Heritage Guelph

0:00No, I'm fine here or anyone online. I'm thinking you're me. Okay.

0:13I can hear you.

0:15Perfect. Just want to make sure I'm in jail today. Last year we had some issues, but happy that we're good today. So welcome everyone and to the guests as well.

0:23Call to order our July 8th, 24 leading up here in 12.

0:27And, you know, we have Garrett here in the room with us as well as many of the mine who are participating this month and likely for the months to follow as long as attorney.

0:39Don't we want to say hello, Garrett? Just a quick introduction. Thanks for having me. My name is Gary needs for those of you who don't know me.

0:47And the acting deputy city clerk with the city clerk's office is the city law right now. And then we have a joining us as well. She's the new board and committee coordinator. She's on screen there and I'll turn it over to win.

0:59Just say hello.

1:01Hi, everyone, I think that you can hear me right? So, I am the new board and committee coordinator and I look forward to working with you guys. Thank you very much.

1:13Thanks to both of you. Right. Our first item today is our indigenous territorial acknowledgement. So, as we gather, let us take time to reflect on our privilege to live and work in wealth.

1:24As any bill of a rich indigenous histories, we are guests here. We should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land. The people who live here today and the generations to come.

1:35If our actions today can move us towards reconciliation, we should take pause and make those decisions attention and gratitude.

1:42This place we call wealth has served as traditional lands and the place of refuge for many people over time. But more specifically, the add along the wrong and the hold and show me.

1:52This land is held as the treaty lands and territory with the mississauga's of the credit first nation.

1:58We'll vice-rector adjacent to the whole new fact and is part of a long established traditional hunting ground for the six nations at the Grand River.

2:05Many first nations in you and meeting people peoples who have come from across total island called wealth point today.

2:13And our next item is the disclosure of the primary interest and general nature thereof and I'm happy to start myself. I have to declare.

2:21Here I interest for I'm 3.2 which is 37 Christie Lane as it is a university property.

2:27It's my employer. So, Kim, I will step out of the room at that point and hoping you can lead everyone through that discussion and then I'll show you back in more through that.

2:38Thank you. Are there any other closure from committee members?

2:42Fantastic. We will with the long then to the approval of the minutes from the during June 3rd, 2024 meeting. So, if there is a mover for that.

2:55Thank you to have that a second camera.

3:02I saw your hand up. I'll take that for a second and then all those in favor.

3:06Just be more in the purpose.

3:11Alright, so before we move into the items, we're going to try something a little bit differently and hope that this works. It sounds like Jackson.

3:21Doing a lot of work with minutes and trying to do things that get into the minutes from the committee meeting. So, what we're going to do is what we always do is a presentation and then the committee has an opportunity to ask questions and then have discussion.

3:34But before we get to the point of reading the motion, I'll just ask committee members if there's particular things that they want noted as part of those comments and then they'll be.

3:44We need live transcribe Jack is right on screen just to make sure those are properly documented and communicated and will hopefully make the process a lot smoother and less cumbersome and bring some clarification for everyone involved.

4:00So today's the first time we're going to try it and hopefully it works well and we want to make sure he gets captured as clearly as possible. So, we'll try that for our first item and see how things go.

4:10So item 2.1, which is 150 Delhi Street and heritage permit application with Jack.

4:18Thank you, chair.

4:21So, I'm going to keep this relatively brief. I'm just going to basically introduce what this heritage permit application is for because the project team is here to delegate and they'll be able to provide a lot more detail than I will.

4:38So, this heritage permit application proposes alterations to 150 Delhi Street, which is known as the home would health center, specifically to the building on site known as the manner building not to be confused with another manner.

4:56So, we're going to be dealing with recently.

5:02The fundamentally the permit is proposing to construct an atrium in a courtyard of the manner building.

5:11As well as enclose the first story of a cortico and make some alterations to a later edition, along Delhi Street.

5:25So, I thoroughly reviewed the cultural heritage impact assessment and I thought it was very well done and I'm satisfied that this project will take the necessary steps to minimize any impacts to heritage attributes and where heritage attributes are being impacted.

5:46The project plans to restore other attributes or replace in kind.

5:52So, I think that this specifically the atrium checks the boxes for additions to heritage buildings and that it is supported and supported it compatible and distinguishable.

6:05So, I'm satisfied that the heritage attributes of 150 Delhi Street will not be negatively impacted by this heritage permit application.

6:16So, unless there's any questions for me, I will turn it over to the delegates.

6:39Shelly, you hear us.

6:44Sorry, I'm just trying to figure out there we go. Okay. Hi everyone.

6:49Sorry about that. I'm not a frequent WebEx user. My apologies. So, nice to meet you all I'm Shelly Ludman I'm with the architects we are the heritage consultants working with the team.

7:00Jack, am I sharing our slides or are they being shared by the room? How does that work?

7:06Yes, if you'd like to share them. Okay, okay. I just wasn't sure because I know we had sent them in advance. Okay, let me just pull them up.

7:17Okay, can everyone see that? Okay.

7:20Yeah. Okay, great. Okay. So, thanks Jack for the overview.

7:25As you mentioned, you know, we're just going to kind of run through at a high level, you know, take 5 minutes kind of run through what's being proposed.

7:32I believe you've all reviewed the report prepared by our office, but we wanted to just kind of walk it through at a high level.

7:39All the items that we will be talking through today have been developed in close collaboration with Cornerstone, the prime architects on the project who are also on the line today, Richard and Shannon are here.

7:50We want to jump into the live model and do a little walk through. We can do that. And these are sort of the primary areas that we're going to talk through, which Jack also just mentioned.

8:01So there's the Portico enclosure on the north, the new atrium, the Del High Street sort of elevation upgrades and window replacements throughout.

8:11So, I'll just kind of walk you through each of those areas, talk a little bit about the intention behind the design approach and then just talk through sort of what the proposal looks like and if there's any intended impact.

8:24So, the lower level of the North Portico is proposed to be enclosed and this is to create additional bedroom space within the building.

8:33And the design intent here was really to retain the lightness of the ground floor to avoid mimicking the condition on the upper level to really ensure that that legibility of sort of the original design and original configuration was maintained.

8:46And also to maintain the legibility and grandeur of those of the two story columns and how we really kind of read that lower story as as an open an open porch.

8:55So, we explored a handful of precedents and a lot of them kind of led us to kind of this design intent where, you know, the new glazing is set behind the columns, really kind of reading the verticality of the columns in relation to the new glass.

9:10And you can see that reflected. This is a proposed rendering on the left. So you can see that reflected in what's being proposed with both a combination of clear glass and a light gray spandrel panel and set back really quite far behind those columns to maintain their, their

9:29their, their three dimensionality and the legibility of them as a form to two impacts are, are, you know, required as a result of the installation of this new glass. So one is that to ensure whether tight envelope we have to remove a portion of the rear of the of the columns to get the glazing kind of right up to the

9:50you can see in the side sort of right up to this, this point right here under that second story to ensure whether tight envelope and as a result these brackets are also going to be removed.

10:00The mirroring porch on the other side is still maintained in its original form so you do still have a reference on site for what that original porch used to look like.

10:13Moving on to the atrium so this is also proposed on the north elevation so you can see sort of that that porch that we were just talking about is right here.

10:22And the design intent here was to create a simple and clean interface with the existing building. And we were really trying to ensure that the legibility of that he shaped original plan was maintained, as well as creating new views to the speed river valley from within and and

10:40we'll kind of get to this removal of the non original exterior stairwell in a minute but this this you know additional space is really creating kind of this multi purpose light filled programming social space for for the manner building and allows really to kind of highlight and animate the facade of the building in a way that it has never been been before.

11:05So some alterations are required to accommodate this atrium. A lot of them are largely around various window openings so two original window openings are actually going to have to be converted into into doorways.

11:17Eight basement windows which you can see in an image here so these windows kind of down here are going to have to be in filled because that's where the new floor level is going to be.

