Heritage Guelph

0:07Can you hear me? I can just barely hear you. I'm unmuted. Can you hear me? Pardon. I can't hear anybody in the committee. I sort of hear very lightly what people are saying.

0:42Just barely. I don't think the mics are working in your room there.

1:15This is Joe from the office. Can you hear us from the room? Can you give us a thumbs up if you can? So that we know that you're getting audio is good. It's getting better and better. We can hear you right now. I was wondering. Oh, you can't hear me.

1:31Okay. I'm going to try it. I'm going to go out and try accessing on my iPad.

1:38Instead, can you hear me now? I still can barely hear you.

2:03So, I can hear you Kathy, but I can barely hear the people in the room.

2:10Yeah, I, the mic, it doesn't sound like the mics are working in the room.

2:15Yeah, I could hear you loud and clear all the way through just so you know. Yeah.

2:22You can hear me. Yeah. Just barely.

3:08Just barely you sound very far away.

3:11Can you hear us? We're going to get started.

3:20Good afternoon. I'd like to call and order the December 2nd, 2024 being a period of 12.

3:30Welcome committee members, staff and invited guests who are attending this meeting today.

3:35As we gather, let us take time for reflect on our privilege to live and work in wealth.

3:40So he built over rich indigenous histories.

3:43We are guests here and should reflect upon the responsibility to care for this land.

3:47People who look here today and the generations to come.

3:52And our actions today and move us towards reconciliation.

3:56You should take pause and make those decisions with intention and gratitude.

4:00This place we call wealth has served as traditional lands and a place of refuge for many people over time.

4:06More specifically, the out of honor rock and the whole of show name.

4:10This land is held as a treaty lands and territory with the missus office of the credit first nation.

4:17Well, applies directly adjacent to the hold them and trapped and as part of a long established traditional hunting grounds for the 6 nations of the grand river.

4:26Many first nations in U.S. and Métis people who have come across Turtle Island called welcome today.

4:33So, before we get started, are there any committee members who have any disclosures of the very interest?

4:41I myself have 1 for 99.

4:45Which is item number 3.1 today.

4:49So, David and a lot of you will be sharing that item number we get to it.

4:55And I have received regrets from share Sarah.

4:59May I kindly have members to move in 2nd for both the minutes.

5:06The thing is meeting on a number 4, 20, 24.

5:09Can I just make a comment on the minutes? Yeah.

5:13There's a in the minutes, there's a reference to.

5:19Stephen Robinson giving us a presentation on the heritage conservation district draft plan and guidelines. But.

5:27Really what we received was notification that a report.

5:32Was going to be presented to council the report would be presented to council.

5:37Are made available on Friday, November 1st, we didn't actually see that.

5:41That report just think that can be clarified in the minutes.

5:46That's through the church. We have the word presentation doesn't necessarily reflect the presentation material that you may be referencing there. Okay. We use that word and with that person spoke.

6:02Okay, committee to give information. Okay, and it would be helpful to change that we can definitely do that, but that's been a comment practice.

6:10Oh, council and committees to.

6:12Okay, just my interpretation when I read it, go ahead.

6:17I think maybe the conclusions over the news is words between presentation and update because I believe it was an update that we received. Sure.

6:25So, if it's feasible to just change it from presentation to.

6:29Our committee received it updated on so you could move a motion that the minutes from whatever point to report.

6:37Meaning of the heritage committee, we approve as amended and we'll take that that word update and include that if you would wish to leave that committee.

6:47I would like to place a motion that the minutes are updated to include the word update versus presentation.

6:57And to clarify that no conversation took place regarding that.

7:03Just to add to that motion, sorry, and the conversation we're having when we minute we minute without.

7:14We minute the action like noting that something didn't happen wouldn't be fun practice. I'm an agreement on the update. I think if we if we start adding that extra language after.

7:28We can get on down into some of the details that that aren't necessary beneficial for the minutes.

7:34Okay, the word update is great addition and I understand where you're trying to go and we can easily make that change.

7:40I would caution against adding anything.

7:43Maybe maybe the motion then could say an update on the pending release of draft plan and guideline.

7:52I would look to staff to see that's in line with what the.

7:58Yes, yeah, if I could just add, I want to of course be in line with what works staff.

8:06Like, or how the process for the agenda is written.

8:11I guess my point was that in terms of clarity is coming up in this meeting and other items.

8:20To ensure that for people reading our minutes, they are clear that whether or not a conversation has or hasn't taken place regarding.

8:30That was when we were asked. So, if there is language that we could use to help express that I would be interested.

8:38My recommendation that's there would be.

8:41Okay.

8:49So, before the motion for the update versus presentation.

8:54Okay.

8:54Are you guys are okay with.

8:58I'm okay with that. I would look at anything else.

9:03Okay.

9:04So, I should read up the motion.

9:08Or we should.

9:10Okay.

