HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-016-09 W� REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE n '
Date: Monday, February 2, 2009 Rr�5C,
Report#: PSD-016-09 File #: PLN 34.5.2.64 By-law#:
Subject: FORMER BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL AND PRISONER OF WAR CAMP
2020 LAMBS ROAD, BOWMANVILLE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PSD-016-09 be received;
2. THAT the property identified as 2020 Lambs Road, Bowmanville, be added to the
Municipal Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest;
3. THAT staff report back to Council when a demolition application is received and/or
alternative options for heritage protection have been explored; and
4. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of
Council's direction;
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
David J rome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu,
Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
IUFL/DC/df
27 January 2009
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
REPORT NO.: PSD-016-09 PAGE 2
1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The property identified as 2020 Lambs Road, Bowmanville covers over 40 hectares and
contains a total of eighteen buildings (Attachment 1). This report provides a brief history
of the property, the present condition of the buildings and site, and the process for
protecting heritage resources. The purpose of this report is to recommend that the
property be added to the Municipal Register of properties of cultural heritage value or
interest and obtain Council approval to work with the owner to explore other avenues for
heritage protection.
2.0 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP HISTORY AND USE
2.1 The 40 ha (100 acre) parcel farm at 2020 Lamb's Road adjacent to Soper Creek was
formerly the Jury Farm prior to its acquisition by the Ontario government in the early
1920s for the purpose of establishing a boys training school.
2.2 The first boys to attend the school, when it officially opened in August of 1925, were
transferred from Opportunity Look-out farm in Weston. Various buildings were
constructed over the next several years. Local records indicate that the first dormitory
was built in 1927, a gymnasium and swimming pool building was built in 1929, a large
triple dorm in 1930 and a hospital in 1938. In 1934 the Victoria School in Mimico closed
and the boys from that facility were transferred to Bowmanville. The nature of the
school changed to become more of a juvenile institution. In 1939 the facility was
renamed to the Ontario Training School for Boys.
2.3 During World War II the property was taken over as a German Prisoner of War camp,
known as Camp 30, by the Department of National Defence. New dormitories were
added and the site housed up to 800 detainees who were mainly officers of the Third
Reich. There was an uprising at the Camp following the Dieppe raid in 1942 when an
order was issued to manacle German POWs housed in camps across Canada.
Historically recorded as the "Battle of Bowmanville", the uprising lasted for three days
until it ended with the assistance of the Royal Canadian Ordinance Corps from
Kingston. This uprising is the only known battle of its kind and has national significance.
Occupation of the Training School as Camp 30 ended in April of 1945.
2.4 The property reverted back to the provincial government under the Department of
Reform Institutions as a training school with many of the post war staff being former
servicemen. Educational programmes, dairy and agricultural training of the juveniles
resumed. Regular exercise was promoted and in 1949 the Police Games were held on
the site. In 1955 the school celebrated its 301h anniversary. In 1967 an elaborate
exhibition, which included a parachute demonstration, was organized to mark
Centennial year.
2.5 The school's name was changed to Pine Ridge School in 1967. For a number of years
the school served as a reception centre for all boys admitted by the juvenile courts of
Ontario where they were screened prior to being moved to other schools; this function
ended with the opening of a new centre in Oakville. The school began to admit girls in
the 1970's. It was closed by the province in 1979.
REPORT NO.: PSD-016-09 PAGE 3
2.6 After the Pine Ridge School closed, the province offered the property to the
Municipality. The offer was declined by the politicians of the day during a special
meeting of Council held on October 6, 1983. Concerns included the acquisition cost,
cost of maintenance, building renovation costs, other operational matters and the
distance of the facility from the residential area of Bowmanville.
2.7 On October 7, 1983 the Ministry of Government Services accepted an offer from How
Kheng Ang, in Trust, to purchase the school. The transaction closed in February of
1984 and the facility reopened as a preparation school for Malaysian students entering
Canadian universities which functioned until April of 1986. The Members in Christ
Assemblies of Ontario purchased the site in 1987 and leased a portion of the property
for the St. Stephen's Catholic Secondary School which opened in September of 1988.
