Heritage Advisory Committee

0:03Next slide. So here's the problem opportunity statement developed for this EA study, which

0:11is as follows. The purpose of this class EA study is to identify a solution from a

0:16Quellons Bridge that allows for safe use by pedestrians and non-motorized transportation

0:21and that minimizes environmental, cultural and social impacts while maintaining the

0:26bridge's cultural heritage value in accordance with Bylaw 2004-17357 to the extent possible.

0:35The study also strives to implement the city's official plan by seeking to achieve no negative

0:41impacts to the natural heritage system and to cultural and archaeological resources.

0:49Next slide. Okay, so we have five main categories of criteria that are being used to evaluate

0:56alternative solutions for MacCollons Bridge. These are natural environment, cultural heritage,

1:02social environment, financial and technical. I'm not going to read through all of the criteria

1:08within those five categories, but I did want to highlight that the cultural heritage category

1:13includes impacts to cultural heritage landscapes, impacts to built heritage resources and heritage

1:20value of the bridge and impacts on archaeological resources.

1:25All right, next slide. And this slide is really where I'm going to do most of my talking.

1:34This table provides an overview of the six alternative solutions being considered for

1:38MacCollons Bridge and how they performed in the draft heritage impact assessment. Any

1:45alternatives that would not meet modern safety standards, design standards, durability requirements

1:52were not considered for inclusion. I'm going to walk through these one by one to give you a brief

1:58summary of what each would involve. And I'm really eager to hear this committee's advice and opinion

2:05on each of these six alternatives. The order that the alternatives appear on this slide does not

2:12infer any ranking or prioritization. The numbering is really arbitrary. The lifespan

2:19in column two is the estimated number of years that the solution would be expected to be functional

2:24and in service before any significant repair, rehabilitation or replacement would be required.

2:32Okay, so alternative one, let's start there. It's the do nothing scenario, which we always

2:37include in an EA study as a default option. Under this scenario, the existing bridge would

2:42continue to age in place, would eventually deteriorate to the point of collapse. This alternative

2:48has a lifespan of zero years and is not considered to be a potential preferred alternative.

2:55So we'll move on quickly from that one. Alternative to rehabilitate and strengthen

3:00would preserve the main bridge elements. It would involve reconstructing the bridge elements that

3:04have low concrete cover and upgrading the barriers to meet modern design codes. This could alter the

3:10appearance of some bridge elements, such as the thickness of vertical members or the height of

3:17the railing. This alternative has an estimated lifespan of 30 years and it's regarded as a preferred

3:24alternative in terms of sound heritage conservation practices. Moving on to alternative three,

3:31this encompasses rehabilitating the bridge arches and replacing the deck with a new steel bridge

3:38superstructure within the arches. So the new structure would meet modern design codes,

3:45the arches would no longer support live loads and would serve a primarily decorative function.

3:53Less heritage attributes of the bridge are retained under this alternative compared to alternative

4:00two. However, it does address the poor condition of the existing bridge while avoiding its complete

4:07demolition. Alternative three is regarded as a preferred alternative in terms of sound heritage

4:14conservation practices and in terms of lifespan, the estimate is mixed here because it has 30 years

4:21for the rehabilitated arches and 75 for the new bridge deck. Okay, we then have alternatives four

4:30and five and they both involve removing the existing bridge and replacing with a new structure.

4:36So both have an estimated lifespan of 75 years. Both of these alternatives result, sorry,

4:46both of these would result in the loss of the bridge and are not preferred alternatives

4:51in terms of sound heritage conservation practices. Alternative four would replace with a

4:56prefabricated steel bridge. The new steel structure could integrate some heritage considerations

5:03through sympathetic design and prefabricated steel. Although the architectural reveals that I

5:09identified in the heritage attributes for the hangars would be difficult to reconstruct in steel.

5:17Alternative five in contrast would replace with a new concrete bolstering arch structure.

5:22The design could integrate some heritage considerations through sympathetic bolstering

5:26design and the use of concrete. All right, and then finally, alternative six would involve

5:33removing the bridge and widening the adjacent stone road bridge to provide the river crossing for

5:39people walking and cycling. This alternative six has an estimated lifespan of 50 years because

5:47the existing road bridge is around 20 years old already. Alternative six is not considered to be

5:55a potential preferred alternative in the heritage impact assessment because it results in the loss

6:00of the bridge and does not address the heritage impacts. So that's an overview of all six.

6:08Of these six alternatives, our evaluation work to date identifies alternative number two,

6:14rehabilitate and strengthen as being the preliminary preferred alternative for this EA study.

6:22However, it did rank closely to alternatives three, four, five and six in the preliminary

6:30evaluation. So input from heritage wealth and other interest holders is important

6:36to inform the evaluation process. All right, so to conclude my last slide, these are the next

6:44steps for the EA study from Equalance Bridge. We will be continuing to work on evaluating the

6:50alternative solutions and we'll be presenting them for public feedback at our second public

6:54open house. That's going to be on February the fifth and the details of the open house event

7:00are available on the have your say page for this project. We will also publish the engagement

7:06materials on that page for online review and comment. All of the feedback we gathered from

7:12interest holders will be then used to confirm and refine the recommended alternative from

7:17Equalance Bridge and we will document all of that into the project file report and that will go to

7:22city council for review and decision. And then final step is for the project file report to be

7:28published for the 30 day public review. Okay, and then our last slide, questions and feedback.

7:40Thank you so much for your attention. Would we would be pleased to field your questions and

7:46we welcome feedback from the committee on each of the six alternatives being considered.

7:54I had a question. Sure. I think it's, yeah, we can hear it. Is it Donna? I'm sorry, really quick.

8:00Could we maybe take the change the screen so we could see everyone? Is that possible? Does everyone

8:05have access to the slide deck? The committee members, it's really hard to see everyone otherwise.

8:12If we keep the share screen going, I mean, we can, but it's incredibly difficult to see who's

8:17talking when. Don, keep going though. You're welcome to keep talking. You're good. Thank you.

8:24Okay. No, my only question was it says, it may be subtle or maybe

8:34changes to the appearance. I'm just wondering, you know, how subtle or obvious the changes are

8:41because if they're not particularly obvious, if it's just the widening of some things,

8:48or to strengthen it and the appearance of the design, that's one thing. But if it

8:52significantly alters the appearance of the bridge, that's another. And without kind of diagrams to see,

8:59it's hard to have an opinion. Thanks, Don. Yeah, that's a fair comment. We're not at the stage

9:10where we kind of have, like you say, diagrams or drawings to be able to share with you, to give

9:17you a sense of that. I'm assuming you're kind of mainly referring to that alternative to an

9:22alternative three that are forms of rehabilitation of the structure. Yeah, the different, basically

9:29the difference between two and three, because three would be fine if the bridge basically stayed the

9:35same but had, you know, some changes to strengthen it. But if it looks completely different or it

9:42looks garingly different, that's another thing. Yeah, because essentially, alternative three

9:48retains the arches, but also fully replaces the deck. So it would be an aesthetic change, you know,

9:58to the structure. I might just throw it over to Jeremy. If there's anything, Jeremy, you would

10:05kind of want to add to that in terms of contrasting between alternatives two and three and how that

10:12might, how those options, you know, might alter the existing bridge. Sure, thanks, Kate. Sorry,

10:21thanks, Kate. Hi, Jeremy. Hi. For option two, Don, as mentioned, so the vertical stringers,

10:32which I think were identified as number one there, some of them have low concrete cover to the

10:37existing steel. So the intent would be that those vertical elements might get a little bit bigger.

10:44But any of the dimpling in there could be retained when it's built out. We can, you know,

10:50form that up to match, but would get a little bit bigger. The main visual difference you're going to

10:57see in option two is in the configuration of the railings on the bridge deck. The existing

11:06railings have horizontal rails, which don't meet code for climbability as a pedestrian railing.

11:15So we would need to incorporate some sort of vertical spindle type component to those rails.

11:23The intent would be that it would all be fabricated out of concrete. So it would be similar,

11:28but that would be the main visual difference you're going to see on option two. And we've done a

11:34number of heritage type cast-in-place concrete railing systems that incorporate, you know,

11:42beveled edges, dimples, all that sort of stuff to keep it in a similar appearance to the

11:49to the vertical members within the bowstring. The main thing with option three, we would largely

12:00be preserving the arches, the vertical members. Those railings would be preserved, but a new

12:09bridge that's self-supportive would be slid through the bowstring. I think maybe, you know,

12:18the similar bridge that was done in Guelph recently, the name is escaping me. We slid a new bridge

12:25in between the old bridge. Yes, Jack can probably give us the correct names. I apologize, it's not

12:33at the top of my brain right now. Norwich Street is like the one in the document. Yeah, so it would be

12:40similar approach to the Norwich Street pedestrian bridge there, where a new bridge was slid in

12:45between and the existing bridge was maintained. So that's really the difference between option two and

12:50three. So would that remove the steel reinforced concrete or leave it or simply replace it in the

13:02same way? Or option three. Yeah, we would still need to repair some areas of the existing arches.

