Heritage Advisory Committee

0:02our Indigenous territorial acknowledgement.

0:05As we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in Guelph,

0:10a city built over rich Indigenous histories.

0:13We are guests here, and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land,

0:17the people who live here today, and the generations to come.

0:21If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation,

0:24we should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

0:29This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge

0:33for many peoples over time, but more specifically, the Atawandarank and the Haudenosaunee.

0:39This land is held as the treaty lands and territory with the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

0:45Guelph lies directly adjacent to the Haldun Intract,

0:47and is part of a long-established traditional hunting ground for the six nations of the Grand River.

0:52Many First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples who have come from a cross-tortal island called Guelph home today.

1:01Before we move into adoption or approval of the minutes from our last meeting,

1:05is there any disclosure of the cairnary interest and the general nature thereof?

1:09Seeing no one unmute, raise hands, or interrupt me, which I always welcome.

1:19I'll take that as a no.

1:21We'll get into the next item then, which is the approval of the minutes.

1:25So is there someone that would like to move the motion of approving our minutes from the March 5th, 2026 meeting?

1:33Thank you, Piper.

1:35And is there a seconder?

1:38Thank you, Gabriel.

1:39All in favor?

1:41Fantastic.

1:44Thanks, everyone.

1:46So I'm just going to move things around on my screen, and hopefully I can see everybody perfect.

1:51All right.

1:52So moving into our consent agenda, there are two properties on the agenda today.

1:57Are there any questions or comments on any of those properties?

2:03If I, if I may just make a note.

2:06The owner of 245 Dead 1 Street North was indicated that he wishes to add the original windows to the heritage attributes.

2:16So the committee may see this reflected in the staff report that goes to council.

2:22Just the one addition, Jack.

2:24Yes, but I believe in intense include all windows.

2:31Thank you.

2:36Any other think we're a little ahead of whoever sharing screen there.

2:44Thank you.

2:46So is there someone that would like to move the recommended motion and apologies now I can't see everyone.

2:56If you'd like to move maybe just unmute.

3:03Oh, thank you.

3:04Thank you.

3:05I can see your hand and a seconder.

3:10Thank you, Gabriel.

3:11I saw you too.

3:13All those in favor?

3:14Perfect.

3:15Sorry.

3:16Apologies, everyone.

3:17As soon as the screen gets shared, I get to see only four of you at one time.

3:20And I'm trying to cycle to see.

3:23Thank you, everyone for that.

3:25So we'll get into then our committee items.

3:27And the first is the board heritage conservation conservation district plan and guideline consultation to believe we will have a presentation from Rebecca and Meredith.

3:34One or the other probably.

3:36to the committee. So, thank

3:43you, Chair. I'll just introduce

3:46our project team briefly and

3:49where we are in this project. So

3:52this will be the final engagement

3:54with the Heritage Advisory

3:56Committee before we bring the

3:58plan forward for a public

4:00meeting for Council's feedback

4:03in July. So I have with me today

4:06a presentation of the

4:08project manager at ASI and

4:12Meredith Stewart also with ASI.

4:16And today they'll be sharing some

4:19draft policy and guidelines for

4:23your feedback and consideration.

4:26Over to you, Rebecca and Meredith.

4:28Thank you, Jack. So during our time

4:32together this afternoon, we will be

4:34answering the following questions and

4:36providing additional information on

4:38the following topics. We'll review

4:40where we are in the project timeline.

4:42We'll provide a summary of the

4:44feedback received to date through

4:46various engagement activities. We'll

4:48look at how the feedback received has

4:50shaped and informed the development of

4:52the HCD plan so far. We'll cover the

4:54current plan in progress or the work

4:56in progress and finally we'll have

4:58an opportunity to discuss any feedback

5:00questions and or concerns that you may

5:02have based on the material that we

5:04present today. So first we'll start

5:07our session with a review of the

5:09project timeline noting where we are

5:11in the process. We are currently in

5:13the second phase of engagement for the

5:15plan. At this point in the project we

5:17have developed our understanding of the

5:19qualities and characteristics that are

5:21valued in the ward. We've prepared

5:23preliminary policies and guidelines

5:25and completed an 80% draft of the HCD

5:27plan. We're utilizing this phase of

5:29engagement to refine content and

5:31ensure that communication of the plan

5:33is clear and accessible. There are

5:35three phases of engagement planned for

5:40the HCD ward or for the ward HCD

5:42plan, sorry. We are currently

5:44conducting the activities related to

5:46the second phase of engagement which

5:48include a public open house and that

5:50was held at the Italian Canadian

5:52Club within the district on Monday

5:54night. There was a meeting with the

5:56ward working group on Tuesday of this

5:58week and finally our meeting here

6:00today. The third phase of engagement

6:02will occur over the summer.

6:04So now we will provide

6:07an overview of the feedback

6:09we received over the winter during

6:11our first phase of engagement.