9:11Just to help through the chair.

9:16The motion will read that the minutes from the November 4, 20, 24 meeting of the heritage committee be approved as amended.

9:22Okay. And the amendment that we're talking about.

9:25What's the motion for it to be as approved as.

9:28Okay, so in the amended minutes, we'll have to do that.

9:33Thank you.

9:34Um, so kind of numbers to move.

9:40Function, Miranda, the second year.

9:44Okay, so that's been carried.

9:51So, the 1st item on today's agenda is 56 58.

9:56Last those streets out application into knowledge of culture and resource.

10:03So, I believe we don't have.

10:05Okay.

10:06Okay.

10:06Okay.

10:08Um, great. Good afternoon, everyone.

10:11We've seen the complete application of intention to demolish 56 to 58 Glasgow street self.

10:18I'm happy to provide a background on the property and answer any questions you may have.

10:24The property formally 44 to 46 Manchester street,

10:28situated at a large corner at the intersection of Glasgow street, South and not in camp between Essex street, not in the streets.

10:37The precise bill date is a little hard to pinpoint.

10:41There's very little history on the title before it's purchased in 1879.

10:46But a structure is actually indicated on the lot in the 1872 bird's eye view map of Guelph.

10:54The accident building was likely built between 1870 and 1875.

10:59The title history starts in 1879 with the purchase of the lot by William Welsh.

11:04It was subdivided then in 1900 with the portion that 56 to 58 Glasgow street sits on being sold off to sharp ruling.

11:14And then the other half of the property being sold 13 years later in 1913 to her husband,

11:20Carpenter Charles, excuse me, Charles Cooley.

11:24Property in its entirety, both halves of the subdivided property remained in the Cooley family until the 1950s, 1955 before it was transferred again.

11:35It is a one story wood friend dwelling.

11:37It has a rough cast stucco facade, an open gabled roof and a single chimney.

11:43The front facade originally had symmetrical three, three plus three bays and two separate entrances.

11:48It was two dwellings once upon a time.

11:51The entrances and the fenestration on the facade have been extensively altered at this point.

11:57The structure is a simple semi-detached workers' dwelling.

12:01I would say that the heritage staff recommend

12:05that the property does not in fact meet the criteria for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act,

12:12that the intention to demolish be considered by council.

12:17Also that the property be removed from the register of cultural heritage properties.

12:21It is a listed property but not a designated property.

12:26I would also note that Heritage Staff recommends that salvage and reclamation be explored as part of the demolition process.

12:35That's it from me.

12:36Thank you so much.

12:38Do I even have a few questions at this time?

12:42Alex?

12:44Thank you for the report.

12:46Just on your last note there, I wanted to

12:51ask about the process currently writing out for

12:56documentation and archives.

12:58So like, you know, if this moves to demolition,

13:02what remains in city possession with regards to structure as it is?

13:09Like is that photo documentation?

13:14Are there site drawings?

13:15So like just as far as understanding what we leave for future citizens to look back to,

13:22if they want to understand the history of this site.

13:25And am I able to respond?

13:26Yes, I'll turn it.

13:29Yeah, it's a great question.

13:31In the city's archives, we have the cooling inventory, which was completed in the 1970s.

13:38So there is an at the time updated photo of the property and to that time,

13:46the research conducted by cooling.

13:48The property was then researched at the end of the 1990s, 1999 by the city.

13:53So there is documentation history accumulated to that point and then updated photos.

13:59Updated photos were also taken by heritage planning staff, but actually, we see it this year.

14:05So there are, there's photo documentation at several stages in the property's lifespan.

14:11There is historical documentation at moment or at several moments through its history.

14:17No site plans or drawings that I'm aware of.

14:20We also then have the title history sort of tracking the passage of the property.

14:26And in some instances, noting the structures and the structures on the lot over time.

14:35So there is sort of an extensive story of the property and the structure itself.

14:41And fire insurance plans showing the materiality and such as well.

14:45So it is it's extensively documented and more or less.

14:50I have some questions for you to.

14:56Planning staff is.

15:00What is the public access to these?

15:03The city's archive.

15:04Like if there was a citizen that wanted to understand or research a site where a building is no longer there.

15:11What would be the process that they would go through in order to learn?

15:17I may have to refer to 1 of the other staff.

15:20There is public access to archives like the online registry where you can access the title history

15:28of these properties going back in this case to.

15:31879 or 1879 or even to the 1830s and 40s 1 of the lot itself was created.

15:39Um, I think that's chat.

15:41It's sort of access to coolings sort of work.

15:44Yeah, that's all been digitized through the library.

15:47Fire insurance plans are available through the museum.

15:51It would just be like staff's internal photographs that wouldn't be directly accessible,

15:57but they were included in this item.

16:01So they are accessible through the eye on the accurate.

16:04So if I'm just thinking long term, like if somebody.

