Item 5.2 30-32 Eramosa Road – Objection to Notice of Intention to Designate – 2025-297 on the July 15, 2025 City Council agenda be deferred.

32:21Thank you very much.

32:22And we will continue on.

32:26We have 30 and 32 Eremosa Road.

32:29We have an objection to the notice of intention

32:32to Desig-Mate.

32:34And we have a presentation first from Jack,

32:37our heritage planner,

32:39and we have one delegation, Adam Stewart is here as well.

32:42Jack, whenever you're ready,

32:44feel free to give us your presentation on the matter.

32:46Okay.

32:54Thank you, Mayor and members of council.

32:57The city quirks office has received an objection

32:59to the notice of intention to Desig-Mate.

33:0130 and 32 Eremosa Road

33:04issued at your April 8th council planning meeting.

33:08Before addressing the historical significance

33:10of this property,

33:11I'd like to take a step back

33:13and consider the broader context of what we're doing here.

33:17Since the passage of bill 23,

33:20municipalities across Ontario have been working urgently

33:23to safeguard the heritage that shapes our identity,

33:26shared history and sense of place.

33:29If you listen closely,

33:31the buildings and landscapes of Guelph have stories to tell.

33:34And as stewards of our city's history,

33:36you are tasked with deciding

33:38which of these stories we will preserve

33:40for future generations.

33:43Prior to bill 23,

33:44Guelph maintained a robust municipal heritage register

33:47that allowed council to consider designation

33:49in response to demolition applications.

33:52This approach was preferred by staff

33:54as it provided flexibility for property owners

33:57while enabling council to act when necessary.

34:01The loss of the municipal register

34:03represents a significant erosion

34:05of local democratic authority

34:06in determining the fate of our cultural heritage.

34:10Over the last two years,

34:11heritage planning staff and the Heritage Advisory Committee

34:15have worked hard to evaluate Guelph's most significant

34:17heritage properties for your consideration.

34:21Through this process,

34:22we have heard from some property owners

34:23that they have encountered issues with their home insurance

34:26due to designation.

34:28Staff are working to mitigate this issue

34:30to the best of our ability.

34:32We have posted a list of heritage friendly insurance companies

34:35on our heritage planning website.

34:37We're working on a financial incentive

34:39to bring to council in 2026.

34:42We are adding wording to our designation bylaws

34:44to provide clarity to insurance companies

34:46about replacement in case of total

34:49or partial loss of heritage attributes.

34:51And we are conducting outreach to property owners

34:55two months prior to the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting

34:58to consider proposed designations.

35:04The property before you today,

35:0530 and 32 Aramosa Road,

35:08was identified by the Heritage Committee

35:10as a priority for designation in 2024 and with good reason.

35:15This building is one of Guelph's most historically

35:17significant industrial structures.

35:20Constructed in the early 1850s

35:22for industrialist and mayor Adam Robertson,

35:25it is the site of one of Guelph's earliest iron foundries.

35:30Built in the Georgian functionalist style using rubble stone,

35:33it is one of the oldest surviving industrial buildings

35:35in the city.

35:37This foundry played a transformative role

35:40in Guelph's development.

35:42Before its establishment,

35:43tools and agricultural improvements were crafted

35:45by blacksmiths, an expensive and time consuming process.

35:50The advent of industrial production

35:52at the Robertson Foundry marked a turning point,

35:55positioning Guelph as a hub of agricultural innovation

35:58and paving the way for later industrial giants

36:01like Taylor Forbes, Woodyette and Crow.

36:06Originally, the building featured a one story addition

36:09along Aramosa Road and smokestacks

36:11for its boilers and smelters.

36:14What remains today still demonstrates

36:16a remarkable craftsmanship,

36:19particularly in its rubble stone construction,

36:21cut stone coins and tooled lintels and sills,

36:26testament to the skill of the masons who built it.