11:28And for previously in filled windows are actually going to be reinstated so as part of this atrium scope. There's a non original fire stair that had been a later addition to the building that will be removed to really open up the view in this corner right here and as part of that removal we're able to to reinstate some of the elements that were originally concealed when that was when that was built.

11:52It also creates a much more open kind of view out and in similarly.

11:58Then another required alteration as a result of the new atrium is that we're going to have to remove the open balustrade that sort of runs along this this area up here to allow again for a weather tight envelope so a lot of the a lot of the alterations you can see are sort of being driven by ensuring a weather tight a weather tight envelope.

12:19And once that balustrade gets removed we're going to evaluate it sort of post salvage to understand if if it can be reinstated. We have to kind of look at that more closely once once it gets removed and once the new atrium is installed.

12:33These are just a couple before and after photos to give you a sense so again these are those those basement windows that are going to have to be concealed because that's where the new floor level is going to be.

12:43And this is that non original stair that's going to be removed to really open up the views.

12:49The V's out to the north.

12:52Okay the third, the third piece or area of work I guess would be the the Delhi street corridor so you can see the existing condition here on the right and the design intention here was really to improve the relationship with the street and to maximize transparency and visibility between between the building and the street.

13:10And what's proposed here is to recloud the existing really just recloud the existing sort of configuration and volume so no major renovation it's simply sort of adding removing the cladding and and putting in a mostly glazing and the intention with the glazing is it's also a black

13:31a black frame similar to the atrium to really tie sort of these new additions together on on both faces of the building.

13:39And the fourth and final element is the replacement of all the windows so currently, the windows are a bit of a hodgepodge what may say they've they've kind of been replaced at different times.

13:53And so we're really varying profiles configurations and so really the intention here is to create, you know, harmony with the windows, a consistent profile throughout, and we're, we're kind of leaning on the historic archival information that we have, and we'll be going with a six over one

14:12hung window, and this is an example across the street where the windows were replaced quite recently this is a nine over one configuration but it gives you an idea of what, you know what the intention is with the new windows.

14:26And, I mean, all of this is summarized in our, in our report. And as Jack mentioned, you know, our sense was that there's limited impacts to the attributes and that the cultural heritage value of the site is is conserved through appropriate mitigations and minor impacts.

14:43And, you know, our sense is that the proposed work really allows for the ongoing evolution of the manor building and the homewood campus and I'll maybe leave it, leave it there.

14:54And would love to, you know, open the floor to any questions if anyone has I'll stop sharing. And yeah, here to answer any questions and again I'm joined by Richard and Shannon from cornerstone the primary texts if you have questions for them as well.

15:08Thanks everyone.

15:10Thank you. And thanks Jack. So we'll open it up to questions on this general discussion.

15:17I'm your welcome just to unmute you have any questions or comments.

15:25Okay, that's Andrew.

15:27Hi.

15:28With regards to the portico enclosure.

15:33Is there, is there a reason that the, the new glass cannot be just set behind the columns and get rid of the need to cut into the existing from a standpoint of reversibility if that was ever changed in the future.

15:51That would necessitate having new work done on those columns.

15:56Sure, I can jump in and then Richard Shannon if you want to add on, feel free to do that so we did look at that that was one of kind of our initial comments as well.

16:05The rooms are very small.

16:09And the space constraints are something that we're trying to balance to actually ensure that we're getting usable square footage to accommodate beds in this room. And that is largely what's driving the location of, of that new wall.

16:25So, I'm going to piggyback on that.

16:28Sure. Thanks, Ellie.

16:30Yeah, the importance of this is to preserve the current bed capacity. There's 109 beds in the manner building right now.

16:40And with the introduction of the atrium.

16:43Some beds have to be relocated.

16:47And the porch was an ideal place to do so. So there's two bedrooms going in this porch accommodating two beds each of four beds there. And just the dimensions as Shelley was saying, are such that, you know, we need to encroach on the columns a little bit.

17:04And also the configuration, there was an earlier image of the bulkhead that, you know, and the beam that joins between the porches, we need to kind of connect to that to maintain the building envelope.

17:18So that's what has led us to shave off a portion of the columns. It would be, we're not affecting the structure. So it would be possible to reinstate those I think if this was ever undone.

17:33Thank you. I've got 1 follow up questions with regards to the portico.

17:39Because we're, or because you're proposing to turn that space from sort of an exterior space into an interior space.

17:48Could you speak to I didn't see it in the proposal anywhere. Is there, is there any impact expected to the existing.

17:56Doorway existing exterior door which will now become an interior doorway in this proposal.

18:03As far as the layout for those bedrooms, the exterior doorway that's there now will be removed.

18:14So that the corridor can extend and there's like a little alcove.

18:19Through which you access the 2 bedrooms.

18:24Is that, is that captured in the heritage impact.

18:39It's not Alexander. Thank you for flagging that. That's definitely something we can speak to. Great. Thank you. Yeah.

18:49I have no further questions on the portico. I'll open the floor up.

18:53Thanks. Cameron.

18:56Thanks. I have some more follow up stuff for the portico. So I thought it might be a good chance to jump in here. I guess, is there any opportunity to possibly salvage those angle sections from the top of the columns and sort of install them outboard.

19:09Of the glazing or something like that to possibly reuse them.

19:12Do you mean the little brackets? Yeah, yeah.

19:19Good. Look at that. Yeah. The alignment there. They're fair. You can see in that bottom right image that the alignment that they're fairly in board. You know what I mean? They're on the porch side.

19:30Simply because of the way that that beam is constructed. It's a little unusual. Normally you would expect those kind of things if they were functional, they would need to be more or less in the center of the column.

19:42So, Shelley, I don't know what you think because the windows are kind of going right there.

19:49Yeah. And our concern, we again, this is something we did talk about internally as a team and we didn't want to create sort of a false condition.

20:02And they would really not have a place to kind of adhere to, right? Because the glazing is essentially going like right under this line.

20:12So in theory, the brackets could be installed in front of them, but there is nothing for them to adhere to above and they would look a little bit like they were floating.

20:21Our sense was that because the other kind of mirroring condition exists in its original condition, the brackets are still legible there and how this was originally intended to be designed.

20:34And we were sort of pleased with that as a condition in lieu of kind of installing these in a bit of a faux condition.

20:44Yeah, no, that totally makes sense to me. Just wanted to bring it up in case it was an option. And then one follow up question about the windows themselves, I guess it's like a window wall system.

20:54I know the intent is to not sort of match the existing ones above to make it visually distinct. I guess, was there any thought about maybe aligning the vertical mullions with the ones above?

21:06This is totally my own opinion, but I think all the extra mullions, like just one extra mullion below sort of one vertical that looks, to me it looks a little bit messy or something.

21:17Was there any thought about aligning them with the one straight above it?

21:21There definitely was. We have maybe, I don't know, six to ten various other configurations that we explored as a team.

21:31And the version that had the three mullions aligned with above, the proportions felt awkward given the height of them that they were sort of filling the full height.

21:43Something about the proportions to the team just didn't, it didn't feel like it sat well with sort of the configuration of the existing space.

21:52And we landed on this division because it was kind of reading more like a door infill and something that felt more like an infill and less like a window that was intended to be designed as a window.

22:05And we were really trying to strive for a difference between how the upper and the lower levels were being read to ensure that it was legible that something different was happening here and it wasn't originally designed as sort of the same condition above and below.

22:21Folks, it's Richard. There's also a practical reason you can see it in that image right in the center of the center bay.

22:29That's the wall between the two bedrooms, right? And so we're using that doubled mullion, you know, to accomplish that purpose. And so that's part of what led us to this, you know, proportionate.

22:43Okay, yeah, that makes sense. Yeah, I didn't notice the wall there. And yeah, that's totally just my own opinion. I didn't mean to be critical or anything. It's just visual opinion. Thanks.

