Property Standards Committee

0:01Position on March 8th, 2023. The infection again was on March 7th.

0:07Specifically for unit B, the requirements for as follows. Secure in place or stabilize the exterior wooden stairs serving the entrance door to this unit.

0:16Revent the stairs from tipping forward, wait for the building when in use, and ensure the stairs are maintained in good repair at percent and.

0:24Number 2, clear, remove any obstructions from the exhaust vent.

0:30Install the missing exterior vent cap for the exhaust vent and ensure the walk from the span exhaust or vent air to the doors.

0:40Maintaining good work with condition and projections 3.8, 4.14 and 5.14.

0:48Number 3 was to replace the broken or cracked toilet tank lid so as to prevent an accident hazard or an unsafe condition as per sections 3.1.1, 4.8.

0:58Number 4 was replace repair the cracked and loose wall tiles on the shower wall.

1:03Prepare the fact there is on the washroom wall between the window and the shower and floater.

1:08Talk or seal around the base of the shower walls at the top of the bathtub.

1:12Ensure the shower walls are maintained in previous to water as per sections 4.16 and 4.18 of the bylaw.

1:19Number 5 was repair replace the cracked glass window pane on the living room window.

1:24Install the missing window screening or the store window and ensure the window is maintained in good repair and capable of being opened and closed easily as per section 4.5.

1:34And number 6 refers to the exterior window we were looking at was to remove the broken and sharp window glass piece.

1:43The exterior of the front lower window sack frame near the front left corner of the building. So it's been an unsafe condition for an accident hazard as per sections 3.1.1 and 4.5.

1:54In the practice we're to be implied with by April 8th 2023.

2:01April 11th.

2:03I'm sorry, this was also emailed and mailed to the owner on April 11th. I.

2:11I had an email from the owner indicating that they were starting repairs on Thursday and they were going to do inspection of the unit.

2:20On April 14th, I had emailed the owner requesting a timeline of both the interior and exterior pairs that were supposed to start early the following week.

2:30On the same day, the owner responded to me and said that they should be able to get everything in order on Monday the following week.

2:37As long as the tennis to operate on April 20th. I emailed the owner for confirmation that repairs have been completed with a copy of the violation notice attached to the email.

2:47April 20, sorry, May 2nd.

2:51Driving by notice that the broken glass was removed from that lower window.

2:58On the exterior side of the building.

3:01Finally, in June, June 20th.

3:07Follow up inspection was conducted.

3:10The exterior wooden stairs serving that entrance unit.

3:15We're secured in place the washroom exhaust vent was missing the exterior cap.

3:20Or you can go to pictures.

3:42So, the exhaust cap, the window there was missing the.

3:50Plats or closures and then inside the washroom exhaust vent, sorry. The.

3:59Our tiles were buckled and cracked on the shower wall.

4:05There was areas of missing cocking along the base of the shower walls.

4:15Cracked shower tiles outside the closet.

4:21Where the tank lid was cracked.

4:25The washroom exhaust band again wouldn't hold a piece of toilet paper or tissue.

4:30And the living room window in the top corner was cracked.

4:34Crack appeared to be sealed with a type of 7,000.

4:40And the window was missing screening.

4:44The result of that the an order was issued to the property owner.

4:48It was issued on.

4:52July 18th.

4:54Sorry after July or June 20th on June 21st. I emailed the owner with a copy of the notice.

5:13Have the outstanding outstanding items addressed by July 5th or in order would be issued.

5:20On July 6th, I emailed the owner of the confirmation that the outstanding items had been corrected.

5:26Response on July 18th.

5:32I conducted a follow up inspection confirmed that the 4 items was on the order of outstanding.

5:42Which were to clear remove the obstructions from the washroom exhaust vent, install the exterior vent cap.

5:49And it sure was working in good condition venting to the exterior.

5:53Replace the broken and cracked toilet tank lid.

5:58Number 3 was to repair and place the crack and loose wallpiles on the outer wall.

6:03The crack here is on the washroom wall between the window and the shower enclosure and the bathroom seal around the base of the shower walls.

6:09At the top of the tub and ensure the wall were produced to water.

6:13Number 4 was to repair place the cracked glass window pane on the living window.

6:18Install the missing windows screening and ensure the window repair and capable of being open and closed.

6:25Issued on 18th. The compliance date was August 9th.

6:36Copy was emailed to the owner that day.

6:39It was sent in the mail on July 19th.

6:44August 10th. I was advised that there was a notice of appeal received.

6:49On August 25th. I conducted a follow up inspection.

6:53We could go to August.

6:55At that time, I confirmed that the toilet tank was laid was still broken.

7:06Exterior exhaust cap hadn't been replaced.

7:12The living window was still cracked.

7:18Missing the window screening.

7:21Shower walls hadn't been repaired. They were still cracked and buckled.

7:25The washroom exhaust fan and again, wouldn't hold a piece of tissue.

7:33And at that point I was advised by the occupant that they were moving out at the end of the month.

7:46The appeal of the privacy.

7:50Thank you.

7:53Any questions from the yeah, I might first.

7:57Maybe should be best to do a longer like that would be.

8:02Trust the comment later.

8:05So start up. You have any questions for the sale? I'm especially.

8:09When you expected it is the dinner still there.

8:14So on the 25th, they were still living there. Yes.

8:18You still found them there. Yes.

8:25The other questions from committee.

8:31Okay.

8:33So, I'm going to move on to the appellant.

8:36Say your case.

8:39Yes.

8:40Hi.

8:42As of May 25th of this year, we knew that the tenants are moving out.

8:45There was actually on the force mode by the L to be later tenant board and force.

8:51We came to conclusions with a unit number B that she is going to be terminating her lease and moving out a definitely she could even do it as soon as possible.

9:01So we had to have permits in hand outstanding which committee has received the ruling a full renovation with our permits at hand to the entire building.

9:12It's not that we were not willing to do.

9:17You know, whatever is needed to be done is just that money is tight inflation.

9:22The interest rates were going up and we knew that the tenants are going to be moving out.

9:27So, to a certain point, and then fixing things that have to be done. What, what is the logic in it. Currently, the unit is vacant. It's all got it. There's nothing in it. Nobody lives in the unit. Nobody will live in a unit until we fix the unit totally renovate the

9:44unit which you should have in your package as a full.

9:49Defense that that's what we're doing and city of golf is aware of it and city of golf has given us them.

9:58Permits for the full renovations.

10:03It was just a matter of time that we knew when the tense we make their life us and to the standards will never needed to be done but I mean broken window I got to fix a whole entire window spend $1000 where interest rates are going up everything's going up.

10:18Where is the logic when we know that they're going to be moving out in two months from now.

10:23It was just their tenants doing damages to the units to cause me grief because they kind of knew they have to be moving out but that's a different story.

10:34And legally they have moved out so the entire building is empty and it's vacant.

10:49Any.

10:54Okay, any questions. Yeah, I find that first when it was inspected.

11:03The tenants were there. And as I see 123, they are simple.

11:10If anybody if I'm living in my using bathroom at my home, I have to repair within 24 hours.

11:19A broken toilet went not working. It has nothing to do with my projects in future.

11:25How I would wait or not. So my other plan is when the tenant was there.

11:31How come so many months that you were not repairing these are many small jobs. They are not major constructions or things which should wait.

11:42No one in a right mind whether the good or bad and as we as a responsible person can leave a bathroom in such a way.

11:52So, so I would like to know that I can understand the frustration but this part, which has been inspected by inspector is very clear of a very, very basic.

12:08They need me to be rich immediately.

12:11So, so you are a representative of city of golf. There is a portion of the building you can pull up the front picture which is missing railings itself the city of gold property.

12:23And the running hasn't been installed there since 10 years it's been no dance that you're telling me that it's a 24 hours fix when is city of what we put it railings where it's really.

12:35They're supposed to be done. And on the front of the building I mean it's been more than ages and they have not not done anything that I need to do something with 24 hours, whereas the city of wealth doing their portion of their things.

12:49But on the other hand, the tenants never notified us of any issues until Jason for property standards came with the orders to us. There was a shock to us, never complain.

13:02Of course, when we went to the board with LTV to prove our case that we need them to move out in order to do the full renovations.

13:11Then things started being sour the relationship between tenant and landlord where the tenants were not advising us what's wrong they just went to the city.

13:21So if you have my point with your case of 24 hours, the ratings in the front is a step over four feet high. It's on city of wealth property in front of my building, which needs a ratings and they're not done.

13:34It's been more than 24 hours. I'm only doing what I have to do. And I actually did what I did.

13:42Maybe you're not. It is maybe it's not in the context I was saying, because the way I can see the pictures.

13:51It is not that there's something happened. It should it looks the way the times are the way it has not been addressed for a very long time.

14:00So when they inspected that doesn't show us that problem was just few days before. So it technically it was not being dressed. Maybe you were not informed is another thing.

14:16I think that this type of is not a major work which we in our bathroom will not address and it looks like it was not addressed, whatever the right or wrong reasons.

14:30If I knew about such things for my tenants, possibly at the current time that we need it, we were just the tenants will be living them. We wouldn't be there full renovation. The entire units are gathered.

14:44There's nothing to repair right now. Everything's going to be brand new. So why should they be investing money in a point of right now and spending thousands of dollars were on a fixed budget on this entire project, especially knowing that the tenants are moving out and they are out.

