Heritage Guelph

0:02Jack, would you mind letting us know who's in the room from the committee?

0:05It's been a long time since I've been on this side and not in the room.

0:08Yeah.

0:09Charlie, Combo, and David Camilletti are here in this.

0:14Okay.

0:15So is Miranda or Lara online or no?

0:21Lara is here.

0:23Online.

0:24It's just not on my screen. That's fine. Okay.

0:31Perfect. Well, bear with me everyone.

0:33Then it's been a while since I've run one of these remotely.

0:37But I'll start by welcoming everybody then, call to order to the September 9th,

0:412024 meeting of Heritage 12 and welcoming all committee members staff and invited guests who are attending today's meeting.

0:48I'll start with item 1.1, which is our Indigenous Territorial Acknowledgement.

0:53And so as we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in Guelph,

0:58a city built over rich Indigenous histories.

1:01We are guests here and we should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land, the people who live here today,

1:07and the generations to come.

1:09If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, we should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

1:16This place we call Guelph has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for many peoples over time,

1:22but more specifically the Atawanda Runk and the Haudenosaunee.

1:26This land is held as a tree lands and territory with the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

1:31Guelph lies directly adjacent to the Haldeman Tract and is part of a long established traditional hunting ground for the six nations of the Grand River.

1:38Many First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples who have come from across Turtle Island call Guelph home today.

1:45All right, I'm moving into the next one, which is disclosure of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof.

1:53I'm happy to declare first and Kathy, Kathy go ahead, sorry, I have so much on my screen at once, you can declare first.

2:00That's okay, you could have gone ahead of me.

2:03Mine would be 58 March in Avenue, it's across the road and Kitty corner to me, so I'll put that on the register, make sure to register that later today.

2:11Perfect.

2:13I'll just turn off my screen when we get to that one.

2:16Excellent, thank you Kathy. Are there any others besides myself, which I'll get to in a moment.

2:21No, all right, and for mine, it is item 3.3, which is 37 Christie Lane, and that is University of Guelph property, which is my employer and Kathy so graciously is going to chair that part of the meeting for me as Kim is away this week and I'll just turn my camera and

2:39off and mute myself as well at that point.

2:42And I have submitted my declaration already on that one.

2:46Any others before we move on.

2:50Seeing no hands or no one interrupting me.

2:54We'll go to the approval of minutes so the recommended motion is that the minutes from the July 8 2024 meeting of the Heritage Guelph Committee be approved and there's no changes or amendments to that I'm looking for a mover.

3:14Thanks Alexander and a seconder.

3:22Sorry I'm just scrolling through the screen online as well I see David's hand up so thank you David.

3:28All right, and we do have a slight. Oh sorry sources of vote I forgot all in favor of the minutes.

3:39I'm just looking for Laura. Amazing. Thank you everyone. So different for me being online and not in person for some reason. Apologies for the clunkiness of my leading.

3:49So, we'll get into committee items today. First, we do have a slight change. So we're going to do item 2.4.

3:56First, moving that one up and then we'll go back to the regular order of our meeting. So for item 2.4 it's 302 and 306 Edinburgh Road South application to remove properties from the municipal register and we have Jack for the presentation.

4:12Thank you chair. I'm going to invite our delegates up to the table for this item and group and our one.

4:22You can just come to sit.

4:27So, this is a bit of a unique item, a unique scenario. I was approached by a prospective property owner, a three or two and 306 Edinburgh Road South, which are listed on the municipal register.

4:43They're unique listing because it's not actually the residences that are listed, but it's four stone markers that you may have noticed while driving on Edinburgh Road South.

4:54So we, we determined that those stone markers came from St. George's Church. If you read the staff report, there's a photograph from the 1880s that shows that they were used as a gate posts at that time.

5:08It's possible that they date from the original St. George's Church in St. George's Square. The priest of the parish said that those types of markers were usually used to indicate sacred ground.

5:21It could have been used to demarcate church property when the church was located in St. George's Square.

5:27But sometime in the 1950s or 60s, they were removed from St. George's and relocated to their current location at 302 and 306 Edinburgh Road South.

5:39So the property owner indicated that they would like the properties removed from the register and heritage staff are supportive of this if the stone markers are returned back to their original location at St. George's Church.

5:53So the parish is interested in having them back and the property owner is keen to facilitate their relocation.

6:02They've retained Tacoma engineers to make a plan for reinstallation at the church, including an approximate location at where the stone markers will be.

6:11They still have to do like an utility locate to make sure that they can indeed go there. But the idea is to have them flanking either entryway into the church, which is approximately where they were in the photograph shared in the staff report.

6:29I'm happy to answer any questions committee may have, but I'm also happy to turn it over to the delegates.

6:35Not seeing anyone unmute or look like they want to ask any questions in the room. So Jack, the delegates are welcome to speak.

6:52I think Jack said that well.

6:56There was a meeting that took place with the church.

7:00Thanks.

7:01We'll be back again. There's a part of us moving back to where you're once located. So we're happy to work with Tacoma to facilitate that with that.

7:11Yeah, structurally to very strict board. So we'd recommend a new foundation for feet down just to minimize any frost teeth or movement of the.

7:20Here's when they're reinstated and then just some minor anchorage. So I hope you've all received the plans and just that puzzle and have it answer any questions related to that.

7:30We certainly prioritize kind of minimal intervention, but that also wanting to make sure that we're putting back something durable. Let's get a last long time.

7:38Excellent. Thank you. Are there any questions from committee members for Jack with the delegates?

7:51I'm just curious about the order of operations as far as.

8:01If we give or if we accept the request to remove those properties from the register. Is that something that we can make contingent on the.

8:13Is that a successful removal of the stone peers or is that something that has to happen prior to the removal? Like, is that in the way of the removal?

8:21Or is that something that can be given after the relocation?

8:28Thank you, Alex. The motion I recommended is that the properties be removed after the successful reinstallation of the martyrs.

8:37So we would keep them listed until they are successfully reinstalled at the church. And this would have to be approved by council prior to any removal activities. So, like we had there on October 8th.

8:52Thank you.

8:59If questions or comments, anyone on the committee?

9:07Nothing online or in the vote can go ahead.

9:11I don't know. Kelly, it's okay. I get Kim all the time.

9:16Sorry.

9:21Just, just wanted to clarify, I guess, through all the research, it has been determined that there's no historical value to the current properties where these are. Like, are we not concerned about that or any precedent this fits out?

9:35Well, there, it's a unique listing because when you list a property on the register, you have to identify heritage attributes and on this listing, the residences are in the register. So, it's just those points.

9:51Now, like at a glance, the properties are typical 1960s bumblers, but we haven't done any research on them because they aren't protective.

10:03Mike, there was a specific story there, Jack, sir, to interrupt, but that came from, I believe, the pastor there, but they knew who took them and it was a member of the church that building this home to the touch stuff that you should.

10:18You might want them so you just move them to the hospital.

10:23Perks.

10:25Okay.

10:26He was the only instructor out there to work on some sort of expansion or something at the church site and they were in the same time.

10:35Yeah.

10:41And there's a question from Alexander.

10:44Thanks. I was going to bring this up at a later point, but this seems a good time now. This is directed towards staff.

10:54So, is it possible in future when we're receiving documents through the agenda, if the if it's whether it's a listing on the register or if it's the actual designation bylaw is that can that be included as part of the documentation that's provided to the committee members, so that when we're looking

11:13at what's being referred to we have a clear understanding of it.

11:18Yeah, absolutely. The municipal register is available because of the requirements for posting the available information is slimmed down from what it used to be. So we can when dealing with listed properties we can circulate the old register

11:37listing so that the committee has all that information in front of.

11:41Thank you. And the other just point of order. And this was probably said, but I have the memory of a goldfish soak in the agenda it's listed is just Arlin delegating.

11:53But just for the record, if we could have the gentleman's name that's also here for this item, that would be great.

12:02It's Andrew.

12:04And you're the owner of the property. No, we have the property or contract for just the work.

12:12So, this prior to the.

12:14So, can we get that name added to the meeting minutes.

12:24Yeah, he wasn't included in the revised agenda because he registered this morning or 10 am. Yeah, which is permitted for revised items.

12:35Thank you for the clarification.

12:41And it's Miranda here. I'm not sure if you can hear me, but I had to dial in. I have trouble with the audio, but can you hear me, Sarah?

12:49Yeah, you're good.

12:51Okay.

12:54Question. Did I hear that they'd be removed from the register after they were moved? And if yes, why would they be removed from the register?

13:04The properties will be removed from the register.

13:08The markers will be returned to 99 Woolwich, which is currently listed on the register.

13:15Okay, perfect. Thank you.

13:23So, I'm going to ask you if that was lingering, but you're good to go.

13:27Sorry, just thinking about this on the fly in conjunction with this motion is it.

13:35I, because of course we're adding this, these peers back to a property that I believe is designated. Should we also establish that we will be updating the.

13:49The attributes of the St. George's church to include now those peers if we're getting them back located on.

13:56St. George's church is actually not designated.

14:03It is within the proposed boundary of the downtown heritage district. So these markers would in theory be protected through that.

14:17Thanks for the clarification.

14:27Kelly's hand is up. Thanks, Kelly.

14:29Just, I think, probably a question for a heritage.

14:34So it sounds like I gathered this is a really, really unique situation.

14:39Is there any concern about the setting of precedent that down the road if there's a to facilitate an investment purchase that somebody could just sort of pick and choose what elements of a property they don't.

14:54Are we are we concerned about that? Are you concerned?

14:57I don't think so because this listing is unique. There are many listed properties where that has or the structure on the property isn't included. But some other element.

15:08Property is so just because that's not common. I'm not concerned about it and and I mean, we'll be losing our register.

15:18So, yeah, okay.

15:22Okay.

15:28Questions or comments from anyone online.

15:32Yep, Alexander.

15:34Will we be seeing this come before us again?

15:38Like at the stage in which contractors are hired to relocate the peers or by making this motion.

15:46Now, are we basically saying, you know, do what you need.

15:51And that's the last word you know, commenting.

15:57This is the last time it'll go to the heritage committee, but it will be before council in October members delegate.

16:07I have anything.

16:20He's, he's, you're no one online has any hands up or has unmuted and to Kelly.

16:25No, Kim. And David, if there's any other questions in the room.

16:31No. All right.

16:34If there aren't any others online, I will read out the suggested motions that we have and so that's that heritage wealth supports the planned relocation of the stone markers listed on the municipal register of heritage properties to their original location at 99 will which street and that heritage wealth

16:49supports the removal of 302 and 306 Edinburgh Road south from the municipal register cultural heritage properties after the stone markers listed on the municipal register of cultural heritage properties having successfully removed and reinstalled at 99 will which streets.

17:05So someone who will move that.

17:10Thank you, Laura, a seconder.

17:15Thank you, Kelly, and then all those in favor.

17:23And all those opposed. Alex, I didn't see if you had risen. If you rose your hand for the motion for in favor or opposed.

17:32Sorry, yeah, I was taking a second there. I'll vote in favor.

17:37Okay, so I believe that was all in favor then so thanks everyone.