13:12But then the deck underneath the bridge deck, which, sorry, the bridge deck and the stringers

13:22underneath, which I don't believe are identified as heritage attributes per se, those would be

13:28modified to remove dead weight from the existing bridge just to take some load off of the arches

13:35and to allow us to slide the new bridge through. Well, that it sounds from what I can hear,

13:40it sounds like it would be fine. Yeah, the appearance of the overall bridge would change

13:47because you've now got a new bridge sliding through and it would have some sort of existing

13:52trust system or beams or something. So the visual appearance would be altered because of that.

14:03Okay, well then I'm back to how much will it be altered? Yeah, the bridge itself is not going to

14:11be altered. But just if you stand there and look at the bridge, you're going to see kind of two

14:16bridges overlapped on top of each other similar to what you've got at Norwich. So yeah, I don't

14:24know what the Norwich bridge looks like. So it's hard to read. I meant, yeah.

14:31Justin? Thank you, Madam Chair. So I think, you know, really complex file, of course,

14:40and there's a lot of information here. So I'll try to tackle some questions I have in a sort of

14:45coherent way. Perhaps maybe as a starting point, I know in terms of our distinctions drawn in the

14:55tables between two and three, they both point out that rehabilitation itself, the construction

15:03activities to rehabilitate, could result in damaging the heritage attributes. But it seems to be

15:10unclear whether and how much that might actually happen. So I guess I'm wondering,

15:16from an engineering standpoint, and it may be something that, you know, we're not prepared to

15:21respond to yet, because it actually will take doing the rehabilitation work to discover how

15:25much damage will be caused to the existing structure. But in terms of drawing a distinction

15:31between two and three, is one more likely, the rehabilitation activities of two or three, more

15:37likely to preserve most of the heritage attributes. I know we're talking about the deck versus the

15:44arch, et cetera, but I mean more in respect of the rehabilitation activities that would be required

15:49in either case, and how much they're going to result in either case in the destruction of

15:55attributes inadvertently. Thank you, Justin. I think I will defer to Jeremy if that's okay, Jeremy,

16:06to sort of help answer that question and kind of distinguish between alternatives two and three

16:13in terms of scale of rehabilitation and kind of risk of impacts to the heritage features.

16:22Sure. Thanks, Kate. The scale of rehabilitation for both option two and three is quite significant.

16:34Concrete bowstring arch bridges are what's known as a single load path structure.

16:42So in a typical bridge where you've got, say, four or five

16:48girders that are underneath the bridge, if damage happened to one of them, the bridges

16:52aren't going to collapse. However, with a concrete bowstring arch, significant damage to one of the

16:58arches could potentially cause the bridge to collapse. So from that perspective, doing repairs to

17:08concrete bowstring arch bridges is very sensitive, requires a lot of 3D modeling,

17:17and requires staging, specific staging so that when we're doing the repairs to the bridge,

17:26we're able to preserve the things that we want to preserve without compromising the overall

17:30stability of the bridge. So that's just a little background into saying that

17:38when repairs are completed, we can work to preserve as much as possible. It's just that

17:46it needs to be done kind of piece by piece as we're working our way across the bridge and in a

17:51specific order so that we're not at risk of compromising the rest of the bridge.

17:59And if that specifically answers your question, Justin, or if you were asking more about

18:05preserving specific elements, is that more what you were?

18:08No, that is where I was going with it, Jeremy. I guess I'm just noticing that it sounds like

18:13either way, two or three, ultimately during rehabilitation, it may be discovered that

18:21certain elements of the bridge are not salvageable or cannot be conserved. And even though we may

18:28prefer two or three or City Council may ultimately choose two or three, the actual work may determine

18:35what is viable in terms of conservation as well. But sorry, please.

18:42No, no. Go ahead. The other thing I'll know, maybe I'll pass it, Madam Chair, to David for now.

18:50I think I'm just sort of collecting my thoughts and I probably would be more helpful to pass it along.

18:56Thanks, Justin. David, you're on deck.

19:01Yes, quick question. Have we done, do we have any sense of the financial

19:06costs for going with option two or option three?

19:13In terms of costs, we're still working on refining cost estimates.

19:21But the initial indications, I'm just looking at my notes I have here,

19:26really that options two to six, they're all in the range between one million and around three

19:33million capital costs. So that's our kind of very broad ballpark that we're in.

19:41The lowest capital costs are expected to be for options four, which was the remove and

19:47replace with steel bridge, and options six, remove and widen the adjacent road bridge.

19:56So four and six are at the lower end of the capital cost scale.

20:02And the highest capital cost is currently expected to be alternative five, which was

20:09removed and replaced with a bolstering concrete arch. And then alternatives two and three,

20:15really, they sit kind of somewhere mid-range in between those. So they kind of, they sit between

20:22four and six as being the lowest and five as the highest. So that's the capital cost. But then we

20:32also will have criteria evaluating more of the lifespan and the maintenance and future

20:42repairs and rehabilitation and so on. Thank you.

20:48Justin? Yeah, thank you. I think, you know, maybe more generally, from the standpoint of heritage

20:58conservation at least, one, four, five and six are kind of, you know, not viable, basically. We're

21:06talking about the removal of the bridge and replacement with something else or just letting

21:10it continue to degrade and not conserving any of its features. So I think from the standpoint of

21:16heritage advice, we're looking at two and three. I wonder as well, in respect of the designated

21:23attributes, perhaps this is a better question for staff, but given that there was a similar project

21:30on Norwich and it sounds like it was an alternative three project that presumably heritage staff were

21:39endorsing of where you replace the deck. If the deck is not a heritage attribute and mainly

21:45what we're concerned with is the preservation of the arches from a heritage standpoint,

21:53three maybe most viable, just kind of thinking out loud here, but I'm just curious from the

21:58heritage attribute standpoints, sort of which one of two and three causes the most to be lost

22:06with respect to heritage attributes? Yeah, I'm happy to answer that.

22:11Heritage planning staff, our preferred option is number two because we believe that would

22:18cause the least adverse impact, not only to the heritage attributes identified in the bylaw,

22:25but to the overall appearance of the heritage structure. So that and Kate noted that staff's

22:33preliminary preferred alternative is number two right now. If I could just maybe with a follow-up,

22:42Madam Chair, I just, so the Norwich project, is it correct to say Jack that it was a number three?

22:50Yeah, a new bridge was built atop the Norwich Street bridge.

23:01It's a different structure, but the result is that the historic Norwich Street bridge is

23:10slightly obscured by the new bridge. Okay, that's helpful. Just as a follow-up to that perhaps,

23:21like I think there are a lot of non-heritage considerations here. They're obviously relevant

23:26to this decision Council will ultimately make, but aren't per se relevant right now in the context

23:31of giving advice, right, like the cost of the project, the lifespan that might be achieved from

23:37one project versus the other, though I will say that does have a heritage dynamic and so

23:42far as, you know, option two, it's noted as a lifespan of 30 years, whereas option three has

23:48presumably a longer lifespan because you replace the deck and so in that respect, you have the

23:55bridge for longer and that matters in respect of its sort of historic importance to the community,

24:01setting aside maybe a bit some of the heritage attributes pieces. So I continue to just think

24:06out loud. I hope that's helpful for the group, but I'm also supportive of option two, but I wonder

24:12and respect this lifespan piece, whether or not in sort of the larger scheme of things, if option

24:19three actually achieves more heritage conservation because we keep the bridge for longer, 75 years

24:24versus 30 years. So that's just my thought. Thanks, Justin. Stephen, I saw your hand go up and then

24:32Piper. Thanks, Sarah. Just a quick observation. The option three does propose a new deck,

24:43replacing the deck. I think we should also give considerate, you know, appropriate consideration

24:49to the idea of what would have to be added to the bridge to make the railing compliant with code.

24:56I think what maybe we can all agree on is that with the Norwich Street Bridge,

25:01it's not so much the replacement of the deck that's visually predominant in the bridge today.