14:59The tenants have not informed Mr Jason LaFear about that. They knew since May that they are moving out. They have the judgment against them.

15:09Let's move on. Do you have any questions? Yeah, you informed the inspector in the city that these tenants were already scheduled to move out.

15:23I'm not sure I don't recall that.

15:28No, when I saw the appeal package that was the first of I had seen of the tribunal hearing decision.

15:40Like I said, the young can tell me in August that they were moving out at the end of August for sure.

15:46Okay.

15:47And when were these permits taken out for that particular unit?

15:51The entire building last year were given to us in early March.

15:58And we had for the permits and 2 years ago and October ish something like that.

16:04And did you let the inspector know at the time that you had permits issued to do these repairs?

16:12As a whole renovation.

16:14The entire building to do the renovation. Yes, they're even posted on the doors when you go inside the units and in the main lobby.

16:22Was that have an endpoint? I was aware of that. Okay.

16:28How long were those 10s in that particular unit?

16:32I mean, since I purchased the building, I mean, I purchased the building about 2 years ago.

16:39And I took the initiative to, there was no way of fixing things. You have to just take everything into property, do it and make a beautiful building from scratch properly done with proper codes with proper building permits.

16:58And that's what we're doing. I mean, we're investing into this property heavily to make it more livable and more enjoyable with more rooms.

17:06Okay.

17:09Thank you.

17:11I have a question for you. When will these renovate renovations be completed?

17:18The entire building.

17:20We're hoping a year, but it all depends on how much the interest rates go up and so on. I mean, money is tight right now.

17:33You know, everything is going up and up. It's been dragging for over a year. I have two units that are totally gathered. We started getting the third one. Nobody lives in the unit. Nobody will live.

17:43One of the tenants actually has a right of refusal. So one of the units, once we renovate it, they come back and the other three units, they're going to be pretty beautiful units.

17:55And you give an approximate timeline when you think this building will be.

17:59Is this the relevance to what?

18:02Sorry. Why is this so relevant to what?

18:06Then will your renovations be completed?

18:08And why does this matter to you?

18:13My no.

18:15The renovations are completed. The work in the order would be complied with. So that's why I'm missing.

18:22I mean, obviously, all the work would be complied. I mean, there's no toilet working. There's no toilets even in the rooms. You can come and take pictures and see for yourself.

18:30Also, a couple of days ago, we started demolishing the entire unit.

18:35So once we finished the units, we finished the units. It could take us a year. It could take us up to two years.

18:41But it's going to be brand new driver, brand new installation, brand new windows, brand new toilets, brand new plumbing, brand new everything.

18:48Brand new windows, roof, everything.

18:50As per our permits.

18:52Okay. Is there any more questions?

19:01So I think that's the end of this hearing.

19:10This time.

19:11Yep. You can close it and speak your decision. Yeah. So we can close this.

19:18Anybody wants to leave. We're going to decide our decision.

19:22And okay. Thank you.

19:24You want to, before you close the section, sure. The city's position would be to confirm the order that stands.

19:33But obviously, the, if he's intending to comply by renovation, that's going to bring it in. So we may support an extension to accommodate for that. But we don't want to see the order to wash at this point.

19:46That's our, that's our position. That's not what the demand. Okay.

19:53So, Mike, Mike, because we understand and practice that things will get repaired that way. And it sounds by every stretch of years doing that. However, during the time it was occupied, he didn't do any of the work and we validated that.

20:04So we don't want to flush that we're, we're waiting for the work to be complete to confirm it's been done.

20:10Okay.

20:11But if, if at this point with all this information that we have now, right.

20:15Right. So I mean, if you know, it's been good, it's going to be pretty hard to comply with some of the times correct.

20:23Once the renovations are complete. Whenever that would be.

20:27May I just say something? Do I need to show you or bring you into the units that are gathered to the stats? There's no toilet. There's no fence.

20:38It's going to be new plumbing, everything. Do you want to see that? Is that convincing to you that everything's going to be brand new? I'm not reusing the old stuff.

20:48I mean, it's a full gut renovation. It's not just a repair patch here and there and bring the new tenants in.

20:58And confirm unit B has been got it?

21:01Unit B has been started gathered. I mean, by next week we should be totally down to the bare walls.

21:07I have unit A, got it totally unit C. No, it's unit C. It's not got yet and unit D totally got it.

21:17And we're actually adding dormers to the upper roof and as per our growing drawings, we have permits for plumbing, we have permits for drywall insulation, for electricity.

21:28And they were stepped in at the hand. So we're aiming our target is to aiming for May summer and that to finish entire building, but all depends, right?

21:41But regardless, I mean, you have to keep Mr. Jason property standards at hand and wasting our time over here. Where is the logic in this whole thing?

21:51I'm trying to fix everything as brand new as possible. And you guys are saying, oh, we have to still go back and check the toilet lid is fixed when I'm putting brand new toilets, gushing the old ones into the garbage.

22:02We're just wasting each other time over here guys.

22:07That's all.

22:13Okay, thank you. Thank you.

22:15And there's anything else?

22:20So we can close this meeting.

22:29So, you wanted to put that on.

22:38That could be open session and recorded for everything. Yeah, it has to see.

22:43I didn't know that was out. Yeah.

22:46Yeah.

22:47Yeah.

22:48Yeah.

22:49Right.

22:57Right.

22:58Just see what's the.

23:02Just a question.

23:12Question.

23:14It's not one day.

23:16It's when to go.

23:18So you know, say operation.

23:20Also, because of the.

23:22It's, it's, it's, it's, it's strong.

23:33So, because we mentioned all this.

23:37Yes.

23:38Okay.

23:43So, they will be.

23:46Yeah.

23:49I'm not saying it's just.

23:51It's just.

23:52It's just.

23:53That you're always making.

23:55So.

24:00Thank you.

24:14Also, as I said, it's an out there.

24:19It's an old.

24:35Same.

25:18Yes.

25:19I at least see.

25:21So.

26:04Just.

26:07Just, just.

26:10Just focus on you.

26:14You.

26:16I'm on to you.

26:38Questions.

26:40Questions.

26:42Yeah.

26:50For example,

26:51they can close.

27:00Right.

27:05So.

27:19Just.

27:20Just.

27:21Just.

27:22Yeah.

27:23So,

27:26just.

27:32Just focus on you.

27:44So,

27:45just focus on you.

27:46Just focus on you.

27:47Just focus on you.

28:10Just focus on you.

28:11It's not beyond ever to get a job.

28:13It only starts.

28:18That's what I mean.

28:20It's not going to be.

28:22It's not going to fix as little things we're going to fix at all.

28:24It's just a repeat.

28:26It's a one-off thing.

28:38It's a one-off thing.

28:40It's a one-off thing.

28:42It's a one-off thing.

28:44It's a one-off thing.

28:49It's a one-off thing.

28:51You turned it to the right.

28:58Yeah.

29:12It's the end of the final.

29:14It's a one-off thing.

29:16It's not a one-off thing.

29:18It's a one-off thing.

29:20It's a one-off thing.

29:28It's a one-off thing.

30:19Oh, thanks.

30:30Okay. Thank you everybody.

30:32It is the decision of the committee

30:34that order 23-675

30:36be confirmed

30:38with the compliance date extended

30:40to May 31st, 2020.

30:42We can now move on to item 6.

30:54them since.

30:56My interrupt, you're extending.

31:03So we have confirmed the order with the compliance date extended to May 31st, 2024.

31:15For those freedom to answer, Mr. Jason has to come and see. But where is the, I'm not

31:24understand that property standards have to do their things.

31:29How is this a reference to what I am doing? I'm doing, I have already said the of what

31:35inspectors building inspectors coming and looking at brand new everything and making

31:40sure everything is done to the scope of the work that we have provided to them.

31:44So why is this relevant to this?

31:47You guys are just, it's just, I understand. I appreciate it, but it just doesn't make sense.

31:56Okay, so what if I don't finish the brand new units by May 24th? Do I get to reappear

32:04again or how does this work?

32:07You don't know.

32:14No, he would be in violation. You're.

32:17But I mean, you're giving me a timeline to finish my units on a renovation that there, there's nothing in them.

32:26I have to complete them by because of property standards committee by that or by that timeline.

32:33That's absurd.

32:35So, so you've rendered your decision. So the option after here. So the decision will be mailed out or an email as well.

32:50There are options to appeal the decision of a committee. So those will be included on the bottom of your decision and that would be the next step. Should you wish to go that?

33:00I mean, I understand, but I just don't understand the logic and the bureaucracy and what you guys are saying that you guys are giving me a time and what I have to finish my renovations by or I could reappear again.

33:11We're just wasting each other's time telling you everything going to be brand new. I mean, I can even bring Jason three months from now just to see the state that we're up to.

33:19I mean, he's kind of going to see a new nobody is living in the units until we get occupancy permits.

33:28It's not just a small little renovation we're doing. We have to get occupancy permits final by the city in order to get anybody in there.

33:37Yes, sir. The decisions already been made. We're going to be moving on to the next item. Thank you. Thanks for your time.

33:44Okay. Thank you guys.

33:46Oh, yeah, we're going to sorry we're going to take a 5 minute break.

33:54And when we come back, we'll move on the next day. Okay. Thank you.

41:03Okay, thank you everybody. We're going to move on to item 6.

41:07We'll start with the city.