6:13An online public survey was

6:17posted on the Have Your Say

6:19website that was active over the

6:21winter. The survey asked a range of

6:23questions that sought to better understand

6:25various aspects of the district such as

6:27sites of cultural or community

6:29importance, a request for additional

6:31information on historical businesses

6:33within the area and reactions to

6:35potential goals and objectives for the

6:37conservation efforts within the district.

6:39You may recall that these were

6:41questions that were also raised at our last

6:43meeting back in the winter.

6:45The feedback that we received

6:47during this first phase was thoughtful

6:49and considered. It showed the depth of

6:51care that people have for the area.

6:53Much of the content that we presented

6:55was confirmed to be reflective of the

6:57collective understanding of the district,

6:59both historically and as a contemporary

7:01place. We heard about places that people

7:05considered to be important cultural and

7:07community spaces and landmarks within

7:09the district. On the map on the screen

7:11you'll see blue and green properties

7:13or buildings that were previously identified

7:15sites and the yellow to pink sites

7:17represent new places identified through

7:19engagement. The range from yellow to pink

7:21reflects the number of mentions

7:23with yellow being fewer and pink being

7:25greater. We also asked

7:30what features and characteristics of the

7:32district people would want to still be around

7:34in the future. The responses to this

7:36question were varied

7:38with many focused on specific buildings

7:40and green spaces within the district,

7:42which are also shown on the map.

7:44The next slides highlight

7:51a few of the responses received through the

7:53Havier-Se survey, which capture the range

7:55and depth of feedback we received.

7:57These are all quotes from

7:59those who participated.

8:01My father's family immigrated from Italy.

8:03Our family brought with them their strong

8:05values of hard work, family loyalty

8:07and community responsibility, as well as

8:09their traditions that were preserved,

8:11practiced and celebrated openly.

8:13This included their language, faith,

8:15music and food that has enriched

8:17and reinforced a sense of belonging

8:19amongst them and their

8:21neighbors from various backgrounds.

8:23The 100 steps

8:26Elizabeth Slashier on street public

8:28scares to St. George's neighborhood always

8:30meeting people there. The rich

8:35heritage of gardening in the ward,

8:37everyone had a garden, grew their own

8:39market produce with hundreds

8:41of fruit trees. They all

8:43shared what they had in abundance.

8:45The gardens came out of necessity, as well

8:47as cultural heritage from the places

8:49they had immigrated from.

8:52I love the architecture and green spaces

8:54within the ward, and while I happen

8:56and while I will leave Change Will and

8:58should happen, retaining this is very

9:00important to me. The parks along the river

9:02behind York Road are vital

9:04and so too is the old houses that exist

9:06within the ward.

9:11Certain themes, topics and sentiments

9:13were repeated in the feedback received during

9:15the first page of engagement

9:17and some of these include the people

9:19and connections that form the community

9:21within the district that are at the heart of this place.

9:23Freedom of self-expression

9:25is a core value for those living in the

9:27ward. Walkability

9:29and being a pedestrian-friendly place is

9:31important to the experience and function of

9:33the district and the unique mix

9:35of buildings add to the character of the

9:37area. Where we

9:39frequently heard something is important

9:41or has value, that feedback was incorporated

9:43into the development of the plan.

9:47So we'll now look at how specifically the previous

9:49engagement has fed into the plan

9:51as it has evolved.

9:56Feedback received has been used to inform,

9:58refine and shape the following parts of the

10:00HCD plan. The statement of district

10:02significance, objectives for the district,

10:04property categorization,

10:06statements of contribution,

10:08and the policies and guidelines.

10:10To provide a more tangible example of how

10:13feedback has helped to refine the plan.

10:15On the slide you'll see an example of

10:17an objective that was presented in the

10:19Have Your Say survey as well as to

10:21the working group and our previous Heritage

10:23Guelph meeting. And in

10:25hearing that people were worried that the

10:27policies and guidelines might be too restrictive

10:29and limit the ability of property owners

10:31to be expressive with their properties,

10:33the draft objective was revised.

10:35The updated version adds

10:37in that an important goal of the plan

10:39is to support innovative and creative alterations

10:41that reflect the unique needs and

10:43identities of property owners.

10:45This addition now provides a clear

10:47directive to continue the pattern of

10:49self-expression and experimentation

10:51within the district.

10:55As we've worked on incorporating feedback

10:57we have been advancing the various components

10:59that form the HCD plan, which we'll now

11:01also review. When we last

11:05met we were focusing on

11:07preparing the statement of district significance

11:09and the objectives for the district.

11:11We have now moved into drafting the Heritage

11:13Permit System, policies and guidelines

11:15within the plan.

11:17These parts of the plan provide the practical

11:19components on how the document should be

11:21used and implemented.

11:25In order to write policies and guidelines for

11:27the plan we needed to finalize our categorization

11:29of properties

11:31as either contributing or non-contributing

11:33to the district.

11:35Since we last met this process has been

11:37completed and you'll see on the slide

11:39that categorization of properties.

11:41Contributing properties were those typically built

11:45during the district's early development

11:47around 1855

11:49through to its period of intensification

11:51between 1880 and 1939.

11:53And or

11:55are representative of a

11:57building typology that has been determined

11:59to express an important theme within the district.