17:41I guess we can give a moment for the delegates if they'd like to take off. I don't think they want to stick around for the whole meeting.

17:54Search.

18:00Alright, and so we'll go now to item 2.1, which is 84 Forbes Avenue heritage permit application with Steven.

18:09Thank you, Sarah. I'm just going to get to the right screen and delay.

18:40Right.

18:43I'm presenting a staff's hair is planning staffs recommendation for heritage permit application that's been made for 84 Forbes Avenue.

18:53That's hairs permit 24 006.

18:58And I'm providing information and staff's comments for the permit for a different addition and alterations to 84 Forbes.

19:07This is a property that's designated under part five of the heritage act, as it's given with Brooklyn and college will heritage conservation district.

19:16I won't flip through the entire document in the text, but I will take some highlights from the report that you got a chance to read. I'll use the illustrations to to

19:31as because they're helpful, I feel for understanding the subject property is highlighted in the dark black line here in the pink area that you see in the GIS mapping here indicates the extent of the

19:44Brooklyn heritage.

19:49I'm hoping everyone can see the imagery well enough.

19:54This as well from the GIS shows an error photo that shows the entire property.

19:59But with with topographically what's what's on the property and where it's important to point out, you can see my cursor the house question is here.

20:10And you can see that the curve driveways here at the corner, says a corner property.

20:16And in the exterior side yard currently there is a swimming be removed.

20:22As part of the proposal.

20:25So just to give you an idea of the context you've seen these images, but just for those who are watching or listening on watching.

20:35This is a photograph of taken from for example you toward the corner.

20:42Subject house, which dates from the late 1870s, your early 80s, but brick laid in a slumish bond pattern.

20:53And the chimney that's closest to us here is the, the one remaining original.

20:59So seen from the front. This house has a somewhat unusual enclosed front porch.

21:08See in brick with a semi circular art window on it.

21:14And the side wall or at least the east gable of the house.

21:20And a view over top of the existing swimming pool to the side of the house that we have the proposed addition.

21:27You can see in the back of the house, there is a darker brick to story tale that was not necessarily original to the house, but early on in house evolution.

21:40And I wanted to make sure the committee was aware of how much of this property is currently visible from Mary's streets. This is the corner.

21:48And also wanted to point out the large maple tree that's on site here, which is the tree, which is actually protected under the heritage act as well because it will barrage is the public realm.

22:02It's part of Canada.

22:04So there is a site plan that's been included by the proponent, which is even merit.

22:16Design firm that's where he went to property.

22:20Showing the proposed addition here.

22:25And basically, the addition is seen on the right with cladding that's indicated as vertical.

22:35Board that not even would necessarily, but in a may back or party board product, which is, we have lots of precedence is being quite an acceptable material for heritage permits within the heritage district.

22:52So, after discussion with heritage planning staff, there were changes made to the proposal to bring it within what staff feel is, is reasonable compliance with the requirements of the heritage district planning guideline.

23:06One thing I will point out though, and that is the side stairway.

23:11It faces the exterior side yard.

23:14And you see it here in the rear view.

23:18Although I didn't bring this to, it didn't include it necessarily in the report itself. It's something that's actually will have to be resolved through the zoning review process for this is considered by the general manager of planning because exterior stairs such as this that are open.

23:38Are aren't.

23:41Are not allowed according to the zoning regulations. So the, the owner and their designer will have to figure out a way to either make these stairs internal or move it to the rear building.

23:56So those are the images that use.

24:00I'll just bring us to the.

24:05Well, the last part of our report, I apologize for scrolling so quickly, but in my report has stated that heritage planning is the opinion that permit to construct this addition and these alterations is in keeping with proper.

24:22And I've said it satisfies the guideline for the district plan, but as I've just mentioned, it will, they'll have to be a solution that the proponent comes to for the exterior side, Eric stairs.

24:37It's something that the committee may want to consider.

24:43Change that that may be.

24:46Supportable by heritage planning staff.

24:49I'm not sure if it's something that necessarily needs to come back to the committee for a second consideration, but I'm hoping that the written report stands on its own, but also hoping that the comments made just now out the committee members to understand what was being presented.

25:04So I'm happy to answer any questions Sarah.

25:09And so just really quickly and then I'll send her go to you first as a comment. The goal of this now is questions comments, but also to note that for the the actual motion that we will provide bulleted comments that we think are of importance as we do the July meeting correct.

25:24Jack and Steven that's the goal.

25:26Yeah, I'll be taking notes of comments that we can review them before voting.

25:32Perfect. All right, Alexander.

25:37Thank you, Steven for the report and thank you for raising just at the end there the interaction between for what's going on with that side.

25:47Stare well.

25:49I'm like my main concern is if we're providing a motion on this report and it goes to building services and the report changes that heritage golf is going to miss the opportunity to comment on any changes to their this proposed.

26:06Addition as before it goes before council, in effect, making our comments sort of, you know, null and void. So I wonder if my like obviously building services is going to Trump, whatever heritage golf is going to comment on, should we not be deferring this until after

26:27the building services department has made it, you know, a definitive decision on whether these stairs need to go at the rear of the property decide because that might impact the whole plan that we are going to be looking at and to provide comment on.

26:44Through chair, my response would be that I'm happy to hear all of the comments that the committee members would want to make.

26:57And not necessarily just about the stair situation side stair.

27:03I'm, I, it's not, I'm not surprised and also I'm pleased to hear that many members would are interested would be interested to know what the ultimate outcome would be.

27:16I'd be pleased to hear if the committee had a preference as to what which could be done with design with these stairs at the site exterior side.

27:29But I think that there would be the owner and designer would have choice of either enclosing or relocating stairs to the back. It does impact the interior design of floor plan layer.

27:44But I'm, as I said, I'm happy to hear that we're we're presenting today to have committees comments on that.

27:56But Alexander. Thank you. And I'm just to clarify, I'm happy to provide comment and I'm sure other committee members are as well as a process though I'm concerned that.

28:08Or, and I'll make this clear. I want to ask specifically staff or Steven yourself.

28:16If we provide comment and put a motion forward today.

28:21Should the change should there be a change to the plan of this addition. We'll heritage wealth.

28:28Have a chance to provide comment on a changed plan.

28:32That's the case.

28:36The through the chair. I'll just reiterate what what stated in my written report that this heritage permit is it's not approved. It's not the type of permit that would be approval by council is approval by the general manager planning.

28:52And building.

28:55I know that the general manager is has an interest in what committee members comments would be.

29:02I believe it would.

29:05I think it would be reasonable to say that it's up to the general manager side.

29:10If this were to return, if the change that's necessary is it's significant enough.

29:16That it may require returning to heritage for more consideration.

29:22I'm not, I'm not sure what that means just yet because the discussion with zoning with building has.

29:29Doesn't come to a conclusion yet.

29:33So it's, I believe it would be in the hands of general manager.

29:37It would be helpful for the general manager to know as many of the comments this committee would like to present at this point because that can be included in the discussion with with the parts.

29:48Through you chair, I just to respond to that I.

29:57I understand what you're saying, Steven. I think I'll just.

30:04Once more reiterate my fear is that we provide comment on a set of plans that.

30:11Change and may change in a minor or may change in a major fashion.

30:15But that heritage golf loses the opportunity because there is no, it seems to me no clear.

30:22Process for this coming back to heritage golf that.

30:26We can provide comment today, but what may end up going before council.

30:31Or sorry, because yeah, sorry, I retract that this isn't going to go before council, but that essentially we are providing comment on something that may or may not be the final draft.

30:41That it does.

30:43Call into question why we're providing comment on these set of drawings if something hasn't been fully determined at the building services level. So anyways, I will leave that there and let other members provide comment.

30:57Through the chair, I just just want to finally say that there has been many precedents before with heritage wells that.

31:06Recommendations that staff may include or close with.

31:12And if there are minor changes are changes that are minor in nature.

31:17To this this proposed heritage permit.

31:21If they're minor in nature in the past heritage well has given.

31:26Not authority, but just has suggested that yes, the things that are minor heritage planning staff can take care of certain things.

31:35I think what has to be determined is how is what the change.

31:39How minor or majors change will be to.

31:44In the exterior side here of stairs that are proposed in these drawings. If Christa walkie sees this as major, then it would come back to the committee for for their comp for further comment.

31:56But as I said, I'm just as interested in the committee's comments on the rest of the design as opposed to just simply the 1 aspect of this proposal that may not be clients with all cities requirements.

32:17David go ahead.

32:20And think of what would actually then be removed from the original from the structure now then.

32:26That would be 1 entire sidefall for the addition that would be taken out.

32:32I through you chair, I think I'll I'll turn to the site plan to begin with.

32:42And I'm hoping that you could see my 1st, so we have the original house, the brick house here.

32:51With the proposed the new.

32:55For cover for the front just outside the close with the original tail here.

33:02And this section here and this section is a flat route.

33:07Basically a flat roof area that extends over to the rear.

33:11The connector here is a gable roof. You can see the ridge here that would connect the new, the addition or the garage here to this what's currently west wall existing brick house.

33:27Does that was welcome down.

33:31No, I don't believe so this image shows the walls in question these walls are actually going to become interior walls. Okay.

33:41For the issue.

33:42They're trying to know they're going to stay.

33:44Yes.

33:47The heritage district designation doesn't does not control or guide interior renovations, but I've always been a proponent of if there's a way to retain and even feature.

34:00What may become former exterior walls. I'm always sort of.

34:05Looks like that.

34:07That's what appears to be.

34:18Yep, go ahead Kelly.

34:20Yeah, I was just going to note that, you know, I can see that they're putting, looking to put a legal accessory apartment in.

34:29In this addition above the garage.

34:34Which I think is the real positive.

34:36The.

34:38I do find the stairs.

34:42I'm not really concerned from the look of it and I'm trying to think of.

34:47You know, usually you see with either a duplex or a non legal.

34:51Historic triplex that tends to be in the back or somewhere that you really can't see from.

34:57And often looking at the house.

34:59I gather they want to keep their backyard, maybe they're going to put the backyard or something like that. I don't know, but.

35:05It seems a little more logic to me.

35:08Honestly, a more logical spot for it would be in the back yard, but I appreciate that it lead up there.

35:14It could have.

35:17But it.

35:19The rest, the rest of it in terms of with the keeping of it, I.

35:25I'm satisfied with that I think it would sounds like it will look nice. So.

35:30Through you, chair, it's my understanding from discussion with the designer is that the pool will be removed as I've mentioned, but there isn't the idea to put a new pool.

35:42It's actually to gain to gain some backyard because the placement in this house.

35:49And I didn't touch on this in the report the house was originally on a large.

35:54It was built in the middle of a bigger one.

35:58But then the rear part was severed off to make a creative property that fronts now on to a fair view that.

36:05So really this, this house has very little or hold back.

36:10And with this addition, though, it does create a certain area for their family to enjoy.

36:18So, sort of, if you will, it's side by side.

36:26Do you have a quick question just clarification the stairs is due to the heritage guidelines. It's not zoning that they can't have the stairs in the side yard.

