Staff revise the heritage attributes of the designation bylaw to be limited to salvageable steel elements of the conservatory structure.

50:46so we can still, we would designate,

50:50so would you designate the whole thing

50:52or would you designate different attributes of it

50:56to be incorporated into the landscape design?

50:59We have another email today from the University too

51:02that talks about the Landscape Architectural Program

51:06and having a design competition and whatnot.

51:09So I just, how do you see that playing out

51:12how they would incorporate the conservatory into that

51:18that would still allow dismantling

51:20or demolition of the conservatory?

51:24Through the Mayor to Councillor Downer.

51:26Designation provides an opportunity

51:29to find creative solutions to these problems.

51:32Between now and the issuance of a bylaw,

51:35there is time to refine the heritage attributes

51:39to be included.

51:41So we could remove some of the attributes that were listed

51:45and just include the steel elements of the building.

51:50And then would you envision them being

51:52those steel elements being incorporated

51:55into the landscape design?

51:57Is that, that's the idea then somehow?

52:00Not replicating that building within that

52:03with those same steel, same steel structure

52:06but doing something different.

52:08Through the Mayor to Councillor Downer.

52:11The form of any commemorative structure

52:13would be very much up to the University to propose.

52:17Okay, thank you.

52:20Thank you, Councillor Allt.

52:23Thank you Mayor Guthrie, through you to Mr. Mallon.

52:26Thank you very much for your presentation.

52:29I was in discussions with President Rene Van Acker

52:33earlier about this particular challenge

52:35that the University has.

52:37What you're presenting strikes me as a bit of a win-win.

52:40Commemorative aspect of it, but, and recognizing

52:44it's a heritage structure, but recognizing

52:46some of the challenges to preserving the building.

52:48What I'd like to know is did a heritage wall

52:51propose this idea?

52:55Or did they know about the proposal

52:57for the heritage attributes and what could be done with them?

53:03Through the Mayor to Councillor Allt.

53:05This is a staff recommendation.

53:09Heritage Gwalf recommended a comprehensive list

53:11of attributes for this structure.

53:16So just following up through Mayor Guthrie.

53:19So Heritage Gwalf was not aware of this then

53:21is what I'm hearing you say.

53:24Through the Mayor to Councillor Allt.

53:27That is correct, but they would be made aware of it

53:29through any heritage permit required to dismantle

53:33or make a new structure.

53:35All right, thank you very much.

53:39Great, thank you.

53:41Also Councillor O'Rourke please.

53:47Through you Mayor Guthrie to Mr. Mallon.

53:48I'm just curious, does the designation

53:52or the requirements to reuse any of the structural elements?

53:56Like if they have to reuse this deal,

53:58is there a component of how much they have to reuse

54:01or show the shape?

54:02I mean, does the designation or any of those requirements?

54:07Are they particularly onerous

54:09or expensive requirements for the University?

54:12Or can they be interpreted broadly?

54:15Through the Mayor to Councillor O'Rourke,

54:18they can be interpreted broadly

54:19and there's a lot of flexibility

54:21within a designation bylaw.

54:23Okay, thank you.

54:28I don't see anyone else at this time.

54:31So thank you very much.

54:34Let me go to several pages here.

54:46David Camilletti is, David are you here?

54:50Oh, front row, didn't see ya, sorry.

54:53Come on down, you're here on behalf of Heritage Guelph.

54:56And yeah, feel free to come right up to the mic

54:58and you have your remarks as well.

55:02Five minutes is the top limit there.

55:05So you'll hear a chime at four minutes and 30 seconds

55:08just to give you a warning, okay?

55:09But I'll turn the mic over to you, go ahead.

55:11Yeah, thank you.

55:12I don't think I'll need that, Mr. Mayor

55:13and members of Council.

55:15At the beginning of 2023, Heritage Guelph got together

55:20because at the time we were faced with a one year deadline

55:24from the Ontario government about which properties

55:28we were to designate from the city heritage registry

55:32that didn't have such a designation.

55:35And we opted to do a list, first a list of 22,

55:41then a list of 10 properties that we were going to work on

55:45in order to find out the proper designations.

55:50The 37 Christy Lane property was at the top of the list,

55:56both the list of 22 and the list of 10.

55:59And as a result, we were able,

56:03it was high on the list for us to consider.

56:07And as the Heritage Guelph staff went through all the work

56:13in terms of considering what heritage attributes there were,

56:19our faith in it was rewarded as Mr. Malin has pointed out.

56:27There are eight of nine criteria are met by the conservatory.

56:33Normally, we would get something between three and six

56:40attributes that are met.

56:43So, Heritage Guelph very strongly supported

56:50the notice to designate the heritage property.

56:54The notice to designate and send it to council as a result.

56:58So, we're here to tell you that this is a very exceptional

57:01property of the ones that we've considered.

57:04And as mentioned, it was the top preservation priority for us.

57:11The, actually it was that January 2024, sorry.

57:17The headline in Guelph today says, at all,

57:21it says Guelph Heritage Top 10 ULG Conservatory

57:25Top Preservation Priority.

57:28As we went through the background,

57:31which Mr. Malin has pointed out,

57:34it's quite clear that the conservatory over the years

57:37has been a popular centerpiece of both the

57:40Ontario Agricultural College and then as it evolved

57:44into the University of Guelph.

57:461998, an article from the University of Guelph called it

57:51one of the few remaining centers of glass

57:55and safe press wood centers that are around.

58:00That article also called it the jewel in the crown.

58:03Certainly from the historical attributes point of view,

58:07Heritage Guelph strongly agrees.

58:10So, we have made our, we have a very limited mandate.

58:13We are to consider the historic attributes.

58:17As mentioned, it's the age of nine.

58:19It's far ahead of anything else.

58:21And so with that in mind,

58:23we made our, we made our recommendation to designate.

58:27And I'm here to tell you that it's something that the,

58:30that our group feels very strongly about.

58:33And that's why we've recommended it.

58:36Subject any questions or all that I would like to pass on.

58:40Okay. Thank you so much, David.

58:42We appreciate it.

58:43I appreciate you being here.

58:44It looks like Councillor Allt has a question for you.

58:47Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie.

58:49I'll just, I'll just pass it through you to Mr. Cameletti.

58:53In your presentation, you mentioned that you were

58:57supportive of designating.

58:59That's all that I heard was only designating.

59:02And I wonder how this dovetails or contradicts

59:07what we heard from the staff recommendation

59:09about designation and possibly commemoration.

59:13If you could talk to that, please.

59:16I'm not sure I thought, I mean,

59:18our role as a committee is to entertain recommendations

59:25and proposals from staff about whether or not

59:30under the Heritage Act of various properties

59:33meet the criteria, one of nine criteria.

59:38In this case, we found that it met eight of nine criteria.

59:42And so we made the recommendation to desipate.

59:45That was the extent of what we were involved in.

59:49Okay.

59:50Thank you.

59:51Thank you very much for that.

59:51I think that's one of the challenges

59:53that we as a Council have when,

59:55I think when we hear the word designate,

59:57it means pardon, no pun intended,

59:59concentrate and almost keep holy and don't mess with it.

1:00:03Do you have a question, Councillor Allt?

1:00:06Yeah.

1:00:06The question is only at this time.

1:00:09Yeah, sure.

1:00:10The question is this, Mayor Guthrie,

1:00:12if you would indulge me, the question is,

1:00:14when something is designated as a heritage site,

1:00:19it could still be altered as per the recommendation of staff

1:00:24that something could be put into it

1:00:26that was commemorative, is that correct?

1:00:28That's something that once it leaves us,

1:00:30that's out of our hands.

1:00:32We've made the recommendation for designation.

1:00:34The final form that it comes out is,

1:00:36is something that's left up to Council.

1:00:39And if it's appealed to the land tribunal,

1:00:44so thank you very much, Mr. Campbell.

1:00:46I appreciate your answer to my question.

1:00:49Thank you.

1:00:50Thank you.

1:00:51Are there any other questions for the delegate at this time?

1:00:54Seeing none, thank you very much for being here.

1:00:56Appreciate it.