41:12Well, for the record and Steve Jameson property stacks inspector for the city.

41:17And he Irish associates.

41:23So, it is your call. Lawyer works for the city that's been assisting Mr. Jameson.

41:27You have a program today.

41:28So, here we have a property located within the city. Well, that 21 87 Gordon street.

41:37Which the city of wealth property standards received to complete April actually to the most.

41:4321.

41:46So, this is regarding barn structure. I suppose we just go ahead and pull up the photos from.

41:53April to 2021, just so the.

41:57Committee has some reference points.

42:07So we're dealing with a very old barn at this point.

42:09The property itself in its entirety, including the houses was vacant throughout the inspections the last couple of years.

42:20So during my inspection, April.

42:222021 we found the rear barn had several deficiencies.

42:27It was partially collapsing in the section, as you can see, this would be facing north.

42:32And they're.

42:34It's built into a.

42:36A hill so there'll be a full story underneath that.

42:39So that's collapsing into the basement in that entrance area there.

42:43We also found evidence that people were entering the barn.

42:47Very likely trespassing as a place was vacant.

42:51And some deficiencies with the missing pieces of the roof and barn boards and whatnot.

43:00So you can see through some of the photos.

43:02The structure at that point was still stable, aside from that partial collapse.

43:08On the 1st, you can see some of the born burn, burn, and for the materials have.

43:15Not been maintained.

43:19So, as most of the committee is probably where the property standards by law does exist.

43:251 of the 1 of the main focuses is is safety and minimum standards for property maintenance.

43:30So everyone wants everything to be safe and have a minimum standard.

43:34What basically I'm going to be showing here is that the issues being today were not being maintained to the.

43:40The minimum standard of the bylaw, of course, and the owner has been well aware of this issue since.

43:46It's my knowledge before 2018.

43:48So.

43:50I was my 1st inspection.

43:52And as such.

43:55I issued a notice, which is not in order to the property owner, which I was dealing with Alex.

44:02Drung.

44:03The works from the anatomy home is represented the Ontario limited company.

44:07So, if you want to open up the April 22, 2020, you know this.

44:14The PS yet.

44:17So, after that initial inspection, what we do as a courtesy to begin conversations with the owner is we basically give them a letter has no legal force and effect.

44:28However, it raises their attention that we received the complaint and opens that dialogue for further discussion.

44:33In that notice and letter, I requested that the owner obtain services of a structural engineer with the expertise of heavy timber and stone structures.

44:42To inspect and provide a report how to best stabilize the structure.

44:47And prevent further deterioration or collapse of the overall structure as for the section provided to us in building code act.

44:55To require a special.

44:58Experts section 1522 of the building code act.

45:03So, then I was looking for the or that information to be supplied by the property owner.

45:10In this case, Alex and be provided to the city for valuation and issuance of a further order as a result of that information.

45:19We also requested that time to keep all bacon buildings and structures secured from authorized entry at all times.

45:25As there was evidence it was being entered.

45:32So, we can probably move on to the next inspection.

45:36From there, we did have some conversations back and forth.

45:44With the owner who's cooperative and indicated they were going to take provide us with.

45:52The required engineering report.

45:55So, there's some back and forth regarding that.

45:59See what I guess we should get the order of their first sorry, the engineering report empty.

46:05If it's on there.

46:10So, in the meantime, while waiting for the.

46:13Engineering report.

46:15We had requested the bill building be secured by a minimum standard fencing.

46:24Thanks.

46:25So, we did receive in June 28th a fairly comprehensive report from MTE.

46:32And I won't go into the details of it. I believe it was provided in.

46:36Okay, so there's a lot of reference there of the condition they do have the expertise it looked like we had 1 of our heritage.

46:44Planners who has expertise in buildings go over as well.

46:48So, they had a method in place here to support the structure, which appeared to be our satisfaction.

46:59So, there was somewhere back and forth between receiving this and securing the bar.

47:06Let's go to the next set of pictures, which would be.

47:10So, we see a.

47:30A brief attempt with some snow fencing to.

47:36Prevent authorized entry, which was really leading our standards.

47:41It was being bypassed and it wasn't secure.

47:45That time, it's not too much to show it.

47:47My.

47:49Main inspection.

47:51Every move to September, that will be in reference to the September 8th, 2021 order.

47:57Which is based on the full inspection of that time.

48:01September 1st there.

48:04So, fast forward and we can see again, same fencing, no change in the fencing.

48:09There was an attempt at boarding up some of the doors.

48:21And this inspection and around the back.

48:23I believe there's a photo of and you can see there's a board placed over the.

48:28The art that it caved in, but the fencing wasn't being maintained. Unfortunately there.

48:34You can see some cracking of the original.

48:37How that was affecting stone structure around the side.

48:42The back should show some of the unauthorized entry.

48:47Some of the boarding that was done.

48:48So, the owner was trying to work with us a little bit.

48:50We appreciated that, but further work needed to be done.

48:53And the stabilizing hadn't taken place.

48:55Obviously, the roof hadn't been repaired.

48:58So, date of inspection for this would be September 8th, 2021.

49:02So, we issued an order soon after.

49:06Basically referring again to this bar on property.

49:11What we did in section 1, you all have copied my September 2021.

49:17What we did was very typical for property standards.

49:20Once we received expert opinion in the form of an engineer reporter, what not.

49:24We refer to that engineering report and ordered them to undertake the work.

49:29As per that report to effectively short of the area of the wall that was collapsing.

49:34And the photos.

49:35And secure the foundation structure to prevent further deterioration or collapse.

49:40Pretty straightforward.

49:43And then further speaking to you as a cure nature of the building.

49:46You must keep all buildings and structures secure from authorize,

49:50unauthorized entry at all times.

49:52Obviously the snow fencing wasn't adequate.

49:54It wasn't working to keep people out.

49:57There's also I made reference to repairing pieces of roof cladding and siding

50:02there in section 3 of my order.

50:06Obviously, roofs and walls will accelerate the duration of the structure if not maintained.

50:11So that's in general, if they're going to be keeping the building.

50:15So that was section 3, sorry, in section 4, which was about siding and then the roof separately.

50:19So as part of the property standards by law reads, you can leave property level and graded

50:28condition.

50:29So as a note, which wasn't in order, but as a note recognizing the fact that that

50:34is an option to comply with the order.

50:36I did outline, you made a malicious structure in this area in a level graded condition to comply

50:41with the bylaw.

50:42That's again, as per the building code act in the property standards by law, that is an option,

50:47whether we have it on the order or not.

50:49We referred them to the building services if they were going to take that course of action,

50:54as they would need a permit for that and permit us to meet through the building services.

51:02So in response to that order, I did have, I should have an email.

51:11I included in the package, I'm not sure if you have.

51:14There should be in with the orders.

51:21So yes, further discussion with Alex Trump, who's the representative I was dealing with,

51:46have been dealing with the property.

51:47He was, as you can read in his email, he was very happy to comply with the order and he

51:54didn't have any objections at that time.

51:57And he planned on doing the work as per the MTE report.

52:01So, and that was stated, sort of when it was at June 28th.

52:05So that was actually prior to my word, but suffice it to say the order at that time was not appealed

52:12by the property owner.

52:15And we had made them very well aware of the issues at hand to do with that structure in

52:20the building, maintenance of it, or demolish it.

52:24But you can't just leave it as is, as it is slowly deteriorating.

52:29Unfortunately, no work had been completed at all.

52:35To the effects of the email in our order, they did not appeal that order.

52:39And I do have another inspection in February 2022.

52:47So February 28th, there should be some pictures for February.

52:54Oh, there's no in my folder.

53:11Don't they try and share the look of my screen.

53:14If you have them up.

53:16See, that be where it is.

53:18This is only in reference to, oh, no, I don't have any.

53:25My apologies.

53:26That's why I put some in there.

53:28The effect of February was there was a, you'll see in my later photos, there was an effective fence,

53:35six foot fence, continuous around there that was being maintained.

53:37It also had sheathing and opaque covering on it.

53:44So that was more effective in keeping people out because the danger of the building of

53:48partial collapse at that time.

53:50So at that point, due to the nature of the building, the owner had conveyed to me on the phone and

53:57in several conversations, they weren't actually sure if they're going to keep the building,

54:00although he did commit to shoring up the building and preventing it.

54:04That didn't happen.

54:06And then later on, he had admitted, Alex, this is a verbal conversation, but for what it's worth.

54:12So I think that's a good point.

54:15But again, for my purposes, property standards inspector, the building's not being maintained.

54:21It's in an unsafe condition.

54:23It's either needs to be maintained or demolished.

54:26Neither one of those things occurred.

54:29And I think that's a good point.

54:31And I think that's a good point.

54:33And I think that's a good point.

54:35And I think that's a good point.

54:37And I think that's a good point.

54:39It agreed to be maintained or demolished.

54:41Neither one of those things occurred.

54:44And the barn was left at state, the superlative last photos, until our current issue, which has come up.

54:52In July 27, 2020.

54:57The state received further information by way of complaint that a partial collapse had turned into

55:03a larger collapse of that wall.

55:06So, I hope in the 2023 photos will show up there.

55:21So we'll see the same wall, North facing wall,

55:23and that would have been the entrance

55:25basically has fallen into the basement of it.

55:30And the fence is largely still intact.

55:33We don't think that's really as a result of anything other

55:36than when we have some very exceptional weather this year.