The sports fields were used by many of the recreational leagues in Clarington. In 1999
the property was sold to Sea Land Holdings Corporation and became known as the
Great Lakes College which was home to students from Hong Kong. After the
headmaster was murdered by two of the students the school closed.
2.8 During the time Sea Land Holding Corporation owned the property from 1999 to 2005,
they filed an application (in 2002) for Official Plan amendment which proposed to delete
the Community Park in favour of an Urban Residential designation and to change the
Future Urban Residential designation to Urban Residential. The buildings on the
property were proposed to remain. The Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) reviewed
the architectural and historical significance of the property and deemed it worthy of
designation; however, the owner at the time did not wish to be designated.
A number of studies were required prior to staff making a recommendation on the
Official Plan amendment application. As of April 2004 none of the studies had been
submitted. In May of 2005 the property was sold to Madressa Ashraful Uloom. They
did not proceed with the Official Plan amendment application and the file was closed in
April of 2006.
2.9 The school functioned as an Islamic University called Darul Uloom under the ownership
of Madressa Ashraful Uloom, in January of 2006 the Region of Durham received
applications for consent to sever the areas north and south of the buildings thereby
splitting the property into three relatively equal parcels. The Kaitlin Group proposed to
acquire the northerly and southerly parcels for future development purposes. Planning
Services Staff supported the severance application as the northerly and southerly
parcels are within the boundary of the Bowmanvile Urban Area and the valley lands
were to be dedicated to the Municipality as part of the severances. The applications
were approved on March 13th, 2006 but the conditions of approval were never fulfilled
so the approval lapsed.
2.10 In February, 2007 the property was purchased by Lambs Road School Property Ltd.
(Kaitlin). Darul Uloom, the Islamic University continued to operate until they vacated
the buildings in October of 2008. The buildings while last occupied by the Islamic
School; have been in continuous decline since the 1990's and are in a state of disrepair.
REPORT NO.: PSD-016-09 PAGE 4
Current Property Issues
2.11 In the fall of 2008, the Emergency and Fires Services Department notified the Kaitlin
Group that they were to secure the buildings, provide security and fire protection
capability. The Fire Chief met with a representative of Kaitlin and made suitable
arrangements to keep a water supply to the fire hydrants in the event of a fire. Water
schematic drawings have been provided to Kaitlin and all water to the buildings has
been shut off, as have the gas and hydro. There was a potential leak in the water
treatment plant and water was slowly overflowing into the Soper Creek. The Ministry of
the Environment has been involved and the issue at this time has been addressed but
continues to be monitored.
2.12 The By-law Enforcement Division issued an "Order Requiring Compliance" on
December 11, 2008 relating to three areas of concern, the railings on the dam, the
broken and dilapidated fencing around the property and the vacant buildings. By-law
have indicated that the remedy for the vacant buildings is to have them secured. Kaitlin
appealed the Order, a Property Standards Hearing was scheduled for January 27, 2009
at Kaitlin's request, the Hearing has been rescheduled to February 3, 2009.
2.13 On December 23rd, 2 008 the Planning Services Department received a demolition sign
off sheet from the Kaitlin Group for the eighteen buildings located on the property. A
demolition permit application has not been filed as of the writing of this report. Staff
discussed the heritage significance of the property with representatives of Kaitlin. A tour
of the property for heritage assessment purposes was arranged in late January. At this
point Kaitlin's schedule for demolition is within two to three months.
3.0 PROTECTING CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOUCES
3.1 In achieving its cultural heritage objectives, the tools that the Municipality has at its
disposal are the goals and objectives of the Official Plan, the Provincial Policy
Statement and the Ontario Heritage Act. The Clarington Official Plan sets out the goal
or preservation, restoration and utilization of Clarington's heritage resources. The
Provincial Policy Statement states that significant built heritage resources and
significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved.