1:00:57And so I'm going to go to delegations

1:00:59and I know on our report here, it says one, two, three,

1:01:03four, five delegations, but I have good news.

1:01:08It's just one.

1:01:10It's like, it's really just one and then like backup.

1:01:14So we're going to have the acting president

1:01:20from the University of Guelph, Rene Van Aker to come up.

1:01:23And then the others that are listed on our agenda,

1:01:28Harry Baker, Justin Selby, Arlene, is it Otto,

1:01:34and Lloyd Grinheim are backup.

1:01:39Got like your own band here.

1:01:40You're the lead singer and you got backup.

1:01:43So we'll, they're here kind of representing

1:01:47if there's any kind of tech, more technical questions

1:01:49and things like that, that may need to be answered, okay?

1:01:51But from a delegation point of view,

1:01:53I'll turn the microphone over to you.

1:01:55You do have up to five minutes, okay?

1:01:56And then stick around just in case there's some questions.

1:01:58So whenever you're ready, go ahead.

1:02:00Great, thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and Council.

1:02:04And this is for proceeding with slides.

1:02:06Okay, great.

1:02:08And I'll proceed with the presentation as planned

1:02:12and I'll quickly through it.

1:02:14But I just want to say that this is the first we're hearing

1:02:17of these kind of changes and possibilities.

1:02:20And I would say at the front end that if that is how things go,

1:02:26you have our commitment that we would try to save

1:02:29what we can and incorporate it into future designs

1:02:32for commemoration.

1:02:33But I'm here to share a vision from the University

1:02:39for the future of the DM Rutherford Family Conservatory

1:02:42and to ask for council support in making the vision

1:02:47we propose a reality.

1:02:57The conservatory has a relatively short life cycle

1:03:01of 25 to 30 years requiring multiple rebuilds

1:03:05since it was first constructed in 1931.

1:03:08Today's building replicates that 1930s structure

1:03:12which served as an entrance into a greenhouse complex

1:03:16that was decommissioned and demolished in the 1980s.

1:03:19Since then the conservatory has transitioned

1:03:22into an ornamental structure primarily

1:03:24for public enjoyment.

1:03:26It has not served as an educational or research structure

1:03:30for the University in the past 15 years.

1:03:33Today the same structure issues

1:03:36that have consistently plagued the building

1:03:38have effectively forced its closure for public safety.

1:03:42We've commissioned multiple independent structural

1:03:44engineering teams to complete their own assessments

1:03:48of the building.

1:03:49These reports have come back unanimous.

1:03:51A full rebuild of the structure is required

1:03:53to make it safe and fit for public use.

1:04:04It's three main elements, wood, steel and glass

1:04:07are all showing signs of needing extensive replacement

1:04:09or enhancement because the conservatory operates

1:04:12with a high humidity interior.

1:04:15The wood is subject to constant rotten decay.

1:04:17In fact, it's estimated that 10% or less

1:04:20of the wood is original due to its previous rebuilds

1:04:23and limited life cycle.

1:04:24Steel framework must be significantly reinforced

1:04:27to bring the building up to code

1:04:29and ensure it can withstand winter weather conditions.

1:04:32Our structural engineers have recommended adding three times

1:04:35more steel than currently exists

1:04:37which could impact the overall look

1:04:39and feel of the building.

1:04:40Finally, all the glass will need to be upgraded

1:04:42and changed which would remove any original pains

1:04:45that may still remain.

1:04:50Today's presentation is a culmination of many months

1:04:53of careful deliberation across multiple university departments

1:04:57and the executive team as leaders of the university.

1:05:00We have a duty to ensure the institution

1:05:02is financially sustainable and makes prudent decisions

1:05:05that align with its educational and research mission.

1:05:08As members of the council likely know university finances

1:05:11across the province are in a precarious position.

1:05:15At the university of Guelph we are projecting

1:05:16our fifth consecutive operating budget deficit

1:05:19due to increased expenses with limited

1:05:22and constantly limited tools to generate revenue.

1:05:26The structural engineering assessments

1:05:28have estimated the cost of rebuilding the conservatory

1:05:31to be at least $5 million

1:05:33with annualized maintenance of $2,250,000.

1:05:37If the structure were to be rebuilt using the same materials

1:05:41we'd be looking at a regular $5 million investment

1:05:44every 25 to 30 years.

1:05:46Currently we have over $400 million in deferred capital renewal

1:05:51and major maintenance requirements on our Guelph campus.

1:05:54This includes spaces for teaching, learning, research,

1:05:57student housing and other spaces vital to our core mission.

1:06:01Given our current financial situation,

1:06:03strategic investments must support our key priorities,

1:06:06academic and research facilities,

1:06:07support for student mental health and well-being

1:06:10and student housing.

1:06:15We have an urgent need to make the conservatory site safe

1:06:18for the public as soon as possible

1:06:20while also evolving the space into its next

1:06:22and more permanent life cycle.

1:06:23We're proposing create a commemorative garden

1:06:26that will tell the story of our agricultural beginnings

1:06:29and meaningfully student memories

1:06:31that were made on the site.

1:06:35The space will be designed by community for the community

1:06:37and provide an educational opportunity

1:06:39for our landscape architecture program

1:06:41to shape the gardens through a design competition

1:06:43which we would launch next year.

1:06:45We're also seeking to reuse salvageable materials

1:06:48as suggested ensure our generous alumni community

1:06:51is appropriately recognized for their support

1:06:53of the conservatory and the university.

1:06:55We strive to ensure the essence of our heritage thrives

1:06:59along with our pursuit of academic and research excellence.

1:07:02Some examples are.

1:07:04Oh, I'm so sorry.

1:07:05Just got to, so sorry.

1:07:07Got to turn off the mic there at the five minute mark,

1:07:09but we got pretty much to the end there.

1:07:12So we appreciate that.

1:07:14Let me just ask if there's any questions.

1:07:16I'll start with counselor Gauher then Claeson.

1:07:20Thank you through your worship.

1:07:22Thank you for the presentation.

1:07:24I was hoping to get to the part where you can tell us

1:07:27what the plants are for the replacement of the building

1:07:31or the maintenance of the building if you can tell us.

1:07:33You know, I believe that there was some information

1:07:36about a contest that that would be done.

1:07:41Yeah, so we've already been in contact

1:07:43with the director of our School of Environmental Design

1:07:47and Rural Development,

1:07:48which runs our landscape architecture program.

1:07:50The students there are often engaged in design competitions

1:07:56with various design briefs.

1:07:58We would propose and they are accepting of us

1:08:00using this as an opportunity for a design charrette

1:08:04that would produce a brief that students would then compete

1:08:08with to create a variety of designs to choose from

1:08:12for a commemorative structure

1:08:14within the existing gardens on that site.

1:08:17Okay, thank you very much.

1:08:19So to clarify, the site would be maintained

1:08:22as a garden space.

1:08:24Absolutely, yeah, that would be, yes, that's right.

1:08:27Thank you very much.

1:08:28Thank you, worship.

1:08:29Thank you, counselor.

1:08:30Claeson then Arorak.

1:08:32Yes, thank you through you, Mr. Mayor, to the delegate.

1:08:35Thank you for your presentation.

1:08:37I just had one question with regard to, you know,

1:08:40the commemorative component of the garden

1:08:44and the work that's being proposed.

1:08:47I read in the report that in 1998,

1:08:49your alumni raised $256,000 for the restoration

1:08:54of the greenhouse.

1:08:55And I'm just wondering if there will be some efforts

1:08:58to fundraise for the camera emigration of the space as well,

1:09:02just to acknowledging, you know,

1:09:04some of the work that was done too.

1:09:06And has there been any, and aside from that,

1:09:09as a separate question, was there any work done

1:09:12to explore the potential of restoring the greenhouse

1:09:17through fundraising efforts through your alumni?

1:09:20Yeah, in fact, we connected with a number of alumni

1:09:24who have fond memories of the garden

1:09:30and we also connected with the Rutherford family.