55:39I'm sure that's contributed to it.

55:41This is kind of the idea we were trying to avoid.

55:44Unfortunately at this stage it did occur.

55:48So I had a few meetings with the management

55:50since we already had an existing order

55:53that hadn't been appealed.

55:57However, due to the nature,

56:00considerable change of the nature of the damage,

56:04we decided to issue another work

56:06because it's significantly different

56:08and work continuation,

56:09but it's significantly different situation.

56:13So in this case, we have my current order,

56:16which is the order that's being appealed,

56:19which was issued Thursday, July 27th, 2023,

56:23and my inspection was the same day.

56:26Again, referring to the large barn on the property,

56:29the North facing entrance as was referenced in my photos.

56:34So what we're looking for since no demolition permit

56:37or no conversations have been put forth, not to date,

56:43as of this hearing since 2021.

56:47We're looking for the property to be immediately put in place

56:53an engineered solution to secure the remaining roof

56:56and stone walls of this identified heritage resource

56:59and to prevent further deterioration and collapse.

57:03So part of the conversation that we had between 2021 and 2023

57:07is that heritage wealth had some interest in it.

57:11It bears in mind some explanation,

57:14just I'm not sure what your level of understanding is

57:16with the heritage department resources in the city of Guel.

57:23We're very separate.

57:24We don't really have anything to do unless we have a question.

57:28Like in the original order,

57:29they had expertise in heavy timber and stone construction,

57:32so we had to rely on them.

57:35They did explain to us that they had some interest in it,

57:37however, the building's not designated,

57:38so it doesn't have those protections

57:40under the Heritage Act at that time.

57:43And that's why we issued the order

57:45independent of heritage at that time.

57:48So when we fast forward,

57:50because it's of heritage interest,

57:52it's actually on the heritage registry.

57:55And bear in mind that doesn't give it specific protections,

57:58but it does give the city a certain level of time

58:02to express interest if they want to move.

58:04Now that's an issue for heritage,

58:06but bottom line is they haven't demolished

58:10or restored or done anything,

58:12basically the building is falling in on itself.

58:14So try to separate those out while recognizing

58:16that there's a process that exists for that,

58:19however, not being designated.

58:22So we again, as for an engineering report

58:26and the engineered solution to stabilize the large collapse,

58:30and we noticed the chain link fencing

58:32that had been previously erected was damaged,

58:35and we requested that be repaired.

58:38Also, there was no change to any repairs

58:40to the roof gliding, which is still missing.

58:42So that's consistent with my first order,

58:45and missing pieces of wood siding,

58:47again, consistent with my first order.

58:50So we have a similar note at the bottom

58:53as in the first order where we referred

58:57that if they're gonna be demolished,

58:58and then we need a permit,

58:59again, that's pretty standard for us,

59:01referring we've won any officially induced error,

59:03if we say, hey, we'll build this deck

59:06and that deck need a permit.

59:08I don't want someone saying, well, Steve said, build the deck.

59:10He didn't say you need a permit.

59:11So we normally put that sort of information on there,

59:14just as an FYI is a courtesy to the people.

59:16So similar to the first order,

59:18the second order I did the same,

59:20and I made a note because Heritage has made me aware

59:22because this is a property of interest,

59:25however, not designated,

59:27they may object if a demolition permit was applied.

59:32So that was a courtesy note

59:33that I placed on this order to make them aware

59:35and open that dialogue hopefully with Heritage Club.

59:39And then they can have that conversation separately.

59:41So that brings us to our discussion today.

59:46Again, we're not in the,

59:49for those that are in the industry,

59:50kind of we're not into letting buildings

59:52just fail on their own.

59:54It's either fix it, maintain it, keep it,

59:57figure out which one you're gonna do.

59:59You can't leave it in the meantime, half up, half down, right?

1:00:02That's the layman's sort of terms.

1:00:06So the status position is that the order must be confirmed

1:00:08to ensure no further deterioration or collapse occurs.

1:00:12And until the property can be restored,

1:00:15or there's something that's worked out

1:00:17as far as demolition,

1:00:18and neither of those things have occurred yet.

1:00:21So we would be seeking the confirmation of this.

1:00:26An alternate for us,

1:00:29our position would be essentially,

1:00:31if it's gonna be extended,

1:00:34or we would be possibly looking to have our own engineers attend.

1:00:43I don't know if we should discuss.

1:00:46That's an alternate for confirmation, right?

1:00:49So it depends on the positions put forward

1:00:52to the apparently, I guess, at this point.

1:00:58So that's about our biggest discussion.

1:01:03I guess that's most of the discussion.

1:01:04If you guys have any questions for me.

1:01:08Okay, sorry, Parthik.

1:01:11If I take out your note,

1:01:12I really would not support.

1:01:15As yourself, do you have any objections or demonstration?

1:01:19Because if they are meeting by-laws, either way,

1:01:25why if you, as you were explaining,

1:01:28heritage is separate and you have nothing,

1:01:30why you incorporated this as a part of your process?

1:01:35That's something we've learned.

1:01:36Like in your assessment,

1:01:40it's a deliberated condition and has to be described.

1:01:43Why so much time do you have an objection on the other side?

1:01:46Why, if it's just separate to it?

1:01:50You can be perfect for the trophy.

1:01:53It's learned to experience.

1:01:55For one, we've had other buildings,

1:01:56we've had it with heritage interest,

1:01:58again, not being designated.

1:02:00We've given them similar cautions

1:02:01just so they're aware that they're gonna have

1:02:03that conversation, right?

1:02:04So if you're gonna file for demolition tomorrow,

1:02:07bring all the stuff you need to support that

1:02:09and be prepared to have those conversations.

1:02:11That's separate for me,

1:02:13but I don't want some guy coming out with a tractor

1:02:16on Sunday and knocking it down, right?

1:02:19Just like if I say you need a permit

1:02:21because you need to rebuild a deck,

1:02:23or those, you know, it's very common for stairs and decks,

1:02:27and basement apartments,

1:02:29new windows and basements need permits.

1:02:30So we put those notes about the permits on there quite often.

1:02:34And the heritage process for us is similar enough

1:02:37to the permit process that we wanna make sure

1:02:40that they're well informed.

1:02:41Since I'm giving them official direction,

1:02:44that could include demolition, right?

1:02:46You're gonna need a permit,

1:02:48you're gonna have to talk to heritage.

1:02:50They've already informed me that they wouldn't support it.

1:02:53That's their process, right?

1:02:55But that's not, that's not for me.

1:02:56If they filed a demolition permit in this case,

1:02:59that would bring the conversation to

1:03:02whether that permit gets issued or not.

1:03:05And that's again, a topic that heritage golf

1:03:07could maybe speak to.

1:03:08I understand that they have filed papers to,

1:03:12with interest to designate the building

1:03:15since the issuance of this order.

1:03:18So that would be again, the discussion from them

1:03:21outside of this.

1:03:22But if that was going to take place,

1:03:23we would still need to be confirmed

1:03:25to make sure that something of the interim

1:03:28would be protected, right?

1:03:32How long has this property been on there,

1:03:36the heritage watchmen?

1:03:39I'm not really sure what,

1:03:42I can't really speak to in-depth heritage issues.

1:03:44I don't know.

1:03:46We do have a heritage representative,

1:03:48but I'm not sure if that's appropriate for the long term.

1:03:53Well, I'm curious that this had been an issue

1:04:00of ongoing issue by understanding the timelines correctly

1:04:03since 2018, is that accurate?

1:04:07Yes.

1:04:13Just from the documents referenced in the interim,

1:04:16for me referenced it.

1:04:17So it would appear to me through their own documents

1:04:19that they were aware of the issue prior to that.

1:04:22Okay.

1:04:25And the previous order,

1:04:29and that's dated 2021 as well, right?

1:04:34Correct, the previous,

1:04:35our initial involvement started.

1:04:36Right.

1:04:38So I read down below at the bottom,

1:04:40penalties for not applying.

1:04:42So I'm assuming the order was confirmed

1:04:50the first time in 2021.

1:04:52Deem confirmed because that was not appeal.

1:04:55And so what happened after that?

1:04:57It was just nothing was followed up, nothing was,

1:05:01like there was, where did the penalties come in?

1:05:03What's that part of the process?

1:05:05Part of the conversations we had,

1:05:07of course we did come into our COVID,

1:05:10which does,

1:05:12discussion as that was part of my discussion

1:05:15with Alex at the time,

1:05:16he was having trouble getting estimates,

1:05:18although as he puts out,

1:05:20he had every intention to input it,

1:05:22writing that he was wanting to comply

1:05:24by way of shoring it up.

1:05:27And the last conversations we had were basically,

1:05:29I'm not sure what we're gonna do now.

1:05:32The cost was a factor for them.

1:05:34I believe there was a number,

1:05:35I don't have it here with me,

1:05:37but he was talking between 90 and $120,000

1:05:40to shore up that building at that time,

1:05:43previous to this current issue.

1:05:46So where we left it in,

1:05:48again with COVID in mind,

1:05:50where we've got a bit of a gap of a year.

1:05:53So the enforcement for us would be

1:05:55to choose either prosecution or to undertake the work.

1:06:00Those would be the options.

1:06:02And as provided for in the bylaw in other areas,

1:06:07we could leave the property in a level under new condition

1:06:09and recover costs for that.