16:10Sorry, through chair staff, if somebody wanted to say have copies of those photos with the process

16:17feed to reach out to staff to say, I would like to request the photos that have in your files for

16:22property and is that as long as they weren't flagged confidential.

16:27This is sometimes property owners will say you can photograph my property, but I don't want these photographs published.

16:32Right.

16:33So as long as that's not the case, then we'd be happy to share.

16:36How would that that still carry?

16:40Wait, even if the phone was were building that no longer exists on that property.

16:47I would have to consult legal.

16:49Yeah, let's bear.

16:52Another follow up question I have is in the demolition permit process.

16:57So is my understand that there is no requirement for measure drawings for demolition permit application?

17:06And we can request it.

17:11We would likely do that if we thought the property married designation.

17:16Right.

17:17So, I guess I'm just trying to understand like if there was a desire to get as is site drawing of

17:25destruction that could be more archival material or sort of more or less separate.

17:32You know, you still is.

17:35But I have no further questions.

17:39Thank you.

17:39Are there any other questions?

17:43Any other members?

17:45No, I'm not seeing any hands.

17:49So we'll move on to the proposed motion for this item.

17:53And that is that heritage wall supports the staff recommendation that 56 58 Glasgow streets out.

18:00Does not meet the criteria for designation under part 4 of Ontario here at a jacked.

18:05And that heritage wall advises city council that 56 58, Glasgow streets out be removed from the municipal register.

18:13Of culpras, heritage properties.

18:15I may have to sell a number.

18:17Alex.

18:19I may have to sell a number.

18:26Alex.

18:26And the second year I see Laura on screen and all in favour.

18:35That's been carried.

18:37Okay, so we will now move on to item.

18:40Number 2 on today's agenda, which is 37 for Celine.

18:45And the 1st sub item gets to be called 2.2.1 November 13 council meeting.

18:53Lessons and opportunities for the discussion from Jack, Malin, David, and also downer.

18:59So I'd really like to know.

19:01Thank you, chair. I'll get us started.

19:04So.

19:05Member Kamalini suggested that we have a discussion about what transpired with 37.

19:10Christy Lane of the November 13 council meeting.

19:13So I'm just going to provide a brief overview of what happened from my perspective and then I'll turn it over to Kathy and David to.

19:20To provide their perspective.

19:22So it was my understanding in the weeks leading up to November 13th that the university was meeting individually with counselors to request that they not support.

19:32Designation.

19:33So I'll admit that I woke up on November 13th, assuming that designation was not going to happen that evening.

19:42A couple hours before the council meeting, counselor downer reached out to me with a with ask.

19:50For advice on a amended motion to the notice of intention to designate that would make it only cover the saligable steel. That would be the only hair to chat with you.

20:05So, if I'm being honest, I think if that amendment was not proposed, we would not have received a notice of intention to designate.

20:13I will admit that I, I regret not encouraging counselor downer to reach out to David Kamalini beforehand so that heritage goals delegate could be informed of the amendment that was coming forward.

20:26However, I think this experience highlights that sometimes council disagrees with staff and the heritage committee.

20:35In this scenario, they found a compromise where they, they did respect our suggestion that the property be designated, but they changed some of the attributes.

20:46So I'll turn it over to David or Kathy to try and.

20:51If I can go with them and I haven't been good enough to join us.

20:54Um, yes, thank you for the background.

20:57Um, I was about a week and a half before the council meeting, I was definitely I was also on behalf of 12 to deal with the.

21:09With our work with our notice with their supporting or its intention to dedicate the entire property.

21:15As, as being 8 of 9.

21:20I can be a checker.

21:23And in fact, that with both Jack and she, the head of practice, which is that would be the priority would take and the adults are worth that.

21:31The top three top of our agenda Friday when we met in January, what would be the cost.

21:37I am so we write out until the day of the council meeting. I was under the understanding you going from representing heritage 12.

21:49Wrong recommendations that the property itself.

21:54He said, I did get some before some notice that something something might be happening, but nothing formally.

22:04When I got to the meeting, um, council is good enough to hear our revenue stations.

22:08So, there is that's really what's around the amended motion. So.

22:13I'm going to stop as an autopsy as to how we deal with this in future.

22:18I do concerns are a, there was no notice.

22:22That you guys again, it was switched to family and meet.

22:26Terry wrote it, but.

22:28There is often be going on on motion that's not going to be considered.

22:34Second, it's important. I think we could have done some work as well. If we got a sense that.

22:41Council is not going to entertain the entire building.

22:46We could have.

22:48We can't and you can done some priority.

22:50You know, if you're a nine.

22:52This is probably still important when you're going to give us a priority there.

22:56We could give him an amended review.

22:59What, uh, you know, what might you say, but you could have grabbed through the council something to work with.

23:05In terms of working with the university on coming up with compromise.

23:10So, I think we need to have in place some mechanism.