25:10It's actually the side rails that were required to be added to the design that in a way kind of

25:19in my opinion, overpower the historic bridge underneath and beside it. So because the arched

25:27bridge is actually quite large, these are really tall arches. It may be that if additional hand rail

25:35has to be added, it may not be as at the end of the day, may not be as secondary as a heritage

25:44attribute secondary to the new construction. That's all. If I may jump in there, Stephen,

25:52it's Jeremy Colberg again. A new bridge that would be placed within the McFillan's bridge structure

26:06would, due to the length, the span of that existing bridge would likely need to be some sort of

26:11of a truss bridge versus the Norwich one, which is more, the girders are underneath and a new deck

26:18was placed. So there's a little bit of differentiation in there. It won't be just the railing that you

26:24would be seeing. It would be kind of a truss sitting within a truss, likely a prefabricated

26:31steel truss that we would kind of be able to slide under because we've got that the top cross

26:38board. We need to stay under that. So it just, it is a bit of a bigger span bridge. So there are a

26:46few more complications versus what's on the Norwich bridge, but similar concept. Thanks for that,

26:58Jeremy. Piper and then David. I was wondering if it's okay if I share like the Google images link

27:06to what the Norwich Street Bridge looks like so we can sort of contextualize like what that actually

27:12the solution looked like there for number three because we're sort of trying to talk about it as

27:16like a comparable project. And I think what people are saying about what staff is saying about it

27:22really overpowering the bridge is very evident from that. Is that something I can do? I'll turn

27:29to Andrew for confirmation. Yes, to chair up after you. It's Andrew from the Clark's office.

27:36Those images can be shared. It's certainly something we could pull up or the member could

27:41pull up if they have it ready to share. But I'd lead up to the member to let me know when we make

27:48it happen. Piper, if you're comfortable sharing, you're welcome to share screen or links to the

27:53Google images, whatever was your preference. And if not, Andrew can pull it up. I'm sure quite

27:57quickly. I did a quick search too. Actually, I could also probably just share it on my screen if

28:01Yeah, I just put the link in the chat. I think that might be easier.

28:05Chair up. I'm just going to pull up through that link now. That's wonderful. Just a minute to get

28:09there. Just thought through you chair up. If someone would let me know if that looks okay on

28:30screen. Yep, we've got it. Thank you. That's the old one. No, we'd like to. That's the new one.

28:52This is just a static picture. I'll share it up. It's a good shot there. Does that

28:57communicate what you're looking for, member? Yeah, I was just going to say with that,

29:02I felt like especially since what was just mentioned about it having to be more reinforced

29:07than this, I feel like it would completely like include the sight line that we're looking at

29:13with the other bridge. Like even this where you're looking at it from the side and you can only

29:18really see the original structure when you're looking adjacent from the bridge. And if the

29:22experience of walking across a bridge is about the structure of the bridge, then anyone using the

29:27bridge like in an active way wouldn't experience the bridge in the same way.

29:45Were there any other comments on anyone want to talk about the Norwich Bridge that was just

29:48shared? I do agree, Piper. I think that was a very valid point and I had brought it up myself as well

29:53in Google when Jack mentioned the bridge itself. If not, David, I know you were patiently waiting

30:01as well, so I'll turn it to you. Okay, thank you. All of the options are really very informative.

30:08Does this help us though? Like when is the city's role under the responsibility

30:14under the Heritage Act with respect to the bridge in terms of repair or maintenance or otherwise?

30:24What are we contemplating central to what the city's role and obligation is under the legislation?

30:32Are we going the right way? Are we going the right track?

30:37I'm happy to respond to that. So under the property standards bylaw, we have an obligation to

30:46maintain the heritage attributes of the bridge identified in the designation bylaw. And so

30:53options, options two and three that would maintain the heritage attributes would align

30:59with property standards and the Ontario Heritage Act.

31:05It's divided then, it's the property standards act and the Heritage Act that the city has to

31:11grapple with in the book of these options. The Heritage Act allows municipalities to add

31:18maintenance of designated structures to property standards, which we did July 2024, I believe.

31:28Okay, all right. Thanks, that was helpful.

31:33Justin. Yeah, thank you. I just dropped off there for a second everyone. So I think I missed a

31:39little bit of the discussion. But while I asked my question, perhaps just as a starting point,

31:45what was shared, the image that was shared, was that the Norwich Bridge? Just to show,

31:50okay, just show what that looked like. Because I think to that point, by the way,

31:54you know, obviously, that doesn't look like a heritage structure, right? So I think at face

32:01value, I think we, it's from the standpoint of heritage conservation, I think it's,

32:08my preference would be to that city council dot two, as opposed to three. But still, on that point,

32:16if I could just ask separately a sort of non heritage question from Kate's presentation,

32:21that I think is just a little bit confusing for me. I'm not personally familiar very much with

32:26the bridge, besides doing some research on its history and reading the agenda materials. But

32:31this, it's connected by trails that the city doesn't maintain, but that the public have access to.

32:37I'm just, but that is sort of my way of asking, what is the intended purpose of the bridge once

32:42it's conserved? It will continue to be used as a pedestrian bridge by the public, but what's the

32:47city's role in maintaining the connected trails, I guess, none. But like, how does that get reconciled

32:53with the investment to conserve the bridge? Thanks, Justin. It's a, there's a really great question,

33:03because it is kind of an unusual scenario in that respect. So this is in some ways kind of an

33:08often asset for the city, right? Because the, the trails that connect to it are not maintained by

33:18the city. And as it stands, the city, it's not part of our trails master plan or other policy to

33:27you know, pursue taking on those trails or adding them to the city trail network. So

33:34as far as we know, the expectation is for that, you know, the status quo to remain,

33:40to remain going forwards. So really the city's responsibilities would be kind of limited to

33:49the bridge itself and not the connections to it. Yeah, that's really where we're at at the moment.

33:59Yeah, if I could just as a follow up, okay, so the city doesn't own the adjacent lands that connect

34:05to the bridge, it's their own by somebody else, but the public getting access to it through what

34:11means just like, like a non for profit on some or it is, it is the bridge itself and I think

34:20land leading to it is part of the overall public right of way, which is quite wide at this location

34:26because of, you know, it was the original traffic route. And then we had the new road bridge added

34:33and the road realigned. So it is public right of way, but it's not like actively used, maintained

34:41in that respect. And it's the the trails are not like recognized as being designated city trails.

34:49And so there isn't any, there isn't any, you know, maintenance performed by the city to

34:56to make those trails available and are accessible.

34:59Yeah, thank you.

35:01Daniel.

35:01Yeah, sorry, I'm just fiddling with the technology. I do somebody sent me an article from

35:14March 2025. And it and it does appear that there are a lot of groups that do use that. And this is an article from

35:25members of the Guelph Coalition for Active Transportation, Guelph Cycling Club, Guelph Hiking Trail Club,

35:33Guelph Historical Society, Guelph Offroad Bicycling Club, Guelph Outdoor School and the Urban Park

35:41Guelph and Yorkland Screen Hub. So there are quite a few groups that seem to be interested in this

35:47and seem to use it. So it's a well used, well used, you know, bridge. I've walked in that area myself.

36:01Yes, thank you, Don. Definitely, we have, you know, already, we did a first public open house in November

36:07at the beginning of the project. And we, we've certainly already heard lots from the people who

36:13use the bridge and those groups that you mentioned. And so we, you know, expect and hope to hear more from them

36:19at the second public open house too, so that we can keep getting input from all the folks who value the bridge and use that.

36:28Justin? Yeah, thank you. I want to ask another non-heritage question actually. And I just, it's,

36:39it's because I'm sort of trying to reconcile this a little bit. Lots of different groups value the

36:44bridge for different reasons. Maybe it's historical importance or it's heritage significance or because

36:50it's connected some trails. And that's great for the community because they use them. But

36:56what I'm struggling with a bit is, so the city doesn't have plans to integrate those trails into

37:02its network and operate them, at least not at this time, is contemplating subject to council's

37:08decision and investment to rehabilitate or replace the bridge that connects those trails.

37:15So I'm just wondering in terms of the bridge's future purpose, how does, how does that get squared?

37:22Like what if the network needs investment in order to be viable itself? And now we have a bridge

37:31that investment was put into to conserve, but actually won't be used by anyone

37:38because of the trail network piece. So I may be another non-heritage thing, Kate.

37:46Yes, thank you. I mean, yeah, you've captured it really well, that kind of conundrum

37:53of the situation. At the moment, obviously, we undertake this work based on the city's existing

38:00policies in terms of trail network and active transportation. It's something, obviously, that

38:10we will gather feedback on through the study. We could choose to make recommendations about that

38:18as part of the study report. We haven't formulated anything around that at this stage.