1:06:11We could take them to court,

1:06:13but there's other things perhaps

1:06:15that Ellen might be able to speak to regarding site plans

1:06:19and whatnot I'm not involved with.

1:06:20So with the abundance of caution,

1:06:23we at that point had to basically pause

1:06:26and cross her fingers during COVID

1:06:28that nothing was gonna happen,

1:06:30but unfortunately, fast forward

1:06:33through nowhere being done by the owner,

1:06:35being able to be done or whatever.

1:06:37We're here and we had her for the collapse.

1:06:40Okay.

1:06:49And just a question, I guess,

1:06:54property, when Heritage Club has an interest in a property,

1:06:58I'm assuming that all the means,

1:07:01it doesn't have to start with me that they've got budget

1:07:04or they've got resources to acquire

1:07:07or somehow maintain the property?

1:07:12No, that would be part of our considerations.

1:07:17Well, I did fail to mention,

1:07:18part of the consideration in being able to leave it

1:07:21was the restoration of that six-foot fencing.

1:07:23And the fact that reasonably you have to work

1:07:26harder than just walking in.

1:07:28So yes, the building's unsafe, we recognize that.

1:07:31I didn't want to demolish it,

1:07:32but which would be the cheapest option as the city.

1:07:36I wasn't gonna move that.

1:07:38But in the meantime, we're hoping the structure's gonna

1:07:40maintain itself until a direction is picked by the owner.

1:07:45And yet legal, I'm not sure if legal options at that point

1:07:48would have, we can even file it during COVID

1:07:51because we were having more charges.

1:07:54There were other, there were a lot of factors

1:07:56that were unfortunately,

1:07:57but to answer your question specifically,

1:07:59I think I avoided that, I apologize.

1:08:00Oh.

1:08:01It was a terrible answer.

1:08:04Yeah, no, I wanted to add that in there, I apologize.

1:08:07But specifically, you wanted to know

1:08:08if heritage golf would have both resources.

1:08:11I don't think that would be their role.

1:08:13And we don't have that level of protection of that

1:08:16in any policy that I'm aware of for heritage

1:08:19to be able to step in monetarily.

1:08:22But they may be able to speak to that.

1:08:25Okay, thank you.

1:08:28Just to confirm, if they did go ahead

1:08:32and demolish this property,

1:08:33and you were able to obtain the permits

1:08:35that would comply with your order?

1:08:38We have done that in the past.

1:08:39So, similar to the other appeal that was heard earlier,

1:08:43someone takes the building permit,

1:08:45and I was explaining to one of my managers earlier,

1:08:48we have case law.

1:08:49So if we were taking action, say legal action

1:08:52on an open property standards folder,

1:08:54that they also had an open building permit, for example,

1:08:57that has been seeming to be in conflict,

1:09:00that doesn't stop us from taking legal action,

1:09:02but the prospect of reasonable outcome of charges

1:09:07to menaces.

1:09:08So that was also a consideration.

1:09:10But no, they didn't take the option to file it.

1:09:13And if they did, however, then we would

1:09:18still leave our folder open

1:09:20because until it's down for a restore, again,

1:09:24it's not the by-lift,

1:09:25but we probably wouldn't be taking action during that.

1:09:28Again, a roundabout way of answering it, I apologize.

1:09:32And then they work to apply for a demolition permit

1:09:36that would give the city, I believe, 60 days

1:09:38to then go ahead and decide if they want to designate it.

1:09:41I think council would have to decide.

1:09:42That's right.

1:09:43Okay.

1:09:45So it's not a thing you could obtain one,

1:09:47but it would be a 60-day window to find out if you can.

1:09:51So the point, maybe, should we speak to that point as well,

1:09:55because that filing, that interest is being put for

1:09:58the city council, which may impact our ability to enforce.

1:10:02Again, the confirmation can still stay confirmed.

1:10:05However, any work, depending on how the outcome

1:10:10of city council goes, right?

1:10:12So in the meantime, we want to make sure no further

1:10:16collapse has occurred until whatever lays out.

1:10:23You know what item three has been combined with?

1:10:26I guess there were some issues with the chain link.

1:10:28Yes.

1:10:29Yeah, it's been wrapped here.

1:10:40That's what's looking for.

1:10:42One simple question.

1:10:43If the building flaps and say there's vagrants or something

1:10:46in the building, is that the city's responsibility

1:10:49or the property of the town?

1:10:51That's the complex legal question.

1:10:56That has many answers.

1:10:57I'm not sure.

1:11:00Well, the liability is probably all over the place.

1:11:02I would just be speculating.

1:11:05Whenever the city is involved, we always

1:11:06seem to have an aim on something, which is how it goes.

1:11:11But how this would play out if it caught on fire.

1:11:14I don't know what my abilities would be there.

1:11:17We've done our best to try to secure it and ensure our job.

1:11:21But.

1:11:24OK, any other questions?

1:11:26John.

1:11:27OK.

1:11:27Oh, sorry.

1:11:28One last one.

1:11:33At any time did you look at having the city of wealth

1:11:39engineers look at what it would take to secure the property?

1:11:44To shore up.

1:11:45To shore it up.

1:11:47Yeah, we did have those conversations internally.

1:11:49Yeah.

1:11:50OK.

1:11:51And again, COVID, the totality of it wasn't feasible for us.

1:11:56And then we had the also there is an element of responsibility

1:12:04right for what's a word when you use due diligence.

1:12:09But you can call it the lowest bidder.

1:12:11Call it what you want.

1:12:11If we took the more expensive option, then which.

1:12:14Probably is too short up for whatever that would cost.

1:12:20I'm sure that's probably the balance issue as I've read in the documents is cost rate.

1:12:26Versus if we if the city were to move into all of that COVID would be.

1:12:31I would suppose significantly less.

1:12:34So if we were to take more expensive options,

1:12:36the city may be putting themselves in the position of eating that cost.

1:12:41To shore that up.

1:12:42So that was that was the discussion that we had.

1:12:44Do we want to do that?

1:12:46Right.

1:12:47And if the limit we had in resources, legal COVID.

1:12:53Issues were available for us.

1:12:58Thank you.

1:13:01OK, any further questions from the committee?

1:13:04No.

1:13:05OK, thank you.

1:13:06We can move on to your bell.

1:13:10Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1:13:11My name is Jennifer Meadar.

1:13:14I am Council Member for the number company 257-595-0 Ontario Limited.

1:13:19And with me is co-counsel is Jessica DeMarinas.

1:13:24And we have used some written submissions that were circulated to the secretary.

1:13:31And which I believe a hard copy has been placed before you.

1:13:34And I'm going to be generally followed by those submissions.

1:13:36So, as you know, the order relates specifically to the barn structure on the property.

1:13:45And the barn has been in a vacant state for several years.

1:13:49And most recently, as a primary of the order, the north facing rear stone part of the structure has collapsed and the remaining roof walls are at risk of collapsing.

1:13:59Among other terms, the order requires the appellant to secure the roof and stone walls to prevent further deterioration.

1:14:06Or collapse and to repair all roofing to ensure no water entry.

1:14:12And so we are here today requesting that this committee modify the order to become an order to demolish the barn structure.

1:14:21And the reasons we are in support of this request, we have 3 of them.

1:14:29The 1st is that the work ordered is unsafe to complete and disproportionate to the nature of the barn.

1:14:38The 2nd reason is that I've ordered to demolish will appropriately achieve the objective of the property standards by law.

1:14:44And the 3rd reason is that the property standards standards officer and this committee in its place.

1:14:51Is not permitted to consider the interests of heritage wealth and particularly staff.

1:14:57So, turning to the 1st reason, the work ordered is unsafe to complete and disproportionate to the nature and condition of the barn.

1:15:08A structural engineer Paul Slater of MTE did assess the state of the barn in the context of the order.

1:15:17And his report is attached to our brief at tattoo.

1:15:22And it is his opinion, opinion of MTE that the work ordered is unsafe to complete the condition of the barn is such that there is risk of further collapsed.

1:15:31And potential liability to contractors physical harm.

1:15:36In terms of physical harm and even attempting to stabilize the building to commence the work.

1:15:42MTE visited the barn and made observations about its condition and those observations included.

1:15:48Number 1, in addition to the class of the north stone wall, the north stone wall, there are large cracks and other stone walls.

1:15:55These cracks compromise the bracing and stability of the existing walls.

1:16:00Number 2, the wall framing beams are cracked and discontinuous and have compromised the frame of the barn.

1:16:06Number 3, failure and collapse of floor, floor beams adjacent to stone walls has compromised the bracing of the stone walls.

1:16:16Number 4, there are cracked and deteriorated floor beams and missing loose or rotting floorboards.

1:16:22And number 5, there are loose and missing exterior wall bar boards as well as metal roof lighting.

1:16:28And furthermore, MTE has expressed concerns that other walls could be at risk of collapsing, but has been unable to fully inspect the roof and floor beam connections without a lift.

1:16:40And they report that it is unsafe to bring a lift into the structure given the condition of the floor.

1:16:45As detailed in the MTE report, there is significant risk to the structure and human safety.

1:16:53In complying with the order, my client is not willing to take on this significant potential liability, particularly as it relates to human safety.

1:17:01Condition 4 of the order requires the roof to be repaired to, quote, ensure no water entry into the building envelope.

1:17:11And condition 5 of the order requires that the siding be put into, quote, good repair and free from any holes or other defects.