36:36Through you, chair, the design guidelines for recommends that stairways or access stairways or even additions be built to the ideally at the back of a house.

36:53But as I just mentioned, there's really no space to create a rear addition in, in regard to the existing historic house.

37:06It's the secondarily it's or maybe less preferred would be additions or things added to the side of buildings in certain situations.

37:18So it was my impression from as a heritage planner that it's not ideal to have stairs in the spot in a spot that's actually not well seen from the street.

37:30But I also don't think it's a good idea to rely on shrubbery or plantings along Mary Street to mask designs that wouldn't necessarily be completely playing with the design guidance.

37:46I did show that included the current view of the mature plantings and that really do provide a lot of privacy to the whole side wall of this property.

38:02It's not, it's ideal to not have the stairs on the side of the house, but in my discussion with owners designer.

38:12It's their preference to keep as much of the small backyard that they're creating is possible.

38:19Maybe a quick follow up then could the stairs is their potential the stairs will remain there. I mean if it's not preferred, but it's not actually prohibited.

38:28So from it in a zoning situation, I believe I've been I understand there's two choices. The first choice would be to move the stairs here, which would involve a lot of change to the interior design, or the stairs where they are now could be closed.

38:46So the existing building could extend further west to create an interior stairway that exits a main floor door.

38:57Just curious if they could put in a minor variance application as an example to allow for it to be exactly as it is and I'm just working in my mind right now through some planning stuff I guess we can move to Alexander though.

39:12This may it may be an option for them, but I that's more of a discussion that they have to have buildings.

39:20Yep. So Alexander then Kathy.

39:26So it's right. My comments for this particular file.

39:32I think the challenge has been said is is how to balance heritage protections with, you know, growth and a reasonable enjoyment of somebody's property. I eat the backyard.

39:44I think as a whole this this permit application is fine.

39:50I think on the note regarding the side stairs, if they have to be enclosed.

39:57I don't know how that then interplays with the tree that's located quite close to the property line on that side. I think that's where also my concern is if there is a major change, right?

40:07Like suddenly you get, I don't know how that impacts that right and as far as the HCD outlining that the tree canopy covers an important part of this, like, you know, I think we just have to be careful about that.

40:21I am a little concerned that, you know, I think we are.

40:25If we, you know, agree to these this change.

40:29It does kind of have issues with some of the points and 4.2 with regards to location with exterior cladding.

40:37But again, because of the size of the lot, you know, in general, I would say this is a reasonable balance between enjoyment and, you know, use of the heritage property.

40:50I do have 1 minor question, which is just to confirm that the new front porch.

40:56That is on the existing building. Is that going to be an open porch or is that enclosed? It looks from the drawings to be open, but I would just like a clarification on that.

41:07Through you chair to Alex.

41:10Is this the image that you're referring to the in the front elevation this area here? Yes.

41:17Okay. Yeah. So what is proposed is that the existing roof flat roof that is on the the brick.

41:26The brick enclosure porch, best of you.

41:30That that flat roof would be continued to the corner corner call as an open.

41:36A follow up question and through you chair is.

41:43I don't have an clear understanding as far as how the building services work, but what is the process for turning a open porch into an enclosed porch, like say 10 years from now.

41:57If this is that something that has to become before as a heritage permit application if somebody wanted to turn this open porch into an enclosed porch, or because of the location of this new porch.

42:09Is the owner allowed to just enclose it without heritage permit application.

42:15I can provide it straightforward answer to that chair.

42:20Alex, any, any alteration pose like that to enclose even a porch that's original to the house.

42:29An enclosure porch area like this would definitely require the approval of a heritage first.

42:35I'm, I'm pretty positive it would also require permit or at least consideration by building service as well.

42:43But what's here to planning staff are recommending now is that this open blackboard is a reasonable alteration this area.

42:53Thank you.

42:56Chair, can I have one more item just in this relates more to Alex good point of the, if the garage addition building were to be extended to the West.

43:09Enough to enclose these side yard stairs.

43:14Their impact to the tree, and especially it's roots.

43:19I'm, it's my understanding that would be minimal because the in ground swimming pool that exists right now already as.

43:30I would say it's already eliminated. Roots or has not allowed a root system to establish where there would be a foundation.

43:39Or underneath or around the side.

43:42That's all.

43:45Thanks, Steven. Kathy.

43:47Yeah, thank you. So I have some concern.

43:51And the comments is, is around when you look at the front elevation, it just, I'm concerned about the scale of it, the size of it and that it will probably significantly take away from this house on the hill, right?

44:04It's a house on the hill.

44:06And, you know, I know I understand there's trees and bush around it now, but those are not going to be there forever. So we have to consider that.

44:16In thinking about the scale of it, the large size of it, and I know we're just providing comments. So I'm doing that. I do think that this new addition should be set back.

44:26From the right now it's flush with the front that.

44:32That front window that comes out from the porch. And if that was set back.

44:39You know, to be even to the where that new door is going to be or to where the porch is set back. I think that would address that setting this back a bit.

44:51So that that front window that it's sort of still a nice primary attractive front window. If you set this whole addition back.

45:01That would be my suggestion. I think.

45:05I don't think this addition is quite where the pool is and I think it still is close to the tree, but that's not that my issue is.

45:11With that new addition being flush with that front wall, I think that the garage doors, right? So I think it should be set back from a design perspective.

45:23I prefer to have the stairs at the rear. I don't care if they're on the outside so much as if they're at the rear.

45:32As I said that I know the hedge is there now, but it may not stay. I mean, the tree might be protected, but the hedges.

45:40So that they might want to clear that at some point. So that's my concern and just from in construction right now are a tree protection by law doesn't protect trees under properties under half an acre.

45:58So we don't even have regulations around how to protect roots that are there. So it looks to me like in construction, you'd have a lot of heavy equipment running over that.

46:08So if we could make sure that there's protection for the roots that are there as well, if those comments could be passed along.

46:16I get called in at this neighborhood to me so many times about people not developer construction companies like storing heavy equipment right on roots. Right. So it's that's my issue there.

46:30But again, I'd like to see the addition set back to make to recess it to make it look a little more subordinate to the main house.

46:41I'm not crazy about the clodding either. I think that you know what comes to mind for me is the yellow brick house on Stewart Street.

46:50Where they put a big addition on it. A yellow old yellow brick house, but a significant addition and it was recessed back and it was yellow brick they retained yellow brick on the addition as well.

47:03So those are my thoughts.

47:06Alexander.

47:12Just in relation to Kathy's comments as far as when I was looking through the report that was supplied to us.

47:19We get the top down site plan.

47:23It's it's because of how it's added into the document. It's actually very difficult to actually it's impossible to understand what measurements we're looking at with this addition for this, like on the side yard set back or the rear yard set back.

47:40If it's possible in the future to be provided with drawings that you know those those measurements are legible. I think that would help give us a better sense of how much room.

47:53We're dealing with and how much room that the, you know, the, the homeowners are looking to get with, you know, the location of their addition.

48:03These are the property.

48:06I think as far as the tree is concerned, I, I'm also concerned about the branches as far as like if there is an addition.

48:14Or is that major alteration to the canopy as far as like cutting down branches in order to provide clearance for the building.

48:21And then finally, I just would like to say on the.

48:26The point about exterior cladding.

48:30You know, I obviously there's a lot of costs involved, depending on what.

48:37You know, somebody wants to use as far as the cladding on their, their, their property. I mean, brick as lovely as that is would be a huge cost.

48:45Currently, the, I think the Brooklyn and Heights design guidelines.

48:52This approves of party board. If we're going to start giving exceptions to like to additions to allow for Hardy board as a suitable exterior cladding.

49:04In this context, should we update the, the guidelines to say that it is an acceptable.

49:11Yeah, sorry.

49:18Through the, through the chair. I think you'll find when you read through the district plan and guidelines is that the ideal is to.

49:27If you're replacing materials to replace with same materials, you're making an addition.

49:34Ideally, the traditional bricks stone.

49:41Or even in some cases, traditional stuff like some dishes stuck up is the best answer.

49:48When would this is required, or when would as an option would what is the best material to be using, especially if you're thinking of board and baton or fat board or some fat board.

50:02But the district plan does say that in a case by case basis.

50:08Would cement based materials or seven dishes materials that give the heavy appearance of traditional wood cladding.

50:20Maybe except.

50:22So, my recollection of the Brooklyn and college district plan was to make sure that we avoid the use of vinyl and even metal in cladding.

50:35The group, I must say gray area, but the more I think more flexible approach has been taken in a number of applications since the district was approved.

50:47So that the party board of the main back materials could be used in a way that has a good likeness to traditional wood, but with different means.

51:09Are there other questions or comments in Japan? Oh, you said you were taking, I think some notes.

51:17So maybe if we're at a point where you could share those with us of what's been captured as part of the motion that would be helpful to make sure there's nothing that's been missed or any thing any additions anyone would like to see.

51:31Yep.

51:32And sharing plans. These, these are the comments that I captured.

52:01Happy to make any edits. These are your comments. So, I'm very we describe.

52:09Miranda, I know you're on a phone. Did you want me to read them out or can you see them okay on your screen.

52:21Thank you.

52:38Is it possible to add a note about the tree canopy on there because I think that is such a good point about the potential impact.

52:47And I mean, it's general because if it gets moved to the back then maybe it wouldn't be as big an issue the stairs but I think it could be helpful to have something about protecting the existing tree canopy.

52:57As much as possible.

53:06Alexander.

53:09Yeah, as far as the last point goes, unless another committee member feels otherwise I would, I would find that to be better to be removed.

53:21I don't, I think my comments were directed more towards how to interpret the Brooklyn College Heights design guidelines, but I don't feel it's appropriate to ask that the exterior cladding be changed.

53:38I think Kathy might have a comment to that one.

53:41Yeah, I do. I still think that I would say the exterior cladding is not appropriate. I would just say there's a preference.

53:52In this case, because it is the yellow brick house and and I've seen it done like I said they put in a large garage with an apartment on Stuart Street on a yellow brick house that that the brick would be would be preferable.

54:06I mean, it's when we can't, you know, I don't think we're going to be making them do it, but you know, if they have the opportunity, I think it should be a preference to conform.

54:16This, this is not this is this is quite a large scale addition to this house. I don't know if you're familiar with the house, but this is really going to change that streetscape at that corner and even even though it's hidden on the one side from the front.

54:32And if those bushes go, it's, it's not as hard difficult house to do. So I don't want to be telling them that they can't do it, but I also think that we should try to request the best that we can.

54:45Miranda, you're angry. I don't know if you wanted to add something.

54:54I was just going to say, again, where Kathy says preference for brick cladding. I think that might be also the word for.

55:04The stair location.

55:06I know it says a more logical location, but certainly preferable so that they're not visible or less visible.

55:13Are there comments and to Kelly and David as well, not ignoring you either.

55:39Sarah, it's stated.

55:41I have a chance I would just like to make a comment on the.

55:47And that's.

55:51And that's.

55:53And really, it's not to support one choice of material over another. But I think it's important when you read through something like the standard guidelines for the conservation of the start places in Canada.