12:01Non-contributing properties

12:03are not expressive of the district's cultural

12:05heritage value and or do not fit

12:07contextually within the district.

12:09Additionally, we have defined

12:14and matched the public spaces within the district

12:16that contribute to the cultural heritage

12:18value of the area.

12:20These include things like parks and green spaces,

12:22walking trails, bridges and gateways,

12:24privately owned public spaces,

12:26community nodes and the frequently occurring

12:28Y and T intersections that contribute

12:30to the low traffic volume

12:32and walkability of the district.

12:34So I'm now going to hand things over to

12:36Rebecca who will go over

12:38policies and guidelines and permit systems.

12:40Rebecca,

12:42And thank you Marietta

12:44and good afternoon everyone.

12:46Thank you for having us.

12:48So

12:50as Marietta just walked through

12:52with the classification

12:54of all of the properties

12:56within the district and to contributing

12:58and non-contributing

13:00as well as defining

13:02this public space features.

13:04Polices and guidelines

13:06have been under development to

13:08direct how change can

13:10occur at these different types of sites. So policies on one hand are developed to direct

13:17how the HCD will be managed and typically use language like shall as they are considered

13:24mandatory aspects of the plan. Policies are then also paired with guidelines and guidelines on the

13:31other hand provide really practical guidance and recommendations on different ways a property owner

13:39can achieve the policies and the guidelines in the plan typically use language like should

13:46or encourage and are not considered mandatory. Next. So the structure of the plan sets things up so

13:56there are sort of three sets of policies and guidelines. One set addresses change within

14:02contributing properties so you see that on the left all of those blue squares and then there's a

14:09second set of guidelines and policies and these are dedicated to guide changes within

14:16non-contributing properties so those are all the gray squares on that map and then there's a third

14:24set of policies and guidelines that have been developed for public spaces in the district

14:29and you'll see that on the right. Next. So we want to just give some examples of the look,

14:40feel and substance of policies and guidelines in these three categories. So to start we've prepared

14:50a sample excerpt of a policy and guideline for contributing property. So on the screen here you

14:58see an example of what a policy and supporting guidelines would look like within the Ward

15:03HCD plan. So in the sort of green yellow text is the policy language and it states additions

15:15that contain representative or unique residential building types shall be permitted at rears and

15:23sides and then the white text below present the guidelines that provide the practical ways to

15:29achieve that kind of policy. So as an example of some of the guidelines that would pair with that

15:36policy went undertaking an addition to a contributing property, a residential contributing property,

15:45some guidance is as follows. The height of the rear or side yard addition may be permitted to

15:51exceed existing roof ridge lines or another guideline speaks to materiality and form

15:59providing advice around that the additions should be compatible yet distinguishable

16:07from the primary structure to which they are being added. And then another example of a guideline

16:16is that a compatible addition should reflect the types of additions already extent in the district.

16:23And then you'll also see on this slide that we are giving a sense and flavor of the visual

16:31aids that we've been developing to try to explain what these words mean on the ground.

16:37So where applicable the plan will also include graphics like the diagram on this slide that

16:46illustrates how this what this policy could look like in general terms on the ground. Next.

16:55So moving along to a sample policy and guideline for non-contributing properties. So these are

17:01these are the sites within the district that are expected to to have a considerable degree

17:10of change. They might be places where you have infill or where buildings may a building that's

17:17there may come down and a new building come in its place. And it's a similar format to what

17:26you just saw where the policy starts off the section and is mandatory. And in this case the

17:34sample policy talks about scale and massing of new development on a non-contributing property.

17:44So the policy directs that building height informed shall be proportionate to the street right of way

17:51compatible with adjacent contributing properties and existing zoning bylaw provisions.

17:58And then similarly there are guidelines that assist in

18:04further explaining how this kind of policy can be applied. So for example a guideline related to

18:09this reads new development and additions for example on triangular or corner lots should

18:16be compatible in scale form and materiality with surrounding contributing properties.

18:21And then another guideline reads setback and or stepping of any new development on a triangular lot

18:33is to allow visibility or to allow visibility of the intersection is encouraged. And then similarly

18:40there are illustrative excerpts associated with the policies and guidelines to assist in

18:49visualizing what these policies and guidelines can look like on the ground in general terms.

18:58If we go to the next slide we now move to the heritage permit system which is sort of the

19:04back end of how property owners and the city implement the policies and guidelines. So that

19:13part of the plan is currently in development. We've put together some draft

19:24framework for the heritage permit system that is proposed in the plan. And essentially what

19:31the plan will do is provide property owners with information on what type of heritage permit if one

19:38at all may be required for various kinds of interventions that would be expected to be

19:45undertaken and then the associated process that would that would follow with the type of heritage

19:50permit required. So heritage planning within the city has as you all know a sort of three stream

20:00of heritage permitting and those are described here minor major as well as new construction

20:08and or demolition. If we can go to the next slide. So what we've done to date and shared

20:19at the public meeting on Monday as well as with the working group on Tuesday is a classification

20:25of how a heritage permitting system would work within the Ward Conservation District.