1:17:19Again, I reiterate that the barn has been vacant for several years.

1:17:24And to bring it into a state of having no water entry into the building envelope and to have no holes or defects in the siding would require a budget estimate of more than $400,000.

1:17:35And in the opinion of MTE, the cost of repair is disproportionate to the value of the structure relative to the cost of demolition and the potential safety risks which outweigh the structure value.

1:17:47So just quickly turning to the MTE report, I'll just highlight some of the comments made.

1:17:53At tab 2, page 11, again, they listed a number of structural deficiencies and disrupts on the birth page there.

1:18:03And then turning over the page, the first paragraph on page 12 of the brief.

1:18:09It is the opinion on the undersigned that the barn is unsafe in its present condition due to the above observations.

1:18:15The work requested by the city of wealth as part of the order to comply is not safe to complete.

1:18:21There is risk of further collapse and the terms of liability to contractors who would attempt to shore the building as they would have to further to remove the damage would frame floor and debris.

1:18:30Of failed stone foundation walls in order to effectively shore the building.

1:18:35The potential safety risk outweighs the structure value.

1:18:39And then moving down to the middle of the page, we estimate the demolition and disposal of the building and foundations to be between 20 and 30,000.

1:18:48Compared to a budget estimate of more than 400,000 to restore the building to the point.

1:18:53To a point to limit further damage and deterioration.

1:18:57And then the report goes on to note that the budget estimate for restoration may not be the worst case scenario could be significantly.

1:19:05More if embedded with members are found to be rotted within the stone wall.

1:19:10And empty empty was unable to assess the high level beams for Ross as this unsafe to do so given the floor condition.

1:19:18And then the conclusion is due to the risk and liability to workers as well as the financial cost of restoration compared to the structure value.

1:19:25It is our opinion and the building should be demolished.

1:19:28So on balance when repair is compared to demolition, the costs and risk of repair far outweigh the cost and risk of demolition.

1:19:40Moving on to reason number 2.

1:19:45In order to demolish will appropriately achieve the objectives of the property standards by law and the building.

1:19:53Under section 1515.3 subsection 3.1 of the building code act.

1:19:58The committee may monitor.

1:20:00by the order, if doing so would maintain the general intent and purpose of the bylaw and

1:20:05the official plan.

1:20:07And I would note that the official plan under the heading of property standards states that

1:20:11the purpose of the bylaw, one of the purposes of the bylaw is encouraging the removal of

1:20:16buildings that have declined to the point where they cannot be satisfactorily and economically

1:20:22rehabilitated.

1:20:23That's in the official plan in relation to property standards.

1:20:27And the same section of the official plan in relation to property standards also states,

1:20:33in no instances will the bylaw's application to matters dealing with health, safety, and

1:20:39security of building occupants be compromised.

1:20:43In no instance will safety be compromised.

1:20:45So it's clear from the official plan that a key objective of the property standards bylaw

1:20:52is safety.

1:20:57So the general intent and purpose of the property standards bylaw is also dictated by section

1:21:0315.1 subsections brief of the Building Code Act.

1:21:08And under that section, the Council of the Municipality may pass a bylaw to A, prescribe

1:21:13standards for the maintenance and occupancy of property, and B, where property does not

1:21:18comply with the standards, require that the property is repaired and maintained or cleared

1:21:23of structures and debris.

1:21:25So repaired and maintained or cleared are set out as equal, not hierarchical outcomes.

1:21:32So the bylaw does not prioritize repair over demolition.

1:21:38Given the condition of the barn and the safety and liability risks associated with repairs

1:21:42in order to demolish the barn would more appropriately maintain the general intent and purpose of

1:21:47the bylaw than repair.

1:21:50As further support for demolition of the barn, the previous property standards ordered from

1:21:532021 for the barn indicated expressly that the demolition and leaving the area integrated

1:22:00in level condition would be sufficient to comply with the bylaw.

1:22:03That property standards bylaw has not changed since that original order.

1:22:09And the listing of the status of the property as being listed but not designated has not

1:22:13changed since the time of that original order.

1:22:18In that paragraph 15 of our submissions, we note that there is an example and another

1:22:25property standards committee, the property standards committee of the city of Windsor,

1:22:30where cost of repair was found out way the cost of demolition such that the orders for

1:22:36several properties were modified to allow for demolition instead of repair.

1:22:44And that was in relation to orders to repair issued against the Canadian trust company regarding

1:22:50vacant structures.

1:22:53And they again sought that the orders be amended from a repair to demolition.

1:22:59The CTC requested that the committee modify the orders on various grounds, including

1:23:03the cost to repair the structures to a habitable state would exceed the value of the property

1:23:08and that restoration of the structures was not the intention of CTC when the lands were

1:23:12purchased.

1:23:14And the property standards committee of the city of Windsor unanimously allowed the appeals

1:23:19in order to demolition for a number of the properties.

1:23:22And just quickly, if we turn to tab 8, we will see the minutes of that committee meeting

1:23:30over the page 54 of the brief.

1:23:33Under item 5, discussion of appeals, it says the Canadian trust company against orders

1:23:45issued September 24, 2023.

1:23:47The notice that appealed dated October 9, 2013, received within 14-day time frame.

1:23:52And then skipping over the next paragraph, it states Mr. Lowenstein provides the following

1:23:57comments relating to the 114 orders to repair issue to the CTC.

1:24:02Third bullet point, the order to repair should be modified to permit the demolition of these

1:24:08buildings because it is the evidence and reports of the CTC written by a tightened destruction

1:24:13that it will cost more to repair these properties than what they are worth.

1:24:17In some cases, all or substantially all the value of the properties would be consumed by

1:24:21the repair that would be required to make the properties habitable.

1:24:28Over to the next page 55 towards the bottom, the bullet 245 from the bottom states the

1:24:36cost to make the properties habitable is estimated approximately 100,000 per property, references

1:24:42made to the tightened report and copy of that report was left at the end of the meeting.

1:24:49Over the page top of page 56, birth bullets, the CTC has no interest in restoring properties

1:24:56and is not only required to restore them to the building code but is required to undertake

1:25:02massive construction to the properties.

1:25:05And then the next bullet point, sudden blitz of 114 orders to repair when the city has

1:25:09apparently been monitoring these properties for years.

1:25:13City advice to complaints was received, however CTC has no details of the complaints.

1:25:24And then on the next page, page 57 middle of the page, Mr. Lowenstein noted that demolition

1:25:30is provided by the building code act, which is an Ontario statute that supersedes the

1:25:35municipal bylaw.

1:25:38And then onto page 59 of the brief, you see that in the border, second paragraph on page

1:25:4559, it is ordered that the set orders to repair be modified to orders to demolish the

1:25:50non heritage conservation district properties as identified in Appendix A. And if you go

1:25:56over to page 61, you will see all of the properties where that order was modified to demolition.

1:26:10So in this case, it has similarly been determined that the cost and risk of repair is highly

1:26:18disproportionate to demolition.

1:26:20So again, for those reasons, we, it would be appropriate and in accordance with the

1:26:25bylaw and the act to modify the order to one of demolition.

1:26:33Moving to the third reason in support of our request, the property standards officer and

1:26:39in its place now, the committee is not committed to consider the interests of heritage wealth

1:26:44and specifically heritage staff.

1:26:48The property standards officers scope of powers that set out in the building code act section

1:26:5315.2 sub one and two of the building code act allows the officer to enter upon any property

1:27:00without a warrant and to issue an order where they find the property is not in compliance

1:27:05with the bylaw.

1:27:06In this case, the officer went outside their legislative scope and powers and consider

1:27:11the objectives of heritage wealth.

1:27:13The barn is listed on heritage wealth heritage registry pursuant to the Ontario Heritage

1:27:18Act, but has been earmarked for designation since 2011.

1:27:24The only obligation associated with being on a heritage registry is giving notice of

1:27:29intention to demolish.

1:27:30There's no option, no requirement to maintain heritage activities.

1:27:34Despite all the legal consequences of being listed on a heritage registry, the order describes

1:27:39the barn as an identified heritage resource and states that heritage wealth would not

1:27:44support demolition of this building.

1:27:47That's simply not accurate.

1:27:48This is an identified heritage resource.

1:27:50It's not been designated.

1:27:52When the order was sent to the owner, it was also copied to Stephen Robinson, who is a

1:27:57senior heritage planner at wealth.

1:28:00And in Metropolitan separate school board and Scarborough, the court commented on what

1:28:05can and cannot be achieved through a proper standard bylaw.

1:28:08In that case, the city issued an order under its property standards bylaw attempting to

1:28:12enforce a site plan agreement to remove a portable structure.

1:28:16The court found that the provisions of the bylaw had to be interpreted in light of the

1:28:20bylaw as a whole, which dealt with the exterior maintenance of property.

1:28:24And the court found that it was simply not possible to read the bylaw in a manner that

1:28:28would allow the city to use it to enforce a site plan agreement.

1:28:31And an import in that case allowed the owner's appeal and set aside the order.

1:28:35And we've included that decision in our materials, but I'm not going to take you to it.

1:28:41In the case before you, the scope of the bylaw addresses standards for maintenance and occupancy

1:28:47and properties and structures and the clearing of properties and structures and debris.

1:28:52The bylaw does not include reference to standards or processes set out in the Ontario Heritage

1:28:57Act.

