Heritage Guelph

0:02One more member.

1:56There.

2:03We downtown on my new world. So, there's, you guys take a few minutes.

2:09Is that a recent.

2:11Great.

2:13From 95.

2:17Oh, really.

2:18Almost 20.

2:20I'm not dead.

2:22I'm on the 25.

2:26When over five years, right for five years.

2:30When we're at moral.

2:32Okay.

2:38Yes.

2:40All right. Welcome everyone in person and online today.

2:44So I'll call it the order of the March 4th, 2024 meeting.

2:47I'm going to be the first to attend the item in our territorial knowledge.

2:53As we gather, let's take time to reflect on our privilege to live.

2:57A city built over rich indigenous histories.

3:01We are guests here.

3:02We should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land.

3:05The people who live here today and the generations to come.

3:08If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, which should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

3:15This place we call work has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for many people over time.

3:21But more specifically, the other wander on and the whole of Ashok.

3:25The plan is held as a treaty land and territory within the office of the credit first nation.

3:30Welcome as directly adjacent to the hall of the tract and as part of a long established big moment to the ground, the six nations of the ground river.

3:38Many first nations in New York and many people who have come from across the island of well home today.

3:45Next thing I'll just ask for the disclosure of the culinary interest and the general nature there of happy's better hand up right away.

3:54I don't vote so I don't know if it makes a difference, but 32 Martin Avenue is pretty close to my home. So I'll just turn off my camera and at that time.

4:06Thank you.

4:07Anyone else.

4:11So next, we'll get the approval for the minutes and our recommended motion is that the minutes for the February 15th.

4:27The truth just if someone will move that motion.

4:31If you a second years.

4:35I think there's a square about your face. I couldn't see it for a second. Thank you. And then all those in favor.

4:41Brenda.

4:45Laura.

4:47Maybe you can say everyone.

4:50All right, and then you'll get into the 30 spring street care to permit application with Jack.

4:55Everyone should be able to see my screen now.

5:17So we have heritage permit application for an addition to the rear of 40 spring street property designated under part four of the Ontario heritage act.

5:30I'll note that the property owner Ian family is here as a delegate today to answered questions if it has any.

5:40So, what I wanted to start with this map is actually from the designation by law. And it shows what is designated on the property.

5:51The designation by law was written with the intent of giving a future owner flexibility to add in addition to the rear of the structure. So, the west elevation and the facade on the south.

6:08And then the other portions of the building that are designated along with other attributes like the barge board and the roof line.

6:23We did a list of attributes.

6:32Before I get into plan. So I wanted to show what's visible from the street because the building is pretty set back.

6:43So, and this is visibility in the winter when there's less foliage than normal. So as you can see from the driveway, the facade and the west elevation are visible.

6:58But closer up this is what the front of the house.

7:07I'm just going to find photos of what the rear of the house looks like right now so they're there are later additions.

7:14So, one brick and one quad in that way to be aluminum.

7:24You can probably correct me.

7:28According to the property owner there's structural issues with both of these additions, but brick and here.

7:36So the permit proposes to remove these and replace them with the new addition.

7:46So what you can see here is what it's proposed.

7:50So this is viewing. This is the north elevation of the process.

7:56So the view from the rear yard is very little of this will be visible from the public realm.

8:05Planting is proposed to be would something I appreciate in this design is that property owner took steps to try and echo the design of the previous or of the original structure, especially in its unique clipped gables.

8:25So, here's elevation front so.

8:38So this, if you're standing directly in front of the house on on the property, not from the right of way, you would be able to see this garage protruding to the side.

8:53Again, the use elevation is not protected as a herring to judge.

9:00And I think from the driveway, it would actually be quite difficult to see this.

9:09And lastly, I'll just say this provides a good kind of overview of the extent of the addition.

9:16Here.

9:17So I'm recommending that the permit be approved because it, as far as I am aware, does not affect any of the listed heritage attributes.

9:30Happy to answer any questions folks may have. And also, I'll kind of we've been in here just in case there's questions that are more relevant for him.

9:46I think that's my question but in the background, you'll find all these awesome.

9:53You're saying not as a leisure effect.

10:00That's right. Yeah, it'll just be the rear of the structure. That's going to be affected. The front is staying as as is.

10:10I'm not as a driver or a conflicted with it. Just for anything other than the end of you.