22:55The questions or comments.

23:01And so, oh, go ahead.

23:03If nobody else anything else to say on the protocol, I've got a couple of questions with regards to the atrium.

23:12So, I want to commend you guys on the

23:23noting the balustrades for removal for salvage.

23:27I, two, two questions around that one is, could you talk about who's going to be making the evaluation with regards to whether or not those balustrades are salvageable.

23:40Like, is this contractor that is being hired or is this being made as a decision internal to either er eight or the other architectural cornerstone. Thank you.

23:52Yeah.

23:56Do you want to start?

23:58Sure.

24:01I think it'd be a collective decision and certainly we would be glad to reach out to Steven and Jack for their input. We're just not sure how intact those balustrades are going to be.

24:15Once we pull them off.

24:17Thankfully, we have an excellent construction manager Vandal construction is a lot of this sort of work. So, we know they're going to be as careful as they can.

24:26We are counting and you can see it in the bottom left picture.

24:31We are counting on actually reusing some of the salvage material to reinstate the balustrade outside where the stairwell is currently located. Thanks, Shelley.

24:45And that's where the stairwell, you know, intersects the building and connects into the attic actually so there would be no existing balustrade left.

24:56So we're really hoping that there's enough of that material it's not continuous the balustrade all the way along there's, there's open and closed sections, but we're hoping that there's enough of the little columns and brackets and things to use outside.

25:11And then, based on what's left, if there would be a process to sort of say, okay, here's what we've got let's make it our best to collective decision, we'd welcome input from from heritage wealth as part of that.

25:27So to follow up on that. And I guess this is a question also for heritage staff.

25:33The final decision on salvaging or actually, let's, I'll forget the salvage for instance, the using them or adding a balustrade in the section that is highlighted in blue that you're you were discussing.

25:53Is that something that is made that decision is made in correspondence with heritage well for is that are we sort of signing off on any of this at this stage.

26:08I hope that you can trust even in my discretion with the soligibility of the materials and generally I defer to Steven on matters of heritage material.

26:26In the similar vein, it's not listed here, but in this spirit of salvaging, there is a portion of the original masonry that is highlighted not within this slide, but in the original document that we received sort of tucked around the corner.

26:45So not that not the stairwell but you know around the corner there is since that building was built 1912 I believe it's probably pressed bricks so it's either frontal press brick and probably Milton.

26:58And, you know, that's a hard brick to match I know from experience is there a plan or is there been discussions about evaluating the salvaging of that brick in order to compliment any repair work for the remaining of the building.

27:14Yes, it's Richard. Yes, that's intended. Okay.

27:19Thank you.

27:20We do. We do have access to some good sources for replacement bricks that match the sort of historic Toronto size. So that that's always an option if needed.

27:38We're really hoping that when the stairwell was added the masonry exterior wall was left alone there be no reason to have pulled the brick off it's quite thick. We won't know until we start to open it up.

27:54But we're hoping that it's really just the windows that were cut in as doors that we're proposing to put back so we're not expecting to need too much brick, but that portion that you've highlighted is available to us and is intended to be salvaged.

28:14Thank you.

28:17Other questions or comments from any committee members.

28:24It's Cameron here again. Just one question with the atrium.

28:28I don't think this is the case, but is there any impact to the roof line like visually from the the ice to street side with the atrium like extending above the roof or is it.

28:36It's kind of the same height.

28:38Shelly, I can speak to that it is above the roof. The atrium.

28:45Is constructed like a table.

28:47So that the structure is independent of the existing building, but to, you know, connect it and make it, you know, weather proof.

28:54We are.

28:56So spending a wall down to intersect with the existing parapet. So the top of the atrium roof is maybe 6 or 8 feet.

29:06Above the existing roof.

29:09But that wouldn't be visible from Delhi.

29:12Okay. Yeah, that's what I thought. Thanks.

29:19Okay, or just maybe 1 last fall for comments and questions that are we get into a little bit of note taking that I did during the conversation as well.

29:29And not to anybody else. There's something that you want to have in there. Happy to add. There's 2 things that I noted that would probably great for.

29:37And that was included as part of our recommendation as the comments will receive.

29:42And the 1st was about the taking the big senior door or co-inclosure that it will be removed, even though that wasn't included in the cultural heritage resource.

29:52So recognition of that. And then the 2nd 1 that I noted was anticipation that cornerstone will work with Steven and Jack regarding salvage ability of original material such as the palace rates and bricks.

30:06So are there any other key comments that folks would like to have noted or.

30:11I know some of the comments were just.

30:14I've been using clarification.

30:17Yeah, just with with regards to that exterior door.

30:23And then, you know, if there can be further documentation, if it is that.

30:30I find that to be sort of a major impact if we're thinking about reversibility, if this ever gets changed back in the future. I mean, we've lost that door completely. It sounds like.

30:41I don't know if there's a plan that can be put in place for the retention of that door, like it removed and then.

30:49Place in storage or something in case of this scenario like that, but.

30:54And I'm not sure I highlighted the door, but is there also.

30:59Windows on that I don't see photos necessarily so I'm not, I think there's probably some oval.

31:06Windows.

31:08Yes, good point. There is a little oval window that we had.

31:12Thought we needed to enclose for privacy between the new bedroom and the existing 1 that's on the other side of the exterior wall.

31:20But after start talking about it and thinking about it further with Steven and Jack, we can keep it.

31:25So the new bedroom will have a, we're just going to leave the brick exposed. It'll have a little oval window. It's already been in filled on the inside anyway.

31:34Okay, so that we can keep and I'm sure home would.

31:40We'll have a place that we could keep that the entrance feature Shelly.

31:46You know, they have some storage facilities. Yeah, and to be carefully removed and kept. Yeah, and we can, we can definitely include some language in in our updated report that speaks to, you know, not only the impact, but that we could put in, you know, a salvage and protection plan.

32:08There are either comments.

32:11Let's have a capture.

32:17Not seeing anyone.

32:19Please.

32:20I'm here.

32:22He wants to say something. We can go along then to the recommended motion.

32:27And that is that heritage well provided the following comments.

32:31I think I missed some.

32:34So, if I think I missed.

32:38Yeah, so it was a point of that and then it was anticipation that cornerstone will work with Stephen and Jack regarding salvage ability.

32:45I think slowly on my top.

32:47You're doing dictation live right now.

32:50Originally material.

32:52I'm originally material such as the balustrades and bricks.

32:57And then I think also just noting that the point of view is that the

33:07comment about Shelley working with the folks at home, which you have a plan in place as part of the updated reports for.

33:22Storage.

33:24Not best word, but storage and pieces.

33:33Bring you.

33:35Thanks again.

33:37Thanks, Anne.

33:38And then I think also just noting that the comments about shelly working with the folks at home would have a plan in place as part of the updated reports or.

33:59Storage very much best work, but storage of some of these pieces.

34:06Yep, Alexander. Is your hand up to move the motion? Just a minor comment.

34:18No, just I do minor comment on the writing of the.

34:25Of the motion, is it possible to change the 2nd bullet point to remove.

34:32Such as, but to just be a little bit more pointed about the salvage ability of the original balustrades and brick.

34:40Intended to be removed. Yeah. Yeah, thank you.

34:56So maybe I should forget it. We need to read all of this out or we.

35:02No, so just in terms of process here, I think what we're trying to accomplish is is exactly what.

35:10What just happened is to have everything on there to make those edits those changes to capture the comments of committee.

35:17As they see it now and that way.

35:21Everybody in the room knows what's being loaded on. So what you see on the screen is what's going to be moved in 2nd and 1, then when you follow the vote, we can go for it. So you don't.

35:29You won't need to read this. I like this is a nice short one, but you might get into situations where we have a lot of comments that we're scrolling through and and doing those edits and updates. So as long as.

35:39The committee is comfortable with what's on screen call for a mover and 2nd or in that a vote.