56:05There's a lot of a lot in that writing and there's also in our Brooklyn and college heritage plan about making additions or making a new construction.

56:16Differentiated from the original older works.

56:22Now, it would be great to be living and working in a place where when a brick addition is made, you can tell the difference between the old house and the new house.

56:34But I think that in my opinion, very often it's better to change material.

56:41The material that's appropriate for the period, not necessarily exactly the same material.

56:47So, if the, in addition, such as this, I agree with Elsa down and that this is a major addition.

56:53But I think they're.

56:55Subtly or not so subtly, there should always be a different change between years.

57:02Kathy.

57:06I don't necessarily disagree with this that, but this, this addition is flush with the front of the house.

57:12So, it's not going to look like an addition. This is like completely different because we, it's being built flush to the house.

57:22I don't, if it was recessed, I don't think the plotting would matter as much.

57:30It would be subordinate to the main house and I don't think it would take away from the house as much.

57:36It's a very attractive house. Anyway, those are my, I mean, that's my comment. I mean, it's just, I've seen it done on, on that other house I mentioned and it doesn't look.

57:45You can't tell that it's really new on the yellow brick, but you know, so I've seen that I've seen the baton and would look good as well.

57:54But usually when, when it's subordinate, when it's right flush with the face of the main house, I don't think it looks good at all.

58:05Actually, it just looks like they're two separate buildings. It looks like it wasn't meant to be.

58:11Alexander.

58:20I'd like to just provide some comments on.

58:24What's been made by downer and Steven.

58:28I agree with counselor downer that the, I would be more than as a Mason myself, I'd be more than happy to see, you know, brick as the preferred choice for these buildings.

58:43I think I'm also aware that I think we don't want to put undo cost on the proposed plan so that these buildings can grow and change over time.

58:56And then as far as comments to Steven said, but the Canada guidelines, I think a lot of a lot of hash is made about that in subordinate and the difference.

59:07Mark difference between the new and the old.

59:10I think we achieve we could achieve that with brick yellow brick as a modern material that laid in a different brick bond pattern.

59:20I think we would, you know, my understanding of parks Canada guidelines is that it should be distinguishable to the eyes of a professional. So somebody should be able to look at it and say, look close enough and say, yeah, this is an addition.

59:33But we could respect the material the existing building.

59:38Maybe as a happy medium between these two.

59:41Perspectives we could say a preference for brick cladding on all street facing sides of the addition.

59:48So that would be at the front, but also on the side where the shrubs are in case those shrubs are ever removed.

59:57How would I would provide that for Kathy if you want to our counselor down or if you want to provide for the comment.

1:00:11Again, this was just a preference it's not.

1:00:15It's not within your budget, then, but I can see what they're doing, but I mean that that's fine. That's fine. I mean, we have an addition on our house. It's very subordinate, but it's not all brick.

1:00:25It's got brick killers like the front porch. So it's built into it, but it's like, I just my concern more is around the flush face to build the addition being flushed with the front of the house.

1:00:37And I think it should be recess.

1:00:39Any other comments, changes, additions to the list that Jack has provided.

1:00:58And maybe to Jack, even for point of clarification, do I need to read out this entire part for the motion.

1:01:04Kathy's shaking your head. No, I think maybe you weren't. I'm just saying thinking Kathy shaking your head. No.

1:01:09No, I think the committee can all see these comments.

1:01:14All right, so with the motion as it is proposed, I'll read the motion, but I won't read any of the comments so that heritage 12 provides the following comments the general manager planning and building services with respect to heritage permit application HP 24-006 for

1:01:3084 forms Avenue.

1:01:33As of course they appear on the screen.

1:01:35Is there someone to move that motion.

1:01:41Thank you, Miranda a seconder.

1:01:44And all those in favor and opposed.

1:01:51We have Alexander.

1:01:54All right.

1:01:56We will go to passes and we will move on to 58 Martin Avenue Kathy has a conflict of interest and will turn off her camera.

1:02:05And we are still with Steven.

1:02:15I think I heard my screen for the item.

1:02:24Everyone can see that screen.

1:02:28So here is planning provides information and staff comments on her is permanent applications has been made for an addition and alterations to number 58.

1:02:39Which is property doesn't mean our five of the heritage acts and it's located in the culture heritage conservation district.

1:02:49We have there are some similarities between this application item and previous one.

1:02:58So they're similar but separate.

1:03:01As the building is within the heritage district and the again, the one that existing cottage was built at 58.

1:03:18I just on the side of the house was built to base.

1:03:25I'm sure that the point as you can see the location of subject property within the Brooklyn neighborhood.

1:03:36And more specifically, maybe I'll zoom in a bit more.

1:03:41So the location, the location of the existing brick college is here, printing on on Martin Avenue with the driveway.

1:03:51So again, we have a property that's not necessarily the typical property for houses.

1:03:57Today.

1:03:59We have a property that has corner yard that has the potential for.

1:04:08An addition to this building. So, you can see here, a view of the property from the intersection.

1:04:20Martin and James streets.

1:04:23And you'll notice there is a large tree here with this tree actually has been determined not to be contributing to the tree to the canopy overarching the streets.

1:04:36It's actually related or located.

1:04:39Really between the two houses that you see in this picture and by its trunk is behind this college.

1:04:47So, another view from the streets.

1:04:56And this small cottage building as I said was built in the 1920s and has many features that are very typical of that period.

1:05:05The main thing that I always recognize would be the rug brick brick that has a texture that looks like it's down.

1:05:14And you'll notice with this house with the 20 this is typical of the time period that the brick headers of the windows soldier brick course just very typical but even the windows sales are.

1:05:28So, just ask the front facade to the building as we see it today to substantial chimney stacks rise from the south wall cottage.

1:05:42These are beating.

1:05:44The addition that is not original.

1:05:48Well, the portion of the building at the drive-through size.

1:05:53And this is the part of the building.

1:05:58See quite a lot of changes.

1:06:04So,

1:06:06I'll just, sorry, there's a bit of lag. I think in this image. So, just to go over the basics in the proposed site plan.

1:06:17We have Martin Avenue here.

1:06:20And the drive the existing driveway area.

1:06:23The cottage itself, the original floor print floor.

1:06:27The footprint is here with the existing addition being modified here and an addition proposed on the north side.

1:06:37Which is closer to James Street.

1:06:41Sorry, James Street West.

1:06:43So, I won't necessarily go into detail, but I will point out something.

1:06:51But this is these drawings, you may have noticed this as well when you're reading through the drawings indicated vertically, vertically oriented cladding.

1:07:01But in fact, when we move to the sample of materials that the proponent is provided, you can see it here.

1:07:10The main back product, which is gives the appearance of horizontal wooden platform inside.

1:07:20And that's actually what's being proposed in the post.

1:07:25So,

1:07:29I will basically, I think those are all of the images, all the images that you saw in the post what's what's here where I'm scrolling through.

1:07:41And that's just the change in siding. I really don't feel there's much else that I could add verbally right now that's not all right.

1:07:50So, chair, I'm happy to answer any questions that the committee members may have.

1:07:57We are joined today.

1:08:00By the property owner.

1:08:03And that's Rick Wilson Rick is listening in.

1:08:10So, questions for Steven.

1:08:15Are there any comments anyone would have about the application to get into the motion.

1:08:54Seeing any hands. So, if there are no comments.

1:09:03We need to revise our motion on this one because we have no comments or just add a bullet that there are no comments.

1:09:10Steven.

1:09:12I think in past we, we may not may or may not have added a clarification bullet that might be inappropriate looking at the clerk here.

1:09:22I'm getting a nod.

1:09:26Sorry, a nod that we should have a bullet or that we don't we could just leave the motion as is.

1:09:30I personally think it would provide soldier if there was a point made that there were no comments.

1:09:42Okay.

1:09:44With that, then I'll read off the motion and that bullets so that heritage wall provides the following comments to the general manager of planning and building services with respect to heritage permit HP 24 dash 005.

1:09:57For 58 Martin Avenue that there were no comments made.

1:10:01Is there someone to move that motion.

1:10:10Thank you David a seconder.

1:10:14Lara and all those in favor.

1:10:19Excellent. It has passed. Thanks everyone and Kathy you're welcome to come back and join us.

1:10:30Sorry, I was at it. Did you have a question.

1:10:33Yeah, I did. Sorry. I.

1:10:35We not having a delegation from the.

1:10:39I think only if we had questions direct.

1:10:43Yeah, I believe he was here just to answer questions.

1:10:47Thanks for the presentation.

1:10:49All right, moving to our last one in section 2 we have appointment of member heritage golf to the board West heritage conservation working group and presentation from Jack.

1:11:07Thank you. This shouldn't take long at all. I'm looking for a member of the committee to volunteer themselves and for the committee to appoint a member to serve on the working group for the word by series patient district studies.

1:11:24So the working group is part of the engagement that's done for the development of the district study and as well as the planning guidelines should we get to that phase.

1:11:34And so they work with the project team to provide specific advice on heritage conservation, the character of the neighborhood.

1:11:44And the history of the neighborhood. So, ideally, if somebody has some familiarity with the history.

1:11:52Of the word or the heritage and the word.

1:11:55I invite the member to volunteer themselves.

1:12:01Jack, would you mind just speaking to a bit of commitments for it like time commitments and yes.

1:12:07Very limited time three to four meetings over the course of the project.

1:12:12All all be virtual at typically not all members of the work group are able to attend every meeting. So, relatively minimal time.

1:12:31Alexander.

1:12:33Yeah, is there any concern about, you know, conflicting interests if one of the members is living in that within the boundaries of that HCD that's proposed should it be from a committee member that is from outside of the proposed HCD.

1:12:51I don't think that's a concern because the majority of members of the work group are associated with the ward in some way with business there resigned there or work there.

1:13:07Kelly, I would put my name out for it. I don't live there but I grew up my parents live very close to there and I got lots of trouble there.

1:13:20I definitely have ties to the word I love that they might be more than happy to participate.

1:13:32Well, thank you for volunteering. I'll read out the motion then that Kelly called well be appointed to represent heritage wealth on the ward heritage conservation district working group.

1:13:42Is there someone to move that.

1:13:45David, thank you. Seconder Alex you mind if I put you a seconder and then all those in favor.

1:13:56Alright, onto designation updates. So we have 3.1, which is 99 Malpy road west cultural heritage evaluation report with Steven.

1:14:10Actually, chair, if I could also introduce.

1:14:18Robert full of welling. Otherwise, the one is Bob slow like who is our heritage research assistant for this summer. Bob has been.

1:14:27He fell down a really deep on this file and we're really pleased that he did with his expert.

1:14:353 skills. We're going to tag team on this not necessarily equal way.

1:14:41Pick things off with describing to the committee the historical background to what we're now calling this.

1:14:50Yeah, thank you chair committee.

1:14:54Lovely introduction.

1:14:57And you want your meal. Okay.

1:14:59Okay. Yeah, so I'll just spend a couple of minutes here talking about Steven said the historical or associated value, namely through its connection to one family or kind of two families.