36:29Additionally, the building's conversion

36:31to residential use in the 1920s

36:34is one of the earliest examples of adaptive reuse

36:36of industrial architecture in the city.

36:40I do want to acknowledge a darker chapter

36:43associated with this building's history.

36:46During the American Civil War,

36:47Guelph's population was divided

36:49in their support for the North and the South.

36:52Adam Robertson, the owner of the foundry,

36:54was a staunch supporter of the Confederacy

36:56and he plotted to manufacture canons and grenades

37:00for the South in this very foundry.

37:03Fortunately, the plan was thwarted

37:05and the weapons were never delivered.

37:08I really want to be clear,

37:10this designation is not intended to celebrate

37:13or glorify that troubling episode from our city's past.

37:18Rather, it serves as a reminder

37:19that history is rarely simple or one-dimensional.

37:23It is often shaped by contradictions,

37:25by moments of progress and innovation

37:27that exist alongside injustice and moral failure.

37:32Preserving this building allows us

37:34to confront that complexity head on.

37:36It challenges us to engage with the full scope of our past,

37:40not just the parts that are comfortable.

37:43In doing so, we gain a deeper, more honest understanding

37:45of how our community has evolved,

37:47how decisions made generations ago

37:49continue to shape our values, built environment

37:52and collective identity.

37:54This is the true purpose of heritage conservation,

37:57to preserve the stories that help us grow, reflect

37:59and strive for a better future.

38:04This building tells the story of far more than one man.

38:07It is a living archive of the many hands,

38:09lives and histories that have passed through its walls.

38:12It speaks to the skilled masons who carefully laid each stone

38:15with precision and pride,

38:18crass people whose names may be lost to history,

38:20but whose work still stands as a testament to their artistry.

38:24It speaks to the foundry workers who endured

38:26the intense heat and danger of industrial production,

38:29forging tools and machinery that would shape

38:31the agricultural landscape of Wellington County.

38:35It speaks to the tools that were cast here,

38:37plows that tilled the soil, harvested the land

38:40and supported generations of farmers.

38:43These tools were not just products,

38:45they were instruments of transformation,

38:47helping to define Guelph's role as a center

38:49for agricultural advancement.

38:52And it speaks to the many individuals and families

38:54who have called this building home over the last century.

38:57Their wives, layered over time,

38:59have added new chapters to the building story,

39:02chapters of domestic life, community and adaptation.

39:06The structure is more than stone and mortar.

39:09It is a witness to the evolution of our city

39:11and a reminder that heritage is not static,

39:14but is continually evolving.

39:17Council, I respectfully submit that this property

39:20meets the criteria for designation

39:22under the Ontario Heritage Act

39:24and is well worth preserving for future generations.

39:27Thank you.

39:30Thank you so much.

39:31We appreciate it.

39:32We have one delegation on this.

39:35And so Adam can come down, Adam Stewart.

39:39And let me just confer with clerks for one second, Adam.

39:47Yeah, it's five minutes.

39:48Just wanted to confer to make sure I was right.

39:49Yeah, so no more than five minutes.

39:51You'll hear a chime at the four minutes and 30 second mark

39:54as a 30 second warning.

39:56And then just stick around in case

39:57there's any questions as a follow up, okay?

39:59Thanks for coming, Adam.

40:00The time will start when you start, okay?

40:01Go right ahead, okay.

40:03Good evening, Mayor, Council and staff.

40:04My name is Adam Stewart, owner of 30 Airmost Road.

40:06And I'm also speaking on behalf of the owner

40:08of 32 Airmost Road,

40:10as this is a semi-detached residential dwelling.

40:13There are several items I'll be discussing

40:14leading to our position,

40:15that this notice to design is based on the flawed process

40:18and misrepresentation of heritage attributes

40:20and ultimately unable to support the designation

40:22at this time.

40:24To begin the consultation and engagement process

40:26was not reasonable.