20:31Remembering that a heritage permit system is always going to be tailored to what the objectives of a

20:38district are and the particular understanding of heritage values and attributes in in the place.

20:46So we've thought quite carefully about not only what are the characteristics that are important

20:51to preserve and steered forward in the district but also what are the objectives what are we trying

20:57to do here and that is a big piece that that really shapes how the the heritage permit system

21:06gets developed in terms of what kinds of permits are paired with what kinds of activities. So what

21:12you see here is an example of a table that will be in the plan that explains to property owners

21:17of a contributing property the kinds of different permits that may be required depending on you

21:23know what exactly is being proposed. So at the top you see that there are any range of activities

21:30that don't require any permits so things like stabilizing vacant buildings or doing repairs

21:36in the same style material size shape and detailing of existing building elements.

21:43Also you'll see in the exempt that replacement and addition of exterior building elements in the

21:50same style materials size shape and detailing would also be exempt recognizing that that kind of

21:58ongoing replacement and and addition of exterior building elements is part of the Ward's DNA and

22:05to to keep that very organically moving is is a key part of what this plan is seeking to do.

22:14As another example next you'll see exempt or minor permits so this is a list of activities that could

22:22could either result in no further permitting required or based on the specifics of of what's

22:27kind of being contemplated it could move into a minor permit category and that would be determined

22:31based on discussions with staff so things in this category would be something like

22:37right the top replacement and addition of exterior building elements with new or different materials

22:45could either be exempt or move into a minor permit system or similarly additions at mirrors and

22:53sides of primary buildings could be exempt or move on to a minor permit trackway. As an example

23:01the another the other category of heritage permits those requiring falling into the new

23:08construction and or demolition permit category which is sort of the the the most multi-step

23:16and tiered permit process where it goes through through staff heritage committee and to council

23:23the kinds of activities that would follow on that pathway would would be things like demolishing a

23:28primary building on a contributing property or constructing a new primary building or structure

23:34so so like total loss of material or total replacement of material that could significantly

23:42impact the district moves on that pathway versus a major permit has been paired with

23:50alterations or additions that could could quite significantly change the the way a property

23:59contributes to the district so for example full second story additions on a single story primary

24:05building have been paired with a major permit pathway so think like a cottage with a full

24:15second story being added could could quite drastically transform that cottage into a

24:20totally unrecognizable feature and so it's so it's moving on a fairly detailed permit pathway

24:30and then just as another kind of example of the the flavor and substance of of the permitting

24:37system in this district things like constructing an accessory dwelling unit like a garden suite that

24:44is not visible from the public right of way has been paired with an exempt to be exempt the the

24:50rationale being that this is a pattern that has always occurred in the ward and if it is not

24:56visible from the public right of way and adds density and intensification and promotes affordability

25:02this is something that should be encouraged and incentivized if we move to the next slide this

25:09is a table of how permits would work in relation to building interiors but also non-contributing

25:17property so I think this group is very familiar that modifications to building interiors are exempt

25:28from heritage permits in a district unless there's like a part four designation that has specific

25:34interior attributes but that's always a big question we get from property owners you know I'm

25:39renewing my kitchen I'm a contributing property do I need to get a permit and the answer is no

25:44for non-contributing properties we have paired things like constructing a new primary building

25:51or structure to move along a new construction and or demolition permit pathway and again

25:59accessory dwelling units being having a similar approach even for non-contributing properties that

26:07where they're not visible they would be exempt but where they are are visible you know think like a

26:13side yard near the front of the property or even there's a few properties in the ward that do have

26:18buildings set quite far back so there's a lot of front yard in a few instances so a garden

26:24we could be visible from from the public right of way and and quite and you know have the capacity

26:30to change the streetscape and rhythm that could that would fall into a minor permit pathway

26:38we move to the next slide I think we are yes to to the the pause moment for Meredith and I

26:44um so um that gives everyone a um a flavor of of the content um of the work that's been under

26:54development and that has been working its way through various channels this week for comment

27:00and feedback um so we'd like to really hear from you here today about what you've heard the material

27:05covered um any reactions questions or comments from any of the committee members okay thank you

27:17I'll open it up to anyone if there's any questions or comments you'd like to share

27:22and maybe we could stop sharing screen for a moment so we can see everyone if possible

27:28thank you yes Dawn go ahead I still struggle with the um the date the cutoff date of 1939

27:40which leaves almost 90 years of buildings uncovered and also the term non-contributing

27:47and I just want to ask again um will the heritage staff be able to re review any alterations to any

27:58buildings in the ward or is it just going to be the contributing buildings because I don't know

28:08you know how these are being divided into contributing and non-contributing and I worry

28:14that there are some important buildings or styles that aren't really being recognized

28:24through the chair thank you thank you Dawn um maybe I'm sure Jack has some maybe um thoughts and

28:31comments but I can maybe um provide a bit of a response to those are really good questions so

28:38the um the 1939 cutoff date um and the plan will will detail this out um

28:47quite extensively is a um a date that we're using generally um but not exclusively so there are some