1:15:11And then we'll go from there into Steven will take back over for the building description and the state of significance.

1:15:21And then the history of this kind of this law of his property and namely the families coincides with kind of the early history of the area itself, as far as Southern colonial history goes.

1:15:35Through the Canada company was settled by Europeans pretty early.

1:15:41The first family of note is the family.

1:15:46So, you know, students at the Scott farmhouse, why we're talking about the thoughts, well the thoughts they came from Scotland, people's accounting people's and settled on the area around a lot in the 1332.

1:16:00So not too long after like, and a historic feeling of the tree in 1827.

1:16:06And they, the cause, namely Thomas thought, both senior and junior settled on a lot 15 as well as a new bylaw.

1:16:18Now, I'm a senior, I guess passed away very early on with the lock 15 or 99.

1:16:25I'm not as many as I'm already passing on to junior.

1:16:30However, they also had a daughter by the name of Christina Christina Todd.

1:16:35And she would go on to marry a man named William Scott.

1:16:39Now, the connection between these two families is kind of up in the air. It's from what we gathered.

1:16:46Thomas Todd senior worked with a fellow Mason in Scotland by the name of Andrew Scott.

1:16:52So the kind of loose connection there is that William Scott was possibly the son or relative Andrew Scott and came over from Scotland to join the Tots.

1:17:04They must have been fairly close because Williams got married Christina Todd.

1:17:08They inherit they take over a lot 15 concession seven from Thomas Todd junior. And that's kind of in 1838 and that's when the kind of legacy of the Scots on this lot begins.

1:17:24Now Williams Scott.

1:17:27He dies and roughly 1851 or 1851, you guys say roughly because you're different.

1:17:33It's either 1851 or 1853.

1:17:36Did not find a death certificate but a few obituaries, relatives mentioned those days.

1:17:43And following his death and then the later death of his wife Christina, the farm passed to a man named James Scott James is the second son of William Christina.

1:17:55So, it passes to him.

1:18:00Well, following the death of his father James, a younger man he was born in 1942.

1:18:06So he kind of begins to take over from responsibilities following the death of his father and runs his mother and then eventually his sister is about who was born 1845.

1:18:20Now, these dates are important because the kind of origin of the house itself is especially early on in these, in these early years is a bit more difficult to pin down.

1:18:34Not working with fire insurance plans or things like that. We're mainly balancing a narrative through census records tax assessment records or obituaries.

1:18:45So, while we don't necessarily have a conclusive date for the building of the house itself, we know that it will either be between 1832 or more likely 1837 and 1844, which is the first mention of a tractor or a house on the lot, which we access through in tax assessment.

1:19:03Further, I'm going to mention the birth dates of James Isabella the children of the Scots.

1:19:11Because it both are obituaries it mentions anecdotally or indirectly.

1:19:16They were born in one of the oldest houses in the township or at least in Isabella space she was she died in the same house and which she would born.

1:19:25So we know roughly through that collaboration of obituaries and tax assessment records the house built in the mid the late 1830s and earliest to the mid 1840s.

1:19:36Now, both William and James were known to be, were known in the community they served in various political roles or servants by their reeves deputies school trustees.

1:19:49James was a member of the West Virginia cultural society.

1:19:53William and James were members of the independent order of foresters.

1:19:58But James in particular is actually here on which the screen that Steven is showing.

1:20:04He served as a counselor. Well, the town council, I was mentioned that wider county counselor, at least not until his death.

1:20:12His portrait here in a collection of other counts time.

1:20:17As in the attachments we've included some new pictures for James and Isabella.

1:20:24Even just from reading those you can tell they are quite James at least was quite respected or well known in the community.

1:20:32The, and the farm that they ran to was known to be a big tight shift.

1:20:37So, as far as their importance to both which but also across the wider community of Wellington County.

1:20:43That's the shrine there with members coming with them.

1:20:47The interesting description of James Scott's funeral. I found particularly striking and that there was of course 200 people that attended the farm for his funeral, including the warden for Wellington County as well as counselors in addition to Hugh Guthrie.

1:21:02It was a member of parliament that famously served in both Wilford Laureates cabinet and he crossed the aisle to serve under Robert Gordon's cabinet during the first rule board before himself going on to be interim leader for his certain party.

1:21:16So he was also an attendant said lots of people sent flowers.

1:21:21That sort of thing. So, the historical and associated value certainly centers around James, but as well as other members of this family, as you can see through the obituaries.

1:21:32So that will pass over to Stephen to describe the house itself.

1:21:42Thanks very much Bob.

1:21:45I'm not going to say too much that I haven't already written in my portion of the staff report.

1:21:53I just wanted to say that this is a farmhouse or house.

1:22:01The question that always came to my mind was these walls so thick. It's either got to be a stone building or a log.

1:22:10I've always wanted to have an opportunity to make that more research for this property. And so here we are.

1:22:18We're looking at it.

1:22:20I'll see man bit more because this one and make sure that people are understanding when the password by might see this as a stone house.

1:22:31Obviously, well, it's kind of stoned the near what to me looks more like a stone patio has been built to the walls.

1:22:41And, but that side, the form of this building has a Georgian style or perhaps from the mid even before the 19th century Southern Ontario.

1:22:53Is it has almost all the remarks of.

1:22:58But it is a house that's been modified.

1:23:01And we admit that right off the top, but not modified so much that the original stone building.

1:23:09Is no longer present. So there have been alterations and I don't want you to see my first third but the wall table wall that faces the code.

1:23:22Is typical with too small windows, but a typical it has a door on the side of the house.

1:23:31And typically the door for a Georgian armhouse being center of the east facing wall with flanked by two windows. So clearly the dare I say the sort of red Flintstone appearance of this house was really to not only cover up alterations that have happened over many years but also to

1:23:53to make me have the building have similar improvements all over a large picture window here that's been kind of the wall I believe with the mid 20th century change that was done great probably right before the building.

1:24:09I'm just going to scroll down a bit wanted to comment on what's called the kitchen tail in the middle that's not not a this isn't a unique situation there.

1:24:24I can think of a number of farmhouse well well into county that have this sort of it's almost a T footprint or almost like an eye print, where the kitchen tail leads to what might have been a small barn shit, the back with the transfers to you.

1:24:40So, as you can see the adios stones are flagstones have covered up this wood construction or frame construction tail house.

1:24:53In our research Bob, and our research involves research, I was able to find from the post lunch historical society to be very similar but to two photographs of the house before the cladding.

1:25:09And I find these really useful because when you really probably can't see it on this screen but there's two things I wanted to point out first of all, what's not so obvious would be the horizontal wood clapboard side that's seen on the tail here.

1:25:26And also, the, you can see this, the man door on the gable wall, but a large, what looks like a large stone over top of it. It's very unusual.

1:25:43It almost looks like a, I don't put it or can't appeal to the door.

1:25:49I would be really interested to know what, what this looks like.

1:25:55So, as I've said, there's, there's many clues here to to leave that there's proof positive and some of that flagstone that's fallen out.

1:26:06So, as the linear that shows to old and roughly squared limestone coins or corner plugs in a line, what's likely a combination of granite limestone structure.

1:26:21So, I'll leave it at that.

1:26:24I'm going to maybe just make a bit of segue here to our proposed statement of significance, but I also need to plug my computer in.

1:26:36Something I did mention in the historical and associate section is that.

1:26:42Well, not conclusively for William Scott, at least the Thomas Thomas Todd's junior and senior.

1:26:51We're reportedly masons practicing masons in Scotland.

1:26:55Thomas Todd junior was listed as such on the 1840s census or tax assessment record that we have an Andrew Scott, who is somehow related to the Todd's was also amazing so it seems likely that William Scott, at least if not amazing himself was very familiar with that.

1:27:11Which kind of supports the idea of a don't have to be constructed by Todd's or Scott's with lots of stuff together.

1:27:18This is the first time I've addressed.

1:27:33Now that I have this more chair.

1:27:36I'll just continue to finish my presentation.

1:27:39It's important to understand when you're doing you're doing heritage conservation research.

1:27:45If you can find out what used to be or what was on the property that maybe it's always almost always useful to determine to help determine what is still on.

1:27:55So, in our heritage register, we do have a previous farm building that was on that.

1:28:02In my opinion was likely a similar construction method as to the, the sky farm.

1:28:11And it's this is all material that you've read in the report, but I think it's important to to in providing kind of the context.

1:28:22And they originally was a very successful farm.

1:28:26That William Scott and his success over his son James Scott were put together.

1:28:33And one of the most impressive.

1:28:36There is a God's pick revival bar was on the site as well and these photographs were provided by the post-nation store.

1:28:44So the Scots obviously had the ability to to build buildings that were on the site.

1:28:53But it's serious plans opinion that that things got started quite early on with the construction of the existing still now is in late 1830s early, was likely early.

1:29:08Early, early 1840s within this part of Western's township.

1:29:14So, with that, I'd like to go on to their, what we would propose as our statement of significance for.

1:29:2599 which as you've seen in the report is a huge large property, but.

1:29:32Farm house is extended on that property today meets criteria 1.

1:29:38The criteria used to determine cultural heritage value after regulation, provincial regulation.

1:29:44It meets it because it's a rare early and representative example of a stone farmhouse was constructed in the early 1840s.

1:29:53The house is one of the fewer meaning stone structures.

1:29:57Township was in the first half of the 19th century.

1:30:02So.

1:30:03Property meets criteria for criterion for because it has direct associations with settlement post and Scott family.

1:30:13Who were an important settler family.

1:30:16And specifically the properties associated with James Scott was deputy, deputy, and read for the township was the member of the township.

1:30:26Council and a counselor and county commissioner for the Wellington County council.

1:30:32So, the building meets criteria 5 because it's historical connection to the cultural community.

1:30:42It was first settled by the Todd's Scots highly cultivated and well reputed.

1:30:49So, if that sheep farm remain in the care of the Scott family for 3 generations and continue to operate to the 1990s.

1:30:57Context is important with this property with this.

1:31:01This is a stone farmhouse. I meet criteria 7 because it's important in defining and obtaining and supporting the historical character.

1:31:11The mall, you wrote the streets.

1:31:13And it's a vestige of the early farm landscapes of township.

1:31:17What's Lynch.

1:31:19What is now the city of.

1:31:22The building meets criteria 8 within is physically and sort of linked with surroundings and other resources.

1:31:31Ford Street and Malry.

1:31:35The storm was extracted from the surrounding fields.

1:31:38Property is linked to the surroundings because of the stone farmhouse being vestige early agricultural landscaping process.

1:31:47And criteria 9 finally is met as the house sits in its original location.

1:31:54Fronting the Scott family firms to what was the first day.

1:31:59And it serves as a link to the early farm landscaping and most now the city of well.

1:32:06The distinctive for the Scott farmhouse has a landmark within the store of Malby Road.

1:32:13And it's also a part of the West streets.

1:32:17So with that, I'll.

1:32:19Turn things over back to you, chair and be happy to answer any questions with the assistance above the.

1:32:28Perfect. Thanks, even I think actually we're going to invite the 3 delegates to speak before we go into questions.