40:27City staff sent a letter to me as the property owner

40:30on Monday, February the third, 2025.

40:34Only three days before the February 6th meeting

40:36of Heritage Guelph,

40:38when the property report was presented to the committee.

40:42I would ask Council to agree that the three day period

40:44is insufficient for ability to be properly engaged

40:46in the process and involved in the committee meeting.

40:50If that opportunity were to be extended to us.

40:54As I was not advised on opportunity

40:56to engage the committee meeting,

40:57we're sharing with you some inconsistencies

41:01of the property attributes and context

41:03that goes beyond the report.

41:13Our connection as owners of the property

41:15plays a significant role in assessing

41:16heritage Guelph claims,

41:18which are rooted in the risk of demolition

41:21and risk of heritage protection.

41:23Since staff did not engage us to learn more

41:26about our time of ownership,

41:28our investment into the property,

41:31through permits, we have renovated and curated

41:32for the property with significant investment

41:34to preserve the home for ourselves

41:36and for generations to come.

41:38In short, we're the first true custodians of this property

41:40bring the property to its highest and best use as is today.

41:43And I encourage your questions relating to the point

41:45of highest and best use.

41:48I feel the council will be sympathetic to 30

41:50and 32 Eremos Road is not worthy of designation

41:52as like to offer the perspective

41:53on the heritage attributes that were identified.

41:55It was said by a committee member on February 6th

41:57that this is an important activity

41:59for strong heritage reports to link as best as possible

42:01the statements of significance to property attributes

42:04and I encourage council to cross-reference

42:06to the heritage report.

42:09I feel very strongly that the property should not

42:10be criteria in four and five because there's a lack

42:12of a documentation of any form of significant

42:14industrial innovation of the property.

42:16Also, it's been indicated that the property

42:18is passed association with Adam Robertson,

42:20the supporter of the Confederate suggest

42:21the proper dialogue and community outreach

42:23has not been considered with the general stakeholders

42:25such as the Guelph Black Heritage Society.

42:28You may find it concerning that heritage Guelph

42:30would support new designations with associations

42:32of Adam Robertson and his sympathetic political views

42:34of the Confederates in the American Civil War.

42:38The subject property does not meet criteria in one, two

42:40and eight based on historical images.

42:41The property consists of buildings in red

42:43and I have an image here that I've referenced

42:46but it's not available for your viewing.

42:47I know Councillor Goller has that image that I've prepared.

42:52Based on the images, the property consists

42:53of the buildings in red and the existing residential residents

42:56in question is identified in white

42:58which is labeled as a pattern shop in historical records.

43:00The foundry is however labeled in red

43:02which is no longer in existence.

43:04I need to be very clear, the section of building labeled

43:07iron foundry is not where the existing property is.

43:09In addition, the other identifiable buildings

43:12that once did are no longer present.

43:14Therefore, functionally, historically and visually

43:16it is irrelevant to its surroundings.

43:18The building in its current residential form

43:20currently not represented of the foundry,

43:22in form and function has served as a residential property

43:25for over 100 years, far longer than it has served

43:28as a pattern shop to the foundry.

43:31In the building's current use, the form has changed

43:33significantly and does not represent

43:35the original structure.

43:35There's evidence showing the buildings

43:37west facing facade is having six large openings.

43:39The building currently has two small window openings

43:41on the second level and two modified window openings

43:43in the main level.

43:44There are two additional openings in the west facing

43:46that are no longer present and presumably enclosed

43:49at time change to residential use.

43:51Historical images show a very different side gable

43:53than what heritage gulf report indicates.

43:57Images appear to show the west facing facade

43:59is having a steeped, stepped or tiered gable

44:01that no longer exists.

44:02Also images seem to indicate that the roof pitch

44:05has been reconstructed to a high pitch

44:07after its original built form in current residential form.

44:10The pitch of the roof is much greater.

44:13At the front of the building, there's a porch

44:14that has been an addition to the building much later

44:17than its change to residential use.