35:43I'm sorry, I'm just mulling over the wording of this.

35:51And I'm open from comment from city of staff or heritage staff.

35:57With regards to that 2nd bullet point.

36:01What is so these comments are provided to counsel.

36:07Are they.

36:10Is it are they action plans as far as what we're are they just simply.

36:17Sentences that they take into consideration, like I mean, as far as anticipation, like to the word anticipation that cornerstone will work with Steven and Jack.

36:27I'm not suggesting that they aren't willing to work with heritage staff, but.

36:33Is the wording of that 2, or.

36:35The 2 muddy as far as the intention behind that.

36:40That proposal.

36:43So, the door to anticipation and maybe have it that cornerstone will work.

36:47Yeah, that's not advice.

36:51It cannot be that. So, I'll.

36:54These comments are going to crystal walk you the general manager who has delegation of authority to approve this permit.

37:02So, this is advice from the committee to the general manager.

37:05If that clarifies.

37:08Okay, so it should be advised that cornerstone work with Steven and Jack on solvability.

37:15Okay, that's perfect and maybe to jump in and help even further.

37:20If this was a different type of permit, and this was going to counsel, it would still be of the same type of nature in that.

37:27What you're creating here isn't necessary actionable, but it's advice to.

37:31And then those decision making bodies, whether it's the general manager.

37:35By building or it's the council, they could action those items if they should choose to through the decision.

37:44Okay, thank you.

37:46So, should the points 1 and 2 also be prefaced with.

37:50Advise advice.

37:54I think you capture that in the very first part of the motion in that.

38:01All of these comments are captured and they are advice, their comments, their questions, everything like that. If as long as the committee's comfortable with the wording.

38:10Thank you.

38:15Maybe I'll give folks just a moment to read through that motion, including the additional comments to make sure they're comfortable.

38:31And if so, someone would like to move the motion on screen.

38:37And a second to Miranda, I'll think it was a seconder and then all those in favor.

38:43Amazing.

38:48Thanks everyone and we will move on then to.

38:533.1, which is 19 would you press drive?

39:00Heritage evaluation reports.

39:07Thank you. Thank you chair. So, this is going to be a little bit of a different presentation because of us.

39:14Robert, our heritage research assistant, you provide the.

39:20Kind of historical part of this staff report. So I'm going to I'll pass it off to Bob and then I'll align the statement of significance once Bob is finished.

39:32Yeah, well, thank you. Thank you for having me. Yep. I'm Bob for those who have met me formally Bob. Heritage research assistant with Jack and Steven.

39:40As far as the historical background of 19, what he press goes.

39:45It's not to be confused with the home that we just talked about, but it known locally or or historically as the homework. It's.

39:54Has a strong association with.

39:593 historical families 1, the Grange family would be more of a contextual kind of neighborhood association. Whereas the structure itself.

40:08Is strongly associated with the things mills as well as the house.

40:13So the Grange family through Sheriff George Grange. He's a very.

40:20Big figure in early golf history as a, as kind of a.

40:25What would we'd say, land speculated developer that sort of thing.

40:28He owned a lot of property in the area his.

40:34Through him and his daughter.

40:37Ellen Grange, Ellen Grange, brands of marrying Admiral Kings mills father. So there's a family connection there. Perhaps even before the house is built.

40:46The so that that's the property history. History kind of stretches back to the laying out of the structure itself.

40:57Is constructed between 1854 and 1860.

41:04I kind of say that with a bit of hesitation, but.

41:07Previously, the initial construction of the house was assumed to be in 1860.

41:16By the Kings mills, but.

41:18And 1 of the 1 of the more fun jobs of a historian is to separate kind of.

41:23Solid fact from conjecture I found enough.

41:27Kind of not disagreement, but enough separate comments to suggest that maybe the house was built earlier than that.

41:35So I'll say again, 1854 1860.

41:38Kind of leaving that open there, but undeniably the house is built in at least 1862 as noted in footprint on 1 of the maps provided in the historical attachments. So.

41:50That date at least.

41:53And that is kind of coincided with the ownership of the Kings mills.

41:58Particularly as the childhood home of.

42:04A person known as Charles King's. He is historically significant for.

42:10Not only locally, but nationally and there's a internationally as the kind of inaugural 1st director of the Canadian Navy.

42:18He was appointed by president, not president prime minister John McDonald.

42:24To McDonald's sorry Laurier.

42:30Prime minister Laurier to head this new journey in Canada's Navy, which coincides with World War 1. So he is kind of.

42:42Even though, even though he by time of World War 1, he has gone from golf. He is.

42:47Pretty well renowned for his role in strengthening Canada's Navy and therefore Canada's reputation on the international stage. So it's.

42:54Quite interesting to have that connection locally, but also that international.

42:59The house, however, passes from the Kings mill to the how it's there. Another significant well family like the granges on many significant properties, both downtown and abroad and even post lunch.

43:11They structurally are historically significant for some major renovations and additions made to the property in 1881.

43:20And then from then on it, the property kind of passes from the how it's through several hands to eventually the current owner of Frank or Blair, who has made significant efforts in conserving the structure as well. So.

43:37What to note that.

43:40Thank you, Bob.

43:42In our evaluation of cultural heritage value or interest, we found that the property needs 3 of the 9 criteria.

43:52For designing physical value, it needs criteria in 1 because it is an early and unique example of Italian 8 Tuscan style villa.

44:01May particularly defined due to its usage of wealth's locally quarried limestone.

44:09The subject property meets great hearing to through both the quality and quantity of its heritage attributes, many of which date back to its original construction.

44:18Of note on the exterior is the limestone walls and chimney.

44:23The interior apparently we haven't had the opportunity to do an interior site visit, but it retains many of its features, including original stained glass windows, stained glass shelves in the library and vitriolet glass in the bathrooms.

44:42Many rooms still air original tin ceilings and with paneling.

44:47For historical and associated value, the subject property meets criteria in forward because of its strong association with the Grange, Howitt and Kings mill families, all of whom are prominent historical families, not only locally, but in the case of Kings mills nationally.

45:05The home wood as the childhood home of Sir Charles Kings mill Admiral of the British Royal Navy and inaugural director of the Naval Service of Canada is a significant historical association that those are the 3 criteria that we believe it meets.

45:26So if committee has any questions for myself or Bob we're happy to answer.

45:30Comments not seeing anyone a new person online.

45:38Just a quick one.

45:47Sorry.

45:48So, it's camera here.

45:51In this meeting we're not voting on heritage attributes. It's just the staff report.

45:58For for this item. That's correct. This is just a heritage evaluation.

46:03Okay. Thank you.

46:04Is there.

46:07We know of any remnants on the property with regards to.

46:17The old lot, like, because it was quite a large size. Is there any.

46:22Any documentation for any other elements with regards to this property.

46:27Like, like buildings or.

46:30Outbuildings or like if there was walls or other sort of.

46:37Long lasting features that speak to the original size of the lot.

46:43So.

46:45Yeah, as I touch on in the report.

46:49Initially this lot was, yeah, 60 acres. It was quite the large lot and then was kind of subdivided by the size of the block.

46:57It was quite the large lot and then was kind of subdivided over time. There was a large stone barn that I believe is known. It's no longer standing.

47:07As far as the some of the information that we were working with, I believe, again, at last check the root house was still standing and they've converted into some sort of office or something out in the yard.

47:19Other than that, I'm not aware of any like stone walls or anything like that.

47:26So, I think that's a good question kind of going ahead as far as the wider history.

47:32Both for this property and kind of that area in general, there's a lot of history of mills, for example, like the red mill or the Phoenix mill just further down Waterloo.

47:42And any close proximity to the railways also some significant history there but other than other than the root house I believe that is one of the more significant outbuildings.

47:54That's kind of a good question going forward.

47:57Great. Thank you. Yeah, I only ask because I know with some of the other larger manner properties around the city, you can still see sort of markers for where the old property used to extend to and those.

