housing as: • predominantly one and two storey large homes for the middle and upper class (note: there are also many 1 ½ and 2 ½ storey houses and smaller houses for the working class) • predominantly built during late 1800’s and early 1900’s (note: there are also many mid 1900’s houses) • most mid 1800’s houses are located closer to the western side which corresponds to the neighbourhood’s street development from west to east • house styles are predominately of the Victorian and Edwardian eras (Dilse, 1981, p.99; Cambridge Heritage Master Plan, 2008, p. 125). Note: The Cambridge Heritage Master Plan refers to this neighbourhood as “Neighbourhood of Oak Street”. Dilse’s heritage document refers to this neighbourhood as “Galt’s Eastern Hill”. A brief analysis of Dilse’s 1981 heritage review of this neighbourhood is warranted as it provides a significant benchmark to this current review. The neighbourhood boundaries identified in Dilse’s “Galt’s East Hill” Neighbourhood are very similar to the City’s current study area {Fig 4.1]. This neighbourhood is identified as number 6 on Dilse’s Heritage Conservation Recognition Areas (Dilse, 1981, p. 70). In comparison, the current study area also: • includes properties on the south side of Concession Street • includes properties on Lowrey Street North • includes properties on Cumming Avenue • includes additional properties on Lincoln and Spruce Streets • excludes properties on Harris Street and Maple Ridge Street • excludes properties on the west side of Spruce Street • excludes properties on Main Street east of Chalmers Street

Figure 4.1 – Partial Plan of Galt’s Heritage Conservation Recognition Areas 13

HERITAGE REVIEW HOUSE STYLES, MATERIALS & AGE Dilse’s report includes and briefly identifies a sample 52 houses of heritage value of which the majority are located within the current study area (Dilse, 1981, pp. 100 – 110). The architectural styles identified in this sampling include a wide range of 17 architectural styles in which the dominant style was “High Victorian Gothic”. The range included:

• • • • • • • • • • •

15 High Victorian Gothic 7 Ontario Cottages 6 Gothic Revivals 3 High Victorian Italianate 3 Georgian Italianate 3 Queen Anne 2 Georgian 2 High Victorian Georgian 2 Cottage 2 Second Empire 1 each of High Victorian, High Victorian Cottage, Italianate, Romanesque Revival, Georgian Cottage, Edwardian, and French Chateau

Dilse also identifies a wide range of the exterior wall building materials; the majority of houses in his sampling are identified as granite houses. The range included:

• • • • • •

32 Granite houses 12 Brick houses of which the 8 where yellow brick 3 Rough Cast Plaster houses 2 Limestone houses 2 Limestone/Granite houses 1 Clapboard house

It should be noted that within this majority of granite houses there is a range of granite coursing types, colours and joint finishes. Identification of architectural style and the identification of the exterior wall building material are important to assisting in estimating the approximate age of the houses. As identified by Dilse, granite houses tend to predate yellow brick which tends to predate red brick houses [Fig. 4.2]. Figure. 4.2 – Building Material Dating 14

Dilse’s house sampling of architectural styles and material identification indicates that the houses in this neighbourhood are predominantly constructed from the mid 1800’s to the early 1900’s, which corresponds to the Victorian and Edwardian architectural style eras. Further evidence that many of the houses of this study area where constructed by the early 1900’s is confirmed by review of 1910 fire insurance maps – refer to Figures 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6 for examples. (Source: City of Cambridge Archives) The construction age dating provided by Dilse’s heritage review and fire insurance maps are consistent with dating indicated on the City of Cambridge’s Building Age map [Fig. 4.7]. The City’s Age Map clearly indicates that the properties and buildings (houses) within the study area consist of:

• • • •

a few pre-1850 houses many late 19th century houses many early 19th houses up to 1950 a few post 1950 houses

Figure 4.3 – Partial Fire Map of Chisholm St - 1910

Figure 4.4 – Partial Fire Map of MacNaughton St - 1910

Figure 4.6 – Partial Fire Map of MacKenzie St - 1910

Figure 4.5 – Partial Fire Map of Chalmers St - 1910 15

HERITAGE REVIEW 4

The properties east and south of the study area, which are also primarily residential houses, are primarily of post 1900 construction, which characteristically are quite different than the 19th century architectural character of the East Galt/Oak Street residential neighbourhood. RE

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF G GU UE E LL P PH H -E ER RA AM MO OS SA A

HILLTOP DR

E PARK HILL RD

DU ND

LAURIS AVE

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF W WO OO O LL W W II C CH H

C C II TT Y Y O O FF K K II TT C CH HE EN NE ER R

SP RU

RLY VE BE

E ST

WELLINGTON ST

COLBORNE ST

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF P PU US S LL II N NC CH H

AVE

CAMBRIDGE ST

LINN W OOD

MIN G

AVE

CUM

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O OFF N NO OR R TT H H D DU UM M FF R R II E ES S

ELG

AINSLIE ST N

THORNE ST

HTON

Legend

IN ST

ME CHAL

DICKSON ST

Heritage Character Study Area

ST N

PETTY PL

Parcels LOWE

COLN LIN

Building Age - Tax Services

LL ST N

AVE

Year Built 1804 - 1850

BALL AVE

1851 - 1900 L ST

1901 - 1950

MIL

ROE MON

OAK

1951 - 2000 RICH AVE

2001 - 2012 AMB

AINSLIE ST S

LUTZ ST

RIS

LAN E

H AR

POLLOC K

AVE

Y ST CATHA

R LA NE

MAIN

WE LLI

NGT ON

WARNOCK ST

ER RD

OUR

ALT H

VAL

ON WE

EY AVE LOWR

COMM

WHITEH

E ALL LAN

UR ITE

ELG S IN ST

M ST

LL ST

N ST

HOL

LOWE

AVE

ERO

CHIS

MCKENZIE ST

CAM

HAV ILL

K ST PEC

AR TH

CE ST BRU

WALNUT ST

LE RIDG

E RD LOW

N ST

ST S

AVE

AV E

S AVE

GE R

1:2,000

EA ST

HE R ISTOP

OP E

CHR

R EY

SC RIM

CES SIO

DU DH

Y 168 LANEWA

CON

MERS C HAL

MAP

ELLIO

TT ST

CENTRE ST

Figure 4.6 – City of Cambridge Building Age Map Disclaimer: This document is subject to copyright and may only be used for your personal, non-commercial use, provided you keep intact the copyright notice. The City of Cambridge assumes no responsibility for any errors and is not liable for any damages of any kind resulting from the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this document. The City of Cambridge does not make any representations or warranty, express or implied, concerning the accuracy, quality, likely results or reliability of the use of the information contained in this document.

Technology Services GIS Division Wednesday, February 1, 2012 9:08:17 AM G:\RestrictedGIS\Information Products\Planning\Mxd\JHoran_EastGalt_HCS.mxd - walkern

Another resource that identifies the Study Area’s architectural diversity and heritage significance is the October 2010 City of Cambridge Heritage Property Inventory. The City’s heritage inventory lists 10 properties that are designated under part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act that are located in the study area. Also listed are approximately 70 other house properties that are considered of heritage interest, although not designated under part IV. Some examples of designated houses are provided:

71 Bruce Street – High Victorian Italianate Style, 2 storey grey granite, designated for architectural significance.

29 McKenzie Street – Italianate Style, circa 1875, yellow brick, designated for architectural significance

16 McKenzie Street – Ontario Cottage Style, circa 1873, granite rubble stone, designated for architectural and historical value – original owner was Robert Wilkins who was prominent Galt merchant tailor and owner of downtown Wilkins block on Main Street

Our current review of this heritage study area confirms the large diversity of architectural styles and construction materials, but, also concludes that the diversity is greater than reported in the Dilse report or included in the current City of Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory. The Dilse report concentrates primarily on pre-1900 houses and doesn’t include significant post 1900 houses. The City’s Heritage Properties Inventory also includes other architectural styles, such as fine examples of Edwardian Classical houses and related Foursquare style, however, the mix of styles is even more diverse. Also included in this neighbourhood are good examples of older bungalows, Victory houses, Victorian Tudor, and more modern bungalows. There are also many fine examples of several vernacular types, both late 1800’s and 1900’s. To illustrate the wide range of architectural styles, materials and age of the neighbourhood refer to the next section of photos for examples of significant houses, many which are listed in Disle report and also listed in the Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory.