1:32:37So, welcoming parties if I don't get anyone's name, please correct me. Catherine McLaughlin, Hugh, Andy and the she.

1:32:45Jones.

1:32:48Can everyone here is okay. Are you okay. Yeah.

1:32:52Can everyone.

1:32:54Yeah, I'm I'm last to Jones. I'm with the static consulting.

1:32:59I don't want to take up too much of your time today. I know we've got you guys have a busy agenda. We reviewed staff's report for this property. I think we want to.

1:33:08There's 3 questions we wanted to to ask staff and put forward for, you know, committees consideration during your discussion following our review of the report.

1:33:18And the 1st is that the city's report while it has a very detailed statement, a significant doesn't identify.

1:33:24The city's report is about the heritage attributes of what they might consider heritage attributes of the property. So we're wondering if staff could could share what they might be considering to be some of the potential attributes that would relate to the criteria identified in their evaluation.

1:33:41The 2nd question would be, I think Stephen spoke a little bit to this in his discussion here, but how the heritage integrity their modifications to the property have informed staff's analysis and evaluation.

1:33:53So the city has completed some comparative analysis of stone construction within a similar date range as part of their analysis and evaluation of this property.

1:34:14So I'm happy to respond to that. What I think I heard on 3 questions 3 sort of topics.

1:34:22First, first being the, if staff could suggest heritage attributes or.

1:34:28It's, it's not at this point in the discussion that heritage planning would provide a recommendation as to what the heritage attributes of this property would be.

1:34:40We're simply providing our recommendation as to cultural heritage evaluation report.

1:34:48What makes what makes the property.

1:34:52And in this case, the building significant and how it might meet or why not meet the criteria under regulation 906.

1:35:04It's, it's customary for heritage to be given an opportunity to consider heritage attributes at a little bit of a date when the staff are bringing its recommendation regarding.

1:35:18Reasons for designation and a list of heritage.

1:35:23So.

1:35:26Chair, I'm not sure.

1:35:29The delegate prefers the responsive to my response.

1:35:34Now, or at the end.

1:35:38Lasha, do you have a preference.

1:35:40No, no preference. I think whatever works for for Stephen or or the committee.

1:35:47You're welcome to respond now. I think that might be easiest for folks to keep track.

1:35:52Thanks. I think we appreciate that there would be they would be identified at a later opportunity. I think it would just be beneficial because there's been a lot of modifications to help the property owner understand.

1:36:04Sort of what physical elements specifically would be related to the criteria that have been identified in the evaluation.

1:36:13Through you chair. I think it's it's fair to say that physical.

1:36:20Form of the Scott firm notes.

1:36:25Stone farmhouse.

1:36:29Is is really what what heritage planning has been considering as being.

1:36:36This is significance that meets the design physical and signed out.

1:36:42The criteria one.

1:36:46Not I'm not suggesting that it's necessarily.

1:36:52Hard role of any heritage attributes that we may bring in future, but I think, I think the stone pharmacist is really what we're talking.

1:36:59And not, not the patio stone.

1:37:02The underlying original house that Williams.

1:37:06Maybe we could go to the.

1:37:12Chair, I see that there is a question from 1 of the members or at least the handout, but I think this this question the 1st 2 questions from the delegation.

1:37:22Do actually relate because we do need to consider.

1:37:27How much of that original stone farmhouse does still exist.

1:37:32And we need to give consideration to how much alteration.

1:37:36Has happened and therefore what is the current physical integrity of the stone.

1:37:43Still, I'll turn it over to you.

1:37:49And maybe just point of clarification from clerks in the room. Shall we keep going with the delegations before questions?

1:37:58Just to help with the chair, it would probably be beneficial to continue with all your delegations.

1:38:05Go through that and then if more questions arise.

1:38:09How many members can can ask those at the end.

1:38:12Perfect. So.

1:38:14Lasha, I believe it's still your time.

1:38:18And then I think it was just the 3rd question about whether it was there was comparative analysis time because I know the evaluation mentioned that it was a rare example.

1:38:27I think whether there was additional research completed on on any other buildings within the city that might have similar time periods and similar construction.

1:38:42Through you chair.

1:38:44I think it's important.

1:38:46Or we spent least heritage planning felt it's important to open the staff report in the first paragraph of the background.

1:38:57We do make reference to other similar.

1:39:02Structures of buildings and specifically farmhouses.

1:39:06And we do make reference to the James Hamlin farmhouse on clear road East.

1:39:14The kid barn, which is not a house early, but it's part of a farmstead. That's really what we're talking about here are extant elements of.

1:39:25How we're written off settler firms.

1:39:28So we make mention of the kid stone barn player farmhouse.

1:39:33Gordon street stone farmhouse that's an empire of Mark along the street.

1:39:40The log farmhouse that's known as the heart farmhouse within the.

1:39:47Parts, link subdivision and the upper Crawley farmhouse, which is another good.

1:39:54Has closed on in the hand.

1:39:57So we make mention of these buildings, not only because of the similarity in the time period and materials that should be used to construct these farm houses, but also to raise the fact that.

1:40:10Everything that we're mentioning city heritage planning staff has been consistent with its recommendations to heritage wealth that these types of buildings as it states in the official plan.

1:40:20They really are deserving of protection and all of the buildings that I've just referred to properties have gone through the area.

1:40:29So, I think just to summarize, I think that the scope is excellent candidate to be added to the list. At least the list of properties to be consistent.

1:40:39The only properties to be considered.

1:40:42For protection.

1:40:46Maybe, but so I think that touches on the third question that I just wanted to get back to the idea of the second question, which may be calling into question the physical integrity of the stone farmhouse.

1:41:00Scott farmers.

1:41:04I think the opinion just yet, or at least I think we still need more information to determine what the physical integrity is of the stone building as you've seen in one of the figures in the report.

1:41:17There, there is good evidence that there is a.

1:41:201840 stone farmhouse you're there.

1:41:24It's underneath them the overall form is there with the site cable recline.

1:41:28But I think this is something that we're in discussion with the element with the owner of his property is that there may be heritage planning staffs.

1:41:39And the recommendation has been made that it would be.

1:41:44It makes sense to do what we can carefully and cover certain areas of this building to determine.

1:41:53Just how much is still left in.

1:41:57I'm going to give him that the farm is still there.

1:42:03It's a really quick remedy, how much of the building is significant as far as the wood frame tail of the back. That's also something that's to be discussed as well.

1:42:14But.

1:42:15Is to get back, we can't stop isn't isn't that the point where we're presenting or recommending heritage attributes.

1:42:24we realized that there's been a lot of change to the building.

1:42:26So we're keen to continue discussing what property owner

1:42:30and how we can best determine what is still there.

1:42:34And we're happy to describe a pair of those

1:42:40or maybe recommendations based on other similar properties

1:42:47that have already been sent back to you, Chair.

1:42:57Thank you, Stephen.

1:42:58Lasha, was there any other comments

1:43:00that you wanted to make before I move on

1:43:02to one of the other two delegates?

1:43:05None for me, thank you.

1:43:07Thank you.

1:43:09So Hugh or Catherine, I'm not sure if either

1:43:11if you wanted to speak or if you had a preferred order.

1:43:13I believe Hugh unmuted first,

1:43:15so I don't know if Hugh, you wanted to jump in there.

1:43:18Sure, thank you, Chair Epp

1:43:20and members of the committee and staff.

1:43:23We appreciate the dialogue

1:43:25that's really what today is about

1:43:27to indicate sort of staff's initial research on the property

1:43:33and we also had the opportunity to meet with staff recently

1:43:36before the report was released.

1:43:38And that's always appreciated to again start the dialogue.

1:43:44This is part of a secondary plan area

1:43:48that is intended for urbanization

1:43:50and that Thomas Field, who we represent,

1:43:54again, I'm a vice president of GSP Group

1:43:57and a land use planner.

1:43:59I should probably back up representing Thomas Field

1:44:02and we're working with Lasha at StandTech

1:44:04and Catherine will speak next as the landowner.

1:44:09But really this area is intended.

1:44:11It's noted on a schedule in the secondary plans.

1:44:15So we are aware of it being on what I'll say,

1:44:18the city radar in terms of heritage.

1:44:22And at the same time,

1:44:24we're recognizing the practicality of urban development

1:44:28and wanting to balance the heritage aspects

1:44:31that are there within the secondary plan.

1:44:34So really, I think Lasha's indicated

1:44:39sort of some of the initial questions that we have.

1:44:42And I think Stephen has been clear

1:44:44in that this is early stages that they need to do some more

1:44:49work, we probably need to understand what that means

1:44:52in terms of preservation of a building or not,

1:44:57whatever that might be.

1:44:57So again, thank you for the opportunity

1:45:00to address the committee today.

1:45:04Great, thank you Hugh and Catherine.

1:45:08Thank you, chair and committee.

1:45:10My name's Catherine McLaughlin from Thomas Field Homes.

1:45:13I don't have anything further to add,

1:45:15rather I'm here to answer any questions of committee

1:45:19if they do come up in discussion.

1:45:21Thank you.

1:45:24Great, thanks everyone.

1:45:26So I will open the floor then.

1:45:27I know Alexander, you had your hand up earlier.

1:45:29So if you have a question for the delegates

1:45:31or Stephen or comment, you're welcome to take the floor.

1:45:35Thanks.

1:45:36I just wanted to thank Stephen and Bob

1:45:39for such an in-depth report.

1:45:42I think it really helps, especially with the criteria

1:45:44that they've outlined that this property meets.

1:45:47I think it really helps to identify how underneath

1:45:53whatever is on the front of this building,

1:45:55there is a structure there that speaks to

1:46:00quite a deep history and relationship to the old world

1:46:04as far as skills and trades coming over.

1:46:06I think it's a, we're at a time where development is

1:46:11increasing and these buildings are at risk.

1:46:14So I look forward to the upcoming meeting

1:46:17where we discuss attributes and thank you.

1:46:23Great, thanks Alexander.

1:46:26Other comments or questions from committee members?

1:46:28Kelly, I see your hand up.

1:46:30Thanks.

1:46:31I think this might be at a subsequent meeting.

1:46:33I just heard, will there be some information provided

1:46:37about the, we're concerned about what the veneer

1:46:40is doing to the original stone and

1:46:44is that like, is the original stone being damaged

1:46:49by the veneer that's on it or we don't know

1:46:55what's happening at this point?

1:46:58Through the chair, I'll just respond that this is something

1:47:02that the aeroplanets in discussion with the property owner.

1:47:06I think both they and we are interested to know

1:47:12the condition of the building,

1:47:13because I think that's very informative to know.

1:47:17Eventually once we get into discussing the aerodynamics,

1:47:20that will be an important consideration.

1:47:23Yeah.

1:47:24Also, time is of the essence to do with buildings like this

1:47:28because if in fact, there is something that's impacting

1:47:35the building, we need to try to work together

1:47:38to come to a solution.

1:47:47Other comments or questions?

1:47:57And given the motion that it reads about comments,

1:48:00I did just take note of one comment to attach to the motion.