23:14So that you're suffering if whatever we're dealing with counselors.

23:19Do you think with something other than what we're going forward? We should know about it.

23:23And ideally, we should have an opportunity to get the.

23:27Uh, get the input of staff and the public, you know, as to what things of.

23:33You know, what an old race news something other than the full.

23:37So, again, that's all I'm certainly understand, you know, things hot and council. My father was a council.

23:43They refer to appears though, you know, we know that things are not always as they seem, but we are still that obvious.

23:48And they already got.

23:50And I think that an opportunity was missed.

23:52Uh, it's just the final.

23:54You know, it's just the final thing that we could have been able to come back to an amended report to say, okay.

23:59We don't do the whole thing that he should be there.

24:02Could that could have that maybe something more interesting?

24:05If you could, I'd like to make sure that we went to the skin.

24:09You have that opportunity to the week. There's our oldest.

24:12Respect.

24:15Particularly questions that I'd be much.

24:25How's our downer? Do you have any questions or comments? Dad?

24:29Um, I would say that that's everything kind of happened really quickly at council. So it's not.

24:37It was earlier that day that I, you know, I got a sense that, um.

24:42You know, we might not get the designation and I reached out to staff and said.

24:47Can we still designate but allow for them and I was worried about losing our.

24:55Can you hear me? Yep.

24:58It seems like there's noise.

25:00We're getting back through. Is there something looping through?

25:06Ourselves.

25:14I just wonder if she's equating because we.

25:17Because of our microphone maybe usually our microphones are good because they take into account

25:22speaking. However, if there's anybody in here with a laptop with their.

25:27Mike still muted. I think what we can do while that's our job of speaking was that you can get that.

25:35Okay, so it, it these things happen. So it's not like council makes a decision beforehand. It's, it's.

25:43I reached out so it's not like anybody knows.

25:47I mean, in an ideal world in this situation.

25:51It could have been referred back to heritage Guelph and said, okay, so.

25:54So, what can be done, but I personally reached out to staff and said, can we.

26:00And it was told to me that we can reduce the items that are worthy of, you know, are part of the designation to.

26:09Then allow them to take it down. So that's sort of what I moved forward with.

26:16Because losing the complete designation has always and just saying, oh, they're going to because they agreed to do scale drawings.

26:24And they agreed to do.

26:28Design competition with their landscape school using parts of it.

26:33I mean, in my 20 years on council, I've heard these things before and often then I think of the Mitchell farm. I mean, they don't happen. Right. So.

26:42Once they've lost designation, the city seems to have lost any kind of input or documentation of it.

26:50So that was sort of my backup to it was like, well, maybe we can do that.

26:57You know, I don't know if I could have referred it back to the heritage committee to decide that because.

27:04Heritage Guelph had already given its recommendation and it was and it's a gem. It's and I remember saying that at the meeting. It is worthy of designation.

27:15But what happens with these issues where there's basically demolition by neglect in a lot in most situations and and we end up with with no commemorative.

27:28Input into into what happens next on that commemorative part. So I sort of I think that's where it went. It all happened rather quickly that afternoon.

27:40My bad, I mean, we were in the middle of budget and it was just something that I had been sort of in the back of my mind for a few days that.

27:48I really wanted to ask heritage staff questions about what was going on. I don't know that it would have changed heritage.

27:56Well, it's recommendation because it's still, as I said at the meeting.

28:00The heritage golf meeting we had it's not for heritage golf to consider.

28:05The condition, the conditions and all the engineering reports that they put forward, it's about.

28:10You know, the attributes and ways that move for the designation.

28:15So that's sort of where actually even my confusion lies. What can we do moving forward if we want to.

28:23If council wants to commemorate and still keep some kind of input into.

28:29How any kind of designation designated building is commemorated without.

28:35And still ensure those records. So I don't know if that's clear, but.

28:40You know, I just remember from that day, it was all very well, it was all very last minute sort of coming to the understanding of what might happen here.

28:50But I'm open to take questions and suggestions on, you know, on this.

28:55You know, heritage golf is an advisory committee.

29:01You know, it's, it's, it is hard when council has a different role in this and looking at a broader,

29:09a broader, the broader context of the whole issue.

29:13So I don't know what heritage golf can do in a situation like this.

29:18I do see this different than the kid barn, which is.

29:21Ben noted as a heritage asset for many, many years and has been requested of the developer to keep that property in.

29:33You know, the property standards up and the condition of that up. I don't think anybody on the city knew the condition of the conservatory to make those same types of moves.

29:43As was sort of other property, the one on the Tory road north last year as well.

29:47We weren't aware of the condition of that one that ended up with demolition, but we've got no nothing now from that building to commemorate it.

29:57Jack, do you have any happy to answer questions?

30:09Questions or do any members have any questions?

30:14Comments.

30:16Okay. What are your comments?