38:25And obviously, it'd be something I would think, I would expect that council would be,

38:30like you are, just in like, that they would be thinking through and considering too. And

38:34they're making a decision about this bridge, but thinking also about the connectivity to it and

38:41its future use. So it's an important consideration. I don't really have like a great answer for you

38:47right now, but I appreciate that you're thinking those steps through. You articulated it really

38:56well. Thanks. Jack, did you want to add something to that point before I go to Don?

39:05Yeah, just real quickly. I just wanted to add that because council has decided to designate

39:12this bridge. Staff interpret that to be direction that it should be maintained. So that's the

39:20perspective that heritage planning staff are bringing to this is not necessarily looking into

39:25trail connectivity, but how best to conserve and identify heritage resource in the city.

39:33Which would align, I guess, to it, I guess our goals of this committee, right Jack?

39:37Although big picture is absolutely a big part of this too.

39:42Justin, do you want to add something back to that comment from Jack, or is it different? I

39:45should go to Don. You should go to Don. I'm prepared to make a motion, but I want to hear Don first.

39:52Sure. Thank you. Well, all I was going to say was that it's not really our role to consider all

39:58of those other factors. It's only our role to make recommendation on the heritage aspects. Is that

40:05correct? Yeah. It's within our purview of our committee, yes. Because how much they spend or

40:11who uses it or what it belongs to is really somebody else's, you know, bailiwick.

40:23Yeah, I just wanted to mention before a motion, I had a question about the railings. Like if it was

40:28option two, but there were, there did need to be modifications to bring it up to code.

40:34Then I'm wondering if you have a plan for what that would necessarily look like to be respectful of

40:39like, obviously that it is a concrete bridge, but wanting to make sure that you can distinguish

40:43the changes made from the original bridge, like would it be a different shape, a different material?

40:47What was the idea for that? Or is there? Hi, maybe I'll jump in really quick too before there's a

40:52response to that comment. We also have the opportunity to make comments as part of this. And so I had

40:57noted just based on the discussion that for the recommendation number two part there, one of

41:02the comments be that vertical spindles, if vertical spindles are to be added to the rails,

41:06they should be fabricated in a manner that matches the bridge construction. But if there's other

41:10things that we want as part of those sort of recommendations with comments, we can add that

41:15to the motion as well. And so if one of those is that there should be some distinguishable

41:19aspect of it that can be added into our motion to just wanted to note that before maybe Kate,

41:23I don't know if you wanted to respond to that or if Jeremy did. I was going to throw it over to Jeremy.

41:29I know that we've talked to Jeremy about that kind of thing. Is that okay Jeremy to kind of

41:35describe a little bit of what that might look like? Yeah, thanks, Kate. As we've been talking

41:41here, I've been scouring through Google Maps trying to find the bridges that we've done in the past

41:45that might have something similar so that I could give you an example. But in terms of what we would

41:53be looking at materials wise, I think we would be proposing that the railing would be concrete

42:00similar to the existing railings. The existing ones being horizontal do need to have vertical

42:07elements added. Obviously still preliminary stages here. But I think that the solution we'd be

42:18proposing would be using concrete, would have similar proportions to the existing vertical

42:24components there and would kind of fill in between the horizontal rails that are there. So

42:32trying to preserve the overall aesthetic of it, not putting in a steel railing in front of the

42:39existing concrete would not be the preferred recommendation there. It would be a similar

42:45concrete material, similar appearance. We can put in the architectural features that are identified

42:57within the vertical components. We can kind of mirror those and keep it a similar appearance.

43:06Hi, Amber, did you want to add anything else or respond at all?

43:11No, thank you. I just noticed that someone's in the chat. I'm not sure if people are seeing that.

43:16I'm sorry, Sherry, I'm just going to jump in here. It's Andrew from the clerk's office.

43:20So in situations like this, there's no registered delegates for this meeting. So members of the

43:24public, they're attending, they're watching, but it's sort of like they're maybe calling out

43:28a little bit at a turn. We'd leave it to you, Sherry, to kind of monitor that if it's inappropriate

43:34or appropriate. That's not for me to comment on, but I would note that there are no registered

43:39delegates here. So no one's registered to speak to this item. Okay, we'll continue on then. Thanks

43:44for that note, Andrew. Don, over to you. No, I'm done. Oh, so just the hand was just there from

43:55before, no problem. So I did, I tweaked that one piece a little bit. I'll just read it really quick.

44:02And then Justin, I'll go to you because I think you have a motion. So the way I worded it is if

44:07vertical spindles are to be added to the rails, they should be fabricated in a manner that matches

44:11the bridge construction in material and appearance. I'm happy to change and add and do all those other

44:17things if folks have other comments or if there's other things we want as well, any other comments

44:21we would like to have included in the motion. And Justin, I'll turn it to you now.

44:27Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I hope I'm capturing this correctly. My and Andrew, you know,

44:35tweak this as needed to reflect Sarah's comment, but I think I'm gathering from the group. We've

44:41landed on the fact that from the standpoint of heritage conservation, alternative two is preferred

44:47and that the committee recommends City Council adopt alternative two. Sarah made a great

44:53addition to that that I can't quite capture right now in respect to the comment she made. But if

44:59that could be included as part of the motion, I think that would make it more complete. And if

45:05other members perhaps maybe have other things to add. But I think I think we've landed in a place

45:09where we're comfortable recommending alternative two. So why don't I share my screen really quick

45:16so you can see the motion as it's written. Really, really quick. Give me one moment. Sorry,

45:22Chair, I'm Andrew from the clerk's office. I have the motion prepared for you. Perfect.

45:26I'm going to put it on the screen for everyone right now. I know we have a mover here,

45:29and we just need a seconder. I'll give everyone a chance to review the motion on screen that was

45:37moved by Justin. And then if someone is willing to, I see Kate has her hand up. So Kate, did you

45:53want to say something? Sure, I'm not allowed, I'm not sure how to extend, am I allowed to prompt

45:59you. But I am keen as the project manager to document the committee's position on all of the

46:09alternatives presented. So just for you to consider whether you might incorporate that into your

46:16motion. So I'll leave the motion as is right now as moved by Justin, and I'll see if there is a

46:23seconder. Dawn, I see your hand and the little yellow hand are both up. So I'm going to say

46:28Dawn is seconding. And I'm going to keep going with the vote right now. I'll ask if they all are

46:35in favor. And I'm just going to move through really quickly all these teeny tiny little

46:42boxes to make sure I see everyone. I believe I've seen everyone. So I'm going to say that that's

46:51passed. Thank you, folks. And then Stephen, so that's passed, but Stephen, I'll turn to you.

46:57And I see you have your hand up as well. Yes, only to say that the name equivalent has two L's.

47:08Sorry to be picky. No, we like that. Those corrections absolutely. So we'll make sure

47:15that we get two L's into it. All right, well, thanks everyone for that discussion. Piper,

47:22yep, I see your hand is up. Sorry then. So to what Kate was talking about, is it possible for us to

47:29make another motion to protect like option three as a preferred if option two isn't possible?

47:36And then to say that we don't support the other options just so that we're speaking to all of

47:39them? I believe we can if you'd like to move a motion. So maybe give me, Andrew's maybe documenting

47:49something right now. So I don't have to attempt to get this together. Andrew, do you want to write

47:53that out or? Chair up through you. It's Andrew from the Court of Justice. Yes, I will prepare

47:58something insured on screen now that may fit what is being discussed. Just give me a second to share.

48:04Thank you. So they're chair up sorry for the delay.

48:16Not a problem at all. We'll make sure there's two L's in the name for this one. I have done that

48:25chair up through you. Yes, I have. And I would have done as I set up as a preferred second alternative

48:31simply changing the wording there to prefer a second alternative to capture that that preference.

48:36Do we want to add the committee does not support options one, four, five?

48:43So I'm not sure if you heard that chair up through that was Jack. He's noting that we may want to

48:47add that the committee does not prefer the second or the remaining alternatives that these two are

48:53the preferred options. I'm not sure if that is what would like to what the members would like to

48:58capture, but I would look to you. I think that's what Piper was saying. Piper and I see your hand

49:02is up. I don't know where you are on my screen right now, but I think that's what you your

49:06comment was, but you're welcome to correct that. Yeah, no, I would say that we don't support those

49:11options. But also I'm wondering if maybe the wording of that statement could be misconstrued

49:15is that we support alternative three. I feel like that seems a bit too positive for what we've

49:21discussed. So maybe if we could make the wording more clear, I'm not sure how you guys are reading

49:25that about how our absolutely our first preference is that, but if for some reason that isn't an

49:30option, like that's made impossible by some other circumstance, then our opinion would shift to

49:36alternative three. Chair Abbott, through you. I'm just working with Jack over here to try and capture

49:44that. We're just going to. I just wanted to say I agree with Piper. I think it sends

50:02two is preferred, but we don't really care. Three might be all right as well. But I don't think

50:08I think we only prefer to and that's right. We're just finalizing this motion. We'll have

50:15sure not screened just a second. Sharon, thank you for your patience. Committee that is on screen.