1:48:04So I'll read it out and then happy to have it moved

1:48:07and seconded or adjusted as folks see.

1:48:11So the recommended motion that the comments provided

1:48:13by heritage wealth members on the 99 Maltby Road

1:48:15cultural heritage evaluation report

1:48:17be provided to staff and council for their consideration,

1:48:20that the condition of the building be understood

1:48:22as it relates to heritage attributes.

1:48:26And if folks are comfortable with that,

1:48:28looking for someone to move the motion.

1:48:33Thank you, Kelly.

1:48:34A seconder.

1:48:38Thank you, Alexander.

1:48:39And then all those in favor?

1:48:46We get everybody on there.

1:48:49Perfect.

1:48:50Thanks, everyone.

1:48:54Thank you.

1:48:57Thank you.

1:48:58All right.

1:49:04We do have a full agenda today.

1:49:05So moving on to a few more items.

1:49:09Item 3.2 in our agenda is 19 Fountain Street heritage

1:49:13attributes and designation recommendation with Jack.

1:49:18Thank you, Chair.

1:49:20I might take this opportunity to suggest

1:49:22that the committee vote to extend the meeting past two o'clock.

1:49:28Since we only have 10 more minutes and three more items.

1:49:33Sure.

1:49:34I have a hard out at 2.30.

1:49:36So maybe we could extend move to extend until 2.30

1:49:40if someone wants to move that.

1:49:44Thank you, Kelly.

1:49:45A seconder to extend the meeting until 2.30, Alexander.

1:49:47And then all those in favor?

1:49:54Perfect.

1:49:55All right.

1:49:562.30.

1:49:59Keep it quick.

1:50:02Oh, Alexander has, I think maybe a concern.

1:50:03I don't know.

1:50:04Maybe you can't say they'll see 30.

1:50:06No, sorry.

1:50:07I just want, I was just looking at the agenda quickly again.

1:50:10We also have, I think one more agenda item that has delegates.

1:50:13Do we want to have professional courtesy move them up one item

1:50:18so that they can get back to their.

1:50:23Different of the chair.

1:50:25If they're available, absolutely.

1:50:29They're not like their heads.

1:50:31Okay. Perfect.

1:50:31So then I will excuse myself cause that's 37 Christie Lane

1:50:34and then mute myself from my camera

1:50:37and Kathy will take over for me.

1:50:42Thank you, Sarah.

1:50:44Okay. So we're dealing with now 37 Christie Lane.

1:50:49We're looking at the cultural heritage evaluation report

1:50:52and the designation recommendation.

1:50:55There's 3 recommendations that I'm going to hand it over to Jack

1:50:59to give us the presentation on this.

1:51:03I think most of you know this is a conservatory

1:51:06rather from conservatory at the university.

1:51:11Thank you, councillor Downer.

1:51:15Because I've done this in July's meeting,

1:51:19I won't go through the cultural heritage evaluation report

1:51:23again, but I will share the updated list of heritage

1:51:29attributes committee requested that I revise the attributes

1:51:33to be more specific.

1:51:35So I've done just that.

1:51:40I do want to note, since we're capturing comments,

1:51:42if the committee has any suggestions

1:51:46that can improve the list of heritage attributes,

1:51:48we'll full-packed and consider it before we bring this to council.

1:52:04So yes, a reminder to the committee that this is a conservatory,

1:52:09so a greenhouse.

1:52:12According to the university, it's one of the last remaining

1:52:15GONA-style conservatories in North America.

1:52:18It's not often in my job that I can say that we're dealing with

1:52:22the last of a certain type of building in the continent.

1:52:26So it's been a privilege to research and evaluate this.

1:52:32So my revised heritage attributes are as follows.

1:52:36The location of the conservatory within the design landscape

1:52:39of the botanical gardens, the scale, form, and massing

1:52:43of the single-story structure, the steel framing,

1:52:47the walls, including wood, steel, and glass material,

1:52:52cypress wood, mollions, and rafters,

1:52:54demonstration with wood-framed windows and transoms,

1:52:58the iconic foresighted glazed dome with curved trusses,

1:53:02the squared cupola, including the finial,

1:53:06and the vestibule, including the decorative arched window frame above the door.

1:53:13I suppose I'm happy to take questions,

1:53:16but I think we'll wait until after the delegates.

1:53:20Okay, Jack, that's fine.

1:53:22Yes, there's three delegates.

1:53:24One of them is Justin Selby from the University of Guelph,

1:53:28Arlan Otto from Tacoma Engineers, and Lloyd Gwynom from Gwynom Architects.

1:53:33And I just want to remind everybody, delegates and the committee members,

1:53:40that today we're talking about heritage attributes of the conservatory.

1:53:45The conditions of the conservatory are not what we take into account

1:53:52that heritage committee, and the council might want to take that into account.

1:53:55I don't know, but from a heritage advisory committee,

1:53:57we're dealing with comments on the attributes

1:54:01and whether this is worthy of designation only.

1:54:04Thank you. So is Justin Selby, do you want to speak?

1:54:09Yes, that's me. Thank you.

1:54:12Yeah, I am Justin Selby, I'm the director of design and structure at Perceval.

1:54:17And I hear what you had mentioned, counselor.

1:54:22When I've been asked to relate this message,

1:54:25it's a prepared message from central communications.

1:54:28So with that, the university does oppose the designation of 37 Christie Lane as a heritage property.

1:54:35I'd like to give you a few minutes to explain why.

1:54:39The conservatory has occupied a special place in the hearts and minds of the university,

1:54:44including our students, faculty, staff and alumni, as well as local law presidents.

1:54:50We agree that the building is long history on campus,

1:54:53however, it's important for the community to be aware of its present state as well.

1:54:58For the past several months, the conservatory has been closed for public safety.

1:55:02The wood millions of rafters mentioned in the heritage plan report,

1:55:06which are not originals of the building at Widespan Broad,

1:55:10is due to the constant high humidity inside the building

1:55:13and the temperature differences between the interior and exterior.

1:55:17They explained why it is one of the last structures in North America.

1:55:22These pieces are not original because they've had to be replaced at least once

1:55:28when it got its name, the Donald and Harry Baker Rutherford Conservatory.

1:55:35In fact, due to the nature of the materials used in the conservatory,

1:55:38the building is a relatively short life cycle, 25 to 30 years.

1:55:42This kind of damage cannot be prevented or identified through reaching agents,

1:55:46so it's too late.

1:55:48But a lot effectively starts from the inside of the wood to the outside.

1:55:53So by the time we get an indication something might have been long, it's already spread.

1:55:59This makes it inevitable that the conservatory would have a regulatory rebuild for the place.

1:56:05What concerns with the building were identified by the University Commission

1:56:09of four different independent consultants.

1:56:12All of the estimated that due to the widespread structural issues

1:56:15the conservatory would have to rebuild at a cost of over $5 million,

1:56:20with annual maintenance estimate of $200,000 to $250,000.

1:56:24This is a multi-million dollar announcement that would have to be made every 25 to 30 years.

1:56:31The latest report comes from the co-engineers, Graham Markets,

1:56:34who have a longstanding relationship with preserve other heritage properties on campus.

1:56:41They evaluate the building for co-environments under its current public use

1:56:46and found updates to be made or extensive and in some cases urgent.

1:56:51First, the University must take down the glass deteriorated wood for the onset of winter weather.

1:56:59While we have secured the building, additional matters will need to be taken to ensure public safety, proportional service.

1:57:06Second, if restoration effort were to have to be undertaken, significant reinforcing of the structure is required.

1:57:12The flow glass would have to be replaced for safety glass and major code upgrades are needed

1:57:17to build official changes to the classification of a farm building or farm building to a public assembly building.

1:57:26This pushes the replacement estimate north of the $5 million,

1:57:30which is already financially on a table for the University.

1:57:35For this committee's information, the University currently has $500 million in outstanding capital renewal requirements,

1:57:41but an annual budget of approximately $21 million.

1:57:44U of G is in a multi-year operational deficit and needs to be strategically transferred to support its core mission.

1:57:52During these times, we prioritize how we stretch the resources that we have.

1:57:56The conservator stop serving its main function for educational research purposes some 15 years ago is a ball into a driver,

1:58:05but or an abstract primary used by community members for public space.

1:58:11The University cannot support the replacement and upkeep of a structure that is not fulfilling its core mission at the cost it would take to replace the conservator.

1:58:20At the same time, the structure will pose significant public safety hazard if the University is not able to act on the recommendations from Tacoma, Graham, and the previous, that's all, is the way to develop.

1:58:31Therefore, we are applying for demolition on it as soon as possible.

1:58:35We recognize the importance of the spirit of the conservator. So the UG is committed to maintaining a public space that highlights both the university's rich contributions there,

1:58:45uh, horticulture and remains open to community members to enjoy.

1:58:50And the conservator's place, the University will be posing to create a commemorative programs that will tell the story of the UG's agriculture beginnings and meaningful student memories that remain on the site.

1:59:01We appreciate your time. The opportunity to address the committee, myself, along with my consultants, to call my name, Graham, or happy to ask you questions.

1:59:08Okay, so I think.

1:59:12Is our is our an auto going to speak and wait for them as well.

1:59:17Can we hear from them first before we go to questions?

1:59:20The 10 which questions if there's questions.

1:59:24Okay, so we're going to go right to questions. They're there for support. Okay.

1:59:27So, what I would say to the committee, if you could keep your questions to the part of the cultural heritage evaluation report.

1:59:38That is before us and which is when we're talking about the heritage attributes of the building.

1:59:45Those issues are there any questions.

1:59:53Alexandra question regarding the 1st attributes that's listed.

2:00:01With regards to location within the tentacle gardens.

2:00:06How does that interact with any.

2:00:09Potential proposal to relocate the structure.

2:00:15If that ever comes up in the future.

2:00:17So, he never see currently he's looking at a, or they make campus.

2:00:26The bill if the building were to come down, like we tend to the state of a conservative yards for remain in that fashion.

2:00:37It's not a site that's been identified.

2:00:46Sorry, through you chair, can I direct my question to I should have been more specific. Can I direct that question to.

2:00:53Say staff as far as the impact that that I don't I don't really want to.

2:00:59Discuss this within the context of the proposed demolition permit, but just as in regards to the upkeep of the building.

2:01:11So, if I can, if I can direct that towards.

2:01:15Yeah, your questions about the location.

2:01:19Yeah, how would that impact sorry to interrupt? How would that impact the any potential proposal for relocation? If that rock? I'm not saying it's on the table, but just.

2:01:29Yeah, you would require a heritage for.

2:01:32And I thought the location was important because of its contextual association with building and because it's.

2:01:39Though it has been moved within a design landscape that is essentially designed around the conservatories. So, I do think.

2:01:47The location and the sighting of the building is important to identify it.

2:01:52Great. Thank you for that clarification. I have 1 follow up question to.

2:01:56And this is I would like to direct this to you a chair as far as the process year.

2:02:02You said that we should keep questions to the document before us are.

2:02:10Is there a separate are we allowed to provide comment at a later point in this meeting?

2:02:14In regards to what's been provided as feedback from the university, or is that.