28:57properties that post-1939 that are in the contributing bucket um so we're not um sort of applying

29:06a totally blunt um measure we recognize that there that there are things that occurred after 1939

29:15buildings that were constructed after that date and um those may be contributing properties so

29:22so I think we've we've tried to address that um with with a good level of of nuance and and kind

29:30of creativity um the question about whether or not staff will have any oversight of non-contributing

29:38properties um is also another really good question that we've had a range of sort of

29:45comments and reactions to this week um so right now the plan does um set up um a framework for

29:54the city reviewing demolitions and of non- demolitions of buildings on non-contributing

30:01properties um and of course construction of new buildings on non-contributing properties and

30:11the reasons for those are quite different from one another the latter being a new you know a new

30:19house replacing a building that comes down could have the impact to drastically change the look

30:23and feel of the streetscape and and the the characteristics and qualities of the wards

30:28so therefore a permitting a heritage permitting process um uh is important and beneficial the

30:37removal of a non-contributing properties for slightly different reasons one being

30:42we don't always know everything about every property and you may discover that a non-contributing

30:48property um you know you peel something back you learn more about it should not be demolished so

30:55there is there is a pathway for that oversight to happen and for that kind of outcome to occur

31:02and also for there to be some sort of periodic review of these classifications as you may learn more

31:11you know on a site by site level or someone restores some building that looks you know of no particular

31:17contribution at the moment but but you know through a range of um interventions or additional

31:23research becomes like this is this is absolutely an important piece of the ward fabric and and it

31:30should should move into that contributing kind of um framework um Jack do you want to add anything

31:37to that or thoughts on no I think you've captured I think you've captured it Rebecca I think um

31:45having policy to make sure that we consider the loss of a non-contributing property so that we

31:52have a mechanism to review whether it is indeed non-contributing um is important to have in the

32:00plan but uh keeping the policy relatively minimal for non-contributing properties will allow

32:07the flexibility we're trying to aim for um for homeowners within the ward

32:15is this just um for demolitions because I'm thinking also of you know severe alterations

32:23or alterations to buildings that may be unrecognized as being important buildings and I think

32:31one of the problems I have with the non-contributing term is one person's non-contributing is another

32:38person's contributing so I just want to make sure that um certain buildings um don't just get

32:46shut uh shunted into the um uh non-contributing category and um you know have a fate associated

32:57with that that um you know we may regret later or we may lose um you know lose something important

33:09for the chair thank you Don and Meredith I'm not sure if you want to comment um further on the

33:16sort of the methodology um of beyond what what we presented but um just to maybe

33:26further the discussion around this um creating a framework that is that provides a level of

33:36certainty for property owners is really important here um recognizing the limits of that certainty

33:45and um we've we've endeavored to be um very analytical and systematic in the methodology

33:54for why this building ends up here and that building ends up there and it's based on and

34:02I think that the plan that will become public does a really good job at explaining you know

34:08not every old building is necessarily important in the ward it's these kinds of types of buildings

34:19and here's the definition for them and then we compare every building against them to be systematic

34:24and consistent and there will be some some buildings that drop off as part of that um analysis

34:33and end up in the non-contributing for for a range of reasons that that everyone might be very

34:38comfortable with or as you say Don you might be uncomfortable with or you learn more about it and

34:43the uh the framework that allows city the city to kind of like pull that review trigger

34:50where and when they need to we've we feel that that's the um sort of walking the line between those

35:00two you know um uh categories I think my biggest concern is just uh the protection of

35:11modernist buildings at the moment because I think they get ignored and that's why I kind of keep

35:16bringing this up because I worry I mean in some cases we only have one or two examples of a style

35:23and so that's why I mentioned it before with the other district and why I'm mentioning it now

35:33Steven did you want to comment on um this conversation sorry was it a different topic

35:39no it's actually exactly this what Don's the point that Don's raising um through you chair and thanks

35:45for letting me comment I know this isn't my project but I think if Don if you have examples

35:52I'm keen to to be aware of those properties that you may feel they do have contributed in some way

36:00and then if the consultants are aware of that too then I mean for for armed is sorry what's the

36:07expression there's something that's that's if we know ahead of time right if we can even just

36:14start to peel that onion back a little bit we may find new information as as Rebecca has suggested

36:20so I think it's a good idea for everyone to be aware of what's what potentially a property could

36:26what we could learn from a property that's all yeah and I think I've mentioned a couple of them

36:31before there's that streamlined modern convenience store and there's a pretty good gas station on

36:38York Road I'm not exactly sure all of the dimensions of the um of the ward either but maybe I'll have

36:45a little drive around and see if there's anything else that I think is of interest and let you know

36:53thanks Don okay I have a quick question and it might sound provocative it is not meant to be

37:00that way by any means um but Rebecca I think when you were just talking about that systemic

37:05or systematic framework um that you're working on I'm just curious given how eclectic the ward

37:10is it's such a unique place like how does a sort of very system how does that work because my brain

37:16is sort of having trouble thinking of like this box and this box and this box when I feel like