50:45I heard it's that capture your motion. Yes. Thank you so much. Perfect. All right. So is there a

50:51seconder for the motion and maybe I'll say if someone was a second, just want to unmute, I can

50:55only see like four people on my screen right now and say you second that would be helpful.

51:00I'm not seeing any hands on screen myself. I'm happy to second. Thank you, Justin. And then

51:12all those in favor, please raise your hands so we can see.

51:19That helps. Okay. Perfect. And then I think I have Kelly on the next screen. Perfect. Excellent.

51:24Thanks, everyone. All right. So that is carried. And we can welcome Liam to come join us again.

51:34Fantastic. Welcome back, Liam. All right, we will move on to item 3.2. And I'll just note

51:47really quickly. We saw quite a bit of the agenda to get through. So if we approach to a clock, the

51:54item 3.4, Jack, the Heritage Advisory designation priorities for 2026 can be deferred to our next

52:00meeting. So just a note that we'll see how timing goes for folks and be as respectful,

52:05sorry, as we can of our two o'clock timing. With that, though, we're going to get into

52:10item 3.2. And I believe Stephen is going to speak to this one.

52:16Thanks, Sarah. I'm going to share my screen just to show the one image that was included within the

52:25report. Just bear with me for a second here. Just let me know when you can see the image on the

52:34screen. It's taking its time. It's up now. Okay, great. And what I propose to do is just read out

52:49several aspects of the report itself. So archaeological research associates,

52:57otherwise known as ARA, they were retained by Infrastructure Ontario to conduct a Heritage

53:04Impact Assessment, which considered the potential impacts from the proposed severance and sale

53:10of a strip of land on the south side of York Road. So ARA's HIA, and I apologize for all the

53:20acronyms, it will be used to support a request to the Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism

53:26for consent of the proposed sale of the severed parcel to the city of Guelph. The impact assessment

53:33addresses the possible impacts of the proposed severance and sale, but any future plans regarding

53:40the subject lands are beyond the scope of the HIA. So the rationale for the city's intention to

53:48purchase the subject land is to support the York Road Improvement Project. And this land is required

53:54to ensure that capital project can be completed for servicing capacity improvements to support

54:02growth. So the subject land, as you see on the screen, is that's proposed for severance and sale

54:11is a strip of land that's approximately 10 to 12 meters wide, again, as I said, on the south side

54:17of York Road at the Reformatory, in the Reformatory area, but within the property known as 785 York

54:26Road. And lastly, ARA has recommended that the proposed disposition of the subject lands to the

54:35city of Guelph will not directly or indirectly impact, impair or detract from the heritage

54:42attributes associated with the cultural heritage value or interest of the Ontario Reformatory.

54:49And finally, heritage planning staff support those recommendations made by

54:53our ARA in their report, which essentially is the recommendation that you see

55:01in the staff report. That's all, Chair. Thanks, Stephen. Are there any questions or

55:13comments on this one in between the screen? Just making sure. I don't see anyone raising hands

55:28or unmuting. So I will ask then if there is someone that would like to move the recommended

55:34motion. I can do so. Thank you, Liam. And Piper, I'll take you as a seconder if that's okay.

55:42Perfect. All those in favour? Excellent. I think that's everyone. Perfect. Thanks, everyone.

55:54And we will continue on to item 3.3, which is the Ward Heritage Conservation District Plan

56:00and Guideline Consultation Number One. Guelph-Reca is unavailable today, but her colleague Annie

56:07Villiu is presenting instead. And Annie, is there a fantastic welcome, Annie? Thank you.

56:17We're going to be sharing a slide deck. My colleague Meredith Duert is also going to be

56:24presenting part of some of the slides, as well as Jack is going to give a little intro. So if

56:29Meredith, I think, I'm not sure if Meredith is sharing. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Annie. So

56:39since Council affirmed the boundary of the ward in June of last year, we've begun development of

56:47the planning guideline for the district. And so we're still early on in that process. So we're

56:54coming to the committee to solicit your feedback on how conservation should work within the district.

57:02So Annie and Meredith are going to make a presentation today. And then we're very keen

57:07to capture your feedback to help us as we move forward on developing the planning guideline.

57:13Over to you, Annie. Okay. Thank you very much. Yes, Rebecca sends her regrets in terms of this

57:22project. I am the engagement lead, so I'm very familiar with this project. So I'm excited to be

57:27here with you. So what we're doing, the city is completing a Heritage Conservation District Plan

57:33to develop policies and guidelines for a district in the western area of the ward.

57:39An HCD, or Heritage Conservation District, is a planning tool that recognizes the significant

57:45heritage character of an area and puts policies in place to guide how change happens over time.

57:51Change can be minor in nature, such as standard maintenance, to more major changes like demolition

57:57or infill buildings or adding to existing buildings. An HCD is enabled under part five

58:05of the Ontario Heritage Act and allows council to designate a defined area. All properties within

58:11that area are then protected under a bylaw and the designation is registered on title.

58:20We are now in the planned phase of the HCD designation process. To reach this point,

58:25we completed a study phase, some of you might remember, which was conducted from March 2024

58:30to June 2025. The study sought to research, analyze and assess a predetermined study area for

58:37eligibility as an HCD. The study process determined that the area does meet criteria for designation

58:44as an HCD and a recommended boundary was determined. Consultation and public engagement were key

58:50components to reaching these findings, which we'll briefly review. Two open houses were held over the

59:01course of the study phase. The public were invited to attend and participate in information

59:06gathering activities as well as a walking tour. The events also provided the opportunity for attendees

59:12to ask questions about the study and the designation process with the city and the consultant team.

59:18In addition, public notices about the study and related public events were mailed to those living

59:22within the study area boundary and surrounding area. Further, the city's website and social media

59:28advertised the study and posted an online survey for participants to provide feedback.

59:36We also held a series of small group meetings, similar to the meeting we're having right now,

59:41with targeted groups that would provide focused feedback on community interests.

59:49Miss Isaka's of the Credit First Nation and Six Nations of the Grand River were consulted,

59:53with a focus on area histories and receiving feedback on the study area boundary,

59:58particularly along the speed in the Aramosa rivers. Through these various engagement events,

1:00:05we received a lot of feedback on how the area is valued and understood by those living,

1:00:10working and visiting the neighborhood. We heard that participants liked the objectives that

1:00:16included conserving the unique nature of the ward and its irregular block configuration.

1:00:21Participants wanted to see a larger area included in the district boundary,

1:00:25and participants thought the naming of the study area, Ward West, as it was called during the study

1:00:31phase, was confusing and did not align with local understanding of naming of the place.

1:00:36Based on this feedback, a recommended study area boundary was developed that extended the

1:00:44initial boundary to include representative and historically important streets like Moors Street

1:00:49and Mal Street, which were frequently mentioned in engagement events. Further, the cultural heritage

1:00:55values and heritage attributes were refined to include specific significant places identified

1:01:00by participants and through area research. The planned phase has named the area under assessment

1:01:05the Ward Heritage Conservation District. On the slide, you'll see the change to the study area

1:01:14that came out of the study phase. The dashed orange line represents the original study area.

1:01:19The solid line shows the study area recommended to move forward to the planned phase,

1:01:23which has been expanded to the north and east to include several key streets that are important

1:01:28to understanding the historical and cultural development of the neighborhood. On June 10th,

1:01:362025, Council endorsed the study recommendations and directed the study to proceed with an HCD plan.

1:01:43Following this directive, the plan phase began on July 1st, 2025. Okay, so now that we covered

1:01:51how we got here, let's discuss what can be achieved with an HCD designation. So in short,

1:01:56the HCD plan will, one, describe the cultural heritage values of this area of the ward,

1:02:01two, define objectives that will describe a vision for change in the district,

1:02:05provide policies and guidelines for different categories of properties,

1:02:09and provide direction for what changes require a heritage permit. An HCD plan is comprised of five

1:02:18components, which all serve to provide guidance and direction on how the district protects its

1:02:23valued attributes and manages change over time. These parts are a statement of significance,

1:02:31objectives, a heritage permit system, policies, and guidelines. So right now we're focused on

1:02:40developing the statement of significance, which describes what is valued about the district,

1:02:44and the objectives, which describes vision for change. Similar to the study phase, we will also

1:02:52be conducting various engagement events and activities. These engagement pieces will inform

1:02:58the five components of the HCD plan. These are divided into three phases shown on the slide.

