Skip to main content
Jon Christensen
Guelph Council Record

Council Planning · January 21, 2025 · Item 5.1

56-58 Glasgow St. S. does not meet the criteria for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act…

Amendment under the agenda item 56-58 Glasgow St. S. - Intention to Demolish a Cultural Heritage Resource - 2025-08

Carried (11 to 0)

11 in favour, 0 against — unanimous

What was voted on

The motion in its exact words, as recorded in the minutes.

That 56-58 Glasgow St. S. does not meet the criteria for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and that the demolition of 56-58 Glasgow St. S. be approved. That 56-58 Glasgow St. S. be removed from the Municipal Register of Cultural Heritage Properties.

Moved by Councillor O'Rourke, seconded by Councillor Goller.

How the room voted

In favour (11)

  • Allt
  • Billings
  • Busuttil
  • Caron
  • Caton
  • Chew
  • Downer
  • Gibson
  • Goller
  • Guthrie
  • O'Rourke

What council was given

The staff reports and correspondence attached to this item. The summaries are written automatically, so you can tell what a document is without opening a ninety-page PDF.

A summary is this site’s description of a document, not the City’s. Open the document before relying on one.

What was said

63 words from the meeting recording, transcribed automatically. Times are from the start of the recording.

Read the debate(click to open)

40:38Thank you for coming, Councillor Downer. And I'll call the vote. Is anyone against?

40:45Nobody. So that's great. Thank you that passes. If anybody was here in the room for that item,

40:52that item is done. It's passed. So thank you very much. And now we're getting into this.

40:58It's just a public meeting now to hear about the draft official plan amendment

Automatic transcription is imperfect. Treat quotes as a guide and check the recording before relying on exact wording.

Check this against the City’s official minutes

The motion, the vote and the debate come from the City of Guelph’s published record, reproduced rather than interpreted. The document summaries above are the exception: those words were written for this site.

See the rest of this meeting