37:20nothing in the ward sort of follows that path yes through through the chair um or to the chair um

37:27you have uh hit the head on the uh the nail on the head of the challenge that we have been working

37:33through um Meredith did you want to um reflect on the the method of um systematically

37:46analyzing the kind of irregular characteristics of the ward yes uh so as you have said Rebecca it is

37:55the ward is challenging because what makes it special is that it is so varied and so eclectic

38:02and everything's a little bit different but um having completed a survey so having individual

38:08photographs of every single property and looking at sort of everything built within the ward patterns

38:14do start to emerge so you start to see this repeated kind of worker's house that comes up and has this

38:22all sort of shared characteristics and while there's maybe different versions or different

38:28ways that they may be expressed or maybe have been changed over time there are patterns that emerge

38:33within that and then we also are able to look at things like building dates and so we do know

38:40that there was this massive building boom that happened between 1880 and 18 by 1940s really

38:47building starts to slow because at that point many of the the lots are filled um so while

38:53while everything is all kind of different and that is what is characteristic of the the ward um

38:59there are patterns that we can look at and there are there there are ways to look at data to be able

39:05to sort of understand how things actually do relate um or show trends um in ways that we can begin

39:15sort of quantify and qualify what is valuable as a collective versus what might not contribute

39:22to that story if that helps to clarify in terms of the systematic review process that's kind of

39:28different um and that could be a matter of looking at like okay well we knew in 2026 that we had 150

39:35of these workers houses and now because a lot of change has occurred things have evolved 20 years

39:40later we actually only have 50 of these left is the ward is that still characteristic of the ward

39:46and so that's a way you can approach that review process of we know what we know we had this and

39:52we know that there were these patterns um and these repeated forms are those things still here

39:57are they still characteristic of this place or has that maybe changed over time thank you

40:04other questions or comments yes paper i just had a really small question it was really great

40:13presentation um i was curious about the major permit just on like slide 29 where it says the

40:20major permit is fully concealing the front facade of a primary building so i was curious again this

40:25is tiny but like what would be the language for like a building that's on a corner that has two

40:30facades that are visual like visible visible from like a walking place and then how it would work

40:36when you have something that only partially conceals like if someone wanted to build a porch

40:43through the chair that is an excellent question paper that i don't think our our description

40:49of alterations has been fully contemplated that um i think to clarify and it's so good having these

40:55questions because it it reinforces how we need to modify the language around these things that the

41:03intent of that kind of permit pathway is for like a full addition not a not a not a porch

41:13and i think we can can think this through of the the words we use that that really parse that out

41:19um and and maybe it's just further clarifying you know something that that's totally

41:27abstracts the primary elevation and a porch generally would not um that they're you know

41:34abstract um or cover um uh the front elevation um and the other part of that around like the

41:43corner lot and two elevations having a sort of public face um that's something for us to

41:49certainly consider and think about how that gets added into that piece so thank you oh great i just

42:01figured out the raise your hand thing i i'm still struggling with the city's parking system too

42:10anyway uh no just one other thing when you say that it it it's sort of relevant to the um the um

42:17um uh area itself and you you know you have this number of these houses uh what about buildings that

42:24are um not necessarily relevant to the ward but are relevant to the city overall through the chair

42:35um this is something that the plan does address that you know there might be this very interesting

42:41building that on its own is significant and would be like a part an individual part for

42:47designation might be an appropriate pathway and the work that we're doing is identifying those

42:53kinds of properties so they don't kind of like fall through the cracks they may not be part of this

42:58like ward centric fabric um but important fabric nonetheless thank you i'm just quickly joining

43:08down some of the um the comments for the recommendation for the motion other comments

43:15questions thoughts from folks yes paper one other small thing i was curious about is with

43:26the contributing property thing you sort of outlined two channels through which you can go

43:30which is like the dates and then also it representing a building topology or important theme

43:36so i was wondering if you were looking to have that be like a very express theme like almost

43:40like a constitution sometimes there's benefits to having something that's really rigid and defined

43:45and sometimes it's useful to have it really loosely defined so people can work in and sort

43:49of establish their own meaning and value i was wondering what your approach to determining

43:53what is an important theme would be through the chair merit if you do you want to take that or

44:03would you like me to yes i can take that um so essentially the the typologies that we have determined

44:13have value in the board are ones that come out of the historical research and background information

44:19on the board um so that is the statement itself is quite vague um but in the plan there is sort of

44:26clearer a clearer breakdown of what those typologies are and where they're coming from and why they're

44:33concerned valuable in the board um so sometimes it is a physical thing that they um have these

44:39characteristics that are common and repeated and distinct to the board sometimes it's more of a

44:46use so like industrial properties we know in industry is an important part of how the word

44:50was formed and how it evolved um so it might not be as tied to what that industrial building looks

44:55like but more so its use and its footprint and that kind of thing and then other times um it's

45:00more intangible things like places of community gathering places where that have like a community

45:06landmark um so those typologies or the valued properties um do have more concrete connections to