63 Oak Street – Queen Anne Revival, circa. 1885, granite, designated for architectural significance

Example of Georgian Italianate, granite rubble stone, semi-detached – 18 (left) and 16 Cameron Street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory.

200 Main Street – referred to “Wedding Cake” clapboard cottage, circa. 1882, home of prominent Galt Architect, Fred Mellish, architect of many prominent Galt buildings including Carnegie Library and Old Galt Fire Hall.

Example of High Victorian Gothic, ashlar grey granite – 47 Spruce Street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory 17

HERITAGE REVIEW 4

Example of Gothic Revival, ashlar grey granite – 8 Cameron Street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

29 McKenzie Street – Italianate Style, circa 1875, yellow brick, designated for architectural significance

Example of Ontario Cottage, rough cast plaster – 32 Cameron street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of Second Empire, ashlar grey granite – 26 McKenzie street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of Tudor, yellow buff brick – 227 Main Street

Example of Bungalow – 115 Main Street 18

Example of Edwardian era, granite and limestone – 75 Pollock, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of Ontario Cottage, grey granite – 13 Chalmers street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of Queen Anne, red brick – 22 Oak Street

Example of Edwardian Classical, red brick – 47 and 49 Ball Street

Example of Bungalow House – 77 Bruce street, included in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of French Chateau, yellow brick – 7 Cathay Street, included in Dilse report and in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory 19

HERITAGE REVIEW 4

Example of newer bungalow (related to Victory house shape) – 220 Main Street

Example of Victory Houses – 59 (left) and 57 Lowrey Street

Example of Town Vernacular, yellow brick – 35 McNaughton Street, included in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Example of builder houses – 26 and 28 Rich Street

Example of Newer Bungalow – 14 Havill Street

Example of Bungalow House – 45 Pollock, included in Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory

Note: To assist in verification of architectural styles, several key reference books on Ontario Heritage Styles have been used, including:

• Blumenson, J. (1990). Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 1784 to the Present. Fitzhenry & Whiteside. • McIlwraith, T. (1997). Looking for Old Ontario – Two Centuries of Landscape Change. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press (for Vernacular Architecture) • Mikel, R. (2004). Ontario House Styles. Toronto: James Wrimer & Company Ltd.

In summary, there are several physical building character elements that make this a significant heritage neighbourhood:

• A large number of older mid to late 1900’s granite houses (note: there are over 40 granite houses in the study area) • A large diversity of architectural styles with a range of older building materials • And in general, the majority appear well maintained and without major changes affecting their original construction

To further illustrate the above significance, in the context of other older Galt residential neighbourhoods, a brief comparison to Galt’s Dickson’s Hill and Galt’s Northern Hill is warranted. Without question the houses on Dickson Hill are significant for their beautiful range architectural styles, ornamental brick detailing, well maintained appearances, and cultural association to early upper middle class Galt citizens [Fiq. 4.7], (Disle, 1981, p. 87). Of major significance, as also mentioned by Dilse, many of the houses of East Galt Hill are older, which is evident by the large number of granite houses. From a cultural heritage value viewpoint, the Galt East Hill neighbourhood has a significant large concentration of well maintained, old granite houses, of various architectural styles located in an early middle class residential neighbourhood, which maybe the oldest neighbourhood in Cambridge, although not confirmed. This may also be one of the best examples of a neighbourhood with high concentration of granite houses in Southwestern Ontario, although further research would be required to confirm this. In comparison to Galt’s Northern Hill, we concur with Dilse assessment that the housing is similar in variety to the East Hill, but appear to have had more alterations [Fig. 4.8], (Dilse, 1981, p. 95, p. 99).

Figure 4.8: 104 Beverly Street - example of altered house in Galt’s Northern Hill – newer siding applied to exterior of house

Figure 4.7: Example of houses in Dickson Hill – large, brick, well maintained homes on large lots – s/w corner of Lansdowne Road North and Wentworth Avenue. 21

HERITAGE REVIEW 4

OTHER STUDY AREA BUILDINGS Commercial and Institutional Buildings Within this neighbourhood, there are a minor number of commercial and institutional uses. Most of the commercial uses are located in former houses that have been altered for the new use. There is also evidence of a few house properties that were altered for commercial uses, but no longer used for that purpose. Refer to the photos below or examples of commercial and institutional uses within the study area.

Institutional: Cambridge Community Church – s/e corner of Lincoln Street and Pollock Street

Institutional: Ontario Muslim Academy – 100 Pollock Street

Commercial: Funeral Home – 223 Main Street

Commercial: Dental Office – 96 Concession Street

Commercial: Restaurant (left side), Flower Shop – Corner of Main Street and Spruce Street

Commercial: Water Retailer – 68 Pollock Street

Residential Non-Houses The primary dwelling type in this study area is the single detached house. There are a few semidetached houses as well as a few houses that appear to have been altered to include apartments [Fig. 4.9]. There are only a few buildings that provide dwelling units in a non-house type. There is a small 18 unit apartment building at 176 Main Street [Fig. 4.10], and 14 dwelling units located in a converted industrial building on Spruce Street [Fig. 4.11]. There are also a couple of very small apartment buildings within this study area.

Fig. 4.9: 10 Lincoln Street – example of alternation/addition to house for apartments

Fig. 4.10: 176 Main Street – Small Apartment Building

Fig. 4.11: Industrial building converted to Residential – Spruce Street

Conditions In general, it appears that the houses in this study area are fairly well maintained, however, there are some examples of questionable alternations, and lack of maintenance that reduces the overall quality of the architectural heritage character of the neighbourhood. Refer to photos below for examples of nonsympathetic alternations, changes and deterioration. Also refer to section 6 for threats to the architectural integrity of the neighbourhood.

Questionable Design

Questionable Landscape Planting

Abandoned House

Lost Porch

Questionable Front Addition

Questionable Siding

HERITAGE REVIEW STREETSCAPES

Scale There are several common details in describing the streetscape scale features in the East Galt Hill study area, especially when compared to many newer subdivision neighbourhoods:

• • • • • •

Streets are typically tree lined with large mature trees Density is generally higher resultant from smaller lots Streets are generally narrower compared with newer neighbourhoods Streets tend to be shorter (had to be walkable prior to cars) Houses tend to be closer to the street, often includes a covered porch Typically, if there is a car garage, it is detached and at back of house (most of these older houses were built before cars), such that the front house elevation is fully visible • Houses vary in size but, the older houses tend to be higher as floor to floor heights were often higher than with newer houses • Some street lights tend to be shorter, and on Oak and Lincoln Streets there are the notable historic Edwardian Globe Lights which are also associated with Dickson Hill and several west side downtown streets

The above features are generally associated with a pedestrian friendly scaled streetscape. Below are examples of typical streetscapes in this neighbourhood.