48:15I think those tend to get lost in this the years of subdividing homes and if there's a way to capture that within any of this that would be beneficial.

48:27We can do some slew thing in the neighborhood.

48:31Find any remnants on another property permission with permission.

48:36Comments or questions. And I don't know if any of these phones would get into the actual motion for this one track because this isn't the interest rate. So, right.

48:55So, we just leave this motion. This is.

48:58Yeah, unless there's any comments on the evaluation report. Yes.

49:04So, are there any other questions or comments to be valuable for itself?

49:13If not, our motion, the recommendation is that the comments provided by her to 12 members on the 19 would he press drive cultural heritage evaluation report.

49:22He forgot to staff council their consideration.

49:26Let's move that.

49:30I see. I'm sorry. Thank you. Second, Laura. Okay. And then all those in favor.

49:41Thanks everyone.

49:43I will go wait in the hall now. Have to go back to you.

49:46Go later.

50:02Jack, do you want to let me know when Sarah's.

50:04She's gone. She's gone. Okay. So we'll move on to item 3.2, which is 37 Christie lane cultural heritage evaluation report and heritage attributes report.

50:16And we'll start with the presentation from Jack.

50:19Thank you, chair.

50:22So firstly, it was brought to my attention this morning that this item was absent from the original agenda. I think that was a glitch in our agenda software.

50:35We had every intention of including it in the original agenda publication. So my apologies that it was only included in the revised agenda.

50:45Before I begin, I'd like to note, I combined the cultural heritage evaluation and heritage attributes evaluation for this report.

50:54To allow staff flexibility to bring this to council as soon as possible in the fall, because heritage wealth does not have a meeting in August. But if, if the committee would like, I'm happy to bring this back at a later date.

51:11So there are significant revisions. You can, you can let me know.

51:17I'll get started.

51:20So, 37 Christie lane, also known as the Rutherford Conservatory is a glass conservatory located on the U of G campus.

51:33The conservatories are also known as greenhouses, orange trees, hot houses or glass houses. All of these names are relatively interchangeable.

51:43Their primary use is providing warmth and an extended growing period to props that might not survive in a northern climate like Canada.

51:55In the 19th century, increased public interest in horticulture coincided with the industrial developments in the manufacture of glass and iron.

52:05And this dramatically reduced the cost of conservatory obstruction. So you see, see a lot of conservatories being built in Europe and North America during the later half of the 19th century.

52:19The residential and residential conservatories became popular in Ontario during the second half of the 19th century and early 20th century.

52:27A prominent example includes the 1910 Alan garden conservatory in Toronto.

52:34The Rutherford Conservatory was constructed in 1931 by Ward and Burnham Company, North America's premier builders of conservatories.

52:44In 1872 by Frederick Ward and his son in law, Addison Burnham, the company grew to be the most prolific glass house manufacturer in North America.

52:54The company's conservatories include the Conservatory of Flowers in San Francisco's Golden State Park and the Happett Conservatory at the New York Botanical Gardens.

53:05In the early 1920s, a Canadian branch of the firm, the Ward and Burnham Company Limited was established in St. Catharines to serve the Canadian market.

53:15In the early 1930s, the Ontario Cultural College retained Ward and Burnham to design and build an ornate conservatory that would function as a showpiece and formal entrance to the greenhouse complex used by the Department of Horticultural Science.

53:30Today, the HUD building, which is located just behind the Rutherford Conservatory.

53:37Completed in 1931, the structure expresses the Orientalism, typical and conservatory design in the 19th and 20th centuries, drawing influence primarily from Middle Eastern and South Asian architecture with its four-centered arches and faceted dome topped by a tubula.

53:57According to the University of Guelph, the conservatory is one of few remaining Pagoda-like glass and cypress wood structures remaining in North America.

54:08In the early 1990s, the conservatory had fallen into disrepair and was threatened by demolition.

54:14However, in 1998, a group of alumni, faculty, students and staff worked together to raise funds for the restoration of the conservatory.

54:23A gift of 250,000 from Don Rutherford, an Ontario Agricultural College alumni, represented the funding required to conserve the conservatory, which is why it is now today called the Rutherford Conservatories.

54:45Of all the cultural heritage evaluations I've brought to the committee, this one meets the most criteria.

54:53We have it at eight, eight of the nine criteria.

55:00For design and physical value, it meets criteria in one because it is an extremely rare and unique example of a glass conservatory in the city of Guelph.

55:10Glass conservatories are few and far between in the province of Ontario, so I feel comfortable saying that this is a provincially significant structure.

55:20It meets criteria two because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship and it's cypress wood, glass and metal construction.

55:28For historical and associative value, it meets criteria in four because it has direct associations with the Ontario Agricultural College and the history of horticulture in the province of Ontario.

55:39When constructed in 1931, the conservatory function as the formal entrance to the OAC's horticultural greenhouses.

55:48It meets criteria in five because it yields information that contributes to an understanding of the Guelph student and faculty community.

55:55The conservatory has historically functioned not only as a working greenhouse, but as a meeting place for students and faculty.

56:02It has formed the backdrop of countless graduation photos and apparently was the location of numerous wedding proposals.

56:10Subject property meets criteria in six because it demonstrates the work of Lord and Burnham Limited.

56:17Significant builders, greenhouses and conservatories in the 19th and 20th century.

56:23Lastly, for contextual value, again, it meets all three.

56:27So it meets criteria in seven because it is important in defining the character of the University of Guelph Botanical Gardens, which were designed around the conservatory.

56:37It meets criteria in eight because it is physically functioning, functionally, visually and historically linked to the University of Guelph Botanical Gardens.

56:47It is also historically linked to the HUD building, formerly the Horticulture building, which is located to the north of the conservatory.

56:56And lastly, it meets criteria in nine because it is a landmark.

57:00The conservatory occupies a location of visual prominence on the University campus and is well known among students, staff, faculty, alumni and citizens of Guelph.

57:14Now, lastly, for the heritage attributes.

57:19I have included the following.

57:22The scale, form and massing of the single story structure.

57:27The materials with stone, wood, glass and metal.

57:31The fenestration with wood frame windows, side lights and transom.

57:36The iconic four-sided dome with curved trusses supporting the glazing.

57:41Koopala and the entryway including the decorative window frame above the door.

57:48Now, I've had the opportunity to discuss this designation with University of Guelph staff.

57:58And so I'm trying to find a compromise that meets both of our needs. So if that list of heritage attributes is altered, I will bring it back to the committee, but this is the current form it's in.

58:14So I'm happy to take any questions or comments right now.

58:19I will note that there are also delegates that may wish to speak.

58:24So back to you, chair.

58:27Thanks, Jeff. So do you want to start off with any questions that heritage golf might have and then we can move on to the delegations if they would like to say a few words.

58:41Sure.

58:42Yep. Alexander.

58:49Thanks for the report, Jack. I have a couple of comments just with regards to what you've outlined.

58:58As the values as in with lining it up with heritage attributes.

59:03One of the interesting things you noted with this building was that the dwarf walls are salvage material from another since demolished building with relation to the agricultural college.

59:18Is it possible? Is there or is there a reason why we can't update the heritage attributes to reflect specifically.

59:27The stone as it is local limestone reclaimed from a previous building that has a lot of contextual value with regards to this building and the college as a whole.

59:40So, thank you for that question because that's something I actually intended to mention a correction in my report.

59:48So there, there is limestone salvaged from OAC Barnes within the conservatory, but it's used for the raised beds in the conservatory. It's not actually the dwarf walls. That is something I will correct in my report.

1:00:07Because the limestone is not actually connected to the structure. I don't know if we can list it as a heritage attribute, but I will mention that in my discussions with university staff and see if we can find another use for that.

1:00:24On the site if they change anything.

1:00:28And this, this follows on another comment I have, which is regarding the terracotta tiles that are also noted within the report, which I understand that generally designations deal with exterior or elements that are connected within the exterior assembly.