44:19It has also been rebuilt, shared with me

44:21from the past property owner that indicated the vehicle

44:23hit the damage, hit and damage the blocks and columns,

44:26thus not original.

44:28These are not heritage attributes

44:30and the difference in stone and concrete materials

44:32would also suggest this.

44:33In addition, the porch is encroaching

44:36on the city's right of way

44:37for additional planning staff consideration.

44:40The exterior limestone walls appear

44:41to be of the inferior construction techniques

44:42and finish as it relates to limestone construction methods

44:45as per examples of superior limestone construction enclosed.

44:49In the building's current form, the stone stills below

44:51the first and second story windows

44:52do not appear to be the original

44:54to the first construction of the building.

44:56Given the most windows have been altered,

44:57it is most likely that all windows stills

44:59would have been new at the time of the building's

45:01reconfiguration to a residential use.

45:05All right, thank you.

45:06I'm sorry to stop you there,

45:08but there might be some follow-up questions for you.

45:11But yeah, just stick around.

45:12Thank you very much for your presentation.

45:14Is there any questions as a follow-up at all for?

45:17Okay, I see Councillor Gibson on the screen.

45:19Go ahead.

45:20Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

45:22I'm not a heritage specialist and I don't want to weigh down.

45:24I don't want to weigh in on this decision tonight too much,

45:27but I do want to ask the delegate

45:29about your conversations with staff.

45:31How have they gone?

45:32Have you had an opportunity to delegate to Heritage 12?

45:35Have you had an opportunity to have this conversation with them?

45:40So Councillor, yes, we had the chance to meet

45:44with Jack Nal and last week.

45:47I very briefly just to discuss sort of,

45:51I guess the property in and of itself

45:52to understand better process,

45:53but prior to receiving our letters, again,

45:57I mean to get there was a three-day period

45:58between February 3rd, receiving a letter

46:01indicating that a property would be brought forward

46:02to the committee, but that committee met on the 6th,

46:06which really didn't give myself

46:08the other property owner time to consider options for us

46:11and present ourselves in an organized manner

46:14and to present alternative facts to the property.

46:19Sure, sure.

46:20I'm not hearing that you're opposed at the time.

46:23I heard that at this time.

46:25And I'd like to ask, maybe I'll ask staff the question next

46:29about the conversations that could be had

46:32over the next few weeks or few months

46:34to sort of get everyone to yes or to get everyone to no.

46:37And maybe I'll pause there

46:39and I'll wait for questions to staff

46:41unless you have something that you'd like to add there as well.

46:46All right, thank you.

46:47Is there anything further for the delegate though?

46:49Is that yourself, Councillor Pazzo?

46:51Go ahead.

46:52Thank you.

46:52Through the mayor to the delegate, Adam,

46:54thank you for being here.

46:56Just a quick question.

46:56If you can help me understand,

46:58are you opposed to being designated?

47:02Is the opposition to being designated

47:05or is it as Councillor Gibson is saying,

47:08is it about the timing of that?

47:11So I think that's a big question

47:13that I think needs to be explored quite a bit further.

47:19I would suggest that in the short period of time

47:22where I'm trying to understand the process and opportunities,

47:26I would like to see an opportunity where heritage

47:31can thrive with individuals like me

47:33that see a benefit to doing that.

47:34And I don't see a benefit at this time

47:37in terms of tax incentives,

47:39in terms of programs that are in place

47:41that would allow individuals like me

47:43to voluntarily designate my property.

47:46So there are a number of concerns

47:48that a number of people have been raising,

47:52including insurance is one.

47:56I think it's been documented to staff

47:57that there are valid concerns with respect to insurance

48:03at time of designation for properties.

48:05So I think what I'd like to see is a program in place

48:10that supports heritage, but also supports homeowners.

48:13And right now I just don't see that.

48:15However, through further consultation with city staff

48:20and Council, perhaps there's opportunities

48:22to develop a bit of a better approach together.