2:02:20Not within the bounds of this discussion.

2:02:22Well, the recommendation before us, if you look at the motions, you're to speak to the motions that will be put on the floor.

2:02:30On this and and we're not talking about demolition at this point.

2:02:36It would be coming if there was a demolition application that would be coming back.

2:02:41To the heritage committee and at that time, even if my understanding isn't Jack correct me, but even if the committee supported the designation.

2:02:51Never and what are the designation at some point, if the demolition.

2:02:55A permit was applied, then there's an opportunity then for negotiation talks about if it is would be approved. Then.

2:03:04How do we memorialize this?

2:03:07This structure that so that's the later discussion is that correct Jack and Stephen is that my understanding?

2:03:15That's correct and he didn't want demolition application would come first and heritage committee and then again to council.

2:03:22Right, so, so, you know, think of it in that terms that this is sort of the 1st step in that stage. So is it.

2:03:31It's are these attributes important? Are they not because that's what we're voting on today and later on, if they're and we've heard there will be a demolition application, then that's a further discussion depending on what council decides.

2:03:47Just through chair, just a further question on that if it's appropriate, if you deem it's appropriate.

2:03:54Um, is there a sense of timeline as far as after today?

2:03:59When we could expect this to go before.

2:04:02Council and as far as the.

2:04:05Getting started on the intention to designate my understanding would be October 8th. Is that what I'm hearing? Jack? That's our intention. Yes.

2:04:15I've no further questions at this time.

2:04:20Are there any other questions? I can't see. You know, I've got a screen to see everybody in the room, but I don't see anybody's hand up.

2:04:28So, I don't think there's any other questions.

2:04:35Of the committee would there would somebody like to put the recommendation on the floor?

2:04:48Okay, Alexander has moved it. Is there a seconder?

2:04:56Ellie, is that you? I think it is. Okay. Great.

2:05:01Is there anyone in opposition to this before I make a comment?

2:05:08I just want to make a comment to the university, but I don't think anybody's unsympathetic towards the the the issues that you have raised.

2:05:18However, at this and you know, your comments will go on record. Obviously at the committee and.

2:05:28But that's not what before is today, but it sounds like it will be in the future. So we will deal with that at that time.

2:05:35But I would thank you for giving us the heads up about that.

2:05:39Okay, we can call Sarah back to head on to.

2:05:53The one we went over, which was found in street.

2:05:57Thank you, Kathy, and we're still with Jack. So it's all yours, Jack.

2:06:03Help me for the rest of the evening.

2:06:06So the CAGR for the strong views probably June, I believe.

2:06:27This is the Dyson house on town of the street.

2:06:31So I'll remind the committee that it is a stone single story structure with.

2:06:40The brick is specifically significant because.

2:06:47Heritage staff understand that Dyson brick is the oldest brick in town that was made in the city of golf in the way 1840s and early 1850s.

2:06:58So the heritage attributes you see reporting today are resolved discussions with the property owner who indicated that they would like a relatively minimal.

2:07:08List of attributes included in the destination by law. And so I believe I'm captured.

2:07:13But side as well as the two stone sidewalls.

2:07:18I'll read out the heritage.

2:07:23So the side, including the stone foundation.

2:07:27The brick laid in a Flemish bond pattern to original window openings with Jack our Chess and stone cells and original door of Jack our Ted.

2:07:37The East stone elevation, including 3 original window openings with stone cells and lentils and the West stone elevation, including original window opening on first story post found the street West and original window opening on second story.

2:07:56I'm happy to answer any questions that any members have.

2:08:03Alexander, go ahead.

2:08:09If it's possible to put the attribute list back up. Yeah, sure.

2:08:14I have a point of clear question on clarification. So for the East and West.

2:08:21Elevations.

2:08:24It is, it is mentioned that their stone elevations is that the way that this is written.

2:08:31Is that is the stone being outlined as a heritage attribute? Yes. Yeah. The, including portions was just to capture the window.

2:08:43But it is the entire stone wall.

2:08:48Okay.

2:08:51Great. And I understand from the background or that the, the, the front porch is not original to the house.

2:09:02Is there a reason why this is more a dialogue question, but is there is there a specific reason why staff didn't.

2:09:11Beyond that didn't want to include, you know, because it is a marker of craftsmanship if we didn't want to include that as an updated part of the attribute list.

2:09:22I believe the porch dates in the last decade or two. It's not cold.

2:09:28We know from the fire insurance plan that there was originally a wraparound.

2:09:33The porch in the mid or late 19th century.

2:09:38That that is long since been removed.

2:09:43Thank you.

2:09:50Other questions or comments online or not only Kelly, I'm perfect Kelly.

2:09:55I learned a lot of a brick. I'll tell you why I just wouldn't walk past the south a hundred times and just thought it was a brick brick house. So I really appreciate learning about it.

2:10:06But because it's so unique or rare. Is there, is there anything to concern ourselves with over, does it deteriorate in a different way than most of the brick or anything like that?

2:10:18I think we could find an opportunity to encourage the property owner long term plans to reinstate some kind of porch that might protect that brick. I think there are a couple other examples to town including one, one water litter.

2:10:34I believe has the same brick and the apples lawn across the street actually has the same dice brick.

2:10:42So there, there are many of them. So I'm hopeful that asset that great made be protected from the elements again because we don't have a lot of it because apparently it contains a high line of content that causes it.

2:10:54Not whether very well when exposed to the elements. So it's a very soft brick.

2:11:07Other questions or comments from anyone.

2:11:15And if not, I so appreciate Kathy's approach of not having to read out the entire motion as recommended so I will just follow up on Kathy's approach of, is there anyone who would like to move the recommended motion.

2:11:29Thank you Alexander and a seconder.

2:11:32Thank you Laura and then all those in favor.

2:11:39I'm sure we got everybody online sorry folks I think we have everyone.

2:11:49Perfect.

2:11:53All right, and I think our last visual agenda item before we have some announcements potentially is 3.4 22 James Street East heritage attributes and designation recommendation.

2:12:05Once again with Jack.

2:12:08Thank you. Share.

2:12:10I'll remind everyone that 22 James Street East is the Toronto Super Bowl in the railway.

2:12:17Transformer station turned into rail car bar and now presently used as a housing.

2:12:26Despite a couple attempts to get in touch with the property owner we haven't heard back so we're just proceeding with the heritage views that we can observe from the screen.

2:12:38Because it's a relatively utilitarian building that attributes is not very long.

2:12:46The building form, including two story building with rectangle footprint.

2:12:52The symmetrical sod.

2:12:55The brick exterior walls, including paired monumental brick pillars top of sheet metal, tusking capitals on either side of the entrance and brick pillars top of Tuscan capitals on each corner.

2:13:08Sheet metal cornice surrounding the whole building and all original window and door.

2:13:15Again.

2:13:19Happy to answer any questions or receive any suggestions on attributes that we may have missed.

2:13:26Alright, so once again, hopefully in the floor to any questions or comments out, Sandra, go ahead.

2:13:36I'm happy with this. This list of attributes is a small comment. I think it's, you know, this speaks to the right and we had on our list the 99 malty that the paint on this building doesn't mean that we can't.

2:13:50List the brick is as attributes and you know, anything that's on top of a building doesn't mean that it's not a candidate for designation. So thank you.

2:14:02Thanks, Alexander. Any other questions or comments from folks.

2:14:13Seeing none. I'll ask if someone would like to move the recommended motion.

2:14:22Thank you, Alexander and a seconder.

2:14:29Laura, thank you. And then all those in favor, see Miranda there too perfect.

2:14:34Excellent. All right. Last ish piece then I guess is any announcements I have none so looking to Jack and Steven if they have any announcements for us.

2:14:45Yeah, start Steven.

2:14:47It's my pleasure to introduce or heritage planning colleague is sitting right beside me here. Imogen Goldie is has been hired as we had talked to really right I said to him, maybe you should turn on your screen but we just included ourselves.

2:15:11Same one year, which is good.

2:15:13Imogen, I'm really pleased to introduce introducing engine.

2:15:18It's been hired on a two year contract as project manager for heritage planning.

2:15:24And that image income has comes most recently from British Columbia having worked for the province of British Columbia and also for the heritage foundation or heritage BC.

2:15:38Imogen also has had lots of experience on the east coast of the country, having been employed by the Heritage Trust of Nova Scotia and also studying for a planning degree.

2:15:52How's it.

2:15:53Imogen specialized in heritage and rural planning. Sarah that might be a particular interest.

2:16:01And before that, a BA in history and theory of architecture.

2:16:08So, we already had lots of good interactions with the new colleague and they look forward to more more work together as a small with vital heritage planning.

2:16:20Excellent. Welcome. We're in your works. I did to have another member of heritage planning staff join us.

2:16:27Thank you, Stephen. Just more things to note for the committee.

2:16:34So last Wednesday, the heritage conservation district study for the downtown went to council to receive their affirmation of the boundary and direction to proceed with the development of a plan and guideline.

2:16:51And council was unanimous in their support that we proceed with developing a plan and guideline.

2:16:58So we're still on at the designation stage yet, but we're past the halfway point.

2:17:04And I've been project managing that file since March, but now an image in this year I'm not handing over the image for the fun part.

2:17:16What else Stephen and I are bringing a bylaws to council tomorrow night. So most of the notices of attention to designate that have been issued over the last 3 months.

2:17:29We'll be bringing those.

2:17:31And I think that's that's it for staff updates.

2:17:40Alexander, you've got your hand up there.

2:17:43Hi to you chair and I don't know if this is maybe you can advise me on process. I do have some general questions of staff. Is this an appropriate time to ask that or is that have to be logged as a separate agenda item?

2:17:57That might be actually a question for clerks.

2:18:01Alex is they're not related to a specific agenda item either today or upcoming. Probably a simple email or phone call to staff. Maybe the first step for that one.

2:18:12Okay. Well, then just as a comment to what staff provided right now. Thank you for all your hard work. I think you guys should really busy at this stage and I appreciate seeing all the work that's going forward. So thank you.

2:18:25Thank you.

2:18:27All right. And then so thank you for those, those couple of announcements. Last thing that is just adjournments. If there's someone who would like to move to adjourn.

2:18:38Alexander, thank you. And a seconder.

2:18:45Kelly, thank you. All those in favor. Perfect. I think there's two Miranda's on screen, but I'm, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I assume you will vote in favor of adjournment.

2:19:01There's only one thing things may be frozen.

2:19:24Miranda that we unfortunately we can't hear anything.

2:19:27Still unmute Miranda.

2:19:33Can you unmute her join.

2:19:35I don't think she's showing muted at least on my side.

2:19:40And there's indicate.

2:19:49Yeah.

2:19:51You can give us a thumbs up for that as supporting adjournment.

2:20:27Assuming someone on your side is trying to assist.

2:20:31Yeah, we're weird being on this side and not knowing.

2:20:35She has no audio. She's going to hang up and call back.

2:20:40We can, we can acknowledge that the meeting is over though.

2:20:44Okay.

2:20:45I'm going to jump to another meeting then and thanks everyone.

2:20:50Thank you.