View West along Main Street From Spruce Street Park – just outside of study area

View East from downtown along Main Street – looking up to park and Gore tower cupola

View East at Concession and Main Streets – Approximate East side entrance to study area

View East along McNaughton Street – looking to North side of downtown

View East along Concession Street 24

View West along Concession Street

Streets, Landscapes and Public Places “Edwardian street lamps grace Oak and Lincoln” (Dilse, 1981, p. 99). Typically, two street elements are commonly mentioned in most literature descriptions of the study area: the old globe street lamps on Oak and Lincoln Streets, and the mature trees that line most streets. Although more prominent on Galt’s Dickson Hill, the street globe lights are a major feature in the East Galt Hill neighbourhood. Located just outside the study area, the old Gore tower cupola, which overlooks the downtown Main Street, is commonly associated as an East Galt focal point. Besides these three items; Edwardian Globe street lights, mature trees and the old Gore tower cupola, there are other street and landscape features that are located in the study area, such as the treed ravine (western edge of the East Hill), many stone retaining walls, a couple of small parkettes, and landscaped front house yards. Refer to the photos below for examples of these street and landscaped elements.

Stone Retaining Walls – Concession Street and Cameron Streets

Globe Street Lights – Located on Oak and Lincoln Streets

Stairs – To Park on Spruce Street (just outside of study area)

Street Signs – Oak Street and Main Street (standard street signs)

Side walk jogs to Accommodate Existing Trees – Oak Street

Mature Trees – Pollock Street – Located along all Neighbourhood Streets

Views and Viewpoints Important to the enjoyment of many urban neighbourhoods are public viewports that permit special views to and from locations within the neighbourhood. Often these are located from public spaces or along major streets. For example, a distinct view to a landmark such as a church spire or the city hall would be an example of a special viewport. The most distinguishable viewports in this neighbourhood tend to be views to the downtown along Concession, Main and McNaughton Streets. Although located just outside the study area, the most spectacular viewport is from the small park on Spruce Street that gives an incredible vista along Main Street all the way up to Dickson Hill. 25

HERITAGE REVIEW 4

PERIMETER USES

The East Galt/Oak Street Neighbourhood study area is predominantly residential and consists of a lot of older, mid to late 1800’s single detached houses. This is distinctly different from most of the perimeter uses which range from large residential apartment buildings, institutional buildings, commercial buildings, minor industrial and parks. On the west and south of this neighbourhood are also many single detached houses, but, the type tends to be predominantly newer houses. The exceptions, which are similar to this neighbourhood are the older houses at the base of the hill/ravine along Harris, Maple Ridge and Shade Streets, as well as houses located for a couple of blocks further east on Concession Street. Both of these similar areas were also included in the Dilse report. Refer to the photos below for examples of the surrounding perimeter uses.

Central Public School – 175 Main Street

Lincoln Avenue Senior Public School – 77 Lincoln Street

Gore Insurance Head Office – View to rear of office building at north end of Lincoln Street

Lowell Street North – Typical of Smaller Newer Houses located east of study area

Robert Kerr Manor – 143 Concession Street, apartments located south of study area

Galt Arena - located on Shade Street West of study area

New Town houses - Bruce Street – located west of study area

Park – with old Gore Tower on Spruce Street – located just west of study area

Old Industrial Building – south side of Spruce street converted to residential units.

Statement of Significance Under the auspices of the Heritage Places Initiative, a joint federal and provincial undertaking headed by Parks Canada between 2004 and 2010 a nationally recognized set of Standards and Guidelines for Historic Conservation was developed. At the same time Ontario developed and issued Ontario Regulation 9/06 under the Ontario Planning Act. This regulation sets out the reasons for designation or recognition of the heritage value of a site, area of property. The way in which these guidelines and regulations are given shape is through the creation of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Statement of Significance.â&#x20AC;? Drawing on the information contained in the preceding section, Heritage Review, a draft Statement of Significance for East Galt is contained as Appendix D of this report.

PLANNING POLICIES & DEVELOPMENT TOOLS 4

Planning in Ontario is controlled by a number guiding legislative documents, which lay out the framework for all planning applications province wide. At the Regional Planning Policy level municipalities have the ability to enforce there own polices at a more focused level. Over recent years, the planning and conservation of Heritage Resources has become more prevalent as cities and regions begin to recognize the significance of preserving cultural heritage. This however, has brought about some contentious issues between private landowners and municipal governments in the past over whether or not heritage designation affects land value. This section will identify the documents that are directly and indirectly related to Heritage Conservation within the City of Cambridge, and the planning tools which they provide; particularly those that would allow the designation of a formal boundary or area for East Galt, and the preservation of heritage attributes that present within the East Galt study area.

PROVINCIAL POLICY There are three key documents which play major roles in the development of urban growth, and one which relates specifically to the role of protecting Heritage resources, they are; the Ontario Planning Act RSO 1990, the Ontario Heritage Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, and the Places to Grow act.

ONTARIO PLANNING ACT The Ontario Planning Act is a written piece of legislation, which guides planning, and development throughout Ontario. There are two sections within the Ontario Planning Act which could be directly related to the preservation of heritage communities. The first being Part IV relating to community improvement, and section 41 relating to site plan control area. Part IV of the OPA allows a municipality to set by-laws within their official plans which relate to Community Improvement. Section 28 defines a Community Improvement Area as; “a municipality or an area within a municipality, the community improvement of which in the opinion of the council is desirable because of age, dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement, unsuitability of buildings or for any other environmental, social or community economic development reason.” (“zone d’améliorations communautaires”){R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, s. 28 (1); 2001, c. 17, s. 7 (1, 2); 2006, c. 23, s. 14 (1). } Essentially Part IV of the Planning Act allows the municipality to pass by-laws relating to Community improvement, provided that there are provisions within the municipality’s official plan that allow for it. By designating East Galt a community Improvement Project area, the city could then prepare a community improvement plan which promoted historic characteristics within East Galt, and include policies which deal with building standards, and the beautification of streetscapes such as increasing the globe street lighting used throughout the area and East Galt specific street signs. 28

HERITAGE ACT The Ontario Heritage Act regulates the criteria and development tools which regard to the designation of Properties of Cultural Value and Heritage Conservation Districts. Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act allows municipalities to designate individual properties if they are of cultural or architectural interest under section 29 of the OHA. Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act relates to the designation of Heritage Conservation Districts. The OHA enables the municipality to do a number of things, including S.41(1) allowing a municipality to designate “the municipality or any defined area or areas thereof as a heritage conservation district.” (R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18, s. 41 (1); 2002, c. 18, Sched. F, s. 2 (23)) Although part V designation is not the focus of this report, there are sections within the Ontario Heritage Act that provide relevant information for assessing heritage and cultural values. East Galt at this time, there are some sections that provide relevant information. For example, Ontario Regulation 9/06 provides the criteria for determining a property of cultural value or interest. This could be used to set the standards for determining the cultural and architectural heritage values if a Statement of Significance was made a requirement for the designation of a heritage character area. This could be done through an Official Plan Amendment, by which an added a policy that requires a SOS be prepared during any municipal effort to designate a Heritage Character Area. The Kingston Official Plan has a similar policy in 7.1.7 which states the following. “7.1.7. The City may require that a heritage impact statement be prepared by a qualified person to the satisfaction of the City for any development proposal, including a secondary plan, which has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource…. A heritage impact statement may be required where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within a heritage conservation district or heritage area is proposed. (Amended by By-Law No. 2011-89, OPA #6)” A similar policy could be drafted within the Cambridge Official Plan requiring a Statement of Significance be attached to any application to designate a heritage character area. A draft Official Plan Amendment Policy has been drafted, and attached to the end of this report.