10:18Yeah, not as far as I'm aware. And the designation can't apply to anything not listed in the attributes.

10:29There is there is there is one thing.

10:34Hardware on the rear door is listed like the lock mechanism. But that door is staying where it is there.

10:50So the view from the field, but this light photos here, was that standing from view.

10:58Yes, and then you be, can you see where the addition, you would be more visible. I took that photo of UA when I was walking my dog and I forgot to get a second one.

11:12I would be able to see it this time of year because there's no foliage, but in for most of the year, it's would be difficult to make it.

11:26Sorry, did you say me?

11:28Okay, sorry.

11:31Yeah, so just a couple of comments. So I live fairly close by to this and walking by I would agree that you wouldn't be able to see anything if at all, like at all from this change.

11:40So I don't think it's a big deal. Just wanted to confirm Jack.

11:43The original designation mentions I think the east corner.

11:48Does that is that the southeast corner or the

11:51Yes, that's, that's the southeast corner.

11:55Okay, which is also kind of kind of fit.

11:58Right. So that's view B. Okay, so it's not. Yeah.

12:02Okay, so for that and then last thing to confirm.

12:05Does the new addition extend out further to the east than the existing additions do?

12:12Yes. Yes.

12:14Okay.

12:16But it's still all the back so I guess that doesn't matter.

12:19Yeah.

12:21Okay. Yeah, that's all I had just a couple clarification. Thanks.

12:25Good questions comments from anyone.

12:35I'll just go ahead and select the motion then and we'll see if there's someone to move it.

12:40So the referendum motion is that heritage well provide all in comments to general manager planning and building services with respect to the heritage permit application for 40 spring street.

12:49The proposed rear addition at spring street does not actively impact the heritage attribute that abide destination by a lot of the sort of dash one set of six zero six.

12:59So, I'll move the motion.

13:02Kevin, thank you and a seconder.

13:07Thank you. And all in favor.

13:13From Miranda's confirmation, I think, Miranda, can you hear us? So there you go.

13:25I am. Okay. Sorry. Thanks.

13:27Okay. Thank you.

13:28Perfect.

13:30We'll move on to our next item then, which is 32 Martin Avenue heritage permit application. The is no longer on screen. Perfect.

13:38And we'll pass over to see them.

13:45Thank you, Sarah. I'm just going to share my screen.

14:01I'm going to do by way of a sort of brief introduction to the site and what you've got a chance to be true.

14:12That's why I'm I agree.

14:14You have to be true.

14:26Okay.

14:30Okay, good.

14:32I just wanted to move a couple of the parts of state at the top.

15:07Okay.

15:18So after the tech instruction, this is the location of 30 Martin.

15:26And the corner basically the North corner of Martin Avenue and James Street West.

15:32And as you've seen in the report.

15:36Corner property.

15:38Here's from the corner as such.

15:42And the view from Martin Avenue with essentially East shows the area.

15:50So, I just wanted to clarify one other thing in material that was brought to the committee. I had shown the 1922 fire insurance plan that was revised in 1929, which still does not show building constructed.

16:06I didn't actually label the next image is 1946 fire insurance plan. So by 46, this two story group house appears on the fire.

16:17So, back to my report itself.

16:22The purpose of the report is to provide information and staff recommendations and the recommendations for the property owners proposal to start a small two story addition.

16:33Rear of the existing falling as proposed by the application.

16:37And as you've read in the staff recommendations, very tight staffers view the application and determine that post rear.

16:46Would not negatively impact their attributes of the subject building or the historic streets.

16:54And because of that, I am quite happy to present.

17:01The considerations and have to answer any questions. I believe that Andrew on with the moment for the permanent is available.

17:13Not sure if he's presenting just here the questions.

17:19Even.

17:23Even with.

17:27With part of the building or does it mean it's for us here.

17:31The Brooklyn and college of heritage district.

17:41In the way that it was described what the areas attributes to be conserved essentially it sticks with the exterior of buildings.

17:52And especially the exteriors that are seen from the street.

17:56So when that's the reason I wanted to reiterate the fact that the proposed roofline change and this small mission in this application.

18:06It's the change to not be visible from the client.

18:10Which is the general benefit.

18:14That's great.

18:16Questions or comments.

18:24Yeah, thanks. So, just to confirm the scope of what's happening, they're just extending the existing little stairwell.