1:09:34We did a similar kind of presentation to them

1:09:38and they were supportive of the situation

1:09:41and were supportive of taking the conservatory down

1:09:46and creating some sort of commemorative structure.

1:09:50They understood the financial constraints that were under.

1:09:53I think they were expecting that the university

1:09:56would find the resources necessary to do that.

1:10:01We did talk about fundraising.

1:10:05The price tag is high, $5 million for what is currently

1:10:11a structure that does not feature in any of our programming.

1:10:17And so I have to be honest,

1:10:19if we're gonna raise $5 million,

1:10:22we're probably gonna be using that for something else

1:10:24that is a much higher priority,

1:10:27like student residences or student mental health

1:10:32and well-being supports, programming supports.

1:10:35So yeah, we did work through that possibility

1:10:40and it's not an insignificant amount of money to raise.

1:10:45Yes, thank you for that.

1:10:46I appreciate the answer there.

1:10:48And I just have one more than regarding the number 5 million.

1:10:52So I know that a lot has changed since 1998

1:10:56and the price tag of $256,000 is a lot less

1:11:00than $5 million.

1:11:01So I was just hoping that maybe you could elaborate

1:11:03a little bit on why such a significant increase

1:11:08from that 256 number to now almost 25 times as much.

1:11:14Like that's a huge, that's not just inflationary.

1:11:18So I'm just curious about what has gone into that number.

1:11:21Thank you.

1:11:22And this is where I turn it over.

1:11:24The hard questions I turn over to other people.

1:11:28So thank you.

1:11:30One of the challenges we have as well as a restoration

1:11:34is the fact that there's a change of use

1:11:37and that is being identified in the Tacoma

1:11:40and at Grinham Report.

1:11:43And those were the latest structure engineers

1:11:46and architects that we engaged.

1:11:49And part of the change of use is requiring

1:11:52significant structural reinforcement.

1:11:54And that's to the point where Renee spoke

1:11:57on the three times as much steel.

1:11:59So a big part of that cost is the additional reinforcing

1:12:04and potentially some life safety upgrades

1:12:06that we may be forced to do as well.

1:12:08So it's not a total re-en-ree

1:12:10on what the scope was 25 years ago.

1:12:16Okay, thank you.

1:12:16And just to clarify then,

1:12:19the change of use is from a greenhouse

1:12:22that was for programmatic uses

1:12:25to a primarily tourism focus.

1:12:28Yes, assembly occupancy public enjoyment type of facility.

1:12:34Okay, thank you.

1:12:36Thank you, Ororok and Downer.

1:12:41Thank you, Margarit.

1:12:42I'll read through you to President Van Acker.

1:12:45First of all, great news yesterday on the student housing

1:12:48and understand the university has some prioritization

1:12:51challenges as we all do.

1:12:54I just wanted to give the university the opportunity

1:12:57to speak to their response to the heritage attributes.

1:13:02There's a number of you who are here,

1:13:03but you're only given the five minutes.

1:13:05So I'm just wondering if you would like to comment

1:13:07on your response.

1:13:09It's clearly a beautiful building

1:13:10that everybody would love to restore.

1:13:13But I just wanna give you a chance

1:13:14to go through the last two slides there

1:13:16that you prepared.

1:13:19Yeah, I mean, I did almost get to the end of the presentation.

1:13:25Certainly our intention and our commitment

1:13:30is to creating a commemoration

1:13:34that does pay honest and easily recognizable homage

1:13:43to the conservatory.

1:13:46I can't say for certain what the design competition

1:13:49will come up with,

1:13:51but you can imagine if we engage alumni and others

1:13:57in establishing the brief that some of that

1:14:02will feature as core in the brief.

1:14:04So I'm confident that we'll have something

1:14:07that remembers the conservatory well.

1:14:12Somebody asked me if there were other examples of that

1:14:15on campus in another discussion we were having about this.

1:14:18And I pointed at the Portico.

1:14:21Many people will be very familiar with the Portico on campus,

1:14:24which of course was attached to Morton Lodge,

1:14:26but no longer exists.

1:14:28And it is a remembrance of Morton Lodge

1:14:32and some physical heritage of the University of Guelph

1:14:37and our history.

1:14:38And it's an extremely popular site on campus.

1:14:42Thankfully it's built out of stone, so it's very durable.

1:14:46But that was what came to my mind

1:14:48when I thought about having some sort of commemoration,

1:14:51not that it would look like the Portico of course,

1:14:53but in that vein.

1:14:57Thank you.

1:14:58And through you, Margarit, just a second question.

1:15:02I heard your engineer talk about life safety concerns.

1:15:05Is there an urgency around the structures ability

1:15:09to hold snow loads?

1:15:10Is there a risk to public safety or student safety?

1:15:14Yeah, one of our latest reports identifies the fact

1:15:18that the need to remove the wood, which supports the glass.

1:15:22So the glass needs to come down before the onset of winter.

1:15:25So we are up against that challenge.

1:15:30Thanks.

1:15:31I'll ask staff whether that's a consideration.

1:15:33Thanks very much.

1:15:36Okay, thank you.

1:15:36Downer, please.

1:15:38Thank you.

1:15:39Through you, Mr. Mayor, to our three people, guests from the

1:15:44year of G, thanks for being so agreeable

1:15:47to find a way to commemorate the conservatory.

1:15:50I appreciate that.

1:15:52So I've been toying with an idea of,

1:15:56and you probably have heard from Ms. McDonald about,

1:16:00a different motion that would just designate

1:16:03the salvageable steel for this building

1:16:06and try to incorporate it into your landscape design,

1:16:11which I think is a great idea.

1:16:14And I hope at that time that you would involve

1:16:18our heritage staff to help you maybe

1:16:21write up the design brief for that as well.

1:16:24But that would be a question I would ask you

1:16:26if we just reduce the attributes to be designated to that

1:16:31so that those could be preserved

1:16:34and it would create some kind of,

1:16:36also see recognition of the importance of this site,

1:16:40of this building.

1:16:45Is that a question?

1:16:47Yes.

1:16:49Yeah, we talked about this.

1:16:51This is the last minute change.

1:16:53So we're not in a position right now

1:16:56to know how much of that steel is salvageable

1:16:59and how much we won't know until we actually get into

1:17:03potentially taking out the glass in the wood,

1:17:05which will expose the steel

1:17:07and then getting our consulting engineer back to look.

1:17:10So the possibility now to make a statement on that,

1:17:14we don't know.

1:17:16And that's exactly why I put in,

1:17:18I took, originally I just had steel

1:17:21and then I said salvageable steel,

1:17:22so that whatever is salvageable would be used

1:17:25and not tying you to the whole thing.

1:17:28Yeah, I mean, I think we could probably say

1:17:31that we would commit to saving what we can

1:17:36and incorporating it into the commemorative design.

1:17:40Yeah, yeah.

1:17:44Great, thank you.

1:17:45Is there anything further at this time?

1:17:49Okay, it's just me then.

1:17:52I'm just gonna ask basically the same question

1:17:54councillor Downer asked and maybe it's just

1:17:55because I'm a little slower,

1:17:57I just need a, almost, yes, no type of guy.

1:18:00So I just wanna be really clear with my question.

1:18:06You without any motions of council have already stated

1:18:10that you would like to try to capture as much as you can,

1:18:13commemorate as much as you can,

1:18:15implement as much as you can within the next phase

1:18:18of the garden and making sure there's some recognition

1:18:22there moving forward from what you can save.

1:18:26You didn't need a motion for that,

1:18:27but you said that you would do that.

1:18:29Now, there's councillor Downer's point of view,

1:18:32which I can understand a little bit is,

1:18:34there's sort of like a partnership here too,

1:18:36where the city has somewhat of a responsibility

1:18:38to try to acknowledge and designate something,

1:18:44so that we capture that sort of from our role, I guess,

1:18:50is maybe what councillor Downer's trying to say.

1:18:52And so if there was actual direction

1:18:58in regards to that particular part, are you okay with that?

1:19:03Yes?

1:19:04Yes, okay, thank you.

1:19:06Swanda helps me understand, yes and no.

1:19:09Okay, perfect.