45:18types and and um yeah property properties uses and types um within the plan so that those

45:30definitions do feel vague but within the plan there is more sort of

45:35context provided um they give that more meat does that address yeah thank you that's great

45:45I was also just curious because uh with what Don was saying about wanting to protect like more

45:50modern buildings I was wondering if that's something that could be included as a sort of type of

45:54building the modern buildings in the ward to offer protection that one that could be sorry

46:02Rebecca were you going to oh sure I was I was gonna um maybe reflect on that a bit um through the

46:10chair um that also the the building typologies that that Meredith was describing and and the

46:19themes themselves that become the basis for identifying you know this kind of building

46:28typology um and that kind of building typology um certainly come from the analysis in the

46:35historical record but also through the engagement process where we have heard very clearly like

46:41these are the themes that we find important here and we've there's been a very iterative process

46:52of us kind of like taking that back articulating it bringing it back to you know various various

46:57groups and the the plan does um present a kind of narrative of like these are the themes that are

47:08that are expressed here and that is based on a range of sources you know the analysis the

47:14research and what we heard from community today um so it is the frameworks there it has been in

47:23part community driven and not like just you know us sitting sitting in an office kind of thinking

47:29about it um as part of the engagement and as part of the analytical work the um interest in modern

47:38buildings has not risen to the like the four of the conversation that doesn't mean it isn't important

47:44but that is what the the process has told us on that topic to date so um I think it's important to

47:53keep on recording this kind of information while at the same time um positioning it in relation

48:01to the range of like the depth of response we we got about like this theme was like

48:08you know came came across so extensively so deeply versus something else that as

48:14mid maybe mentioned um far less so um that's that's a sort of a balance we need to carefully walk and

48:24I think there's a way to provide pathways to recognize these different kind of buildings

48:30um uh and the pathways they might get on to um with respect to protection

48:39Don? Uh just one quick thing about that um when all those buildings came down in St. George's

48:46Square in the 60s nobody really cared then and I'm not I understand that it it's important to be

48:54sensitive to what people are interested in now but I think somebody has to look at the future

49:00and um if um you know a lot of people don't think modern buildings are important because

49:05they're too familiar they're too too too recent but we don't want situations in the future where

49:12we regret um actions like we regret what happened in in St. George's Square and that's one of the

49:19reasons why I mean I love old buildings um but I'm kind of pushing the modern ones because we

49:26don't want to lose the good examples that we have now for the future so I think it's great one

49:35well go ahead Don no go ahead I was just I was just going to say if it's not coming up that's not

49:41necessarily um a reason to not and you did say it is important but it's not necessarily a reason to

49:50to not emphasize it as well yeah I think that's a great comment just it's interesting with the

49:56word because it is such an anaclactic neighbor that there are those those key pieces that seem to be so

50:01heavily warred that I think you're right Don that the the modern doesn't come to mind for sure

50:06quickly at least in the ward neighborhood as it might in other places and um so I appreciate that

50:11comment as well about keeping it in the in our mind so we don't lose sight of it I agree

50:18I did um take as much as I could notes while folks were talking and asking questions and I did put

50:24it into the meeting chat I wasn't sure what the best way is instead of sharing screen so to committee

50:29members I'll I'll ask all of you were there other comments that you wanted to have included in that

50:34recommendation that I may not have captured hopefully the chat is accessible to everyone

51:07and as folks are just reading through that list if that does feel consistent I believe there's one

51:12more slide but it's moving on to what are the next steps so if if we're okay maybe we can move

51:17forward with this part of the discussion or this part of the the recommended motion and then we'll

51:21just hear what the next steps are if um if any folks are okay with that if someone would like to

51:27move that or if there are revisions or any edits you'd like I'm also happy to do that

51:32thank you for putting that on screen I appreciate that

51:38we're so excited everybody now but if someone would like to um move the motion maybe just shout

51:44out that you'd like to move it I can move thanks Piper and a seconder I see Kelly I think your

51:58hand is up there I don't know if someone else unmuted but we'll go Kelly and then all those in

52:02favor fantastic I think I've seen everyone perfect all right so uh Rebecca or Meredith will turn it

52:12back to you to tell us what the the next steps are for this sure thanks we'll just share screen

52:19so next step so um there's an online survey up right now that shares um all of the same content

52:26that you saw here today in which which we were sharing with the public on Monday night

52:30and the working group on Tuesday so if you have further comment or also just know others

52:35that would be interested please please check out the online survey I'd have your say and

52:41share that with others so we can continue receiving feedback that's really important at this stage

52:47the next then step from there there will be a statutory public meeting in July of council and

52:56prior to that meeting a draft version of the plan will be publicly available and released

53:01through the city's website so um everyone has access to that um well ahead of that statutory

53:08public meeting of council and then the next step after that um is um we will refine the work based

53:17on that statutory public meeting and then bring a final plan to council uh in late summer which is

53:23tracking for like the second week of September um to council for uh recommendation for approval

53:33and that is it for us amazing exciting to see this continue to progress and move towards that