3.2 The Ontario Heritage Act was amended in 2005 to provide municipalities with greater
control over demolition of heritage resources along with other matters. The recent
amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act and Bill 51(Planning Reforms) have provided
additional tools and greater flexibility to Municipalities with regard to heritage matters.
3.3 To consider the potential alternatives to demolition the Municipality has two options: it
can either initiate the heritage designation process to delay the demolition while an
appropriate solution is reached with the owners (see Attachment 2) or it can list the
property on a Municipal Register which would give Council 60 days to review the
demolition application, once it is received, during which time Council could initiate the
heritage designation process.
3.4 The Municipality has a Municipal Register of properties that have been formally
designated by By-law under the Ontario Heritage Act. The Act permits non-designated
properties that Council considers to be of cultural heritage value or interest to be added
REPORT NO.: PSD-016-09 PAGE 5
to the Municipal Register. The cultural heritage inventory dates from 1986 with more
recent updates and lists several hundred properties. It has not been presented to or
approved by Council as the CHC has been working on reviewing the inventory to
ensure its accuracy. The ability of the Municipality to adopt the inventory and record it
on the Municipal Register is one of the new planning reform "tools".
3.5 This property has been recorded in the cultural heritage inventory as being a property of
Primary cultural heritage value and interest. The agent for a previous owner of the
property had been contacted in regards to potential designation under the Ontario
Heritage Act. The agent indicated that the property was for sale so they were not
interested in designation. At the time, the matter was not pursued further by the
Clarington Heritage Committee.
3.6 The property was discussed during the CHC meeting of November 18th, 2008. It was
agreed that Kaitlin would be contacted for permission to access the site to take
photographs and to inquire about the potential for heritage designation. Arrangements
were being made for members of the committee to tour the property.
3.7 During the regular CHC meeting on January 20th, 2009, the Committee was informed
that Kaitlin had submitted a Demolition sign-off sheet in mid-December and had
indicated that it was their intention to demolish all 18 buildings on site within the next 2-3
months. The heritage significance of the buildings and the property itself were
discussed and the following motion passed:
• To request Clarington Council to initiate the designation process, under Part IV of
the Ontario Heritage Act, for the collection of buildings and property at 2020
Lambs Road, also known as Camp 30, training School, prisoner of War camp,
site of Battle of'Bowmanville, and Great Lakes College
3.8 Members of staff, an architect from the Ontario Heritage Trust, two members of the
CHC and the museum administrator toured the grounds of the property on January 21St
The Ontario Heritage Trust have verbally indicated their support for the local
designation of the property and buildings. Their comments are included in Attachment 3.
The background report referred to in their comments is available from the Planning
Services Department.
3.9 In addition to the efforts of the local and Provincial heritage interests, there are many
that believe because of the history of this site and its significance as a Prisoner of War
Camp it should receive some form of federal designation and assistance. Lynn Philip
Hodgson, co-author of Word of Honour, Camp 30, Bowmanville, along with the
Administrator of the Clarington Museums and Archives, have been in contact with Bev
Oda, MPP, and are pursuing various federal agencies. There are a number of agencies
that may have an interest in assisting with the protection of the "most intact" camp of the
40 POW camps that detained 37,000 prisoners during WWII across Canada.
4.0 COMMENTS
4.1 Kaitlin has indicated that despite their efforts to secure the property it is continually
being vandalised. Staff understand Kaitlin's desire to minimize costs, however, our
REPORT NO.: PSD-016-09 PAGE 6
preference would be to work with them to come to a satisfactory outcome for the
protection of the heritage resources.
4.2 At this point it is unknown if the federal government has an interest in protecting World
War II history and what role they may play in the conservation of this site.
5.0 CONCLUSION
5.1 This property is of national significance and the Federal government should be
consulted to determine their interest in the site prior to any buildings being demolished.
5.2 It is Kaitlin's intention to develop the property for residential purposes at some point in
the future. Staff would like the opportunity to work with the Kaitlin Group to develop an
overall strategy for how the significant heritage resources could be protected for the
longterm.