1:19:10Thank you very much, we appreciate it.

1:19:11And I'll turn it back over to my colleagues.

1:19:16Is there someone that wants to move the recommendation

1:19:21from staff, and I'll just read it out loud,

1:19:27that the city clerk be authorized to publish

1:19:29and serve notice of the intention

1:19:32to designate 37 Christie Lane,

1:19:34pursuant to part four, section 29

1:19:37of the Ontario Heritage Act,

1:19:39and that the designate number two,

1:19:40and that the designation bylaw be brought forward

1:19:43to council for approval if no objections are received

1:19:46within the 30 day objection period.

1:19:49So just to kind of get it on the floor,

1:19:52I mean, if those of us don't support that,

1:19:55then you can vote against it, obviously,

1:19:56but just to get it on the floor.

1:19:57So Alton Klosson, and then first question,

1:20:00I'll go to Klosson.

1:20:04Okay, y'all go question to Klosson,

1:20:07and then right back to you, councillor Downer,

1:20:08turn off your microphone there.

1:20:10Go ahead.

1:20:11Yes, and I think this likely, you know,

1:20:14kind of bleeds into your last question to the delegates.

1:20:17So through you, Mr. Mayor, to staff,

1:20:19my question is, I think the recommendations being proposed

1:20:26can be, you know, complimentary

1:20:29to what the university is proposing.

1:20:31So my question is, can we move forward

1:20:32with the designation as recommended

1:20:34and support their proposal of the commemorative garden,

1:20:39saving different elements of it?

1:20:41I just wanted to be absolutely clear on that.

1:20:45Through the mayor to the councillor.

1:20:47So the staff recommendation would have to be amended

1:20:50with an additional motion,

1:20:52and then the final recommendation

1:20:53would have to be as amended.

1:20:57Great, thank you.

1:20:58So that's a good segue.

1:21:00Councillor Downer, I'll turn it over to you.

1:21:02I think you have an amendment.

1:21:03So I've been asked that because I think

1:21:06to put up the motion and staff revise

1:21:08the heritage attributes of the designation by law

1:21:11to be limited to salvageable steel elements

1:21:14of the conservatory structure.

1:21:15And I think this speaks to, even though we,

1:21:18and oh, I need a seconder.

1:21:19Well, councillor Alford said he'd second it.

1:21:22I think this just speaks to,

1:21:24as what Mayor Guthrie had talked about was the city's

1:21:28obligations and record keeping around

1:21:31designated designation of our buildings

1:21:35and what we consider important.

1:21:39That the history of there is also in our records

1:21:43as parts of this building being designated.

1:21:46And that would be the steel,

1:21:48and it would have all the other interesting elements

1:21:53part of the record as well.

1:21:56So I was happy to hear that the university

1:21:58was willing to use a salvageable steel,

1:22:00and I'm sure they're gonna be willing to use,

1:22:02they've said they'd use other salvageable elements

1:22:04into it too.

1:22:06I look forward to them being in discussion

1:22:09with our heritage staff about that design competition.

1:22:14Thank you.

1:22:15Moved and seconded as an amendment,

1:22:16I'd like to ask if there's any questions

1:22:18only on the amendment.

1:22:20Guller and then Billings.

1:22:22Thank you, through your worship.

1:22:23Just seeking clarity from staff.

1:22:26With that amendment, would it allow the university

1:22:29to effectively demolish the structure this winter

1:22:32and then maintain elements per their plan?

1:22:40Through the mayor to the councillor

1:22:41so they could dismantle parts of it,

1:22:44but the structural steel would probably stay this winter

1:22:47until they had worked out a plan for it, I believe.

1:22:52Right, and it wouldn't preclude them

1:22:54from entirely removing the structure

1:22:56and doing something else in sight with the elements.

1:23:01Through the mayor to the councillor, that's correct.

1:23:03Thank you.

1:23:04Thanks, and Billings, please.

1:23:10I also wanted clarity from staff about,

1:23:13okay, so who decides the amount of salvageable steel

1:23:18that has to be reused?

1:23:21Is it the university or is it city staff?

1:23:28Through the mayor to the councillor,

1:23:29so we would work with their engineers,

1:23:32get their engineer report that they have already on that

1:23:35and take a look at it.

1:23:37And then we would take that commemorative plan

1:23:39or the design competition to Heritage Guelph as well.

1:23:43Okay, thanks.

1:23:47Okay, O'Rourke then Alt.

1:23:50Thank you, Marguerite, through you to staff.

1:23:52I'm just reading the last couple of slides

1:23:54in the presentation,

1:23:55and the steel has a different amount of carbon.

1:23:58It's gonna have to be bolted, it can't be welded.

1:24:00So I'm just wondering,

1:24:01because I'm not in this world of construction,

1:24:05I mean, how much cost and complexity does that add

1:24:09to the project for the university?

1:24:12They weren't able to answer

1:24:13because it's sort of a new recommendation for them.

1:24:16I just don't, I don't know if staff have a position on that.

1:24:23Through the mayor to councillor O'Rourke,

1:24:27I believe that was noted for if the steel was used

1:24:30to support the existing structure.

1:24:33A commemorative structure would likely not require

1:24:36the same load on the steel

1:24:38and could take a much different form

1:24:41than what we see today.

1:24:45Okay, thanks.

1:24:51Alt, please.

1:24:54Athery, is this comments or questions or both?

1:24:57It's questions.

1:25:00I'll wait for comments.

1:25:01Comments, go ahead, questions or comments.

1:25:03Thank you very much.

1:25:05I actually want to thank councillor Downer

1:25:08for opposing this particular amendment

1:25:11because I think it's a win-win.

1:25:13And I appreciate that this particular structure

1:25:16is very difficult to preserve.

1:25:19Wood, whether it's cypress or any other wood

1:25:21that's rich in oils and steel structures

1:25:23at the age of which this is are a challenge.

1:25:26Yet at the same time, there is a need to commemorate this.

1:25:30That's been part of the history of the University of Guelph

1:25:33which is now really a world-ranked university

1:25:36for almost a hundred years.

1:25:37So the commemoration makes a lot of sense

1:25:39and I would be remiss if I didn't point out

1:25:42that people like me have been going to this thing

1:25:44for 65 years of our life.

1:25:46It's been there and it's been a focus for many, many people.

1:25:50I think that the university and the city

1:25:52come together with an effective compromise.

1:25:55This will be designated heritage

1:25:57or there will be heritage elements designated

1:25:59and these will then be used to commemorate Guelph's

1:26:02historical agricultural past in a positive fashion

1:26:06that is forward-looking.

1:26:09All right, thank you.

1:26:10Is there anything further?

1:26:12Okay, Gibson and then I have a question as well.

1:26:14So Gibson.

1:26:16Thank you through Mr. Mayor.

1:26:18Good conversation everyone.

1:26:19Thank you very much councillor Downer

1:26:21for bringing forward the amendment.

1:26:23I think it's wise.

1:26:24It's in line with my position on many of these heritage

1:26:27attributes that we want to commemorate and remember

1:26:30but we don't necessarily have to preserve

1:26:32every last piece of it.

1:26:34So I'm hopeful that we can bring this sort of level

1:26:37of realism moving forward to heritage files.

1:26:40I think it's great.

1:26:41And I thank you again for the delegation from the university.

1:26:46Okay, and just before we come to me, councillor Klassen.

1:26:50Yes, I have one question before moving forward.

1:26:55So in preparation for this meeting,

1:26:57I was thinking through some of the greenhouses

1:27:00I've visited in the past.

1:27:01And of course I have some fond memories of growing up

1:27:03in Guelph and visiting the greenhouse

1:27:05at the University of Guelph.

1:27:08And in my research, I looked at a beautiful tropical

1:27:11greenhouse at the experimental farm in Ottawa

1:27:13and I did some quick research and I think in 2015

1:27:16it was renovated and the wood was replaced

1:27:21and there was a significant amount of work done there.

1:27:25And I was just wondering as part of the scope

1:27:28of designating this particular structure,

1:27:32we look at similar projects and what the costs might be

1:27:39from our perspective or is that something

1:27:40that's done entirely outside of the scope of the city?