18:33Up works right. It's nothing. It doesn't seem to be that major change to me.

18:38It is the entire roof.

18:42Structure re being rebuilt is how to make it a continuous roof now for that stairwell.

18:49Through the chair of this respond simply that the after discussion with very planning staff.

18:55The point decided to simply extend the existing group.

18:59To the side, this is the view that you see in front of you now is the existing condition of the rear elevation and the change you can see here in the proposed elevation.

19:11So this hip roof that's seen from the back is extended.

19:15Over top of what would be essentially horizontal by two story addition, as opposed to the existing singles.

19:24Okay, so the angle is slightly changing of the roof line there.

19:29That's it.

19:31Okay, but it would only be on the sort of the non visible side of things. So yeah, I agree. There's not much of an impact there.

19:37Questions or comments.

19:43Okay, well our recommended motion done is that heritage qualifies the calling comments to general manager honey Billy services with respect to the heritage permit application to Martin Avenue.

19:58The proposed alterations to dirty to Martin Avenue abide by the guidelines for the Brooklyn and college bill and heritage conservation district.

20:06Someone to move that motion.

20:09Brenda second, Laura, thank you and all those in favor.

20:15Thanks everyone.

20:17Happy you're welcome to join us back on screen if you'd like to.

20:21Our next item then is 785 or produce at the first amendment of heritage permit designation by law 2021 dash 206 3 1.

20:35See the head.

20:38Again, thank you Sarah from time to time here's designation by lots are required to be corrected.

20:46And in doing so, it's required in the heritage act that your community.

20:51So that on that for that recommendation and the committee's recommendation.

20:56So, in the case of seven, 85, your pro, which is property owned by the province, the chair of reformatory.

21:05There is a need to correct the legal description.

21:11So, without reading out.

21:15Text this probably dry as a chip. I'll just let the committee have a, having a chance to be through it. So, I think I'll just leave things at the recommendation unless there are questions, which I'd be happy to.

21:29Steven, it's Miranda here just just wondering how did this come to light.

21:39The omission.

21:42This is actually something that was brought to the heritage planning intention by legal and realty services.

21:49The, which actually they are the experts essentially and looking at or establishing officially the official legal description.

21:59Okay.

22:00So, it was generally an oversight and now in with this direction, it would be exactly as described in the registered plan.

22:11Okay. And so really the only changes the addition of these parts that were initially left out accidentally. Is that correct?

22:18That would be the amendment. Okay.

22:20That's all for me.

22:22Thanks for your question.

22:26All right. All right. Well, our recommended motion then is that heritage quotes, the courts proposed amendment heritage designation by law 2021 dash 206, three, one as presented in the staff report dated March 4th, 2024.

22:41And that heritage well recommends that city council give notice the proposed by law amendment pursuant to part four section 23 of the Ontario heritage.

22:50Is there a.

22:52Right by legal.

22:54Our lawyer rooms. Yes. And second, Laura is at your hand is there.

22:59Perfect. And then all those in favor.

23:01Thanks everyone to our designation updates.

23:10Well, continue Stephen. Yeah.

23:16Okay. The committee will remember the cultural heritage evaluation report that was brought to the committee which was supported and we're now at the stage where we're discussing.

23:29We've discussed with the property owner. And now with the heritage committee, what heritage actually leads to this report designation.

23:39I would like to say that Paul Harvey, the lead is present in the meeting. Just to observe.

23:47Questions.

23:49I have been in discussion with the property owners and they are supportive.

23:55So, I'll scroll down to the portion of the report that does list those attributes and.

24:04Sarah, if you like, I can read out these attributes.

24:09The following attributes of the property and 408 will road should be considered as heritage attributes designation for section 29 of the Ontario heritage act.

24:21The first attribute would be the form and massing of the two story three bay side gable one stone with one and a half story tail and one story extension in Granite and one.

24:36Some chimney shafts rising from the ridge of both side gable walls. The limestone exterior walls with roughly square coins and loose wires.

24:47Windows central six panel front door with origin transcend wouldn't reveal panels and a wooden plaster ground.

24:57The original shape ball original or openings. All stone lentils and stone wood, so it was at window door.

25:07And finally the L plan of the story and a half tail and sing story extension split face granite walls and limestone coins like those and so.