5.3 Council has the option of listing the property on the Municipal Register of properties of
cultural heritage value or interest. Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act states that if a
property is included on the Register the owner of the property shall not demolish or
remove any building or structure unless the owner gives Council at least 60 days notice
in writing of the owner's intention. The property would have to be on the Register prior
to an application being filed to demolish in order to halt a demolition permit from being
issued. Placing the property on the Municipal Register will give a 60 days period once a
demolition permit is applied for.
5.4 In the interim, Staff can contact the Federal government, hold discussions with the
Kaitlin Group and other interested parties to determine potential solutions for the
protection of the heritage resources at 2020 Lambs Road.
5.5 Staff will report back to Council either when a demolition permit is submitted and/or if an
option for the protection of the heritage resources has been determined.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Aerial Photo
Attachment 2 - Heritage Designation Process
Attachment 3 - Letter from Ontario Heritage Trust
Attachment 4 - Photographs of selected buildings
List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision:
Clarington Museums and Archives
Ontario Heritage Trust
CHC
Lynn Phillip Hodgson
Bev Oda, MPP
r
y e
j3]
V
' J`'��;��'�th► y�•..Yt;.Y+�"!'#�et��€irlr6n,�L_".I.c' !... _ � ...e�� 49-�� * L
LA
rY eRlll ..+ 'e,. Ik11���i�1! .+ r e� A. �' h• .,p. I v
s
���������� i1i M � A �• �, y • vb Pu �i ■ L t.. a `R' � :� Y � �J t.
Aa1�7 ' . ao,�.y, ��i4�i ` �;, M ,1■i .3_� ' 111 .- ��
' �I�ii'19R��_65F e4 S4+i R J 'rg: � •.
Xp ,� '� '� ✓ K �'ii .rJf 1._� i' �'+'.+ ., ',,Ie k�iw3 w: rj
P
is
Attachment 2
To Report PSD-016-09
Heritage Designation Process
In accordance with the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, initiation of the designation
process begins with Council authorizing the Clerk to give Notice of intention. Council is to
consult with the CHC before giving the Notice prescribed. The Notice is to be served on the
owner and is to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality and
is to include a statement that notice of objection to the designation may be served on the Clerk
within 30 days after the date of publication. If there is no objection council can pass a by-law
designating the property. Objections to the designation are to be referred to the Conservation
Review Board for a hearing.
The Conservation Review Board will hold a hearing and within 30 days of the conclusion of the
hearing will report to Council with its recommendations. Upon considering the report Council
can pass a by-law designating the property. A copy of the by-law, together with a statement
explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the property and a description of the
heritage attributes of the property is served on the property owner and the Ontario Heritage
Trust , is registered on the title of the property, and the notice of the by-law is published in the
local newspaper. Should Council not wish to proceed with designation the Notice of intention
to designate is withdrawn and a notice of withdrawal is served on the property owner and the
Ontario Heritage Trust, and is published in the local newspaper. The decision of Council is
final with regards to Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The Province has other measures and
powers to pursue designation.
If a Notice of Intention to designate is given under the Ontario Heritage Act any permit that
allowed for the alteration or demolition of the buildings on the property would be void as of the
day the Notice of Intention is given and the property is treated as if it is designated.
Owners of designated properties cannot demolish or remove buildings from a property unless
they apply to Council and receive consent in writing. Council has 90 days to review the
application. This period can be extended upon agreement between the owner and Council.
Council is to consult with the heritage committee and may consent to the application, consent
subject to terms and conditions, or refuse the application. Notice of Council's decision is
served on the owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and is published in the local newspaper.
If Council refuses the application to demolish or remove a building, or approves the application
subject to terms and conditions, the property owner can appeal Council's decision within 30
days of receiving notification. Appeals filed with the Municipal Clerk and the Ontario Municipal
Board. The OMB will hold a hearing and may order that the appeal be dismissed, or that the
Municipality consent to the demolition without terms and conditions, or with the terms and
conditions set by the OMB. The decision of the Ontario Municipal Board is final.