1:27:46Through the mayor to the councillor.

1:27:48So we do look at similar projects

1:27:49and you'll note in the staff report

1:27:51it does mention other projects

1:27:53and the report that went to Heritage Guelph

1:27:55mentions other projects as well.

1:27:57But we do not look at costs.

1:27:58So we look at the heritage attributes

1:28:00and attachment four of the staff report.

1:28:02Usually it's the heritage attributes

1:28:04and we said eight of the nine criteria.

1:28:07So that's what we look at.

1:28:08We do not look at costs.

1:28:12Okay, I appreciate that.

1:28:14So just a comment because in the spirit of collaboration

1:28:19I'd like to say that something is better than nothing

1:28:22and it can remember a structure is I think better than

1:28:25than getting torn to the ground.

1:28:29But I think there was a strong case here

1:28:30for preserving the structure in its entirety.

1:28:34And there are very few of these structures left in Canada

1:28:38and I think moving forward

1:28:40we're gonna likely see less of them.

1:28:42However, that said, I do think that

1:28:46something is better than nothing.

1:28:48And if we can keep parts of it and keep that spirit alive

1:28:52of the community coming to a place

1:28:55that celebrates our agricultural history

1:28:58then I suppose that is sort of a win.

1:29:02So thanks.

1:29:05Great, thank you.

1:29:05I saw Councillor O'Rourke's hand go up.

1:29:07I think she might have an amendment to the amendment.

1:29:11So go ahead, Councillor O'Rourke.

1:29:14Three.

1:29:15So it's just in the spirit of not having this process

1:29:19be particularly onerous, right?

1:29:20We know that any additional conditions

1:29:23they do have time delays, they do have cost delays.

1:29:26You gotta consult, you gotta bring in engineers

1:29:28that kind of stuff.

1:29:29So I have an amendment that the salvage be

1:29:34to the satisfaction of the University of Guelph.

1:29:40Okay, and it looks like Councillor Billings

1:29:43will second that.

1:29:44Oh, I'm sorry, or Councillor, sorry.

1:29:46Billings, I saw Chew up there as well,

1:29:48but we'll go with Billings

1:29:49because I said the name out loud.

1:29:51Mary-Gathry, I would just.

1:29:53Okay, go ahead, yep.

1:29:55Well, I would just justify it by saying

1:29:58we've heard from the University

1:29:59there's a lot of goodwill around this project.

1:30:02And I don't know what the impact of saying

1:30:04you have to reuse all the salvageable steel or none

1:30:07or I don't know what complexity it adds to the process.

1:30:11So I just wanna believe in the University's goodwill

1:30:14in terms of recognizing this.

1:30:16I'd like to support the designation

1:30:17so that we can say this once was there.

1:30:21But I also wanna leave it up to the University

1:30:23how much they believe is salvageable

1:30:26and also usable in the context of the design

1:30:28they end up with.

1:30:33Yep, a question or comment

1:30:34on the amendment to the amendment, Councillor Downer?

1:30:37So I don't think that's an amendment

1:30:40to a designation by-law.

1:30:42So I'm looking to, I think it's a separate motion.

1:30:46I'm not that I'm arguing against that motion

1:30:49but I do think procedurally this is a,

1:30:54that's just a secondary motion,

1:30:56a standalone third motion like I think.

1:30:59Okay, let me do that.

1:31:00But ask Ms. Walkie to put his hand up.

1:31:06Thank you, Councillor Downer and through the mayor.

1:31:10I do believe if that motion is put forward

1:31:15then I don't believe it's actually a designation by-law

1:31:18at that point in time.

1:31:20And I'm not entirely sure

1:31:24if it would need a designation by-law at that point in time.

1:31:29So it may not even be required

1:31:32that the, we publish notice of designate

1:31:36that it's just we staff work with the university.

1:31:45Okay, just because, if I could again, dumb it down for me.

1:31:49It's just because you kind of go from designate

1:31:52and as you start to strip away, it becomes,

1:31:56there's like a threshold that sort of crossed

1:31:58that makes it more like, okay, we're not saving this thing.

1:32:02So it's now more a collaboration

1:32:05is what you're saying between the city

1:32:06and the university to work together.

1:32:09Okay, because you're diminishing each step

1:32:12to kind of take away, am I saying that right?

1:32:15Through the mayor that is correct.

1:32:16Yeah, okay, okay.

1:32:18So just on this, I can treat this

1:32:22either as an amendment to the amendment, I think,

1:32:24or I could treat it as like another separate motion

1:32:29out of Councillor Downer's motion.

1:32:32But just as I'm thinking about that,

1:32:35I'll just go to Councillor Klassen.

1:32:36And then let's just try to land on votes here

1:32:40and move on, okay, everybody?

1:32:42Yes, through you, Mr. Mayor.

1:32:44Just to stop, I just had a point of clarity.

1:32:46I think there was a previous question

1:32:48and my understanding was there was a response that said

1:32:51we would work with the engineering team

1:32:53at the University of Guelph

1:32:56because they're gonna need to dismantle it.

1:32:59They're gonna need to identify what steel is salvageable

1:33:02versus which steel is not salvageable.

1:33:04And would that at that point not be a conversation

1:33:07between the engineering team and city staff?

1:33:14Through the mayor to the councillor.

1:33:15So it depends on the motion that's put forward.

1:33:17If it's up to the university,

1:33:19then we would kind of remove ourselves

1:33:21from a lot of those discussions.

1:33:25Okay, thanks for that.

1:33:28But just so that I'm clear,

1:33:30if we went forward with Councillor Downer's motion

1:33:33as amended, we would be working with the engineering team

1:33:37to determine what would be salvageable.

1:33:40So it would be a collaborative effort

1:33:44through the mayor to the councillor.

1:33:45So yes, if it's Councillor Downer's motion

1:33:48and no, if it's Councillor O'Rourke's motion.

1:33:51Okay, so in the spirit of collaboration,

1:33:53then we would stick with the first amendment.

1:33:57Okay, thank you.

1:33:59Thank you.

1:34:00So I'm just gonna ask a question here

1:34:01about the clarity about this.

1:34:03I would love your advice on this, Krista.

1:34:05So I'm gonna give you the scenario in my head

1:34:07as to why I'm thinking I wanna support Councillor O'Rourke's.

1:34:10But I need your advice.

1:34:12So if the city under Councillor Downer's motion

1:34:18or amendment, sorry, passes,

1:34:21is there a scenario where there is 1,200 pieces of metal

1:34:27that is deemed salvageable

1:34:30and now the University of Guelph is forced

1:34:33to use 1,200 pieces of salvageable metal

1:34:37to incorporate into some kind of landscaping plan

1:34:40for their garden.

1:34:43Is that the strict and onerous sort of direction

1:34:49that staff would prescribe to the University of Guelph

1:34:53to have to do that work?

1:34:55Whereas I view Councillor O'Rourke's motion as saying,

1:34:59hey, if their landscape architect ideas

1:35:03come back from their students

1:35:07and there's a design element contest

1:35:09and it only needs 120 pieces of salvaged metal

1:35:15that they could move ahead with that

1:35:16and that the city wouldn't be like,

1:35:18no, you gotta use the other 1,000 pieces.

1:35:21And that's where I'm stuck in sort of this onerous direction

1:35:26to the University to commemorate something

1:35:30that they've already said that they would,

1:35:31which we all agree that they said that they would.

1:35:34But the direction that we give to me seems maybe

1:35:37maybe a bit too prescriptive.

1:35:39So I'd love to hear from you,

1:35:41please to help me on this matter.

1:35:46Thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

1:35:48So the Councillor Downer motion is that

1:35:54the heritage attributes be limited to salvageable steel

1:35:58elements of the conservatory structure.

1:36:00I don't believe we would require all 1,000 pieces

1:36:04to be used, we would be taking a look at the plan

1:36:06that they put forward.

1:36:08But we would certainly be encouraging them

1:36:10to use many of those pieces.

1:36:13Councillor Erich's motion gets put forward

1:36:19based on what the University said.