25:23I'll move back up to the recommendations, but I do have an additional information I'd like to share with the committee after the deal.

25:36If you consider.

25:42I'm happy to answer any questions.

25:51Thanks.

25:53I missed last month's meeting, but I think this building was on the agenda last meeting, but that was deferred until this meeting to discuss the attributes with the owner. Is that correct?

26:04That's correct. Okay. Was anything changed of note from what was on the previous minutes or agenda to today's in terms of the attributes or is it.

26:15It's minor changes.

26:18There were no changes to those features that are exterior, but I continued discussion with the property owners and the owners are of the opinion or preference that no interior features being made in the heritage design.

26:35And really that's something that heritage planning wants to respect.

26:40But at the same time, I think it's always important at the state, the initial stage of a cultural heritage evaluation report that if there are items on the inside note, whether they become heritage attributes or not, it's something that's discussed and we did that with the owners.

26:56They were very, but a whole lot that and I really appreciate that.

27:01But no, today we've, we, the owners can serve with their planning recommendations to simply state that the exterior features would be what attributes would be protected.

27:15Okay, that makes sense to me. Thanks. And I agree with that approach as well.

27:25Any other questions or comments.

27:33I think there's other places you want to share now to us to.

27:35I can share it now.

27:38I just love it when our research gathers new information or let's say, figure information.

27:47Bob and Aaron McCorkinville, who are descendants of my cork and Dale family lived in this property as you know it's 2020.

27:58And they have a picture of, they have a clearer version of one of the four shared in the evaluation.

28:06And I just wanted to show it here.

28:09This doesn't really do it justice. I'm sure that the original itself is even clearer than this.

28:14But it's a fantastic shot of the house itself. It shows the side porch that was on the tail.

28:22And the three fruit trees that the three family members are standing amongst. It also shows a stone barn behind which would have been along with a little bit.

28:32And who we're seeing here in the middle of that was George.

28:37And who was getting the son and his two sisters.

28:42So one of the sisters, I'm not sure which one of them did continue to live in the farmhouse walls and the court deals with peer.

28:51And that's some great information that we learned from the deal from Bob and Aaron.

28:58So that's just a value that

29:02I have a question about it.

29:06Are there any existing features

29:10or any

29:12local education?

29:15I'm not aware of trees as an evergreen in the front.

29:32I'm not sure these comments are recommended motion.

29:37That is that heritage 12 supports the heritage of African kids 75408 low road as outlined in the staff report dated every 5th, 24.

29:45And an heritage 12 recommends that city council gives notice of its intention that the 408 below road pursuant to part towards section 29.

29:57Thank you. And sorry, sorry, second as a second year of your time.

30:02And I'll be in the past. Thanks everyone.

30:11Next item is 14.

30:13Thank you, Sarah.

30:20So I'll provide a very brief history of the property and overview of what's there.

30:31And then I'll provide a overview of the safety of significance.

30:37I'd like to thank Bob, our new research assistant. He was very helpful in getting this properties.

30:45Research compiled.

30:48And we sped this up a little bit because the property is or was recently for sale.

30:56So we just want to make sure that the stone houses protected should land to be redone.

31:06So the stone house that you see in this photograph, it's called the law house. It was built by Francis law in 1878.

31:17Francis law was born in England in 1830 and arrived in glove in the early 1850s.

31:24He spent some time as a trapper up near the Luther march and worked in some local quarries before leaving to travel and work in the United States for a couple years.

31:38He met his wife, Emma in Pennsylvania and returned to wealth in 1866 where he started a fish monger business.

31:52In 1978, he built this house using contractor William Slater as the stone mason.

32:01William Slater is known for several notable wealth properties, including St. James church.

32:10I think the location of this property is significant because it was owned by a fish merchant.

32:19It's close proximity to Marcus square would have been incredibly convenient for Francis law.

32:26But also when it was built, it was built very close to the lands and joining Alan's mill.

32:34It also had the Wells first school, the remnants of Wells first school on the corner of the property that's now long gone unfortunately.

32:46In terms of buildings there has been a bit of an evolution over time show some of the old fire insurance.

33:01Sometimes there's also the bell piano and organ company factory located nearby.

33:09There has been a barn and stable on the property since at least the 1870s, but its composition and location has changed over time.