30:18I guess I agree with what councillor downer said in terms of we were asked to consider.

30:28Designation and look at the fact that the job produced we all agreed.

30:34This is a property worthy of designation. We passed the motion to designate.

30:38At that meeting.

30:40And city council might not always do what staff recommends, but certainly.

30:48Notice of intention to designate the support from heritage wall was somewhere in that report, not in the 1st few pages. I don't think, but it was in there somewhere.

30:55And heritage while having engineering reports from the city of well for anything or from the university.

31:03Or any other documents would not necessarily changed our.

31:08Our motion of intention to designate my concern.

31:14Apart from David getting up with all this having sort of happened, it seemed in the background.

31:20Was that the public had no opportunity to provide input the public going into that meeting.

31:27Reasonably, but the notice of attention to designate and go forward to city council and that city council would probably designate.

31:36Based on the recommendation from here to 12 and city staff.

31:40And that building is really important to a lot of people included. It's unique.

31:46And a gem as councillor downer said, and I think if the public had been aware of what was transpiring, there would have been a large delegation, a very large delegation of people there.

31:56To talk about the conservatory and it's importance to the community and and heritage.

32:04Heritage value in wealth and beyond.

32:08So, you feel this long understanding that there wasn't a public notice for.

32:16I just, I believe that the public had they known.

32:21That the designation would not happen and in fact, it's.

32:25To me, we have we, we were asked to send our motion to designate did we passed it.

32:31We already knew there was a demolition permit submitted and as I understand it, we either.

32:36Um, but the city then has the opportunity to either designate the property or approve the demolition permit.

32:44And, and we, we chose to designate it.

32:49That's maybe a separate issue to hold now intention to demolish, but had the public had the opportunity to delegate there knowing.

32:56That demolishing the building was was even a possibility. I think we would have had a lot of people there. So, I think public consultation is needed.

33:03Okay, is it possible for us to create a motion to kind of capture.

33:09Like this feeling. Okay.

33:13Um, just a, oh, sorry.

33:18It's Jack, I, you know, for me, it's a question of Jack, like.

33:23Well, we can't have the commit. I don't know how we advertise it because there's no, um, you know, the agenda's come out and I think there was a press story on it. But there's no.

33:33I don't think there's anywhere until council decides to designate it.

33:38Once we're going through this 30 day process now for designation, is there an opportunity for the.

33:44Public to comment, or is there only an opportunity for the property owner to oppose.

33:50Yeah, there's there's only an opportunity for the property owner to object.

33:59However, because they have applied for demolition, uh, the public can delegate at.

34:05The December 10th meeting.

34:07Yeah, okay. So, so that that can happen and I hear there's movement from the alumni at the university on this.

34:17But that still is neither here nor there.

34:20Um, and council, I believe, and Jack, you can confirm this, a Nessa building is designated.

34:29We can't really deny under legislation demolition. Is that not situation?

34:41I can't hear.

34:43I'm sorry whispering.

34:44Uh, council can.

34:46Council can deny the demolition that's coming forward on December 10th.

34:53We can. Oh, I thought I thought a building had to be designated before if if we.

34:58There's no browns to demolish it and that's it's designated that's why.

35:04Because a notice of intention to designate has been issued, the building is considered designated.

35:10So there are there would be grounds to deny demolition.

35:14Okay.

35:15I'm sorry.

35:16Yeah, I have a comment. I do have questions and comments.

35:23I said most of the weekend trying to understand and I think it's a question.

35:28Having right now is how we ended up here.

35:31So just bear with me and I'll run from this really quickly because I need to frame this.

35:36But in January, the committee with staff.

35:40Identify this as high priority structure building to definitely.

35:46Talk talk talk priority. Thank you.

35:48Um,

35:49In July, we have our 1st meeting where we just sense the heritage information in the attributes.

35:57And we have the delegations from and the university present and the committee requested that the afternoon was be a span.

36:10I'm finding now in the information for this meeting that engineering tend to report.

36:16That engineering tend to report for deconstruction deconstruction in the end of July.

36:23So by the end of the month, the university is already thinking about construction.

36:27However, at that meeting, they said, we're just here to watch the process.

36:33Do you sorry? I believe they announced their intention demolition.

36:36I would say it was in September.

36:40I watched these back because I wanted to see where we ended up. So September.

36:48We look at the updated heritage attributes and staff came back with more fuller.

36:54I can be listening. It's great.

36:56And that is when we hear from the university that they, regardless of what happens with this process, they want to.

37:04Demolish and that's quite a big announcement now at that meeting committee members are.

37:10Instructed that we are simply here to discuss the attribute list and not potential demolition because that's not an agenda.

37:19A demolition permit would have to be on the agenda for us to reasonably talk about demolition. So questions are held.

37:27To the delegate the university in Tacoma regarding their plans to demolish.