1:36:21I believe they'll have design competitions

1:36:23to try to use as much as that as possible

1:36:25and bring it forward in an element that reflects

1:36:27the former use of the building itself.

1:36:33Okay, thank you.

1:36:35Okay, so with that, I think I am gonna make a ruling

1:36:39on the amendment anyways, even before I ask the question,

1:36:44that I believe the amendment that Councillor Ororque

1:36:48is suggesting is an amendment to the amendment

1:36:52that's on the floor.

1:36:53I don't think it has to be separate

1:36:55because it's all wrapped up into one.

1:36:57So I'm gonna state that that amendment is allowed.

1:37:02And I'd like to call the vote on that amendment

1:37:04to the amendment, okay?

1:37:08Yeah, absolutely, you can interrupt me.

1:37:09Yep, Councillor Clausson.

1:37:11Yeah, I just, maybe it's a question

1:37:13and a comment at the same time.

1:37:15So I just, I wanna really be clear

1:37:17before we call the vote on this amendment

1:37:19that if we don't, if we vote in favor

1:37:24of Councillor Ororque's motion,

1:37:27that we don't designate the structure

1:37:30and effectively, as a sit, we lose our role

1:37:35in having a discussion around the future use of the steel

1:37:40or whatever happens with the structure.

1:37:46Through the mayor, the Councillor,

1:37:48if Councillor Ororque's motion moves forward

1:37:50and then it's up to the University,

1:37:51I would suggest that we do not designate

1:37:55and that the property be removed

1:37:57from the municipal register.

1:38:00So make it easier on all of Council.

1:38:03I would suggest that if you, you know,

1:38:05if this passes, we sort of know

1:38:07the trajectory it's going then.

1:38:08If it doesn't pass, then we're kind of back.

1:38:11Point of order then.

1:38:12You go ahead, yep.

1:38:13So point of order then to that, what we just heard,

1:38:16the amendment is contrary to the motion that I've amended.

1:38:20The designation.

1:38:21Right, because the designation would have to be reproved.

1:38:23So I would prefer that we went forward

1:38:27with my amendment, if it passes, then it passes.

1:38:31And then, yeah, it's actually contrary.

1:38:35Okay, no problem.

1:38:36I think Councillor Downer has stated that correctly.

1:38:39So what I'm going to do is I'm going to call

1:38:42the amendment from Councillor Ororque

1:38:43out of order at this time.

1:38:45Just because we need to see if we preserve

1:38:48the designation or not, and that vote is more important.

1:38:52So I will, you know, so now we know what's coming.

1:38:57It's kind of an either or scenario, right?

1:38:59So my preference, so I'm just making a comment then,

1:39:03is that I would rather Councillor Ororque's motion pass.

1:39:08And so I will be voting against this one right now,

1:39:12because I would rather it be the other one.

1:39:14But we'll see how it lands.

1:39:16So I'll call the vote then just on Councillor Downer's motion.

1:39:21And it's that staff revised the heritage attributes

1:39:24of the designation bylaw to be limited

1:39:26to the salvageable steel elements

1:39:28of the conservatory structure.

1:39:30Okay, I'll call that vote right now.

1:39:31Is anyone against that?

1:39:33Raise your hand.

1:39:35So Richardson, Guthrie, Chu, and Ororque, and Billings.

1:39:44So that is five.

1:39:46So I believe that, so sorry, does that fail?

1:39:50No, I can't count.

1:39:52I think that fails.

1:39:58Okay, who's for it?

1:39:59Put up your hand.

1:40:01One, two, three, four, five, six.

1:40:04Yeah, that was right.

1:40:05So it failed.

1:40:06Failed six, five.

1:40:08Okay, so now we know Councillor Ororque's thing doesn't matter.

1:40:11Okay, perfect.

1:40:12So now we're back to the other part of the motion.

1:40:17If we could put those back up on the screen for me.

1:40:34Okay, and so we got both of those now,

1:40:38which will form part of the what just Councillor Downer's

1:40:40motion just passed anyways.

1:40:41So I'm gonna call the vote just on these two, okay?

1:40:44And I'll do them together.

1:40:46Oh, no, doesn't look like it.

1:40:47Ororque, raise your hand, go up.

1:40:49What's up?

1:40:49Yeah, I have a question.

1:40:51Sure.

1:40:52So why can't this property, and I'll apologize.

1:40:56I'm not feeling well, so maybe I'm missing bits.

1:41:02Why can't we just designate that property

1:41:06so that it stays in the record

1:41:08and still let the university do their design competition

1:41:15and come up with something suitable?

1:41:18Am I misunderstanding the process?

1:41:22Yeah, I believe you are, and staff can say that if they wish,

1:41:28but what's in front of us now?

1:41:29We either need to agree or disagree, right?

1:41:33Now, my, and staff can correct me if I'm wrong,

1:41:36but in a way, I would suggest that

1:41:39because councillor Downer's motion just passed

1:41:41that it would probably more correct to vote down number one.

1:41:47Would that not be correct?

1:41:48Because, or does yours kind of,

1:41:53yours ties into number one?

1:41:55Point of order.

1:41:56Was it not an amendment?

1:42:00So this should be changed.

1:42:03Okay, I thought we were doing that as an individual motion.

1:42:08Yeah, it was an amendment.

1:42:09You're right, you're right.

1:42:12You need to put it up on the screen.

1:42:14Okay, we'll give you the time, no problem.

1:42:16We're all gonna become heritage here

1:42:17before we get this done.

1:42:29That's a bit better.

1:42:35Okay, does everyone understand that a bit better then?

1:42:37Seeing that in there now?

1:42:42So my question to staff is if all of these pass as amended,

1:42:47then the university can go ahead and do the,

1:42:51air quotes, demolition,

1:42:53but to the degree of what councillor Downer's

1:42:57motion is, that's correct?

1:42:59That is correct.

1:43:00Okay, okay, perfect.

1:43:02Okay, so I am gonna call the vote then.

1:43:04Is everyone okay with that?

1:43:05Sorry about that, I've messed up a couple of times there

1:43:07tonight, my apologies everybody.

1:43:09Okay, I'm gonna call the vote.

1:43:11Is anyone against?

1:43:15Perfect, we got through it.

1:43:18Okay, thank you very much.

1:43:19That's the end of that item.

1:43:23We are gonna quickly go to a decision report

1:43:28on 601 Scottsdale.

1:43:30We only have one delegation on that matter.

1:43:33I do want to let everyone in the gallery know

1:43:37that my suggestion to you,

1:43:43because I know a lot of you are here probably

1:43:45for the reformatory lands.

1:43:52And I just wanna just give you a heads up that,

1:43:58you know, this might be 10, 15 minutes tops,

1:44:01but there is going to be a break after that.

1:44:04And that break will be another 20 minutes.

1:44:06So I just wanna give you a little bit of a heads up

1:44:09if you're waiting for that moment.

1:44:10It's good to be a little bit longer, okay?

1:44:13So I just wanted to make sure you heard that.

1:44:15601 Scottsdale, we have a decision report on that.

1:44:20And we have one delegation by video.

1:44:25Dana Gilbert is Dana available.

1:44:29And Jack, we just wanna say thank you to you

1:44:30as well for joining us.

1:44:57All right, with that, I am not gonna go to 601

1:45:00because just in case the delegation did not know that,

1:45:03I'm not gonna do that tonight.

1:45:06So we are gonna take our break now.

1:45:08It is 720.

1:45:10I'm gonna ask that everyone come back here

1:45:11to start at 740, okay?

1:45:13And we will start up at that time.

1:45:15Thank you very much.

2:08:34To my colleagues online, this is just a 30 second heads up.

2:08:3830 seconds to one minute.

2:09:43All right, 30 second warning everybody.

2:09:45If everyone could take their seats, please.

2:10:01Okay, everybody, we are going back to the regular schedule

2:10:04as of right now on the agenda.

2:10:06So the next one is the affordable housing,

2:10:08community improvement plan.

2:10:11We're gonna have a presentation from James Goodrum.

2:10:14And we got three delegations that are lined up.