1:28:58And that's important to come back to that.

1:29:00It is not possible to interpret the bylaw or the powers of this, of the officer or this

1:29:05committee to include the objectives or interests of Heritage Well.

1:29:10Therefore, the powers of this, of the officer and this committee are limited to making orders

1:29:15that whether a property meets the standards set out in the bylaw for maintenance and occupancy.

1:29:22So we haven't included it in our materials, but I want to draw your attention to a section

1:29:26of the Ontario Heritage Act.

1:29:28And that is section 35.3.

1:29:33That section expressly allows for property standards bylaws to include standards for the

1:29:41maintenance of heritage attributes of designated properties, designated under section 29 of

1:29:47the Ontario Heritage Act.

1:29:48I'm just going to read that section, section 35.3 to you.

1:29:53Sub 1.

1:29:54If a bylaw passed under section 15.1 of the Building Code Act 1992, setting out standards

1:30:01for the maintenance of property in the municipality is in effect in a municipality.

1:30:05The Council of the municipality may by bylaw, a, prescribe minimum standards for the maintenance

1:30:13of the heritage attributes of property in the municipality that has been designated

1:30:18by the municipality under section 29, and b, require property that has been designated

1:30:25under section 29, and that does not comply with the standards to be repaired and maintained

1:30:31to conform with the standards.

1:30:35So in order for a property standards bylaw to consider cultural heritage attributes and

1:30:40require that they be repaired and maintained, and for an officer to take those heritage

1:30:48attributes into account or heritage in general into account, two conditions have to be met.

1:30:53The first is that the bylaw has to expressly set out standards for maintaining heritage

1:30:58attributes under the authority of the Ontario Heritage Act, section 35.3.

1:31:04And number two, only properties designated under section 29 can be required to maintain

1:31:10those heritage attributes.

1:31:12And neither of those conditions are met in this case.

1:31:18So we respectfully submit that the officer's consideration of heritage wealth was improper.

1:31:23The city cannot advance heritage interests through its property standards bylaw.

1:31:29And in 2021, as we said, the officer ordered demolition as an alternative outcome to complying

1:31:34with the bylaw.

1:31:35And this suggests that if not for the improper consideration of heritage wealth, demolition

1:31:39should have been included in the order as an appropriate alternative.

1:31:48And just before I conclude, I just wanted to comment on a couple of things that were

1:31:52raised in the conversation with the officer.

1:31:56I think it was stated that the problem has been known since 2018.

1:32:00But I just want to be clear just factually that my client, our client purchased the

1:32:06property in 2019.

1:32:08So they've only been in ownership since that time.

1:32:12I also just want to put on the record that we did ask for disclosure from the, through

1:32:17Mr. Irish, and we're told that they would only be relying on the order and the email

1:32:22backing forward.

1:32:24But we've seen here today photos of recollection of verbal conversations, the original order

1:32:30and reference to complaints and that none of that was, we were not advised that any of

1:32:34that was going to be referred to.

1:32:38So with that, in conclusion, the appellant requests that the committee modify the order

1:32:43to an order to demolish the barn.

1:32:47Demolition is an appropriate outcome given the safety and liability concerns with repair

1:32:51is proportionate to the condition of the barn and the relative cost required to complete

1:32:55the repairs as ordered compared to demolition.

1:32:59Further demolition maintains the intent and purpose of the bylaw.

1:33:03The officers powers are set by the building code act and they are not permitted to advance

1:33:07heritage interests through the property standards bylaw.

1:33:12Thank you for the opportunity to address you here today and subject to any questions you

1:33:17may have for us.

1:33:18Thank you.

1:33:19Any questions?

1:33:21Yeah.

1:33:23One thing what I find is that Steve has reported about the condition of that barn more or less

1:33:33you have also made.

1:33:35So both parties are in the same approach that it is a little bit in conditions and something

1:33:44has to be done.

1:33:46So this is a common factor.

1:33:47So the report what he has done is absolutely right and identifying something has to be done

1:33:55and their point that it has to be corrected in a certain way and what I gather is and

1:34:03you are saying that it should be demolished.

1:34:07So my question is and the question mark comes is the factor of heritage.

1:34:14How have you addressed this with heritage directly as they when they it was registered

1:34:23as an heritage property.

1:34:26Have you tried to declassify it because that is the only obstacle in between the demolition

1:34:35or of the of the relation.

1:34:38So how you will define this approach on that and does this property demolished has a commercial

1:34:49value in the market.

1:34:53Okay.

1:34:54So through you Mr. Chair in terms of the first question have we approached heritage.

1:35:00So this property has been listed for some time and we have included our materials a media

1:35:08release indicating that the city has earmarked this property for designation.

1:35:15It has no status other than being on a list.

1:35:18It has earmarked it for designation and has been earmarked for designation has been on

1:35:24their radar for 12 years well before my client purchased the property and the obligation

1:35:31is on the municipality to initiate that designation process.

1:35:35My client has no obligations in respect of that process and as I said in the context

1:35:41of the property standards by law heritage has no authority in respect of the matters

1:35:47that you have the authority to to to apply.

1:35:51So it's really not our start or key submissions is that it's just not something that is open

1:35:59for consideration by this committee.

1:36:03In terms of the commercial value of the property of the entire property of the building.

1:36:09If the knowledge that doesn't carries the commercial value.

1:36:15If you keep the bond as historic of course it has no much you but if you demolish it

1:36:22doesn't carry a commercial value in that property there in that area.

1:36:27It does yes.

1:36:28I'm sure it does.

1:36:29So it does.

1:36:30So the way it's.

1:36:32Well to be clear it's the word we're not suggesting that we should demolish it because of the

1:36:45value of the underlying land.

1:36:47We're saying that you should it has to be demolished because it is now a safety risk.

1:36:53It certainly will have value and it does have value for commercial value of the lands.

1:36:58The lands separately through the clear multi secondary plan which is under appeal by many

1:37:03parties including my clients.

1:37:05Proposes to designate these lands where this where this barn is situated for high density

1:37:10residential.

1:37:11So the city's own objectives are in conflict.

1:37:15And so yes I'm assuming that if it's got a designation for high density residential

1:37:20and I'm not an appraiser or real estate agent.

1:37:22I would assume that it would have commercial value because bond will not bring anything

1:37:28if upgraded also other than being a bar because as in the past as you mentioned it has never

1:37:36been used for any other purpose.

1:37:40So if you would correct it it will only for the heritage purposes right.

1:37:47Otherwise there's no value.

1:37:52I really can't speak to the value of the barn.

1:37:55I mean all I can talk speak to is the cost of repair versus the cost of of demolition.

1:38:04I don't know how it could be used by the landowner if it were to be repaired.

1:38:09I don't know.

1:38:11That's something that I think would have to be considered in a different context.

1:38:15Because your argument drives towards financial side that it's a very high cost to put this

1:38:21structure back as a voice.

1:38:24And on the other side it's very cheap to demolish.

1:38:28That's the economic analysis.

1:38:30There is a financial part of the equation and that is why I'm saying if there is a commercial

1:38:38value that you gain by putting residential properties on any other property.

1:38:43Yeah and that in my respectful submission through you as a chair is not part of the equation.

1:38:48The economic analysis is between again for your authority here repair and demolition.

1:38:55It's not about the underlying value of the land.

1:38:57The economic analysis we submit should be limited to that your authority to either order repair

1:39:02or demolition.

1:39:03I'm not the address to Steve.

1:39:08Does it come within our property to save demolition or not?

1:39:14So so why there is a commitment on that?

1:39:18For the city that's not for my position as a property standards inspector and from the

1:39:23order that I've written I'm not considering heritage attributes of this building as the

1:39:28appellant and we're aware that it is not protected on the heritage act.

1:39:32It's not a designated bill.

1:39:33We're in agreement on that.

1:39:35However, the fact remains nothing has been done to either stabilize or restore it or

1:39:41demolish it.

1:39:42There's been no permit.

1:39:44So as I was alluding to previously if there was an extension, which is a city position

1:39:49and they moved to demolish and file that application, the conversation that we're having with the

1:39:54heritage attributes should be had at that junction because we can't really address heritage

1:40:00and that's not what I'm trying to do.

1:40:03Which they should be addressed with the heritage.

1:40:07If we had that conversation prior to the appeal then maybe slightly different process.

1:40:12So principally you have no objection to the which way it goes.

1:40:19For you it is the safety and the property that should be bylaws fully protected either

1:40:25way.

1:40:26And to answer your question more succinctly, we generally don't put because it's in the

1:40:33building code act as the appellant as put for demolishing as an option.

1:40:37It's also in the bylaws an option under section seven.

1:40:41You can either apply with this order or you can repair or that's that's in the bylaws.

1:40:49That's in the building code act.

1:40:50So when we don't generally put it on the order, we want to order something to be done.

1:40:55That's structured.

1:40:56And again, I've already pointed this out in my discussions, but it wasn't.

1:41:02The note on there was just an FYI is courtesy of the maybe some discussions I had, which

1:41:08is where those discussions with the heritage value should be taken.

1:41:15Okay.

1:41:16So on that end.

1:41:20If we said issued in order to demolish that doesn't allow the appellant to bypass permit

1:41:30requirement.

1:41:31Our position is we don't need to change the wording of the order because it's already

1:41:35provided for they could have applied for demolition at any point since 2021 since receiving my

1:41:39order, they could have reached and said, Hey, Steve, I want to comply with your order.