37:34And I think this is crucial because I, I'm concerned that the process that we should be following as under the Ontario heritage act has been rushed through and in doing so, we've missed.

37:48Key moments that both allow the public to have their input.

37:53But also allow advisory committee, like, to properly provide advice to council.

38:01Again, I'd like to reiterate council is the 1 who makes decisions and they can make those decisions in opposition to the advice that they receive from us.

38:10But I feel at this, you know, and.

38:14Have we, I guess the question is, have we actually provided advice that is meaningful to the amendments that were brought forward at that November 13 council meeting.

38:24I think additional to this, you know, we're told back in July that the structure is maybe okay. Like, we have time to discuss this process a little bit more than in November.

38:39But now we're hearing that this structure is going to fall down. So I am concerned that university has.

38:46Managed to campaign on the idea that this needs to be dealt with immediately.

38:53And in a rushed fashion. So I sympathize with council, because it's a busy time for them that they were also pressured into making a decision that they had not properly received. Maybe all the voices, all the advice that they could have received prior to making.

39:07Uh, a decision, but I guess.

39:11At the heart of this, and I have questions for staff, as far as understanding how this lines up with the Ontario heritage act, because we are about to speak about an item.

39:22That talks about deconstruction and salvage, but my understanding is that neither of those words really are represented in the Ontario heritage act.

39:31A property is either designated or it's not and if it's not, it is open to demolition.

39:36Deconstruction here, I think hides.

39:40Really is a hiding the word demolition that regardless of a commemorative structure that may or may not.

39:48Come out after a deconstruction, we are essentially, I think council essentially have to decide and I believe it's in staff correctly that.

39:58Prista put this forward at the November 15th, meaning that.

40:03You know, if.

40:06We're allowing the university to deconstruct or demolish this building.

40:13What is the virtue of doing a designation process?

40:17And more clearly, I think on the heritage, what is the.

40:23Point of discussing an amended list of heritage attributes.

40:28If the structure that's is going to come down and whatever is going to go back up.

40:34Is in fact the structure that the committee is advised council to designate and that council has to decide whether or not they want to designate.

40:42I David was there present to at that meeting, as he said to provide.

40:52An overview of what we discussed with regards to designation at our meeting.

40:59But I wanted my position, I want to make this clear is that David can't speak to any sort of deconstruction or salvage.

41:08If that was not discussed at a committee level, so.

41:11I don't feel that David being there to answer questions that council might have constitutes as proper.

41:17Um, proper consultation and I guess put this question to staff.

41:24Have have we met the legislative requirement or the Ontario's heritage act to have provided advice to council.

41:33On what is essentially a demolition permit application.

41:39Through the chair, that is what we will be doing.

41:42And when I get to the next item.

41:45Right, um.

41:54Sorry, I'm collecting my thoughts. I've been able to second to correction. I'm what Chris said at the meeting.

42:01Um, so Chris, Chris's advice at the meeting was that if we didn't didn't designate any of that building.

42:12Then that that step that the city would not be involved. It would just be demolished. The application would come forward.

42:21And under legislation and that's something is designated it's very difficult for it.

42:28For it not just to take it to the dump type thing and for the city to be involved in whatever kind of process.

42:36Is moving forward to commemorate it.

42:39We wouldn't be involved at all so so to.

42:42That's sort of what what she was speaking to about the designation either if he the only way that we would be involved in how that building was.

42:54Commemorated or memorialize would be if we designated part of it and insisted that those things be incorporated into the new garden and landscape design.

43:08So that's what she was referring to.

43:13You know, I'm just 3 you chair if I could just comment on that.

43:22Um, I guess the difficulty in when I watched that council meeting.

43:29Is try to square what happened.

43:32How I understand the Ontario hair to jack functions and.

43:37You know, I'm not sure why.

43:41You know, council could council had a decision.

43:46To either doesn't meet the building or to not designated.

43:51And having chosen to does my understanding of the Ontario is that if the university wanted to apply for demolition permit that would open up a 90 day period that would allow for greater public consultation.

44:05Or allow the public to have their say.

44:09I would have given council more time to consider the demolition.

44:14Um, I guess I and I have questions as far as.

44:19And I was going to bring them in the next agenda item, but.

44:22You know, I wasn't able to see the minutes for the November 13 meeting. So I'm not actually quite sure what motion was passed by council at that meeting.

44:32And I didn't see it in November 26th being either.

44:37So.

44:38I just feel like we're going to be departed from the process that is outlined in the Ontario hair to jack and we do so.

44:48At the detriment to not only the advice that advice that can provide to council, but also.

44:57Uh, to the detriment of public, um.

45:01Being able to have her say, I mean, we have a delegate here.

45:04Um, but they might be able to speak to a bigger.

45:09Concerned the public about this building and.

45:12I guess, you know, there's also general.

45:18Issues with again, council can decide if they want to design or not, but we have.