48:27Thank you, Adam.

48:28And so what I'm taking away from this,

48:29I'm gonna synthesize it for me,

48:31is not opposed to heritage, not right now.

48:35Well, as a realtor myself in Guelph,

48:37I do represent all kinds of properties,

48:40those that are historical in nature,

48:44designated and non-designated.

48:46And I do my best to promote those as much as possible

48:50for sellers.

48:51And so in terms of being supportive of our built heritage,

48:56absolutely I'm supportive of that.

49:00Thank you.

49:03So I see no further questions, but maybe I'll ask it.

49:07I think maybe some of my colleagues have tried to ask it.

49:11And maybe I just need to hear it in a little different way.

49:15Are you, would you be more receptive to like a pause

49:21right now as you continue to work with staff on the issue?

49:24Is that where you're at?

49:26Or are you saying, no,

49:28here for asking for anything further, no extra time

49:31to talk with staff at all.

49:32I just want you to not designate this.

49:34No, no, I think what I'm asking is a bit more clarity

49:37around what staff have presented

49:40to what I'm seeing myself.

49:43So I think there's probably better opportunity

49:45to have conversations together

49:47to identify what that might be.

49:49And hopefully in time, council and staff

49:52can develop programs that would truly be beneficial

49:56for homeowners to designate.

49:57So I can't give you a yes or no answer

49:59because I don't see a direct answer right now.

50:06And I know you said that you're representing the neighbor,

50:09but do you think that you and the neighbor

50:12would be willing to sort of work together

50:14if there was a lot more time to work with staff

50:17to get more information, just to kind of work things out?

50:20If they've, or not, I mean, I can't,

50:23I won't speak on behalf of the neighbor

50:26in terms of the level of engagement that they will have.

50:29But what I will say is that they've been very supportive

50:32of my approach to council so far, so absolutely, yeah.

50:35Okay, all right, thanks a lot.

50:37There's nothing further.

50:38Thank you very much, Adam.

50:40We'll bring it back to us for a conversation, okay?

50:43Yeah, thanks.

50:44So just give me a moment, everybody.

50:55Okay, we have recommendations here.

50:58The first ones that the notice of objection be received.

51:01Sorry, everybody, to be received.

51:05And then the second one, though,

51:06is that the designation by-laws for this site,

51:09which is 30 and 32 Air Massa, actually be approved.

51:12Okay, so does anyone want to move those two?

51:18All right, we have Karan and Quasin.

51:23And now I'll turn it over for questions.

51:26I'll start with Alt and then Gibson and then Karan, okay?

51:30Sure, thank you very much,

51:32Mayor Guthrie, through you two staff.

51:37The delegate who just previously spoke

51:40provided what I would call as a plethora

51:42of challenges to staff,

51:44including outlining that this building is perhaps

51:49inappropriately designated.

51:51And Councillor Goller has provided us with the map.

51:54I was wondering, first of all,

51:56if staff could possibly respond to that

51:59in a fairly succinct fashion.

52:06Through the Mayor, Councillor Allt,

52:09I consider the entirety of the building constructed

52:12in the early 1850s to be the Robertson Foundry.

52:16If the map is from the one I assume it is,

52:18from the 1892 Fire Insurance Plan,

52:23the building itself is labeled

52:25a Robertson and Sons Foundry.

52:29Whether this building was the site of the machine shop

52:32or the site of the smelter,

52:34I think that's relatively immaterial

52:36to what history the existing building can convey

52:40to the citizens of Guelph.

52:43Okay, thank you.

52:44That was good in succinct, actually.

52:46Now, there are a couple of other issues as well.

52:49One of the points was raised, insurance,

52:52and I've heard that ad infinitum just recently.

52:54That's a concern.

52:55I was wondering if you could restate

52:57where staff stands on that

53:00and where the understanding is of insurance provision

53:04for heritage designated buildings.