53:40that timeline that deadline and date thank you to both Rebecca and Meredith for that presentation

53:48and we'll be sure to keep participating great well thank you for having us and really appreciate all

53:53the really constructive and productive feedback um and engagement from from the committee here so

53:59thank you it's all signed off down thanks bye bye all right uh we'll move along to our next item

54:11with uh which will be a presentation I believe by Jack on 221 Arthur Street north and intention

54:16to demolish a listed cultural heritage resource excuse me um through you chair I would just like

54:25to note that um correspondence was received ahead of the commenting deadline from P Brian

54:32Scarrett with concerns regarding omissions and assumptions made in the reports accompanying

54:38agenda item 221 Arthur Street north that should be identified prior to making your recommendations

54:44to staff and council and this correspondence was added to the revised agenda and circulated to members

54:50in advance in this hearing thank you yes thank you thank you Jordan um so the city has received

54:59an intention to demolish the listed property at 221 Arthur Street north the property contains a

55:05mid 19th century one and a half story vernacular salt box house originally clad in stucco the

55:12house has been reclined in vinyl siding except for the south elevation which is now clad in wood siding

55:18and the interior of the enclosed porch which retains the roughcast stucco

55:25the original structure has been altered significantly including in addition to the north

55:30elevation construction of an enclosed front porch and creation of new window openings

55:37I would like to thank mr scarrett for the research he submitted that clarified the chain of ownership

55:42prior to the properties purchased by George Heinz in 1866 as well as mr scarrett's explanation

55:49that the reason for the tax increase reported in the tax assessment of 1866 um I would also like to

55:56note that mr scarrett commented that the that he believed the property met criteria in one because

56:04it is an early and representative example of the salt box architectural style from mid 1850s

56:09um as well as the property met criteria in eight because it has contextual value

56:17because it's among the earliest dwellings in the Mitchell survey as always we welcome

56:24any additional research and input from the public and in this case I'm very grateful for the added

56:32context we have for considering this property um after careful consideration I do not believe this

56:38property meets the threshold um for any of the designation criteria in a way that could be defended

56:44at the Ontario Land Tribunal the intent of individual designation is to identify properties

56:50that was significant cultural heritage value in the city I want to qualify this by saying that this

56:56doesn't mean that this property does not have some cultural heritage value this property is located

57:02in one of the candidate cultural heritage landscapes and it would likely be a contributing

57:07property if an arthur street north heritage conservation district were ever put into effect

57:12in the area um so I'm not recommending that this property be designated and I intend to

57:20recommend to council that it be removed from the municipal register of cultural heritage properties

57:27to permit demolition but I'm happy to answer any questions from the committee and um hear feedback

57:33on my evaluation of the property according to the designation criteria thank you thanks jack I'll

57:41open the floor up to anyone who has any questions for jack about the the heritage value of the property

57:50or the demolition report hi brough I'm just trying to find her name but I saw that the

58:01additional information that was provided also mentioned that it belonged to someone who was a

58:05professor at the university of guile um it says that she founded a lobbying group to support

58:13graduate students it's uh rita wensler so I was wondering if there's any like historic association

58:19or you also think that that wouldn't meet that criteria from what was submitted in the correspondence

58:28and now this is not my own research but based on my evaluation of the research submitted I do not

58:34believe that that would meet the 906 criteria for associative value uh though again um I'm

58:43happy that it was noted and glad it's entered into the record no questions from the committee

58:57comments yes don oh you're just muted we've got the hand up down pat now

59:09okay I got mic unmuted too uh no I just I just haven't seen the building so I I'm not sure

59:19uh what to think about it I mean there was a picture but it didn't really show very much

59:26and I and it's completely obscured on google maps and I didn't want to drive in in case I got

59:32charged with trespassing so yeah the property is um quite overgrown so even this time of year with

59:42the minimal amount of foliage there is it was difficult to capture a full image of the property

59:48and it's almost impossible to view from the screen except from a very specific angle

1:00:00yeah your figures I think in the report really give us the best view we could have at this point

1:00:06um seeing no one else unmute or raise hands I'll uh ask if there's anyone who would like to move

1:00:18the recommended motion I can do so thank you Liam a seconder thank you Kelly all those in favor

1:00:30any opposed uh no I believe it carries them thank you everyone thanks Jack I have no announcements

1:00:41but I feel like there's always something from Steven Jack or Imogen maybe I have nothing to report

1:00:52chair I take it back like was no staff announcements today I was every time I don't think there's

1:01:00something there's always one and today the one time I expected for you chair um just not an

1:01:08announcement I think we may have missed the vote on the approval of minutes so if we could just go

1:01:13back to that we got the mover of member Boyd Bell and our seconder was member Slater Eddy but I

1:01:21think we just need to conduct the vote on that please oh sure all those in favor moving the

1:01:25minutes or the motion from our minutes of last month perfect thank you all right I thought if

1:01:35there are no announcements then the only other thing left is to move for adjournments someone

1:01:40like to move us thank you Justin Piper I'll take you as a seconder all in favor

1:01:45all right we'll see you all next month thanks everyone