33:21This is the base house. So, sometime before 1929 this is the 1922 fire insurance plan that was revised in 1929.

33:34The barn was put in a new location. So to what extent the current barn that's on the property. This is the location that it's in.

33:46It's composed of timbers and parts from previous buildings is difficult to determine.

33:54But the barn on the property has been there since the late 1920s.

34:00The laws lived in the house for quite some time Francis law died in 1924 the age of 94.

34:09But his descendants continue to live in the house for several decades.

34:18So, in terms of the designation criteria, I noticed a typo in the CGR. I said it needs for but we have five listed.

34:34So, the property meets criteria in one because it's a representative example of a stone residence built in the neoclassical vernacular style.

34:44It has retained both of its yellow brick chimneys. Many of the windows appear to be original, some have been replaced.

34:54But it's it's stone construction really stands out especially as a residential building so close to the market grounds.

35:02The property meets criteria in two because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship.

35:08And it serves as the great example of the stone work of William Slater.

35:15The subject property meets criteria in four because it has direct associations with Frederick law or Francis law, sorry, and the law family who is a significant merchant in 19th century wealth.

35:29And it's criteria in six because it reflects the work of William Slater, a significant 19th century stone basin. And lastly, the subject property meets criteria in eight because it is physically functionally and historically linked to its surroundings.

35:49I mentioned 14 me is linked to the red brick, 70 detached at 130 132 Sir Street, which is also built by Francis law.

36:01And its proximity to the railroad permitted it to function as a refuge and boarding house during the Great Depression, as well as its proximity to market square which would have been convenient for Francis laws, fish business.

36:17And we do recommend that we proceed with designation of this property.

36:22I'm happy to answer questions.

36:30She was a comment.

36:32Thanks.

36:34So, can we talk with the barn a little bit more on the property. I'm looking at the building description and the statement of significance in the staff report and it only refers to the main building.

36:45Is the intention to leave the barn out of the designation, which I think we shouldn't do this again how many examples of barns are there right downtown still remaining.

36:56But just wondering what the thought is there.

36:59Yeah, that that's a conversation I'm hoping to have with the property owner.

37:05As I prepare the next report.

37:10The barn is in pretty rough shape.

37:14If we could determine for sure that it was the barn that was built at the same time as the house side.

37:21Be able to provide a firmer answer. I think but I hope that we can investigate the barn further before the next report is brought to the committee so we can have just a little bit more information on it.

37:35You're right. It should have been included in the building description. So, we can.

37:40I'll turn it in towards that the next time this property comes to the committee.

37:44Okay, so that's good. Thanks. Thanks, Jack. Because it to me, it seems that if somebody was looking to develop that area, like the barn would be the 1st thing to go. So.

37:53Yeah, looking forward to seeing more. Thanks.

37:58I'm going to go to the point of clarification. So, did you see great contact with the whole order? So that's the next. That's the next. So we don't know.

38:05Yes, that's right. It's ominous and we've gone to a building all around it. Definitely.

38:13Other questions or comments from.

38:28Yeah, so I'll read up revenue motion.

38:32The comments provided by heritage full of members on the 14 needs to be cultural heritage for staff and council for their consideration.

38:41Sorry.

38:42David a second.

38:45Thank you Cameron and all.

38:48Thanks everyone.

38:52Last week I have a new chair and staff.

38:56Well, 22.

39:00Just have a couple here.

39:03So,

39:06I can't remember if we can ask this last time that the word West contract was awarded to ASI.

39:14The same consultants that are doing the downtown heritage district study.

39:19And we're set to have our kickoff meeting for that in a couple of weeks. So we're going to get that project underway.

39:28Also wanted to make the committee aware that we're preparing to bring a batch of part four designations hopefully to council in May.

39:38We have to be determined exactly how many, but there should be several.

39:43And lastly, we're aiming to bring the downtown heritage conservation district study to council in June. So just giving you lots of advanced learning planning three months in advance for everything.

39:59This Steven, do you have any updates?

40:02No, this time.

40:08I guess we're now to a journey to move someone to new journeys.

40:14Kim, a second year.

40:17You want to stay longer.

40:19I can't read your name, but I'm sure we're all in favor of that one.

40:24I'm sure there's meeting on that.

40:27Well, I will machine enjoy the rest of your same Monday. Everyone.

40:32Thanks everyone.

40:38Thanks.