2:10:19And so we will go to you, James,

2:10:24and go from there, thank you.

2:10:29Okay, great.

2:10:31Thank you, so good evening, Mayor, members of council,

2:10:34public and staff.

2:10:35So it's my pleasure to be here

2:10:36to present the draft affordable community improvement plan

2:10:41and the associated financial incentives with that.

2:10:43So what you have before us this evening is a document

2:10:46that is a combination of work across several departments

2:10:49here at City Hall.

2:10:51So the purpose of tonight is to present the draft

2:10:54and receive public feedback.

2:10:56Tonight's not a decision night,

2:10:58but one of the listening and answering questions.

2:11:00And the recommendation reports will be coming back

2:11:03to council on January 21st.

2:11:07So as you know, it's no surprise we're in a housing crisis

2:11:10and time is of the essence.

2:11:12And this community improvement plan is but one tool

2:11:16that we're using to address the crisis,

2:11:18along with many other initiatives

2:11:20that are underway here at the city.

2:11:23That will be included in the housing affordability strategy

2:11:26that's coming to council on December the 10th.

2:11:30In drafting this community improvement plan,

2:11:33we engaged the community in direct meetings.

2:11:37We had meetings with for-profit,

2:11:39not for-profit housing developers.

2:11:43We met with the realtors, the home builders,

2:11:45the developers associations.

2:11:47We met with the accessibility,

2:11:49the planning and economic development advisory committees.

2:11:52We held an open house here at City Hall,

2:11:55and we also had information presented

2:11:56on the Guelph Have Your Save page.

2:11:59Generally, the proposed financial incentive programs

2:12:02were well received, where industry experts felt

2:12:05that the programs would spur affordable housing,

2:12:08while some others were suggesting increased funding

2:12:11at the same time.

2:12:13But what is before you this evening are programs

2:12:15that will incentivize the development

2:12:17of affordable housing, while at the same time

2:12:19recognizing the ability to fund such programs

2:12:22on the tax dollar.

2:12:25So let me take a few moments,

2:12:26and I'll walk you through the plan and programs.

2:12:32So funding for the proposed programs

2:12:34is provided from the Housing Accelerator Fund.

2:12:37The city was allocated $21.4 million in funding,

2:12:41of which $5.2 million of that funding

2:12:45is allocated towards this community improvement plan

2:12:48in the Accessory Dwelling Unit programs.

2:12:52Funding's gonna be provided up front

2:12:53at the time of building permit issuance,

2:12:55and the funding must be allocated by December 31st, 2026.

2:13:00So we've got two years.

2:13:02So I wanna highlight that the financial incentive programs

2:13:06that we're proposing tonight can be combined

2:13:08with other programs offered by the city, the county,

2:13:10upper levels of government and others.

2:13:13Many that we spoke to are looking at combining these incentives

2:13:18with other programs offered through the Canadian

2:13:20Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the county, or both.

2:13:28The plan before you tonight is rooted in research

2:13:31that's espoused within the 2023 State of Housing

2:13:34and Guelph Report and the Draft Housing Affordability Strategy.

2:13:38There's no doubt that we have many pressing housing needs,

2:13:41but the research has identified

2:13:43the following priority areas.

2:13:45The need for smaller household sizes,

2:13:47which includes seniors who may be over housed

2:13:49due to the lack of available single bedroom units

2:13:53and bachelor units.

2:13:54Incentivizing this type of housing development

2:13:57will open up more larger family homes

2:13:59when people are looking to downsize.

2:14:01Nonetheless, we aren't restricting our programs

2:14:05to singles and bachelor's.

2:14:08So it is open to all sizes of units.

2:14:12In addition, Guelph has a rental vacancy rate of just 1.5%,

2:14:16which is below what they term the healthy rate

2:14:20of 3% or more.

2:14:28Through the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022,

2:14:31the province introduced exemptions and discounts

2:14:34from municipal development-related charges,

2:14:36which include DC development charge exemptions,

2:14:40parkland dedication exemptions,

2:14:42community benefit charge exemptions

2:14:45for affordable residential units.

2:14:48These exemptions came into effect on June the 1st,

2:14:51and they can range anywhere between $30,000 and $50,000

2:14:54per unit.

2:14:56In the table before you now shows you

2:14:58what the affordable rents are.

2:15:00So they have to be at this rate or below

2:15:02for each of those types of units and rental,

2:15:05and then a home ownership rate at $398,000 or below.

2:15:11And that's as per the provincial bulletin.

2:15:14So in order to obtain these exemptions,

2:15:19in addition to renting or selling below that number,

2:15:21that figure shown in the table,

2:15:23the units must remain affordable

2:15:25for a minimum of 25 years as well.

2:15:28So keep in mind with our community improvement plan

2:15:32and programs presented to you tonight,

2:15:34we're proposing further incentives above and beyond

2:15:37what's provided with those development rate

2:15:40charge exemptions, and if you're in the downtown,

2:15:43parking's no longer required as well.

2:15:47You'll notice in the community improvement plan

2:15:49that we have minimum size for units.

2:15:51So we're proposing these minimum sizes

2:15:54following the county's lead when they issue their RFPs

2:15:56for affordable units.

2:15:59The building code does have lesser sizes for units,

2:16:03however smaller sizes do limit the accessibility of units.

2:16:07So that's why we've presented minimum floor areas.

2:16:15So our first program that I'll share with you tonight

2:16:18is the vacant residential unit

2:16:20and vacant space conversion grant.

2:16:23So what we're proposing here is $100,000 grant

2:16:27per affordable unit with an additional $20,000

2:16:32per affordable unit for accessibility features

2:16:36that are beyond what's required

2:16:37in the Ontario Building Code.

2:16:39And this program is targeted towards underutilized space,

2:16:45uninhabitable residential units,

2:16:47or the conversion of vacant space to residential.

2:16:53So if you think about, you know,

2:16:55we're trying to unlock units on those second

2:16:57and third stories in the downtown.

2:17:01And this program will be utilizing $3.2 million

2:17:04from the half, the Housing Accelerator Fund.

2:17:08We came to this number by engaging with other municipalities

2:17:12and our local industry professionals.

2:17:15So in addition to these exemptions from the province,

2:17:18this number made sense,

2:17:21and these prices will hold firm for 25 years.

2:17:31So our next program, the second program

2:17:33is the new affordable housing grant,

2:17:35which we're looking at funding options,

2:17:37but we're going to utilize half in the short term.

2:17:40The challenge with the half timelines

2:17:42is that it's pretty tough to bring a new building

2:17:46to construction and finish within two years.

2:17:50So this program is both for purpose built rental

2:17:52and ownership, the program and sense people

2:17:55to include some affordable units within their development.

2:17:59So it's not about building, you know,

2:18:01a 60 unit affordable housing development.

2:18:04It's building a 60 unit development

2:18:07where perhaps 10 of those units

2:18:10meet the affordability thresholds.

2:18:12Having a mix of housing types and income levels

2:18:14within a development is desired.

2:18:17So we arrived at the $25,000 per unit grant,

2:18:21knowing that a traditional tax increment financing grant

2:18:24would generate a tax grant of $2,500 per year

2:18:28for an affordable housing unit

2:18:31that meets the city, the counties,

2:18:33and provincial definition of affordability.

2:18:36So that grant would be over 10 years

2:18:37after the unit was built and reassessed

2:18:39by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation.

2:18:43After listening to their stakeholders

2:18:45that I explained before,

2:18:47I was felt that instead of providing that $25,000

2:18:50over 10 years on the back end of development,

2:18:53that an upfront grant of $25,000 would be more beneficial

2:18:57and that could be combined

2:18:58with the other incentives we're offering.

2:19:01Again, the municipal charge exemptions, no parking downtown,

2:19:05and combining it with other incentives

2:19:08that other levels of government

2:19:09and organizations are providing.

2:19:16Actually, I should note that the development charge exemptions,

2:19:19parkland, community benefits,

2:19:21that's $40,000 to $60,000 per unit.

2:19:23So you'd be adding another $25,000 grant upfront.