45:23A building that needs 8 of 9 criteria.

45:27And.

45:29You know, as per the Ontario heritage acts and the toolkit, if it has value or not, I mean.

45:38That's like, we've established that it has value and the advisory committee spoke to that value.

45:44So, I'm just concerned that the university's.

45:49Set enough things to convince.

45:52To force a decision at the council level.

45:56That sort of it's forgotten that this is a building that it has 8 of 9 criteria to be met and.

46:04We can't speak to the condition of the building because we haven't received reports of the condition of the building and I guess a question. I.

46:13Through you chair to have some downer have you received reports from the engineering reports regarding the condition of the building.

46:23Yeah, I believe they were part of that agenda on the.

46:27At that time, certainly they made a presentation at that building. I'm just I'm trying to recall what.

46:37What was presented, but you know, is is it the heritage Gwells.

46:43Her view to be assessing.

46:47The engineering reports like it's.

46:52Heritage Gwell isn't giving advice on whether.

46:55You know, they're not a peer review for them for.

47:01Those those reports, that's that's all it wasn't it was it was a report from engineers.

47:10It's not that's not under the purview of heritage Gwell that would be my understanding. I mean.

47:17Is it that heritage Gwell's mandate to start assessing engineering reports? Or is it to assess whether something is worthy of designation?

47:27I don't have that expertise.

47:30So, I can't I can't speak that I can't.

47:35They paid for that work. We done Laura, I do see your hand up there.

47:45Sure, yeah, I just if you know, if there's a requirement for evaluation of engineering reports, wouldn't get kicked out for a professional to do like.

47:57Actually put it out to a heritage team.

48:01And have them write a report essentially in HIA, right?

48:07Okay, uh, house.

48:17Through the chair, if you're from regards to comments, I agree. I don't think.

48:25My understanding of the advisory committee framework is that we do not have both the specialty or the.

48:31Purview to advise on structure. I mean, that's something that the delegate for that engineering report was here. We can ask clarifying questions, but they are the 1 that pulled that.

48:43That information or that specialty my concern and the reason I bring it up is only because the.

48:50The amendment to look at preserving the steel framing.

48:54Um, in exclusion of all other attributes that were identified to the building.

49:00Does speak towards an evaluation of the condition of the structure.

49:05Um, do you understand? Like, I'm saying that.

49:10It, I think, unfortunately, the idea of a deconstruction, a commemorative garden.

49:16Muddy the water about the discussion about whether or not the building married designation.

49:22It should have been designated or should have been.

49:25Uh, delisted and then, you know, let the university do what they want. If they want to do a commemorative garden, great. I mean, it's delisted that.

49:33I am concerned that.

49:36We wrote things got rushed through right and weren't able to be asked of the university at the advisory committee level.

49:46Because currently, if I'm wrong, but.

49:501 of the benefits of having an advisory committee for counsel is that this gives another venue for a deeper conversation about concerns questions to the delegate about.

50:03You know, the potential plans so that all that advice can go to counsel to inform their decision.

50:08I feel like we haven't really gotten there and in fact, you know, if we're going to discuss in the next item, possibly construction.

50:17Commemorative garden, I don't even see the university or to call engineering present for this. So, how do we even have that conversation with the delegate?

50:26This is my concern is that we were going to about to be asked in the next item to get on board with deconstruction when we went into November 13 being.

50:39Full fully supportive of detonation.

50:42So there's whiplash there and it's hard not to feel like.

50:49There wasn't enough time given to discuss this.

50:53Proper I don't disagree. My discomfort here is that I can't speak for all of council. I was 1 vote and.

51:04And it was, you know, working back and forth with staff about what attributes we could try to salvage from this.

51:13And it wasn't just the steal the salvageable steel because a lot of the steel apparently apparently is not in good condition.

51:20But again, it's I anyway, it's conjecture was conjecture on my part that.

51:28That designation would fail.

51:31And, and, you know, maybe, but the council has a different role and I've said this before we have a completely different role. We take the advice.

51:41And we consider stuff in a broader context.

51:44If it if, you know, in retrospect, maybe I should have just left it.

51:50Just left it and just let it either die the way it was that might have been better and then that would have been dealt with and done right.

51:58Instead, I attempted to keep it within.

52:01The city being involved in the commemorative part and and the record of it and they were also doing scale drawings, but.

52:11And a lot of us and we hadn't done that before it was it was something that we attempted to do.

52:18But, you know, in hindsight, you know, maybe we should just leave it. I don't know that council would have referred it back to heritage wealth to.

52:29To find a way to to change their recommendations. So your recommendation was to designate it. Could you then make another recommendation?

52:39To commemorate it somehow. I don't know. I don't know.

52:43So, it is 1 of those. It's the process we have and I don't.

52:48I don't how do you if council decides not to designate or they want to designate part of it. Do they refer it back to staff? Can you.