Attachment 3
To Report PSD-016-09
ONTARIO 10 Adelaide Street East
Toronto,Ontario M5C 1J3
HERITAGE
TRUST Telephone: 416-325-5000
Fax : 41.6-325-5071
An agency of the Government of Ontario www.heritagetrust.on.ca
By E-mail and Regular Mail
January 26, 2009
Ms. Isabel Little, MCIP, RPP
Planner, Special Projects
Planning Services Department
Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, ON
L1 C 3A6
II
Ms. Little,
Re: Camp 30, (2020 Lambs Road, Municipality of Clarington)
The Ontario Heritage Trust has been the Province's lead heritage agency since 1967, As
mandated under the Ontario Heritage Act, the Trust supports, encourages and facilitates the
conservation, protection and promotion of Ontario's heritage.
d Thank you for advising the Trust that this unusual historic site or campus is no longer in
educational use and is currently vacant. I understand that the Municipality is anticipating a
request to demolish the buildings. In light of this last week I suggested that Trust staff could
provide some technical assistance including participation on a site visit and the preparation of
some documentation on the property. On January 21, 2009 Trust staff visited the subject
property and met with representatives of the municipality's planning services department, the
Clarington Museum and Archives and the Clarington Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee.
Even based only on the short visit to the property and review of some secondary sources it
seems clear that this large property possesses cultural heritage value. Please find attached a
background report prepared by Trust staff. While this isn't an evaluation of the site you may find
it useful as a starting point for your review and assessment. The Trust encourages the
municipality to complete a heritage assessment of this property and assemble thorough
i documentation regarding the cultural value (i.e. historical, architectural contextual and
landscape) of the site. As a first step the Municipality may wish to consider listing the property
on the Municipal Heritage Register. This would provide up to a 60-day delay of any proposed
demolition and might provide the municipality with sufficient time to complete a through and
detailed assessment. Although difficult to fully appreciate at this time of year the property also
possesses cultural landscape value and the Municipality may wish to consider listing the
I" property as a cultural heritage landscape in addition to or as an alternative to listing individual
buildings or structures.
i
Page 1/2
'i
d
Once Clarington municipal staff and the Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee have
conducted a detailed assessment of the property to clarify the cultural heritage values, identified
heritage attributes and arrived at a better understanding of the significance of the property under
Ontario Regulation 9/06, you will be in a position to consider municipal designation under
Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act. Designation under the Act would be the next logical step
in the protection, planning and potential reuse of this significant heritage resource. I refer you to
'h the Ministry of Culture's Heritage Toolkit for more information on the evaluation of heritage
properties, the designation process and heritage resources in the land use planning process.
http://www.culture.gov.on.ca/english/heritage/Toolkit/toolkit.htm
Should the Municipality identify this property as possessing "significant built heritage resources"
and/or"significant cultural heritage landscapes" it would be consistent with the Provincial Policy
Statement under the Planning Act (PPS 2.61, 2005) and to require that the owner or proponent
prepare and submit to the Municipality a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as part of the
cultural heritage due diligence associated with Planning Act applications. An HIA should ensure
that any impacts on the heritage attributes of the property resulting from proposed
redevelopment are mitigated and that the site's heritage value is conserved.
a I encourage the municipality consider its range of powers to protect this heritage resource and
to work with the owner and the Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee to find a solution that
maintains the heritage value of the property while planning for the preservation and re-use of
the site. Should you have questions feel free to contact me at 416 325-5019.
pp Sin r urs,
9
Sean
Manager, A quisitions and Conservations Services
Copy: James Hamilton, A. Manager, Culture Services Unit, Ministry of Culture
Encl.
Page 2/2
19
4
M
i mil /
,I
fi
qu
`•• , � t. �� , �� 5�4° i� � >.� tj•!k� "sus 1 �^�<< 97rkSb'9!
•rte �,
i,
....�.. .....;-air$e. �7, _. #- .•:..
c n
'a.
ti
I
IN
wro
i
ii
I�t
rl.
�i
is
t Cp f
i btu
'T," 4 nnvaawMrtc� r
w.
I