1:03:04We are currently in phase one of the engagement plan. So in addition to this meeting today,

1:03:12and one with a working group coming up, the project webpage and have your say online surveys

1:03:17now live for the public to participate in. I will now pass it over to Meredith, who will provide a

1:03:22summary of the thematic overview for the HCD. Hi all, thank you for having us today. Just a

1:03:33sound check. Okay, so the purpose of the statement of significance or district significance is to

1:03:40help property owners counsel the Heritage Advisory Committee yourselves, and municipal staff make

1:03:45informed decisions about proposed alterations to the district. So they support the development of

1:03:52policies and guidelines within the HCD plan, ensuring that the direction provided in the plan

1:03:57protects the features and characteristics of the district that are most valued. In order to develop

1:04:02a statement of district significance, we must have an understanding of what themes are important

1:04:07to that district. So I'm jumping around between windows and it doesn't do that. So during the

1:04:17research and analysis performed during the study phase, four themes emerged that we found to define

1:04:23and describe the district. And these are shaping, adapting, making, and celebrating. The shaping

1:04:32theme relates to the district's landscape. Formed by the speed and airamosa rivers and the

1:04:37driveland to the north, the landscape creates a sense of enclosure for the area and provided an

1:04:41important meeting place for indigenous peoples long before settlers arrived. The lowline lands

1:04:46formed a floodplain that limited development in the 1800s, allowing for large industrial

1:04:52operations to be built in the neighborhood when rail infrastructure was later introduced.

1:04:56The irregular blocks and lots of the district respond to the curve of the rivers and the railway.

1:05:09The district has long been associated with entrepreneurship and industry,

1:05:12containing large-scale factories as well as local shops and businesses, often operating out of homes.

1:05:18The simplicity and utilitarian design of the building to the district reflect this history

1:05:23and the families and communities that settled here, many of whom were newcomers and immigrants.

1:05:27They were everyday people that worked, shopped, and lived in these places.

1:05:34The buildings in the district have been modified and adapted over time, changing to meet the

1:05:39evolving needs of the communities that live and work in the neighborhood. Homes have been turned

1:05:43into storefronts, industrial buildings into homes, and other physical and functional adaptations

1:05:49that show a pattern of reinvention that defines the district. Community gathering and celebration

1:05:57are reoccurring themes in the district, with the rhythms and rituals of daily life being played

1:06:02out through local events, installations, and various spaces within the neighborhood.

1:06:10One of the defining characteristics and historical patterns within the ward

1:06:16have been the many small businesses that have operated through street-level storefronts

1:06:20and out-of-people's homes. Carrying forward research conducted during the study phase,

1:06:24small businesses have been identified within the district boundary. These businesses may be in

1:06:29operation today or were historically located within the existing buildings within the district.

1:06:35On the slide, you can see the buildings that we have identified that either currently or at

1:06:39one point contained some of these small businesses. We also learned through the study phase the

1:06:47importance of cultural and community spaces and the value of gathering within the community.

1:06:53In order to devise policy and guidelines that would protect and allow these spaces to thrive,

1:06:59we have identified those places which are active within the community today.

1:07:02So again, on the screen you'll see the various places and spaces we've identified.

1:07:08Now I will hand things back over to Annie. Thanks, Meredith.

1:07:14Okay, so the objectives within an HCD plan are to conserve the district's heritage attributes and

1:07:19manage future change in order to ensure the district's cultural heritage value is maintained

1:07:24long-term. The objectives developed are specific to the district and relate to the built heritage

1:07:30resources, landscapes, streetscapes, and archaeological resources within the boundary.

1:07:35To determine the objectives for an HCD plan, we must consider what are the valued attributes of

1:07:40the district and what are the visions and goals for that area and how it should develop over time.

1:07:49Okay, so using what we know coming out of the study phase, we have drafted a series of goals

1:07:53and visions that we understand are important to the community for the district. These include,

1:07:59one, maintain, celebrate, and conserve the districts you need cultural heritage values

1:08:04in a way that supports ongoing growth, evolution, and dynamism in the ward.

1:08:09Two, promote change in the district in a way that supports its authenticity and evolving quality.

1:08:17And three, encourage and incentivize the ongoing adaptation of existing buildings so that this

1:08:23area can accommodate growth and change while ensuring its historical layers remain recognizable.

1:08:29So the next few slides has a list of goals and visions, so I can read along, but I think it's

1:08:35important to read through them together. Four, implement a conservation approach that embraces

1:08:40visible layering in contrast of existing and new development rather than freezing the area in a

1:08:46single time period. Reinforce the district's unique patchwork quality and its irregular

1:08:52street layout and cheek by jowl lauding pattern. Ensure that additions, alterations, and new

1:08:58development in the district enhance its cultural heritage values while supporting planned density

1:09:03targets and the recommended building heights in the downtown secondary plan. Seven, celebrate the

1:09:11district's worker-oriented history and its industrial legacy, including the water and rail-based industries.

1:09:17Eight, identify opportunities for documenting the area's oral history and further interpreting

1:09:23and commemorating its valued qualities. Nine, identify and support community and cultural spaces

1:09:30that contribute to the social and cultural fabric of the district. Ten, encourage new development

1:09:36that is pedestrian focused. And eleven, reinforce the relationship between district, between the

1:09:42district and the speed and aeromosa rivers, rail lines, and drumlin landscape, all of which

1:09:47contribute to its identity as a distinct place. So now that you've heard all of this, we'd like

1:09:55to have a bit of a workshop. So a key goal in our meeting today is to hear from you on the material

1:10:00we have presented and to get your feedback on both the themes and the goals and visions that we have

1:10:05developed for the HCD plan. As we switch now into the workshop portion of the meeting, we will revisit

1:10:11the themes, then goals and vision to discuss whether where we've got things right and where we could

1:10:17make changes. So we'll be using the mirror board to do this, but first I'll just go through some of

1:10:26these. The first question, so we'll start with the themes as Meredith presented, shaping, making,

1:10:34adapting, and celebrating. So the themes outlined here tell the story of the Ward Heritage Conservation

1:10:39District. This district can be defined by a layering of these themes that repeat and resurface over

1:10:44time, creating a quality to the area that is at one time historical, of another time at extremely

1:10:52contemporary and fluid. Mixing of past and present and the creation of something new all together

1:10:57makes the district a distinct place. So what we'd like to hear from you at first is did we get this

1:11:04right? What does this area of the Ward mean to you? So I will open it up to comments if that's okay.

1:11:16You're all welcome. If anyone has any comments or thoughts, you're welcome just to unmute. Again,

1:11:19it's hard to see folks, so I appreciate keeping this part of the portion of the presentation on the

1:11:24screen. But Piper, you're welcome to jump in. I've never lived in this area, so I'm not going to

1:11:32speak to it beyond this, but I did have one question. You were talking about Indigenous

1:11:37histories and use of the land there. So I wonder about the term celebrating and how we're using

1:11:43that versus commemorating. So I think if we're talking about celebrating, that gets into a question

1:11:50of sort of glorifying colonialism in a way. And I know that's not the intention at all. Of course,

1:11:56people's industry, and there's certainly a lot to celebrate there in small businesses and still

1:12:00today. But I think the politics of that language might get a little lost. That is a very great

1:12:08comment. And as part of this, the planned stage, we will be engaging again with

1:12:16Six Nations and Mississaugas of the Credit First Nations. So we'll be able to get their

1:12:21input directly on these themes. So this is something we can definitely raise and see

1:12:26how, what their thoughts are behind that. So thank you for raising that.

1:12:36Was there any specific feedback from Mississaugas of the Credit and Six Nations?

1:12:40So right now as of, so we, the city and the consultant team, engaged with those nations

1:12:49during the study phase in terms of where we are right now in terms of these specific themes that

1:12:55have been developed as part of the plan. We have not yet gone to speak to them right at this moment.

1:13:11If there's no more additional comments, we can move forward. I will let the chair

1:13:16take my direction on that. I was just going to say, someone who has lived in the ward,

1:13:20I like the eclectic nature of this. I think it really does resonate with the,

1:13:24just the uniqueness of the ward for sure. And it's a very cool place. So

1:13:28that's a personal bias for sure. But I do like this, someone who has that connection.

1:13:34That's something we've heard a lot. Okay. But just to say that's something we heard a lot over

1:13:39and over during the study phase engagement and keep the word weird is what we kept hearing.

1:13:45So it's great. Kelly has put her hand up. So I'll let Kelly jump in there before we move on.