2:19:27So that brings us up a little higher

2:19:30and then you combine that with other programs

2:19:32that the county offers, CMHC,

2:19:35and it's a pretty strong incentive.

2:19:40Then our final program this evening

2:19:41that I'll talk about is the program

2:19:45for additional dwelling units or ADUs, as they're called.

2:19:51So within this program, we have two streams,

2:19:53one for the homeowner and one for businesses developers.

2:19:58Only the business or developer stream needs to be authorized

2:20:00through a community improvement plan,

2:20:02but we're presenting both to you this evening.

2:20:05So both of these streams are going to be funded through half

2:20:09and ADUs are dwelling units that are self-contained

2:20:12and they're subordinate to and either found

2:20:15within the same building or in the same lot

2:20:17as a primary dwelling unit.

2:20:20ADUs continue to be a real strong form

2:20:22of new residential building activity here in Guelph,

2:20:25and that's for a variety of factors.

2:20:29The lower cost to construct relative

2:20:31to other development types.

2:20:33So the homeowner stream is targeted to homeowners

2:20:36that will continue to live on the property

2:20:39while providing a new ADU.

2:20:42The stream provides proponents

2:20:43with a $20,000 construction grant for the unit itself.

2:20:47There's an additional $20,000 if your infrastructure,

2:20:51like your sanitary and water service laterals

2:20:55need upgrading for increased loads.

2:20:57There's an additional $20,000

2:20:58that that service needs to be upgraded,

2:21:02as well as an additional grant of $10,000

2:21:05if you provide accessibility features above and beyond

2:21:10what the building code requires.

2:21:12And these accessibility features were drafted

2:21:14with input and feedback

2:21:15from the accessibility advisory committee.

2:21:22On the developer builder stream,

2:21:24so it's targeted at larger projects

2:21:27that involve a minimum of three to a maximum of six ADUs

2:21:31with a $10,000 construction grant per unit.

2:21:35A one-time grant of $20,000

2:21:37for those infrastructure upgrades if required,

2:21:39which they probably would

2:21:40when we were talking about three to six units.

2:21:45And obviously similarly, the accessibility grant

2:21:48of up to 10,000 for going above and beyond

2:21:51what the building code requires.

2:21:54So for both the homeowner and the developer project stream,

2:21:59we're proposing an affordability requirement of 15 years.

2:22:03And this is based on research.

2:22:04So that's different than the first two programs

2:22:06I spoke about that were at 25 years.

2:22:08For the ADUs, the 15 years is based on research

2:22:12on comparator municipalities and interviews

2:22:14that planning staff conducted over the summer

2:22:17with developers in this field.

2:22:22A 25 year affordability requirement

2:22:24was felt to significantly limit

2:22:26the pool of potential applicants to the program.

2:22:32As we're in tight timelines again, December 31st, 2026,

2:22:37we feel that with the 15 year affordability requirement,

2:22:41the program will be attractive.

2:22:47So in summary, the feedback we heard

2:22:51was largely in favor of the CIP programs

2:22:53as a tool to incentivize the affordable units.

2:22:56So we plan on listening to the discussion tonight,

2:23:00listening to the comments, answering any questions

2:23:02the council, the public may have,

2:23:04and bringing back the report, as I said,

2:23:06a final recommendation report for January 21st.

2:23:10So we can start moving forward

2:23:11and get some of these units in the construction hopper.

2:23:16Thank you.

2:23:19Thank you, James.

2:23:21Appreciate your presentation.

2:23:24And so let's just go quickly to our delegations

2:23:28that have come forward.

2:23:29David Douglas is first in person.

2:23:33Is David Douglas here?

2:23:36Oh, yep, okay, there you are, David, come on down.

2:23:42And is Mike Labby here?

2:23:44Mike, okay, great, you're in the wings.

2:23:48And the third is Morgan Dandy, is Morgan here?

2:23:50Yeah, okay, you're in the front, perfect.

2:23:52So you three are ready to go.

2:23:53David, I'll turn it over to you again,

2:23:55no more than five minutes, okay?

2:23:57Go ahead.

2:23:58Thank you.

2:23:59Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council

2:24:01for the opportunity to speak to you.

2:24:04I'm not going to speak to any of the technical specifics

2:24:08of the matters before you.

2:24:12I know little about them

2:24:13and most of them are well beyond me.

2:24:16But I do want to encourage you to avail yourself

2:24:18of this rare opportunity to expedite the production

2:24:22of affordable housing,

2:24:23which our community desperately needs.

2:24:27You have an experienced and credible

2:24:31nonprofit housing organization before you

2:24:33who'll be making their presentation after me.

2:24:38And they're making a serious and strongly argued proposal,

2:24:41which by all accounts,

2:24:43at least that which is available to me,

2:24:46will materially contribute to the delivery

2:24:48of housing in our community.

2:24:52The proponents are not asking for grants, subsidies,

2:24:56forgivable loans, or similar special treatment.

2:25:00They will not draw upon the Housing Accelerator Fund

2:25:04from the federal government.

2:25:06They are therefore not competing for the scarce resources

2:25:09that other housing organizations might wish to access.

2:25:14They do not require access to specific city-owned resources.

2:25:19And the recommendations will have no impact

2:25:22on the mayor's proposed budget,

2:25:24so there's no direct call on the tax base,

2:25:27as I understand it.

2:25:29And they're not seeking special treatment,

2:25:32such as an exemption.

2:25:34My understanding is that they are seeking a tax deferral,

2:25:39which will be fully repaid as a stream of revenues

2:25:42for the city.

2:25:44Once developing gets underway,

2:25:45an occupancy takes place.

2:25:48All development charges and all other fees and charges

2:25:52will be repaid and full to the city.

2:25:56This same tax deferral mechanism,

2:25:58which when instituted by the city,

2:26:01would also be open to any other non-profit,

2:26:04affordable housing delivery agency.

2:26:08So they're proposing an instrument in collaboration

2:26:11with the city, a form of tax increment financing,

2:26:15as I've generally understood it,

2:26:17that the city itself has previously used

2:26:20and that has been successfully used

2:26:22in the multiplicity of other jurisdictions

2:26:25for over 50 years.

2:26:28It is not an untried experimental device

2:26:31with unknown and unacceptable risks.

2:26:35They propose using an instrument

2:26:37that several neighboring municipalities,

2:26:39such as the region of Waterloo,

2:26:41cities of Waterloo, Cambridge, and Kitchener,

2:26:44are now using.

2:26:46So the question is, for me anyway,

2:26:49what's in the way here?

2:26:50What's getting in the way?

2:26:52What of any planning legislation?

2:26:54What official plan amendments?

2:26:56What zoning by-law amendments?

2:26:59What financial risk analysis?

2:27:01Or otherwise, tells us that there are obstacles here.

2:27:06But giving the burning priority

2:27:08that is affordable housing,

2:27:10and given that there's no Ontario Housing Corporation

2:27:14delivering these houses for us, as we used to have,

2:27:18what could hold the city up?

2:27:20What could hold up its decision

2:27:22to move ahead with this constructive

2:27:24and timely collaboration?

2:27:27So I strongly urge you to make this collaboration

2:27:30a priority.

2:27:32Institute the recommendations now

2:27:34and expedite the production of affordable housing

2:27:38in our community.

2:27:39Thank you.

2:27:42Thank you, David.

2:27:43Is there any questions?

2:27:45Seeing none, thank you for your presentation.

2:27:47Thank you.

2:27:48And Mike Klebe is here.

2:27:52Mike, come on down.

2:27:54From Home Opportunities Nonprofit.

2:27:56Thank you for coming, Mike.

2:27:57And speaking of Mike, the mic is on,

2:28:01so you can start whenever you're ready.

2:28:03I have a little bit of a point of order

2:28:05before I speak, just to make sure things are clear.

2:28:09We originally were coming forward

2:28:11to speak to an amendment to the CIP.

2:28:14But Councillor Goller and staff have worked out

2:28:17a different proposed recommendation

2:28:19that is unrelated to the CIP,

2:28:22but related to the housing issue itself.

2:28:25So I can say what I wanna say now,