Figure 3.1 : Sketches of East Galt Houses from the Dilse Report

PLANNING POLICIES & DEVELOPMENT TOOLS 4

PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT The provincial policy statement is not an enabling piece of legislation like the OPA or OHA, rather it is a guiding set of principles and objectives which represent the minimum standards that should be considered by all municipalities within Ontario. Section 2.6 sets the provincial standards for Cultural Heritage and Archeology, stating that “significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved in section 2.6.1 (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005). Furthermore, section 2.6.3 states that development and site alteration may only be permitted on properties adjacent to heritage properties where it has been demonstrated that the proposed development does not affect the heritage attributes of the property are conserved. (PPS, 2005) The PPS (2005) goes on to state that “mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be required in order to conserve the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property affected by the adjacent development or site alteration”. With regards to East Galt, the policies within the PPS are directed mostly towards protecting properties which have been designated officially. Ten of the houses that are within the study area of East Galt are formally designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and many of them are listed as properties of cultural interest within the City of Cambridge’s heritage Inventory Report. The residents within East Galt showed that they were knowledgeable of the history behind their properties, and that they believed heritage is an important community aspect through the survey results. Since there is a general knowledge within the area, it would be interesting to explore the idea of creating a living history book for the East Galt neighbourhood. It may contain stories about properties or their owners, identify families, and so on. However it is unclear how many property owners are informed of the beneficial aspects of heritage designation under Part IV. Therefore it would likely be beneficial to contact homeowners who may be interested in a heritage designation, and beginning to educate the general population of what a heritage designation really means.

REGIONAL & LOCAL POLICY The Region of Waterloo and the City of Cambridge recognize the significance of preserving cultural heritage resources. The city and Region have worked together to develop and implement integrated policy and tools to preserve important heritage resources on both the larger-scale regional level and within the 30

municipal context of the City of Cambridge. To ensure an integrated commitment to preserving heritage and maximum viability of a heritage preservation program, The Region of Waterloo and the City of Cambridge have taken top down approach to the process. Starting at the Regional Level, The Region of Waterloo’s Official Plan addresses the regional goals and direction in terms of cultural heritage preservation. The Region of Waterloo’s Official Plan also denotes the smaller- scale objectives within the region and the responsibility of secondary plans and specific policy in ensuring the success of the regional goals. The city of Cambridge is a city located within the boundaries of the Region of Waterloo and has their own official plan. Section 4.0 in the cities official plan is titled: Cultural Heritage Resources, and outlines objectives, criteria, resources and funding of Cultural Heritage Resources. To support the cities goals in terms of cultural heritage resource preservation, the City has already created a Heritage Master Plan, which guides the City’s plans for finding, assessing, conserving and displaying heritage resources. Another important set of policy when assessing the opportunities and constraints for heritage resource conservation within the city of Cambridge are the municipal zoning by-laws, which designated the land-uses for individual parcels of land within the city.

REGION OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN The region of Waterloo’s Official Plan heavily endorses the notion of heritage resource conservation. The first section of the Regions Official Plan, which refers to the conservation of heritage resources, is chapter 2 titled, Shaping Waterloo Region’s Urban Communities. Within Chapter 2 of the Official Plan, the sub-section: General Development Policies ensures that all development within the urban area is planned and managed in a specific manner that will be advantageous for direct stakeholders and the general public. Sub-section (e) of section 2.D.1 states that all development occurring within the urban area is planned and developed in a manner that: conserves cultural heritage resources and supports the adaptive reuse of historic buildings. Section 2.B of the official plan addresses planned community structure within the region. The policy ensures that planned community structure reflects the intent of the Regional Growth Management Strategy and provides a framework for decision-making on a wide range of issues, including: land use and transportation planning, environmental protection, cultural heritage, economic development and priorities for strategic infrastructure investments”. For the context of our community improvement plan for the East Galt neighborhood in the City of Cambridge, a policy approach that could be suitable, which is outlined within the Region of Waterloo’s official plan, is the creation of a community improvement plan. Implementing a regional community improvement plan would encourage community improvement through the designation of Community Improvement Project Areas.

CAMBRIDGE OFFICIAL PLAN While the Region of Waterloo holds a strong regional support of heritage conservation, demonstrated through some key policies in the regional Official Plan, The City of Cambridge is equally as committed to preserving and restoring heritage. Section 4.0 in the cities official plan is titled: Cultural Heritage Resources, and outlines objectives, criteria, resources and funding of Cultural Heritage Resources. Some of the primary objectives identified in Section 4.0 of Cambridge’s Official Plan are to “support the conservation, restoration and distinction of the city’s built heritage as a key identifying feature of the community”; “co-ordinate the City’s heritage interests with property owners, local business improvement 31

PLANNING POLICIES & DEVELOPMENT TOOLS 4

areas and other special interests; and “support the designation of cultural heritage resources under the Ontario Heritage Act and the conservation of cultural heritage resources through the Planning Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, the Cemeteries Act and the Municipal Act”. Section 4 of the Official Plan also discusses registration and designation of heritage properties, heritage conservation districts, cultural heritage landscapes, and heritage character areas. Section 10 of the Official Plan offers some possible policy approaches, which could be applied to increase the recognition and preservation of certain areas within the urban boundaries of Cambridge. The first option outlined within section 10, titled: Implementation, is Secondary Plans and Community Improvement Plans. “Secondary Plans and Community Plans can be prepared for localities, districts, neighborhoods within the city to offer more direct planning objectives and policy framework to direct and channel development. Secondary Plans and Community Plans approved by Council should conform to the City of Cambridge’s Official Plan and with the Regional Official Plan and should demonstrate how the policies of this Plan can implemented”. Secondary plans can be integrated into the Cities Official Plan through an Official Plan amendment. The city generally approves Secondary Plan amendments to the official plan based on a ranging set of criteria. Two aspects of the East Galt study area which particularly relate to two sets of criteria are, c) mix and range of housing types and densities; and h) cultural heritage resources. Currently, the whole of the City of Cambridge is designated as a site plan control area by the City of Cambridge By-law No. 68-10. However in its current form, the by-law is restricted from affecting any residential single family dwellings, two-family dwellings or detached triplexes. The City may then comment and request changes with relation to design standards, massing and conceptual views of the proposed building, sustainable design elements, including others before approving the development application.

CAMBRIDGE HERITAGE MASTER PLAN The City of Cambridge created a Heritage Master Plan in 2008 to outline direct goals objectives of the city in terms of preserving heritage resources and focus on a municipal commitment of planning for local heritage resources. The purpose of the guide is to address and report the “City’s plans for finding, assessing, conserving and celebrating heritage resources”. The Heritage master plan ensures that all development that occurs within Cambridge respects the heritage character of the area. It provides priorities and timelines for the cities course of action in heritage conservation and recommends policies for inclusion in the Cities official plan. A consulting team, BRAY Heritage, which were hired by the City of Cambridge, composed the Heritage Master Plan. Although the City has not yet adopted the plan, the city is becoming much more committed to heritage preservation and the eventual adoption could ensure the preservation of distinct heritage features, which created a unique sense of place in the City of Cambridge. The plan could offer new ways to monitor the effectiveness of the cities heritage conservation efforts. The Heritage Master Plan also recommends Projects and could lead to changes in the way the city manages its heritage and revises policies in the City’s Official Plan. 32

Section 3 of Cambridge’s Heritage Master Plan addresses strategies for improvement in heritage preservation within the City of Cambridge. One of the strategies explained in the Heritage Master Plan focuses on the study of heritage character areas. To identify potential significant cultural heritage areas, the project team used the existing municipal inventory, as well as previously prepared consultant reports (e.g. Dilse) to identify clusters of heritage resources. Once an area of heritage character is determined it may then become subject to additional planning processes such as secondary plans, special policy areas, urban design plans, or community improvement plans. Framework for enhanced heritage planning examination, including site plan control is also addressed within the heritage master plan. Site Plan Control systems are a way to attend to heritage conservation by setting legislation on built form and landscape design. Overall, the goal of the Heritage Master Plan is to find ways to improve and implement the heritage policy tools found in the City of Cambridge and Region of Waterloo’s Official Plan’s.