53:09Through the Mayor, staff of,

53:13since we've been made aware of this issue,

53:16we've been conducting outreach to insurance providers

53:19to hear from them what their policies may be

53:22for designated properties.

53:24We've also spoken to the Insurance Bureau of Canada

53:26and the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism.

53:31I've discovered that insurance is not very regulated

53:36in this province and it depends insurance company

53:39to insurance company,

53:40what their attitude towards heritage designation is.

53:44But on our website, we have a list of properties

53:48or a list of insurance companies

53:49that are at least willing to have a conversation

53:52with owners of designated properties.

53:54Okay, thank you.

53:55And the last question I have,

53:57reference was made to incentives

53:59and I'm sympathetic to this, I have to tell you.

54:02I was wondering, is staff examining the potential

54:05for incentives and will this be potentially offered

54:09to buildings that are currently on the heritage list

54:14or just possibly to future buildings if this ever arises?

54:19Through the Mayor, as per previous council direction,

54:22it's staff's intention to bring forward recommendation

54:25on financial incentives alongside the Ward West

54:29Heritage Conservation District Plan and guideline.

54:33Thank you very much.

54:35Thanks, Gipson and then Karan.

54:37Thank you, Mr. Mayor,

54:40Councillor, I'll ask my first question about insurance

54:42and what I've read through the correspondence

54:44and what I've heard from tonight is that

54:46there are insurance companies that are willing

54:47to have the conversation,

54:48but a heritage destination unfortunately would result

54:51in many homeowners still needing to search for a new policy

54:56or have new conversations,

54:57which may impact premiums with new riders

55:01and things like that.

55:02So I have heard the answer from staff.

55:04I'm not convinced that we have settled that issue

55:07for homeowners with homes that are just simply listed

55:11and under heritage and then having to go back

55:13to their insurance companies and potentially search

55:15for a new plan.

55:19We had the same conversation last month.

55:21It was unanimous vote of deferral.

55:23I think this falls under the exact same premise.

55:26We have a homeowner who is not opposed

55:27to a heritage designation.

55:30They are encouraging more conversation.

55:33I think the timeline associated with the engagement letter

55:36to the motion passed or the recommendation

55:39passed at heritage,

55:40I think that merits some more conversation

55:42between the homeowner and staff.

55:44Again, I didn't hear an outright objection.

55:46I heard a request for more time.

55:49So Mr. Mayor, I think I will move a motion

55:51of deferral on this file looking for a seconder.

56:00Okay, it's been seconded by Councillor Goller.

56:07Okay, I have to follow the procedural bylaw

56:10and just call the vote right away.

56:12So is there anyone against the deferral?

56:18Okay, Caron and Alt and Downer and Lassen.

56:27So the deferral passes.

56:30Okay, technically we're done,

56:34but if you could just give me a bit of grace here,

56:38it would be really great.

56:40That deferral had nothing in it about timeline.

56:43So, but you guys understand why I had to call the vote.

56:47So I would just encourage, okay?

56:51The word is encourage.

56:52I would encourage you Adam,

56:54because you're still hanging out here,

56:55to speak with staff,

56:57just about some sort of a timeline

56:58to try to resolve the issues as quickly as you guys can

57:01within that kind of framework.

57:05A referral motion might have been able to have

57:08sort of some dialogue and time to come back

57:11and stuff like that.

57:12The deferral though just kind of leaves it lingering.

57:15And so it is what it is and the deferral has happened

57:18to kind of give you more time,

57:20but let's see if we can sort of see if there's an opportunity

57:23to bring it back when there's a meeting of the minds perhaps

57:26or more information is given to you.

57:28Okay, so that's just my encouragement

57:29as you walk out of the building here today, okay?

57:32So thank you to staff and thank you to yourself

57:35and we'll leave it in your capable hands,

57:38the two of you, okay?

57:41Okay, we are moving along then.