1:13:51Hi. Thanks. I like this, the way that you've really kind of combined the

1:13:58duality of it, that it's, it is really historic, but it was almost in some ways ahead of its time.

1:14:03And I think we look at things like mixed use today. And it's interesting that that was just

1:14:10how it always was in the ward. And now so many different neighborhoods are trying to figure

1:14:14out how can we bring in, you know, other non residential dwellings and stuff like that.

1:14:20So I really appreciate that that was emphasized here. And I think it's very accurate for sure.

1:14:27Great. Thank you. Okay. If there's a last call for this, this question, if not,

1:14:39we can move on to the next one. Okay. All right. So we're going to go back to this question of

1:14:50small businesses. So we'll quickly refresh on two maps that we showed earlier. First, this is the

1:14:56map showing small businesses with examples shown in the images beneath. So I know there's a lot

1:15:02here, but for example, there's 132 Alice Street, which was historically known as

1:15:09Meredith, you're going to have to help me with the

1:15:11The L'Oreal Tays, I think. Thank you.

1:15:14Grocery to you. And these coffee bar 132 Alice was historically known as this no white laundry.

1:15:22And 161 Neve Street was historically known as this Neve Street grocery store. Okay, so that's one

1:15:29map. We're going to show these two maps. And then we're going to flip over to Miro. So Miro board

1:15:33so that we can add some of your comments. And secondly, this is the map of cultural and community

1:15:40spaces again with examples shown beneath such as 176 Alice Street, also known as the Palace on Alice.

1:15:48131 Ontario Street, which is the

1:15:51Hitler Public School apologies if I just pronounce that 60 Ontario Street standing room only and

1:15:57double rainbow cafe. So Meredith is going to switch screens to our mirror board.

1:16:04That will help us capture some of your comments. So we'll just switch screens and then

1:16:12we'll provide some facility, a bit of a discussion.

1:16:20So we're going to in terms, I guess we're going to start with the community hubs.

1:16:25So of the community hubs that are on the map that have been identified.

1:16:31Are there any other important community hubs or cultural spaces that you would also add?

1:16:37If so, we'd ask that you please share the name of the place, the address or approximate location

1:16:42and a brief explanation about what makes that place significant to the ward. And just to mention

1:16:47that the questions we're asking today of you is mirrors what we have are asking as part of the

1:16:53have your say survey. So everybody is welcome to if they haven't already go to the have your say page

1:17:00and fill out that survey as well. But we wanted to also ask of the Heritage Committee if they

1:17:07had any important community hubs or cultural spaces that they would like to add. So I'll open

1:17:13it up to see if anybody has anything to share. And maybe sorry to jump in here, but perhaps it's

1:17:27easier to collectively think about this cultural and community spaces map as well as the small

1:17:32businesses. So true all at the same time of the area we can we can yeah collectively discuss

1:17:39both ideas. Yeah. Good idea, Mary. So what I'm going to prompt you with some questions about the

1:17:47the historical businesses. So if you have again if you have any information about any of the spaces

1:17:52on the map, we're interested to hear about why these spaces in particular have

1:18:01invite community gathering, interested to hear about history of these spaces, how they might

1:18:06have changed over time. So both those types of questions for both the community spaces and the

1:18:13the historic businesses were really interested in knowing if we missed anything. And what else

1:18:18can you share with us? And again, as I said, if you think of something later on that oh I should

1:18:32have mentioned, please go and fill out the have your say survey. That would be a good good way to

1:18:40do this. Yeah, again, I haven't lived here, so I don't have any information to share with you.

1:18:56But I was wondering if maybe again speaking to like the earlier point that we discussed if that

1:19:00would be a good way to bring in, of course, if this is something that with consultation they

1:19:04wanted to bring in indigenous respect is if you recognize like cultural spaces here that are

1:19:09significant to the community. So inquiring about previous land use and maybe recognizing that in

1:19:13the plan somehow. Yeah, that's a great great idea Piper. Thank you for bringing that up. We'll

1:19:20make sure to put that in in terms of conversations going on with ongoing with the nations. Okay,

1:19:44I don't know if we want a few more minutes or if we want to move forward we can also go back

1:19:50if as we go through if anything if anyone has any

1:19:53feedback. I'll leave the chair to let us direct how we want to go forward if this is

1:20:03Yeah, I think you're welcome to with on the only one that I was reflecting on

1:20:07was on North or Street South like the the Sleiman distillery that's there. I feel like it's become

1:20:11a bit of a hub in some ways because they host a lot of community events and fundraising opportunities

1:20:16there and it's in a historic building I believe a heritage building and Sleiman has a huge history

1:20:22in Guelph so it's the only other one I was really reflecting on was how that

1:20:27commercial space has become a hub of a lot of community action. Great, so historical building

1:20:34but recent community hub is what I'm hearing. Great. I think as well and this is just another

1:20:41personal reflection in many of the new developments and like sort of the old factories that have been

1:20:48turned into condominiums as an example or apartment buildings there's been a I mean they all have

1:20:54their own community hubs but something like the metal works the the walkway along the water there

1:20:58I think has also become a little bit of a hub because it is publicly accessible space that was I

1:21:03believe redone by private development so I think there's some of those interesting pieces to that

1:21:07against each that very eclectic nature maybe of the the ward where it isn't a private space it is

1:21:12very much a public area to continue to walk and enjoy. Those are two great additions but you're

1:21:22welcome to move on. Okay maybe one last call to see if anyone has anything to add and again we can

1:21:32come back and you're again I'm gonna keep pushing the the survey so there's always that option.

1:21:40Okay so the next exercise that we'd like to get your feedback on is this list of goals and vision

1:21:54so we've outlined a number of them they're all there on the screen if you can see them

1:22:01and what we'd like to ask is which goals visions resonate most with you

1:22:07and additionally are there any goals or visions that you would like to add

1:22:10that you think we should consider as part of this district plan in terms of how best to

1:22:18identify and how best to to to really capture the protection of what is significant and important

1:22:24in this area so you can either do number one number two you know open up the floor to whatever

1:22:31you'd like to share on both these questions I know there's a lot so we'll give you a few minutes to

1:22:45reabsorb. Don you're welcome. I was just going to ask in addition to the things that you've mentioned

1:22:56there are actually quite a few early heritage buildings in there some important stone ones

1:23:03and that sort of thing I assume they're being included in all of this as well. Yeah all the

1:23:11buildings within the HCD boundary are being included they're all included within the HCD

1:23:18which would include both the oldest up to the newest so yes. Right okay great.

1:23:26And just to jump in there as well there is still the possibility of having an individual property

1:23:30designation within a heritage conservation district so if there are some of those really old

1:23:37early stone buildings that do warrant individual designation that is still a possibility even

1:23:41though it's still within the HCD boundary so there could be specific protections put in place for

1:23:50that particular type if needed. But would they need them if they were in a heritage conservation

1:23:57district wouldn't they be automatically protected? They shouldn't yeah so they would still be covered

1:24:03by all of the policies and guidelines that are are a part of the the HCD but it just can be something

1:24:11that a municipality might pursue. I was going to say I resonate and like the the celebrating the

1:24:25district's worker oriented history especially since you were talking about a lot of the area being a

1:24:31mix of commercial and residential housing and buildings so I think if we're focusing that

1:24:37relationship between the structures it's nice to put a human at the center of it I think it's

1:24:40a it's a good one. I also really like the adaptation I was going to say I really like the adaptation

1:24:57pieces about like keeping the existing buildings adapt them change their use and do it in a way

1:25:02that is sympathetic I think to the the history of the neighborhood and it feels like it comes across

1:25:07in a couple of the the goals and visions so I like that that's that it recognizes change can happen

1:25:12and will and should happen but I like that the focus is still on maintaining the roots of the

1:25:17community and and those buildings for what they were but recognizing that we can adapt.

1:25:24Great yes I think one of the the the key goals here is to really capture make it clear that

1:25:29we know change is going to happen we want change to happen it's expected and this is the the core

1:25:34history of this area is change so how can that happen in a way that still celebrates and identifies

1:25:41and protects those what's significant so yeah okay is there any anyone else that wants to share

1:25:58either one that resonates more or less with you we have a I think one more workshop question to

1:26:06get through before we have our closing slides but there's we still have time so okay if that's

1:26:21okay we can move on to the next question then so this one's fun so imagine someone's walking

1:26:29through the ward heritage conservation district in 2050 so what are some of the characteristics or

1:26:34the feel of the place that you hope that they encounter at that time gotta be creative using

1:26:44your imagination what would be a great thing to have. Hyper and then Kelly I really like that you

1:26:52used the word patchwork in one of the goals I think that's a good one so this was also brought up

1:26:57like not making making sure it doesn't feel frozen in one specific time period that it's

1:27:01honoring the sort of evolution of the neighborhood so of course there are going to be new constructions

1:27:05and old construction and making sure that feels cohesive I think that's a nice feel. Thank you.