CAMBRIDGE ZONING BY-LAWS All development within the city of Cambridge is controlled through a set of land-use by-law policy called zoning. The existing zoning within the study area is illustrated below on the Cities Zoning map. improvement plan would encourage community improvement through the designation of Community Improvement Project Areas. The Zoning map displayed in Figure 3.2 below demonstrates the acceptable land-uses within the East Galt neighborhood. By observing the zoning map it shows that despite a very few number of outlying parcels zoned for commercial use and a few high-density residential developments, it seems evident that the neighborhood is primarily a low-density residential neighborhood.

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF G GU UE E LL P PH H -E ER RA AM MO OS SA A

HILLTOP DR

E PARK HILL RD

DU N

LAU RIS

AVE

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF W WO OO O LL W W II C CH H

C C II TT Y Y O O FF K K II TT C CH HE EN NE ER R

SP RU

RLY VE BE

WELLINGTON ST

COLBOR NE ST

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O O FF P PU US S LL II N NC CH H

D AVE

CAMBRIDGE ST

LINN W OO

E ING AV

CU MM

TT O OW WN NS SH H II P P O OFF N NO OR R TT H H D DU UM M FF R R II E ES S

AUG

H TO

N ST

Legend

M CN

N ST EL GI

AINSLIE ST N

THORNE ST

ME CHAL

DICKSON ST

Heritage Character Study Area

ST N

PETTY PL

Parcels LOWE

COLN LIN

Zoning

LL ST N

AV E

Agricultural

BALL AVE

Commercial

MILL ST

Industrial OE ST

Institutional

MO NR

OA K

Low Density Residential RICH AVE AMBE

AINSLIE ST S

LUTZ ST

RIS ST

H AR LA NE

AVE

UTH

GR O

SV EN

AY CATH

MAIN

W EL LI NG

TON

WARNOCK ST

R RD

POLLOCK

Open Space

AV E

ALTH LA NE

Medium High Density Residential

RE Y

VALO UR

ON WE

LOW

COMM

WH ITE

LA NE HALL E ST

PE CK

AR TH

BR UC

ITE

S N ST EL GI

ST ELL

OL M

LOW

AVE

RO N

CH ISH

MCKENZIE ST

CA ME

L HAVIL

WALNUT ST RID GE

LOW

1:2,000

EA ST

AV E

OP E

S AVE

R EY

DU DH

MGER SC RI

SIO N

HE R STOP CHRI

AY 168 LANEW

ES CONC

MERS C HAL

E MAPL

ST OTT ELLI

CE NT RE ST

Technology Services GIS Division

Figure 3.2 : Cambridge Zoning By-Law Map for East Galt

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 9:08:17 AM G:\RestrictedGIS\Information Products\Planning\Mxd\JHoran_EastGalt_HCS.mxd - walkern

SURVEY RESEARCH 5

SURVEY OVERVIEW

To better provide recommendations for heritage conservation in the East Galt area, public input was necessary to gain a better understanding of what residents value about their neighbourhood. To collect this primary data, a door-to-door survey was created and conducted to better understanding the public view. A blank copy of the survey is available in Appendix A. There are approximately 600 homes in the East Galt study area. Of the 600 homes, 211 properties were surveyed on the afternoons of Saturday, March 3rd and Sunday, March 4th, 2012. The result was a 53% overall response rate to the survey; however, 60 people chose not to participate and 52 completed the survey in full. The remaining 99 homes that did not respond were not at home at the time of the survey. The response rate was slightly lower than expected; however, the results show some interesting trends.

SURVEY METHODS

A sample of homes in the East Galt study area were chosen to complete the survey. Approximately every third home was chosen in order to ensure a consistent spread of the entire study neighborhood. The East Galt study area was partitioned into 16 sections in order to appoint surveyors to different areas within the site. Surveyors went to the designated addresses and engaged residents face-to-face. Each resident was informed that students at the University of Waterloo were conducting a survey and were asked if they would like to participate. Surveyors posed the questions and wrote down the responses. Materials used to conduct the survey included information letters to provide residents with additional information about the survey, see Appendix B. Surveyors also had the map of the study area and a list of addresses. Materials also included enough surveys for each home and two pictures, used for one of the survey questions. Survey replies have been condensed into categories to better illustrate resident responses. In the graphs that appear below, categories have been created if two or more people sited the same response. If a response was only given once, it was placed in the “Other” category. A complete list of responses for each survey question, including the individual “Other” responses are available in Appendix C. Additionally, percentages used in the following paragraphs to help express the data collected have been rounded to the nearest whole percent for clarity.

SURVEY RESULTS

This section of the report will (1) provide a brief summary of the demographics of survey participants and (2) offer a thorough overview of key findings from the most significant survey questions. Survey respondents were exactly 50% male and 50% female, negating any bias potentially associated with gender. Of those surveyed, 71% owned their property, while 29% were tenants. The survey proportion of owners to renters is exactly aligned with the regional average. According to the 2006 Census data from the Region of Waterloo, home ownership encompasses 71% of regional households compared to 29% that are rental (Region of Waterloo, n.d.). The majority of residents are relatively new to the area, as 44% of respondents have lived at their property between 0 – 5 years. The second largest, 17%, have lived at their property between 6 to 10 years. A third spike of 12% exists between 26 to 30 years. A handful of residents, 12%, have lived at the same property between 31 and 50 years. These findings are consistent with question two of the survey which asks, “Did you grow up in the neighbourhood?”. Only 13% of respondents indicated that they grew up in the neighbourhood, which helps explain the low percentage of residents that have lived on the same property for 31+ years.

Figure 5.3.1

When respondents were asked, “Why did you choose to live in this neighborhood?”, 44% of the responses indicated, “Visually appealing older homes”. “Location” and “Affordability” followed second and third, respectively. These results suggest that the built character of the neighbourhood plays a critical role in attracting people to live in the community. As the graph shows, there were many responses which fit under the “Other” category, responses include: “Big yard”, “Walkable”, “Trees” and “Unfenced backyards”, alluding to the outdoor character of the neighbourhood. The character of the homes and outdoor areas has been identified as a prominent force that keeps residents living in the area, as depicted in Figure 5.3.2.

SURVEY RESEARCH 5

Figure 5.3.2

As evident in Figure 5.3.2, “Location” (26%) is the main reason residents continue to live on their property in East Galt. The next two common responses were “Visually Appealing Older Homes” and “Safe”. These responses denote a certain comfort level with the neighbourhood.

Figure 5.3.3

Residents have clearly indicated that there are no contentious issues that would drive them to leave the East Galt neighbourhood. Question 6, as illustrated in Figure 5.3.3 asks residents, “Would you ever consider leaving this neighbourhood? If so, why?” The most sited responses were - “No”, “Downsize for retirement” and “Life Opportunities”. The majority of responses that were combined into “Life Opportunities” were related to job offers and travel. This would suggest that residents who live in this area expect to live there for the foreseeable future or until retirement age. In order to determine why these residents want to stay in the area, the following question asked residents if there’s anything in particular that sets this neighbourhood apart.