1:00:44But given the nature of a greenhouse, it would strike me that all these elements work together as a building assembly.

1:00:54Rather than being necessarily interior elements versus exterior elements.

1:00:59I don't know if you can provide comment with regards to that and whether or not we can get those elements listed as heritage attributes.

1:01:08My understanding is that the floors date from the restoration in the 1990s. I do not believe they are original.

1:01:18And then I have one last comment and then I'll yield.

1:01:23You've listed the visual prominence and the linkage with the hut building.

1:01:30Is that something that I know normally sort of conservation aspects of the HCD would take an account.

1:01:38How things are related to each other, but is that something that could be added to the heritage attributes so that, you know, this building doesn't necessarily end up hidden behind further construction on the university grounds or that it's not relocated at another point to an area that's sort of away from the public view.

1:02:00Yeah, that's that's a good point. I'll think about how we can address location and heritage attributes specifically with its connection to the building that's noted.

1:02:11Thank you.

1:02:12Cameron.

1:02:22Thanks. I'm Jack's question for Jack.

1:02:25Like looking at the heritage attributes to me, they seem very general and not very specific or a lot of detail. I'm wondering if more details can be added to some of them.

1:02:35You know, specifically mentioning if it's wrought iron or what type of wood it is, things like that. I'm just comparing it to the attributes for our next item.

1:02:44For card and street and they're a lot more detailed there. I'm just wondering if more detail can be added to these.

1:02:51Yep, absolutely. Especially if you have any suggestions, we can note those in the minutes, but yeah, I tried to keep the heritage attributes relatively general just to allow for some flexibility on the university's part with hopefully some kind of restoration or adaptive reuse of the structure.

1:03:18But I do we know that. Thank you.

1:03:27Alexander.

1:03:29Just a comment to go along with what cameras said, I would imagine that yeah, the conversation that's happening is, you know, how much money is involved with dealing with the existing conditions, given that they appear to be pretty disastrous.

1:03:46But I just worry that signing off on something that's a little less specific than it needs to be could open the door to a situation in which large amounts of that building get replaced with more modern materials.

1:04:02And we've essentially got a situation of my grandfather's hammer, where everything is not original anymore, or most of it's not original anymore.

1:04:11And what are we sort of accomplishing with with regards to the protection of the building.

1:04:18So, as far as the actual like, can we not specify cypress would or local guaff limestone is there.

1:04:29There are ways that we can add detail to this attribute list that help guide cut the conversation moving forward with regards to the restoration plans.

1:04:40Sure. And I just meant in my, my comment about the attribute list being general I have no problem with specifying cypress would or what type of metal was used or any details like that. Again, this is, this is a draft when I bring it to the committee so this is all good input and I will seek to make that

1:05:03attribute list more detailed after this meeting.

1:05:07Yep.

1:05:19We'll.

1:05:22I understanding that time is of the essence.

1:05:25Is there.

1:05:29Is there time to to reassess the heritage attribute list before it goes to council or.

1:05:35Um, because like, you know, you mentioned that we don't have a meeting scheduled for August. So we've combined these to try and get this out as quickly as possible. But.

1:05:47Um, is there like, is there a process in which we can provide comment on an updated heritage, a cheap list or do we need to decide on the wording of it now.

1:05:59I'm happy to bring this back to the committee in September. Like I.

1:06:05I don't think the structure is imminently at risk like in the next couple of months.

1:06:12Um, but I can also discuss with clerks whether I circulate an updated list and if the committee would like to discuss it, we could bring it back.

1:06:27Um, from a meeting management perspective, you can definitely circulate documentation to the group.

1:06:35But you cannot then go back and forth via email discussing it. So it may, it may help in that you circulate a document for preparedness at a September meeting.

1:06:46Where committee members can come with documentation or comments ready and maybe provide those to you if they have questions in advance that you can come prepared for.

1:06:55But if you start going back and forth electronically, it counts as a meeting and unfortunately that would be against the procedural violence.

1:07:09I will also note that because conversations are ongoing with the university, there's a good chance that the heritage attributes will be altered in some way and in which case I would bring it back to the committee after those discussions.

1:07:39Okay, does anyone have any other questions?

1:07:42Yes, it's Miranda here. I guess I would just say.

1:07:47I think the comments that we've already heard around making sure we have a detailed and complete list as best we can.

1:07:55Before this goes to council is probably advisable. And so if we don't think the building is in imminent jeopardy, then maybe waiting till September is the right way to go.

1:08:06Are there any other questions?

1:08:21Okay.

1:08:22I don't see any other hands from the committee.

1:08:28So I'll just go down the delegation list as they're listed in the agenda for today to see if any delegates would like to speak on this matter.

1:08:40So I have Justin Shelby 1st from the University of Walth.

1:08:44I'm going to jump in here.

1:08:51And just give a little bit of update justin is not with us currently we do have.

1:08:56Shane and Lloyd and I believe both are available at the same time. If you want to turn it over to the two of them.

1:09:04Okay. Yeah, I'll turn it over to Shane Lloyd then.

1:09:09Thank you.

1:09:10Good afternoon. It's Shane and hopefully you can hear me.

1:09:20Here is a delegate to listen and learn not to speak. So thank you for the opportunity.

1:09:27I will add there is no pressure whatsoever to do anything with the conservatory until we go through the proper process.

1:09:36So if this was delayed until a September meeting that would not affect any decision making.

1:09:41If anything, it would allow us to work with Jack and his team to without forcing a rush on all these things. So appreciate the opportunity to speak. Cheers.

1:09:55And I think Shane summed that up perfectly.

1:10:01We've certainly been talking with Jack and the university and expect that there'll be a fair bit more discussion.

1:10:11As we actually take a closer look at some of the issues that have been identified to this point. So.

1:10:18Yeah, there's there isn't really a schedule on it other than to keep it moving along.

1:10:24In step with this process as far as as far as we know.

1:10:27Okay. Thank you so much. Shane and Lloyd. Do any other members have questions.

1:10:39For the process at this time Alexander.

1:10:43Maybe staff can provide some comment is there.

1:10:50You know, if we push this out to September, I think that's.

1:10:54It gives time to properly dig into the heritage actually to try and get this.

1:11:00You know, well situated, but.

1:11:03You know, if we're going into another winter season, beyond that, depending on what the conversation continues from a restoration or rehabilitation standpoint.

1:11:13Is there are there conversations or can we advise on conversations with the university with regards to.

1:11:21Mockballing the property in a way that.

1:11:25Sort of inhibits further deterioration while we get these things. This process done properly.

1:11:37Was that a question for me or for the delegate story for you, Jack. Sorry.

1:11:42Thank you. The committee is welcome to provide any advice that they would like to the university.

1:11:49Okay, so.

1:11:55I guess, do we draft a motion to advise university did to work on a.

1:12:02A plan to.

1:12:04And serve the existing conditions of the building from further deterioration as this process.

1:12:11Is undergoing.

1:12:26Just give me, I'm just trying to sort of my thoughts. So.

1:12:31I think I misspoke you, you shouldn't give the university advice, but you can give staff advice on.

1:12:39How we should approach discussions with the university.

1:12:43That makes sense or like if you have.

1:12:48Any other discussion.

1:12:51Advice specifically.

1:12:55I can record that in a minute. So I'm trying to work out some.

1:12:59Some.

1:13:00Emotion.

1:13:08If I could, if I could speak chair just briefly that I think the intention is that the heritage advisory committee is to advice council.

1:13:16As opposed to the.

1:13:19Steven speaking just for those who might not be able to see.

1:13:23Too well in the rooms.

1:13:33Sorry, if I misunderstand the process, I guess I'm struggling with balancing the need to.

1:13:39Maybe extend.

1:13:41The vote on extending the discussion regarding the heritage attributes with the need to try and.