1:27:14Kelly yeah similar I think it's just that sort of really eclectic nature of the ward and people

1:27:24either get it or they don't you know that on any given street you'll see houses of all different

1:27:32shapes and styles and even decades and eras you know it's it's about the least homogenous

1:27:40probably neighborhood and Guelph in all in all honesty so I think just making sure that it just

1:27:46looks really eclectic and you just walk down the street you never know what you're going to see

1:27:50that's what I would hope for. Thank you so much. I'll jump into your next I like that you had walking

1:28:00through the ward heritage district because I think like Alice Street as an example is so incredibly

1:28:04narrow and it reflects like the houses very close to the road there's not a lot of front yards and

1:28:10in some of the streets and so I think maintaining that that it's very walkable hopefully it stays

1:28:15that way I mean we don't see the demolition as an example of Alice Street in favor of

1:28:19wider and bigger and better so I think that that small sort of neighborhood quality I think that

1:28:26the ward has and I think it's because many of those streets are so narrow it just develops this

1:28:30need to drive slow first while people are driving and that it is pedestrian friendly I think it's a

1:28:34very pedestrian oriented neighborhood which I hope that that stays in 2050. Liam I jumped in right

1:28:40when your hand was going up apologize. That was kind of a similar sort of point I would say

1:28:47in 2050 I'd like to see the similar layout of the streets and that irregular and

1:28:53irregular lot layout and street layout I think is really characteristic of the neighborhood.

1:28:59That's great thank you so much anybody else for something to share. Well I think this has been

1:29:21really useful again if you think of something that after the fact please go see the have your say

1:29:29survey and you can these are all the same questions that are on there so looking forward to seeing

1:29:35what people will answer so we'll go to the next slide if nobody else has anything that they'd like

1:29:41to share. So in terms of so thank you for having us today and providing your insights and feedback

1:29:49from here our major next steps include our we're going to have a community workshop to discuss

1:29:55policies and guidelines and the feedback we received here that we'll receive as part of the

1:30:00working group and as part of the public engagements for have your say is all going to be used to

1:30:05inform those policies and guidelines so you'll be able to see you know hear back from what

1:30:11it's going to be a bit of a report back of what we heard. That's in early spring 2026 in late

1:30:17spring 2026 will be the statutory public meeting for the plan just before the council

1:30:25of the council sorry their final council meeting will be in summer 2026 and if council decides to

1:30:31proceed with designation a by-law will be prepared for the award heritage conservation

1:30:36conservation district and that's it for us today thank you so much for having us it was a pleasure

1:30:43to present this information for you and thank you for your feedback. I don't know if Jack has any

1:30:50final comments or yeah I'll just note I put a recommended motion in the agenda in case there's

1:30:58anything that the committee explicitly wanted recorded after this item but the project team

1:31:05is going to take everything that was just said and use that to inform next steps so feel no

1:31:12obligation to pass a motion I just put that there as a placeholder in case there is something specific

1:31:17that the committee wanted recorded in the minutes. So with that note from Jack I did take three notes

1:31:24really quickly too which came from paper about indigenous histories and impacts so what I'll

1:31:29do is I'll read it out and again we don't have to have it as a motion but as folks were saying things

1:31:33I did make a few notes and so the only the comments that I captured and these may be a little bit

1:31:38butchered so I apologize for that was that consideration of the meaning behind the term

1:31:42celebrating as part of a theme related to indigenous peoples understanding previous land

1:31:47uses by indigenous peoples and where those community spaces or hubs may have existed

1:31:53and that the plan maintained the eclectic development and land use pattern

1:31:57continuing to recognize industrial working neighborhood freaks of the ward. I don't know

1:32:02if any of those need to be an official motion from anyone so if no one chooses to move that

1:32:08I think it's so nicely and expertly written that we should adopt this emotion I feel like we

1:32:20Sarah would you mind putting that in the chat so that Andrew can capture it and I may have slightly

1:32:26wordsmithed it a little bit because as I was reading I recognized that some of my grammar was in

1:32:30100% so some of that was a live change but Andrew I'll let you correct some of the grammar as it

1:32:36comes up. Excellent chair chair up and I am prepared to receive those I've got some of it but

1:32:44that the body in the chat may be held thank you chair but I will do I will add this to the

1:32:57motion template that we have here and I'll actually share this on screen when it's prepared so that

1:33:02everyone can take a look and and consider the wording just bear with me as I finalize here.

1:33:08Oh good don't worry. And just bring that up on screen now three chair up to the committee

1:33:29should be up on screen shortly. I'll just note for the you can delete that first bullet it's just

1:33:37a repeat of number one that the following comments from the Heritage Advisory Committee that first

1:33:40one doesn't need to be there that was my accident by um oh sorry chair up yes I was okay and then for

1:33:46the third bullet the word land should go before use so it says eclectic development and land use

1:33:51pattern and that was me just ad-libbing live. Piper? Also then this is maybe nitpicky but with

1:34:00the first point being celebrating as part of the theme related to indigenous peoples I think it's

1:34:03celebrating more so related to the theme of colonization because of course we are trying to

1:34:08celebrate indigenous histories but not so well to recognize that there is a colonial effort.

1:34:15So would it be consideration of the meaning behind the colonial term celebrating?

1:34:21And I was thinking more so like celebrating as part of the theme related to colonization.

1:34:27Perfect. Stephen? I wonder if the word celebrating might be within quotation marks just so it's

1:34:40clear it's just that one term. I love the team effort on this one thanks everyone.

1:34:56So if um someone would like to move that motion. Piper thank you and a seconder again I don't have

1:35:04many folks on my screen so if someone wants to Kelly thank you and then all those in favor

1:35:11I believe we are good thanks everyone and and Annie and team thank you for the presentation

1:35:18today and the workshop and if we can reshare that link with everyone in case there is other

1:35:22feedback I think that would be great. Thank you very much. All right I think in our our last

1:35:3111 minutes Jack we may be able to get into our almost final agenda item which is the Heritage

1:35:36Advisory Committee's 2026 designation priorities so I'll turn it to you Jack. I'm going to actually

1:35:43recommend. We deferred. Sure. I think the discussion might take longer and this will also give members

1:35:52an opportunity if uh since December if you've noted any other properties in town that you'd like

1:35:58considered you can send those to me and then I can include them in the item in the February meeting.

1:36:06Sure. Do we need official motion to defer that or are we good just to say that given

1:36:10time constraints we're going to defer it to February? Sheriff through you I would I would

1:36:15recommend a deferral motion to just go to the the February meeting of heritage

1:36:20at the Heritage Advisory Committee. Okay would someone like to move then the motion to defer

1:36:25item 3.4. Thank you Justin a seconder. Thank you Liam and then I'll in favor.

1:36:33All right so we'll move on then to chair announcements I have none so I'll turn it over

1:36:37to staff. Stephen's hand went up immediately so he's got something for us. Yes I do thanks Sarah.

1:36:46I'm just going to what I'd like to announce is that council will be considering the final draft

1:36:51of the Ontario Reformatory Heritage Conservation District Plan at the council planning meeting

1:36:57on Tuesday February the 10th so this is a decision point for council regarding the proposed

1:37:04designation of the the Ontario Reformatory HCD and also the potential approval of the ORA HCD plan.

1:37:13So the final draft of the plan and guidelines is being released to the public by the end of this

1:37:19week and will be available on the Have Your Safe project page for the ORA project the HCD project

1:37:26and also on the city's web page for the ORA HCD. Thanks Stephen and Imogen.

1:37:38Very similarly down excuse me the downtown wealth heritage conservation district

1:37:46bylaw and the adoption of plan will be going to council January 20th for decision.

1:37:52So the finish line is in sight the final version of that plan is still available on the project

1:38:00page the Have Your Safe page but has not been altered substantively since the last version

1:38:08this committee received. Thanks Imogen some good things moving forward hopefully to

1:38:15conclusion that's exciting. Jack last but not least any announcements? Nothing from me for once.

1:38:23No worries. All right so our last major piece then is if someone would like to move adjournment of our

1:38:29meeting. Thank you Piper seconder Kelly and all in favour. Fantastic we'll see you all in just a

1:38:39couple weeks then thank you everyone. Thank you. Bye bye. See you soon. Great job Andrew.