SURVEY RESEARCH 5

Figure 5.3.4

When residents were asked to identify what they believe makes their neighbourhood special or unique, an overwhelming majority produced responses related to neighborhood character. “Old homes”, “Large trees”, and “Mix of housing styles”, were the most mentioned responses among residents. These results reinforce the belief that residents choose to live in the area because of its historic built character and they believe it is this character that makes the East Galt neighbourhood unique. Resident reaffirmed this notion when asked to pick which community they would prefer to live in from two images. The first of the two images depicted a more historic neighbourhood similar to East Galt, while the second image portrayed a typical suburban neighbourhood. In an overwhelming majority, 92% of all survey participants choose the first historic looking neighbourhood as the preferred community in which to live. It is also interesting to note that for this survey question, many residents also cited the people that live in the community as making this area special. Some of the responses mention, “Long-Time Residents”, “Neighbours”, “Mix of people”, and “Family”, for uniqueness of the neighbourhood. These more social aspects of a neighbourhood account for 12% of the responses, which is significant considering the array of responses received. It is clear that the people in the neighbourhood are also important to residents as they consider the uniqueness of the East Galt neighbourhood.

Figure 5.3.5

An extensive inventory of responses was collected when residents were asked to identify landmarks or specific areas within their neighbourhood that they believe are either important or significant. The “Old houses” of the East Galt neighbourhood received the most responses followed by, “Downtown Galt”. While 7 respondents did not believe there were any important landmarks in the area, the overwhelming majority could produce one or more example. It is interesting to note that the responses, “Old Houses”, “Oak St Homes”, and “Stone Houses”, all refer to a place of residence as being important or a significant landmark. What’s more, 11 out of the 16 responses shown in the graph refer to a building of some sort. It is clear that the built form within the East Galt neighbourhood holds value for its residents. Residents were asked in two questions to identify changes they WOULD like to see in their neighbourhood and changes they WOULD NOT like to see happen in their neighbourhood. The responses are outlined in Figure 5.3.6 and Figure 5.3.7. The overwhelming response was that residents do not want to see any significant changes to their neighbourhood. The most common response to the question, “What changes would you like to see happen in your neighbourhood?”, was, “None”, followed by, “Better home maintenance”. The second question, “What changes would you NOT like to see in your neighbourhood?”, was much more telling. Numerous residents responded in the following categories, “Additional commercial”, “Dense residential”, and “Removal of trees”. There were also several concerns from residents about the closure of the local school and a concern of infill within the established neighbourhood. Residents are scared that the school property will be sold and converted into a dense commercial and residential building. It is clear that residents like the neighbourhood the way it is. It was more difficult for respondents to come up with common changes they would like to see within the neighbourhood. Only 39 people stated that there were changes they would like to see compared to 58 people who stated changes they did not want to see in their neighbourhood. In the first of the two graphs, 18 people said they did not want any changes to occur, while in the second, 3 people said there were no changes they wouldn’t want to see. These results are very telling of the fondness that residents have towards their neighbourhood and their overall satisfaction living there. 39

SURVEY RESEARCH 5

Figure 5.3.6

Figure 5.3.7

Finally, the last question residents were asked was whether or not they believe preserving community heritage is important. The response was a 100% yes to this question. All 52 people who completed the survey agreed that community heritage should be preserved. 40

Figure 5.3.8

The question, “What would you define as the boundary to your neighbourhood?”, was asked in each survey and a map was provided so that residents could indicate the boundaries. The map below reveals the results of the surveys. Each response has been mapped on top of the East Galt neighbourhood boundary as provided by the City of Cambridge. Each response was mapped and filled in blue with a 10% transparency in order to uncover the proportion of the site that residents most often indicated as part of their neighbourhood. The results indicate that residents most often indicated the areas bordered by Oak Street, Main Street, Lincoln Avenue and McNaughton Street. Other areas that were sometimes mentioned were east of Lincoln to Chalmers Street North as well as farther north where Oak and Lincoln meet. It is interesting to note that were many residents had very different ideas of what constitutes their neighbourhood. Some thought their neighbourhood extended significantly past what the city considered to be the East Galt neighbourhood, while others considered their neighbourhood to only be one or two streets.

KEY FINDINGS

The following are key findings that are most critical to developing recommendations for the preservation of community heritage: 1) Residents chose to live in this community because of it’s built character 2) Residents believe the built character and associated historical value make the East Galt neighbourhood unique and or special 3) Residents DO NOT want any significant changes made to their neighbourhood – they like it the way it is. 4) Residents believe that preserving community heritage is important 41

THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES 6

OPPORTUNITIES 1. Existing mature trees and heritage homes enhancing neighbourhood character. As discussed in section 5.3, survey respondents favoured the neighbourhood for the aesthetically appealing heritage homes and properties. This neighbourhood has an established sense of place which is valued by the residents and should be maintained and enhanced. Figures 6.1 through 6.3 below include examples of district signage from Toronto and Collingwood which could be used throughout or at entrances to the neighbourhood in order to reinforce its unique character. 2. Widespread acknowledgement of the value of heritage among residents. Every resident surveyed indicated that they believed that heritage had value and should be preserved. In addition, many indicated that they valued their own property and the neighbourhood as a whole for the heritage features. This is promising for future preservation efforts in the area, as it indicates a broad base of support for preventing insensitive development. 3. Community engagement in issues facing the neighbourhood. Many residents had strong feelings regarding community issues like the recent closing and potential redevelopment of Lincoln Senior Public School; this indicates a healthy community which will be more easily engaged when discussing plans for the community. 4. Strong ties to downtown Galt and local businesses among residents. Many residents indicated that the downtown of Galt was a primary asset to the neighbourhood, and several were enthusiastic about supporting the local economy. In combination with local corner stores, this helps enhance the walkability of the East Galt/Oak Street neighbourhood; as well as supporting local small businesses and creating a more vibrant downtown for Galt as a whole. Figure 6.4 below shows an example of the highly successful Walk Raleigh wayfinding signage, which could be adapted and used in conjunction with heritage signage to improve pedestrian ties to the downtown of Galt.

Figure 6.1

Figure 6.2

Figure 6.3 42

Figure 6.4

THREATS 1. Demand for parking for peripheral businesses removing green space. The survey responses indicated strong attachment to residents in the area to the existing greenery and green space (refer to survey responses), both on public and private property. However, residents indicated that (insurance company from Heritage section) has previously expanded its parking lot onto an adjacent residential property which was demolished. This is a concern, especially considering item 6.2.4 - the redevelopment of Lincoln SPS. 2. Increasing demand for housing regionally affecting the local housing market. Waterloo Region is projected to continue to increase in population steadily for the next several decades, due to provincial policies and proximity to Toronto and other cities in the Great Lakes region. Along with the regional growth boundary, this will increase the value of land within the region generally, resulting in more intensified development near downtowns, and higher prices for homes in the area due to speculation. 3. Infill apartments and large homes which are insensitive to the character of the area. The neighbourhood feel created by the heritage elements discussed in 6.1.1 and the survey results is put at risk when properties are redeveloped in a way that is inconsistent with the local character. Also, insensitive exterior renovations and upgrades that alter the heritage character of the existing houses. Refer to examples of insensitive development in Section 4: Conditions. 4. Potential insensitive redevelopment of Lincoln Senior Public School. Lincoln Senior Public School has recently been closed down, and many residents are concerned about what form the redevelopment of the building and site will take. The existing play areas and green spaces are considered to be neighbourhood amenities, and given the size of the school site any development could have an overwhelming impact on the neighbourhood character.