1:41:43We're going to demolish.

1:41:44We filed an application.

1:41:45I would have said.

1:41:46Very, very, very long.

1:41:49So our positions, we don't need to modify the order in that that's our position.

1:41:54And so they answer my question though, if we issue that order and heritage well with

1:42:03hold up, hold that, not hold it, but watch that order to the knowledge.

1:42:10The way I understand it is that they that just provides that starts through the heritage

1:42:14act.

1:42:15And this may be spoken.

1:42:16Yeah, sure.

1:42:17I'll expect that 60 day timer for the city to officially designate or not.

1:42:24Okay, great.

1:42:25Okay.

1:42:26But for that 60 day period, if that was how the order was changed through penal protections,

1:42:30protection for strip in the order.

1:42:34But when we come back to our issue, so if that, if we extended our word and they move

1:42:41to demolish by filing for it, we can't take action on it because now conversation is being

1:42:49had at that next level, which is the discussion of demolishing it.

1:42:55So it is sufficiently complex that it's we're trying to leave that conversation for that

1:43:00forum.

1:43:01And if we can confirm it to understand that something is going to happen, we don't want

1:43:07to leave it for another two years, for example, as we have done in its currencies, wrap more

1:43:13rapidly collapsing.

1:43:15That's where we need to have it.

1:43:17Someone actually has to demolish it or restore it.

1:43:20So I don't want to see it.

1:43:24Okay.

1:43:25I'm making back to you on that.

1:43:28So you're specifically looking for a demolition or are you prepared to make that application

1:43:38for demolition?

1:43:41So through you, Mr. Chair, first of all, I just want to be clear that what the officer

1:43:47just described to you is that demolition is always an option under the act in the bylaw.

1:43:53That is not my that I do not come to that interpretation from my review of the bylaw

1:43:58or the act.

1:43:59And that is why, you know, we have the exact is that very similar is situation in Windsor

1:44:03where they had to expressly change the order to an order to demolish.

1:44:06I don't see that anywhere in the act or the regulation where you see the comply with an

1:44:10order or demolish.

1:44:12That's not that is not my interpretation of the of the act or the regulations.

1:44:19So my next question, there were two engineer reports completed by the same engineering

1:44:23for the first one.

1:44:27I didn't see it in the material.

1:44:29I'm right in the second one.

1:44:31The first one, we could be up out of breath.

1:44:35Did it speak to safety issues at that point?

1:44:40Roughly speaking, we'll pull it up first.

1:44:43Here, so it's not as if you're never sure.

1:44:46So does it specifically say that structures are safe to do the required work?

1:44:52No, it didn't specify that.

1:44:54The recommendations were on page 2 recommended that at a minimum all doors on the openings

1:45:00be ordered up with reflected by order and access until the future of the barn is decided

1:45:06and new wood frame boarding wall should be erected below the overhand floor, which was

1:45:11the point of initial collapse and the point of current collapse.

1:45:16So the order did mimic the recommendations from that high story.

1:45:23And ensuring the potential, it did also recognize the potential for the bowling condition to result in what we see today.

1:45:30But it didn't specifically say like the second one says, but this is an unsafe structure.

1:45:37No concerns about.

1:45:39Correct, there was no discussion taking on liability or the risk to the word.

1:45:42And they did.

1:45:43Right.

1:45:44So why was that first order?

1:45:50I ignored it was, I'm not really going to put that question, but maybe that's too strong.

1:45:56Why was it not and women's I really don't have the answer for that. Sorry.

1:46:02And my last question.

1:46:05I think you might have already answered it.

1:46:08But what stage and development is this property in now in terms of where you at draft plan approval? Or are you submitted a plan?

1:46:17A plan for the property.

1:46:20That's a fair question through you, Mr. chair. No, we're far from that point. Okay. It's a, as I said, there's a secondary plan.

1:46:28That has been adopted by the municipality and appeal to the Ontario land tribunal. It's under appeal hearing scheduled for next year.

1:46:36Following that, I think the private applications would be submitted and go through this.

1:46:44Thank you. That's a question for the appellant.

1:46:54If the note that was included in the 2021 order that mentions that demolition is an alternative option.

1:47:04And this order was modified to include that. Would that satisfy you?

1:47:08Demolition is an option because.

1:47:12According to the city, even with this order, they're saying you is an option.

1:47:17Yeah, again, I don't interpret the or the act legislation that way. Our preference would be that it be made clear that demolition is the preference of this committee.

1:47:28Given the safety issues associated with keeping them.

1:47:32Or trying to restore the property, but the current order.

1:47:36You don't agree blanket the state is confirmed in the current order. Like they're, they're okay with demolition. That's apparently if you did that, that would comply with this order.

1:47:46You feel reading the order.

1:47:48We, yes.

1:47:50To answer your question, Mr. chair, we want the order to be very clear that demolition is an appropriate approach in the circumstance, given your the objectives of the bylaw and the act to ensure safety.

1:48:01Okay.

1:48:03So, I got another question.

1:48:10Because I'm hearing conflicting definitions.

1:48:14And I guess my concern is, or is this community being used as a proxy for demolition by neglect?

1:48:24I'm not sure I understand the questions are I, we have an order here and we have an uncontested engineering report that says that it would be unsafe to repair the building.

1:48:38So, I don't know that it's fair to assume there's some underlying.

1:48:42Well, the intentions here other than we have an untested engineering report suggesting that the approach, the best approach from a, a classic perspective.

1:48:52And safety perspective is to demolish building.

1:48:55I think I could just speak to one thing my friend was saying that it's not a contest to report. We received the report yesterday.

1:49:00The city has not had a chance to get engineers to provide a responding report.

1:49:06And again, to my friend, the submission about how I refuse to get ready to slow your my email says, typically we do not provide advanced productions. I tell the hearing date.

1:49:18If there's a specific property you are seeking, please let me know.

1:49:21Okay, so I hear what you're saying.

1:49:25But at the same time, you've got experts. You've, you've talked to engineers about this kind of structure.

1:49:36Then where is the where is the city and their engineers in saying.

1:49:44We need to we need to look at this.

1:49:47That is part of our consideration. So if the committee, our position would be if the committee was going to work and the mission that we.

1:49:55Pause and the city have the opportunity to obtain the services where on professional engineer.

1:50:01With especially specialties of her structures and they respond to that report in response to us to memory. Yeah.

1:50:12Okay.

1:50:20Okay. So any further questions.

1:50:24You can close this.

1:50:28I don't and we'll discuss our decision. Thank you.

1:50:42So.

1:50:43We're going to be a.

1:50:56I like it. That's all that we.

1:50:59That's my good news.

1:51:01That's the biggest thing for obviously, you know, and.

1:51:47You know,

1:52:12it's something that.

1:52:13I'm going to a little bit.

1:52:16But.

1:52:17Yeah, I think we saw that.

1:52:20Yeah, I'll find a slightly.

1:52:24I guess.

1:52:30December.

1:52:33It's 17.

1:52:41And then it's clear on this order that you can and proceed with.

1:52:49And.

1:52:53So, there's a process guys.

1:52:55It was my.

1:52:58So, you know, you say.

1:53:02So, so.

1:53:43So, so.

1:53:44So, yeah.

1:53:59So, we're okay.

1:54:16Oh, yeah.

1:54:32It's.

1:54:34Sorry.

1:54:36It was a mistake.

1:54:39I don't like the taste of the pumpkin, but I might have hit it.

1:54:45I never really get it.

1:54:47I guess it's my problem.

1:54:49Oh, okay. There you go.

1:54:51That's my problem.

1:54:53I don't like it.

1:54:55I think so.

1:54:57You can't go in.

1:54:59Well, you have to get it.

1:55:01You don't want to get it on an experiment.

1:55:03Yeah, it's just like stress.

1:55:05So, yeah, so it would at least be with that freshly made pumpkin.

1:55:08It's pretty easy.

1:55:10It's like a little rubber in the egg.

1:55:12Yeah.

1:55:14Yeah.

1:55:16So altogether in some ways it's called the type of pumpkin.

1:55:18Yeah.

1:55:20I just saw off in the summer the afternoon.

1:55:22We don't think it's that much and it's like the last show.

1:55:24I go there and say it's that way.

1:55:26Yeah.

1:55:28Well, you can kind of all.

1:55:30It tastes just like.

1:55:32Yeah.

1:55:34I mean,

1:55:36Okay, we've made a decision. It is the decision of the committee that order 21-1809.

1:56:08CMB modified to remove item 3, which satisfied that was combined with, and then remove the current note.

1:56:17About the heritage of that order.

1:56:22And then we're going to modify it to add a note that says, alternatively, you may demolish this structure and leave the area integrated and level condition to comply with this bylaw.

1:56:34Please contact building services for more information on demolition permits and application process.

1:56:41And then we're going to extend the order until December 31st.

1:56:44Thank you.

1:56:52Okay.

1:56:53Okay.

1:56:53Okay.

1:56:55Okay.

1:56:56Okay.

1:56:57Oh, yeah.

1:56:59Please.

1:57:00Other.

1:57:02Thanks for being.

1:57:04Thank you.

1:57:05Oh, my God.

1:57:08Okay, moving on to item 7, other matters.

1:57:18There any other matters? Okay, we can move on to item 8.

1:57:23We can adjourn. Thank you.