1:13:48Provide our comments so this can go before council so that.

1:13:52The process can continue at a good rate so that we're not risking further.

1:13:59Further deterioration, right? I don't want, I don't want our discussions to necessarily become the, the reason why proper work or proper discussions on the.

1:14:09Remediation of the building are getting held up.

1:14:13So.

1:14:15With regards to providing as a member of this committee providing advice to council or staff through staff to council.

1:14:24Can we provide.

1:14:28Like, can we provide a motion to advise for.

1:14:32On going discussion with regards to the maintenance of the building so that further.

1:14:38Deterioration isn't.

1:14:39Yes, absolutely. And I would just like to underline that these.

1:14:48These discussions have started now.

1:14:51So, like the process that you're talking about it is happening between the university and heritage staff.

1:14:58And I do want to say that I don't think that.

1:15:02I think that having requesting staff to return to the committee in September with an updated list of attributes.

1:15:09I don't.

1:15:10For see that.

1:15:12Putting this structure in jeopardy. I think as.

1:15:16Jane mentioned that might give us some extra time.

1:15:20To work with the university so it could be beneficial.

1:15:34Are there any other questions and comments.

1:15:42I'm just going to.

1:15:44So my understanding is that.

1:15:47We can go forward.

1:15:51With motions 1 and 3.

1:15:54But we'll postpone on motion to and we'll vote on motion on postponing motion to until September 9th meeting.

1:16:01Or would we like to postpone on all 3 motions until the September 9th meeting.

1:16:07Yeah, I've written something up in the Word document.

1:16:12I share.

1:16:18So I've deleted the second and third motion as written in the agenda.

1:16:33Does this do you think that captures.

1:16:37What the committee is looking for.

1:16:41I believe it does. Do any committee members have any questions or concerns about those proposed motions.

1:16:49Not about the content necessarily other than the second bullet point, Jack, you've got updates instead of updated.

1:16:57I was just.

1:16:59Yeah, because it's captured by this motion. Yeah.

1:17:04I agree.

1:17:06Thank you.

1:17:08Okay.

1:17:10Okay, so if there are no other questions or concerns, I'll read out both motions.

1:17:16And then we can have a vote on those.

1:17:19So that the comments provided by heritage wealth members on 37 Kristie Lane.

1:17:25Cultural heritage evaluation report be provided to staff and counsel for their consideration.

1:17:31And that the committee requests that staff return to heritage wealth in September with an updated list of heritage attributes.

1:17:40Do I have a mover for these motions?

1:17:43Sorry, I just can't see because Jack's, if you don't mind not sharing your screen right now. Thank you.

1:17:54Okay, I see Laura mover. May I please have a seconder.

1:17:59Okay, Alexander and all in favor for those use motions.

1:18:06Okay.

1:18:07That was moved.

1:18:09Everyone.

1:18:10Jack, would you like to let Sarah back?

1:18:13Thank you.

1:18:31I was in trouble with that.

1:18:41I'll take this back then and at base can make the sheet that to item 3.3 which is one of your six carbon street hand to chat for the attributes report with.

1:18:52Thank you, chair.

1:18:55This is a report that brings staffs recommendation as far as heritage attributes.

1:19:01But for one of six carbon street, which is known as the Royal tell.

1:19:07It's also to provide heritage wealth with the opportunity to make comments on potentially support staffs future.

1:19:18I have a intention to recommend to counsel that property.

1:19:23The intention of design.

1:19:26I want to just open by just reminding the committee that the committee already support the cultural heritage evaluation report one of six card in the streets at the April 8th meeting.

1:19:40As I said, this is the, as with all of our reports, this is the follow up presentation that deals with statement of significance and the heritage.

1:19:49So the Royal hotel or 6 card is worth the designation for part 4 of the enter.

1:19:58As it meets 9.

1:20:00I'm sorry.

1:20:02It's well, it's good, but it's not quite as it meets seven.

1:20:08I'm not going to read out and prescribe criteria for determining cultural heritage value.

1:20:14And I'm not going to read out verbatim all of the ways that property does satisfy these seven criteria.

1:20:22I'll just, I'll try and touch on the highlights.

1:20:26In design and physical value.

1:20:29So the property.

1:20:32It meets criteria one through its being a representative and early example of some of those architectural styles from the 19th century and those would be the Georgian style it's neoclassical lightness and in it with an addition that has Italian.

1:20:50The property meets criteria to as it displays a high degree of craftsmanship.

1:20:59And this is seen in the load bearing ashlar masonry construction that uses local smooth based hammer dress limestone with the majority of the joints being taken.

1:21:11Again, this is this is showing those three types of contextual style.

1:21:19The exterior elements that I'll talk about in detail when we're discussing the heritage attributes are all exterior elements, but I just wanted to mention that in past site visits with with former owners actually.

1:21:34I have noticed in documented interior features that are of note.

1:21:39That would be the original central staircase, wooden staircase, and the original heavy timber roof framing construction, which is seen in the attic, and that's that's described as queen post stretch dresses.

1:21:58Even though these two elements are important to note that they're not included in the list of heritage attributes that's recommended, but it has been brought to the owner's attention that that staff have friendly advice that they be retained for their value.

1:22:17The historical associate of value is met in criteria for with the properties direct association with the founding of wealth.

1:22:27This, this is on this site, there's been a hotel on this property since the 1830s, which makes this the property we want to be oldest continuing operating businesses well.

1:22:40The hotel in the 1830s provided what necessities to the farmers of Gualfin area by providing them food lodgings while they were downtown.

1:22:52Delivering grain and other cultural produce, but also the building has had significant history in the hotel hotelier history and has entertained rules in rules visits to the city.

1:23:10And even functioned as the per se, the local judicial court, the property meets criteria five. It yields important information with the development of hotels.

1:23:27A very important part of the Royal Hotel and its surroundings is in its contextual value. And it meets criteria seven in the, it's a prominent Frank facade that might be a bit redundant.

1:23:40It's facade, which is the front forms the beginning of an uninterrupted block face on current street.

1:23:48And the fundamental part of the North Street wall, the market ground area, the old downtown for Paris.

1:23:57And criteria eight is met because the Royal Hotel building is an important is it is important to finding maintaining parents character of the current street streetscape.

1:24:10And criteria nine is is met very well, in my opinion, as it's been a long, it has served long as a major landmark in this area of wealth since mid 19th century, and especially since the railway was bringing visitors to from wealth right inside its front door.

1:24:32I'll move from the statement of significance, which I want to point out this great assistance that's been given to me by Mr Robert floor. I stand there sitting beside me here as the research assistant.

1:24:45I want to talk about a bit about the heritage attributes that staff is recommending to the committee. And I will read through these because I think it's important to specify these in with enough detail.

1:25:03The 18 heritage attribute is the three story building mass and the gable roof lines of the 1862 and 1880 to 1892 blocks, just what you see from cards and from the railway.

1:25:18The second attribute would be limestone roofline, our walls that are corbelled at the front wall and parapets, which are from both periods 1862 18.

1:25:32There are existing limestone chimneys stacks and the shafts, which are to be seen as attributes, the exterior limestone walls, including smooth based hammer dress ashlar limestone with the presence of tape pointing stone heads, window heads or doorheads limestone

1:25:53with the windows, cells and coined corners. The shape and location all original window and door openings. It's which based on historical images and references, and just as a footnote, that means the window and door openings themselves, not, not the windows that are here present.

1:26:13have been changed out many times over time. The two carved date stones, one you see above

1:26:23the tripled windows on the third floor of facade and the other in the first floor window

1:26:28in the right hand block. The wooden window lintels above the first floor openings which

1:26:35are possibly from the original 1840 construction in the left block. The scale of the opening

1:26:42of the main entrance with two cast iron columns that are located on either side of the

1:26:47carbon's tweet entrance door. Those are the attributes as recommended and I'd be happy

1:26:55to entertain questions if the committee members have those. And I'll turn things back to the

1:27:01chair. Thank you.