RECOMMENDATIONS 7

The Cambridge Heritage Master plan notes that the city may designate a Heritage Character Area, however; this does not provide formal protection under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as a Heritage Conservation District. Instead, we recommend implementation of additional planning processes such as secondary plans, special policy areas, urban design guidelines, or community improvement plans once an area is designated as a Character Area within the Official Plan.

Official Plan Amendment We recommend that an Official Plan Amendment be made to provide better protection and recognition for Cambridge’s Cultural Heritage Resources. This amendment could be modeled after a policy from the City of Kingston’s Official Plan – Section 7: Cultural Heritage Resources. Kingston’s Official Plan specifically addresses planning tools that can provide better protection to their designated properties, heritage conservation districts, cultural heritage landscapes and cultural heritage character areas. For example, a heritage impact statement may be required when a development proposal is submitted within the character area, as in the Kingston Official Plan under 7.1.7. This requires that a heritage impact statement be prepared for any form of development proposal that might affect heritage properties. “7.1.7. The City may require that a heritage impact statement be prepared by a qualified person to the satisfaction of the City for any development proposal, including a secondary plan, which has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource…. A heritage impact statement may be required where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within a heritage conservation district or heritage area is proposed. (Amended by By-Law No. 2011-89, OPA #6)” We also recommend that whenever the municipality designates a Heritage Character Area, a Statement of Significance be prepared, in order to provide criteria for assessing impact upon the neighbourhood.

Community Improvement Plans One of the tools which would be most helpful for protecting valuable heritage attributes within the East Galt neighbourhood would be the designation of an East Galt Community Improvement Project Area. The Community Improvement Plan as defined in section 28 of the Planning Act is a policy similar to an Official Plan, but focusing on a specific neighbourhood. It deals with plans of subdivision, site design, road patterns, building standards and other land use matters. This should be used to guide the development and growth of the neighbourhood so that it is sympathetic to the existing heritage properties. At the same time, a Community Improvement Plan can be used to grant heritage tax relief, or grants and loans to owners and tenants in order to repair or improve their properties. The policies within the East Galt Community Improvement Area would relate generally to the preservation of the attributes laid out in a Statement of Significance that are valuable to cultural heritage, which may include the use, and intensity of use within the area, and the appearance of the neighbourhood and streetscapes. This could ensure, for example, that mature trees are replaced when necessary through the use of Grants and Loans as defined within S.28(7) of the Ontario Planning Act. Finally, we recommend that the Council for the City of Cambridge consider implementing enhanced property standard by-laws for properties in heritage character areas within the East Galt Community Improvement Area. 44

Statement of Significance The Official Plan Amendment concerning Heritage Character Areas should set out the requirement to adopt a “Statement of Significance” to clearly describe the heritage values and character defining elements of the area. Such a Statement should be drafted to reflect Ontario Regulation 9/06 and in accordance with the national “Standards and Guidelines for Historic Conservation.” http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards-normes.aspx A Statement of Significance is designed to guide decisions made concerning planning applications by applying the test of whether the proposed plans will compromise the heritage values and character defining elements as set out in the statement. A draft Statement of Significance for East Galt is included as Appendix D.

Site Plan Control We recommend developing a set of Urban Design Guidelines, which would be referenced when developing within Heritage Character Areas. This would reinforce that heritage characteristics existing within Heritage Character Areas need to be conserved and protected, and give provide the City with grounds to decline any development application which compromised the existing character of the neighbourhood. It would be beneficial to use the site plan approval process already existing within Cambridge to require that a Heritage Impact Assessment accompany all development applications within Heritage Character Areas. Doing this, would ensure that heritage elements will be considered when new development is proposed. Currently, site plan control in Cambridge excludes single, and multi-family dwellings and detached triplexes; we recommend that Site Plan Control include all forms of residential housing within all cultural heritage resource areas such as a Heritage Areas, in order to properly maintain the character of East Galt.

Increased Density Provision In conjunction with the Community Improvement Area, S.37 of the Ontario Planning Act could be used. S.37 describes increased height and density bonusing. In exchange for a certain undertaking, a developer can be allowed extra density or height in their development. Intensification has been highlighted within the Places to Grow Growth Plan as a key element of future planning in Ontario. However, since residents have expressed their dislike of higher density development in East Galt, increased density and heights would not be appropriate in the neighbourhood. Nevertheless, this can still be used to protect East Galt, because under S. 37, undertakings to improve the East Galt neighbourhood can be exchanged for increased density and height on the periphery of this neighbourhood or elsewhere in the City. These improvements to the neighbourhood could include streetscape improvements, repairs, renovations and more; some examples of neighbourhood signage and gateways are included in Section 6.1: Opportunities.

Education and Information

Education is important in order to assure that residents of East Galt identify with and find importance in their neighbourhood. When responding to the survey, residents were unable to name notable landmarks in their neighbourhoods and many residents were unsure about the past owners and history of their homes. It is recommended that an information program on the benefits of conservation be undertaken by the municipality to educate and provide information to residents of the neighbourhood. Information on the history and significance of their neighbourhood, significant landmarks, and heritage locations can be passed on to residents to instill more pride and encourage owners to preserve their own properties. Information on individual homes including history and past owners could also be beneficial, in order to provide motivation for designation under Part IV of the Planning Act. This information could be disseminated through community meetings, media and mailing. Finally, it is also recommended that all residents of East Galt be given the results of this survey and report. 45

REFERENCES 8

SECTION 1 - Introduction City Departments: Parks. (2012). Retrieved March 20, 2012, from City of Cambridge: http://www.cambridge. ca/cs_community/parks.php?fid=58&cpid=41&did=7&sid=0&ssid=0&tp=0&grid=0 Middleton, G. V. (2011, November 01). Raise the hammer. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Use of fieldstone in Southern Ontario buildings: http://raisethehammer.org/article/1491 Figure 1.1 - City of Cambridge. (2012) Zoining Map Produced by Geographic Information Services Figure 1.2 - City of Cambridge. (2012) Zoining Map Produced by Geographic Information Services

SECTION 2 - Background City of Cambridge. (2004). City archives; frederick mellish . Retrieved from http://www.cambridge.ca/cs_pubaccess/hall_of_fame.php?aid=94&cpid=0& scpid=0&did=2&sid=34&ssid=0&tp=0&grid=0 City of Cambridge. (n.d.). Historical information-evolution of galt . Retrieved from http://www.cambridge.ca/city_clerk/city_archives/historical_information_ evolution_of_galt Galganov & Associates (1997). Brief history of the community of galt. Retrieved from http://cambridgeweb.net/historical/galt.html Taylor, A. W. (1970). Our todays and yesterdays. Ayr, Ontario: Ayr News LTD. Figure 2.1 - Taylor, A. W. (1970). Our todays and yesterdays. Ayr, Ontario: Ayr News LTD. Figure 2.2 - Dilse, P. (1981). A Remarkable Heritage: Programmes and Policies for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. Cambridge, ON. Figure 2.3 - City of Cambridge Archives Figure 2.4 - City of Cambridge Archives

SECTION 4 - Planning Policies and Development Tools Bray Heritage. (2008). Cambridge Heritage Master Plan. Cambridge. City of Cambridge. (2008). Zoning By-law 150-85. Cambridge ON. City of Kingston. (2011). Kingston Official Plan. Kingston, ON.

Corporation of the City of Cambridge. (2004). Cambridge Official Plan. Cambridge. Ministry of Infrastructure. (2006). Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2005). Provincial Policy Statement. Toronto, ON. Ontario Planning Act R.S.O. (1990, c. C-13), Retrieved from the E-Laws of Ontario website http://www.elaws. gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p13_e.htm#BK4 Ontario Heritage Act R.S.O. (1990, c. C-18), Retrieved from the E-Laws of Ontario website http://www.e-laws. gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90o18_e.htm#BK4 Region of Waterloo. (2010). Regal Official Plan. Waterloo, ON. Figure 3.1 - Dilse, P. (1981). A Remarkable Heritage: Programmes and Policies for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. Cambridge, ON. Figure 3.2 - City of Cambridge. (2012) Zoining Map Produced by Geographic Information Services

SECTION 3 -Historical Review Blumenson, J. (1990). Ontario Architecture: A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 1784 to the Present. Fitzhenry & Whiteside. City of Waterloo. (2008). Cambridge Heritage Master Plan â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Final Report. City of Waterloo. (2010). City of Cambridge Heritage Properties Inventory. Planning Services Department, Cambridge, ON Dilse, P. (1981). A Remarkable Heritage: Programmes and Policies for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. Cambridge, ON. McIlwraith, T. (1997). Looking for Old Ontario â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Two Centuries of Landscape Change. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press Mikel, R. (2004). Ontario House Styles. Toronto: James Wrimer & Company Ltd. Figure 4.1 - Dilse, P. (1981). A Remarkable Heritage: Programmes and Policies for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. Cambridge, ON. Figure 4.2 - Dilse, P. (1981). A Remarkable Heritage: Programmes and Policies for Heritage Conservation in Cambridge, Ontario. Cambridge, ON. Figure 4.3 - City of Cambridge Archives Figure 4.4 - City of Cambridge Archives Figure 4.5 - City of Cambridge Archives Figure 4.6 - City of Cambridge. (2012). Building Ages Map Produced by Geographic Information Services All other Figures and photographs in this section were taken by Ron Bean.

REFERENCES 8

SECTION 5 - Survey Results Region of Waterloo. (n.d.). Census Bulletin. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Region of Waterloo website: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/discoveringTheRegion/resources/Bulletin_4.pdf All Figures were created using data collected in the door-to-door surveys mentioned in the Research Methods portion of Section 1. A full version of the survey and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s results are available in Appendices A through C.

SECTION 6 - Threats and Opportunities Figure 6.1 - Sharp, A. (Photographer). (2012). Retrieved from http://adriansharp.files.wordpress. com/2012/01/2012-01-05_069.jpg Figure 6.2 - (n.d.). Fashion district sign. [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://ellidavis.com/images/toronto/ condo-neighbourhoods/Fashion-District-sign.jpg Figure 6.3 - Town of Collingwood. (2011). New downtown heritage and downtown business district entrance signs. (2011). [Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.collingwoodliving.com/HeritageSigns/sign.jpg Figure 6.4 - Walk Raleigh. (2012). [Web Photo]. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= 217333048355727&set=a.217333005022398.54854.215446568544375&type=3&theater

APPENDIX A : INFORMATION LETTER

Page 1 of 1

B : BLANK SURVEY

Page 1 of 2

APPENDIX B : BLANK SURVEY

Page 2 of 2

C : FULL SURVEY RESULTS Question 1 :

Question 2 :

! !

Question 3 :

Question 4 :

! “Other” Responses: Grew up here, less traffic, friends, unfenced backyard, blockparties, big yard, safe, inherited property, trees, good housing market, kids around, walkable, familiar, parks.

APPENDIX

C : FULL SURVEY RESULTS Question 5 :

Question 6 :

! “Other” Responses: Slower pace of life, less traffic, established neighbourhood, nice people, big houses, comfortable, friends, trees, not crowded, long time resident, access to public transit.

“Other Responses: Investment, more affordable, newer homes, hard to meeting people, yes, closer to downtown, cheaper.

Question 7 :

Question 8 :

! “Other” Responses: Children around, less traffic, green space, health care near by, old church, safety, no commercial, wide boulivards, horticulture, walnut trail, senior activies, walkable, community, growth/development, theatre festival.

C : FULL SURVEY RESULTS Question 9 :

Question 10 :

! “Other” Responses: Fire escape, completely new house, windows, new pillars, dormer, extension removed.

Question 11 :

“Other” Responses: Trees, grand house, bridges, Stuffworks, city hall, originial post office, shopping centre, Stoyles store, funeral home, train tracks, river, hill.

Question 12 :

! “Other” Responses: Repair Sidewalks, enlarge sidewalks, less renters, reducing parking, Go Train, close to concession walkway.

APPENDIX

C : FULL SURVEY RESULTS Question 13 :

Question 15 :

“Other” Responses: Remove bus route, coop housing, parking lots, building on green space, more bars, more bus routes, social problems.

Question 16 : Neighbourhood #1

Neighbourhood #2

C : FULL SURVEY RESULTS Question 14 : What would you define as the boundary to your neighbourhood? Below are the compiled results of all boundaries drawn on the survey sheets.

APPENDIX

D : STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Description of Historic Place: This residential neighbourhood is located in the City of Cambridge, in the former City of Galt, on what is locally referred to as Galt’s East Hill. This area is located east of Galt’s downtown and this neighbourhood is bounded by: the ravine/hill on the west side, the current Gore Insurance office on the north side, Chalmers Street on the east side and Concession Street on the south side. This residential neighbourhood consists of approximately 600 residential properties of which the majority are single detached houses built between the mid to late 1800’s, Victorian Era, and early 1900’s, Edwardian Era. Contextual Value: The East Galt Cultural Heritage Character Area is one of Galt’s oldest residential neighbourhoods. Physically, it is located on Galt’s Eastern Hill, separated from Galt’s western Dickson Hill by Galt’s old downtown. Contextually, this residential neighbourhood is Galt’s oldest, best preserved, middle to working class residential neighbourhoods. Historic or Associative Value: The East Galt Cultural Heritage Character Area reflects the historical development of one of the Galt’s oldest middle class and working class residential neighbourhoods. This historical residential neighbourhood commenced with large houses located along the East Hill ravine and along the historic Macadamized Road, currently Main Street, which connected Galt to Dundas, Ontario. Buildings in the neighbourhood sequenced from the western side to the eastern side of the neighbourhood following the west to east pattern of street development. Sequence of house construction can be generalized as commencement with larger middle class homes on larger lots followed by smaller lots and infill working class homes. Many of the neighbourhood streets and older larger residential properties are associated with many of Galt’s prominent early citizens. Design or Physical Value: The East Galt Cultural Heritage Character Area is a good example of a Victorian Era residential neighbourhood containing a mixture of Victorian Era and Edwardian Era houses. There is a diverse mixture of architectural house styles with a large number of mid 1800’s granite houses. Street layouts reflect Victorian Era tree-lined streets within easy walking distance to Galt’s downtown. Two streets are lined with distinctive globe street lights. The western edge of the neighbourhood includes a substantial natural ravine which provides vistas overlooking the Galt’s downtown. Character-Defining Elements: Character defining elements that contribute to the value of the East Galt Cultural Heritage Character Area as a significant residential neighbourhood include:

A high number of mid to late 1800’s and early 1900’s houses with a wide diversity of Victorian and Edwardian Era architectural styles and vernacular houses A high number of mid to late 1800’s granite houses Tree lined streets A treed ravine Distinctive globe street lights Prominent vistas to the historic downtown and historic Dickson Hill