1:27:04Yeah, thanks. Just a question for you, Stephen. So that last bullet point, the scale of the

1:27:13opening. Can you just clarify what that means? Is that like the original opening dimensions

1:27:18or... I think it's because there's new stone or new block around that. I don't know if

1:27:24this opening is the original one or not.

1:27:28I hesitate to share the screen but I'm assuming that each member has the ability to look at

1:27:37the current photographs that are included within the report attachments. The scale of

1:27:43that front opening is important to understand its original shape which in my mind is part

1:27:52of its scale or at least the relative size of the door opening to the Mason. You're right,

1:27:59Cameron. There's been some modern concrete block added to the building to support the

1:28:04load that's above in that surrounding, you might say, for the front door. But it's really...

1:28:14The idea is to maintain the appearance and integrity of the opening that's supported

1:28:20by the cast iron columns within that area. Okay. So it's basically whatever is framed

1:28:26by the columns is kind of what we're referring to there. That's true. And when you look at

1:28:31the historical images of the hotel in its various front iterations and alterations,

1:28:41the uncovering of those two cast iron columns was actually quite crucial because it showed

1:28:46us some of the original fenestration, you might say, of what surrounds that front entrance

1:28:55from the behavior period of the P&T to the night's period. Okay. Thank you, Stephen.

1:29:05Alexander? Yeah. With regards to the heritage attributes, the points that are regarding the

1:29:19limestone. Is it possible to make it specific to the local Guelph limestone? I know that in

1:29:30Ontario, other than Kingston, Guelph is often referred to as the stone city and we have a very

1:29:36prominent type of limestone that's used here. As far as the heritage attributes as guiding

1:29:44future changes to the building, should we not be specifying a local material so that we're not

1:29:52opening the door to changes that might include Indiana limestone, granites, sandstones, all sorts

1:30:01of things under the sun? Through the chair, too, Alex, I'm not sure if you're suggesting that

1:30:15maybe a change to the heritage attribute, all at point. The second bullet point would be the limestone

1:30:21firewalls or even the fourth point, which is the exterior limestone wall. Though all of that

1:30:28limestone, I'm of the opinion that it's this local Guelph stone. Is that not clear in the report?

1:30:36Yeah, it doesn't need to be specified out as Guelph limestone or at least local limestone.

1:30:44So that if these attributes are used later, it's part of a discussion about appropriate changes

1:30:52with the building. We're not allowing for other types of limestones to be used. If somebody's

1:31:01replacing a window or a sill or anything, we're not opening the door to them using limestone that

1:31:08is not local to the area. Through the chair, to the member, I'm happy to further clarify what I

1:31:18mean by the limestone, because I'm of the opinion that the entire building is built with local

1:31:25Guelph limestone or let's say Guelph Wellington limestone. It appears the color, the texture,

1:31:34everything in voted has all the markings of that. But I think your question or comment is really

1:31:41getting at not so much how the current building is described for purposes of designation and

1:31:48protection. It's more what we would consider if we alteration or building a heritage permit

1:31:57forward once the building was designated. That's something that heritage planning staff would be

1:32:04considering right off the bat is that any changes that required infill or change to the masonry

1:32:09would have to be either the same material or like material in order to be appropriate intervention.

1:32:20I think a good example here is that front door surround. If this property had been designated

1:32:27previously or let's say protected previously, a heritage permit wouldn't have allowed the infill

1:32:33to be done in what I think might be called a rock face on a block, which is what we're looking at.

1:32:43So it's the heritage permit process that would would consider what is appropriate use of new

1:32:49materials and alterations. That I want to get back to the first point though. I think I'd be happy

1:32:56to add to the heritage attributes the limestone that the building is constructed with is local.

1:33:02Yeah, no, I think we agree. I think specifying would suggest to this committee that specifying

1:33:11the Wellington Guelph limestone is an important clarification for future discussions down the

1:33:19road. I just, you know, should this be something that happens recent if the building is intended to

1:33:27be changed at all or, you know, if in 50 years where I'm gone or whoever's seen charges looking

1:33:35at these heritage, heritage attributes list and that we've gone the extra step to really specify

1:33:42what aspect of the material we are trying to identify. And I think the fact that, like you said,

1:33:48it's it is a local limestone that has been dressed is the key component to this to this building

1:33:57that we're trying to maintain. So I would that I would my only suggestion to this committee is to

1:34:02and to staff is to update that that wording. The comments or questions?

1:34:21And I just ask a quick point of clarification that I think there's been two comments. One about

1:34:26the clarification on what scale refers to and I think I'll capture that it's certainly original

1:34:30what opening that fair and then just knowing the global wealth or wealth of limestone.

1:34:38And is it fair just to amend the recommendation to

1:34:43that heritage wealth supports the heritage attributes identified or

1:34:47what is it part of the streets? I think it's a bit of a line as we are suggesting to comment

1:34:53or two changes to minor terms being that you said a minimal to above.

1:35:03Sorry, I'm doing some work in my mind right now. So maybe the motion could be that heritage

1:35:13wealth supports the heritage attributes identified to 106 Cardin streets with amendments to

1:35:20note the scale refers to the original wood opening cast columns and that wealth Wellington local

1:35:28wealth Wellington limestone was used as a lineman's type of report dated July 8 2024.

1:35:36And that heritage wealth recommends that city council give notice of its intention to designate

1:35:40106 Cardin Street pursuant to part form section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

1:35:50That has sort of captured those two. Yes, Stephen.

1:35:56Thank you, Chair. Just one suggestion for clarification. You made reference to the

1:36:02original what you described as the original front. It actually wouldn't necessarily be

1:36:09original, but I would suggest the existing. The existing wood opening cast column.

1:36:25If that sounds reasonable and amenable to all, I will ask if there is a mover.

1:36:33Would you like me to get it up on the screen? Sure. Yeah, Jackson put it on screen just to

1:36:38make sure it's captured for everyone's. I may need you to read.

1:36:46I don't know if I can repeat any of this.

1:36:50Okay, so I think what we came up with was that heritage 12 supports the heritage attributes

1:36:55identified for 106 Cardin Street with the following amendments.

1:37:07Yeah, but you got anyways. So this that, you know, that's hail refers to the existing wood

1:37:13opening and pass by the columns and that the limestone is do we want the word local in

1:37:24their local Gwelfel, Wellington? Is that fair enough additional word? Stephen's on it. So I

1:37:30would say that's that is the right way to say it. As outlined in the staff report dated July 8,

1:37:362024 and apparently to 12 recommends that city council have noted some of the intentions to

1:37:40designate 106 Cardin Street to depart for section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

1:37:49That captures things. Is there someone to move? Java, secondary, Lara is here,

1:37:56hand there and then all those in favor? Thanks everyone. Move on to the chair announcements,

1:38:07nothing for me and it's weird like that. Are there any announcements from staff?

1:38:10Not a whole lot to update on. Open house for the word West happened on June 27th and we had a very

1:38:21good turnout. There were a couple heritage Gwelfel members in attendance and surprisingly,

1:38:28most attendees seemed very supportive of the project, which is refreshing. It's not always the

1:38:34case at open house. Oh, also one more thing to note. Downtown Heritage District study

1:38:46date has been identified now to bring it to council and I believe it's the September 4th

1:38:51committee of the whole meeting. So I'll provide the committee with more details on that if we

1:38:57get closer to that date. Just I'm sure the committee members are aware of this, but

1:39:09council tomorrow evening, there are three notices of intention to designate and present.

1:39:20All right, last item on the agenda is adjourned. I'd like to move to adjourn. Thank you, Kevin,

1:39:29Kelly, I'll take you a second or I did see your hand go up and then all those in favor?

1:39:34Wonderful. Have a nice rest of your summer because we won't meet in August. See you on September.

1:39:42Bye everybody. Thank you.