52:59Can you require that council have to do that? I don't know. I don't think you can. I mean, maybe staff can have me with that. I.

53:07That just seems that that's not going to happen either. Like at the council level, because.

53:16They're sensitive to a number of things that, you know, I don't really want to and I can't speak for all of council. I can only say the kind of role we have there.

53:25Yeah, so.

53:32Long ago, I'm looking at you, Jack, and you see, because you're probably the only other people who were around that.

53:39We had a similar situation with the building on 5th road.

53:42This ring about building was designated. I think.

53:46Ultimately, maybe what city was hoping for was a commemorative.

53:50Garden structure from that building and then I think eventually the building had to the destination had to be removed in order to.

53:58Take it down and come up with that structure.

54:01That's my reflection. Just have to go back and look up the address. That was Steven's file. So.

54:07I don't know it was annoyed ever achieved.

54:11We're 15 system.

54:12Council, that's the council, that's the last part.

54:16Notice some attention to designate council do not support what's annoying. Notice. Okay. Okay. So it was never designated that place.

54:24But wasn't there some effort to designate particular elements of the building portions of the tower? Yeah. Right. And then that had to be removed.

54:35I think the property owner.

54:38Did not support that.

54:40That's my recollection as well. Okay.

54:45I'll have to go back and look that up, but it seems very similar where it was. It was a pickle factory, right? The old.

54:51I've grown and counsel.

54:54Disagreed with the advice of heritage and.

54:58And voted to demolish it all and not save us.

55:02Not all of us agreed with that, but that was the decision of council.

55:09Um, for each to.

55:14Counselor Downer's comments, um.

55:17I would like to just take a second to say that my comments are not here to blame council.

55:28Or staff I, and I take David's going earlier about this as an opportunity for understanding what transpired and how to move forward with other heritage violence.

55:41I think I.

55:47Again, I would like to just and ask questions to staff because I think council downer has.

55:54It's brought this up, but my understanding and correct me if I'm wrong.

55:58Council have the decision to designate or not to designate.

56:03They could have.

56:06Designated less than what.

56:09Um, we can really have advised as far as the actual list.

56:14Um, that that is their purview, but you know, had they chosen to designate.

56:21Um, then if the university wanted to move ahead with the demolition and potential commemoration garden that that would be its own process.

56:31Where they would apply for demolition permit application or a heritage permit.

56:35Application with regards to the alteration of the heritage action gets at which point.

56:41Heritage wealth could have provided comments that would go to staff and allow like, is that correct? Am I understanding that's that's what an item.

56:51Yeah, right, but I think the concern is that.

56:55And correct me if I'm wrong, that's my dad from what I'm hearing.

57:01There was concern that the designation might not have gone through so.

57:08It was moving to the next step of trying to see what could be saved.

57:12And I.

57:14I almost would have this 1st day, I almost would have rather.

57:18Uh, refer to council had just decided to designate or not in entirety.

57:23Um, because at least it would have been a little bit more clear.

57:27And, you know, council chose not to designate.

57:31Uh, the rather the 37 Christie Lane, I mean, they did so within the face of.

57:38A building that needs 8 of 9 criteria that was identified as a top priority. That is their decision and we would ultimately respect that.

57:48I just think that.

57:51Fear was introduced based on the decision that the university was taken and we.

58:00Have unfortunately moved too quickly at a time when there was a lot of other items on the agenda. I have full sympathy for council in that regard. I mean, it's hard enough for us to have the time to really delve into things sometimes.

58:14So to do that within an agenda that ultimately went to midnight and had to recess.

58:19Is a huge ask.

58:21Um, I only feel regretful that.

58:25This could provide council with advice specifically towards potential reconstruction and I know it is coming now, but.

58:34It seems after the fact, it seems as though we've got this process.

58:39Mix backwards to, you know, as far as when we should have provided.

58:44Um, our comments or had that discussion and again.

58:47Bring this up in the next agenda item. We don't have the delegates here to ask clarification clarifications about the condition of the building or plans for a commemorative garden.

58:59I just think that.

59:01You know, where is the due processing and having the conversation allowing the public to engage with this.

59:08It just feels incredibly rushed.

59:15Okay, so just in the essence of time, I didn't want to give this comment like this discussion sometimes it does merit time.

59:25How do we want to go about moving forward? We want to put together a motion.

59:30Would like to move to the next item.

59:36Um, we just the furthest to.

59:39A word, a word to room to be that.

59:42Yeah, members community, but I think we have to be honest with you.

59:47Who assess how we can forward.

59:52Uh, if I could just be my two cents, because I'm already given a dollar.

1:00:02Um, I guess I, I understand that we're trying to have.

1:00:10Something come out of the discussion, um, I think the value of the discussion is ultimately what comes out of this. I'm not sure.

1:00:19There's a need for a motion on this particular agenda item. I think the next agenda item, we could have a motion that speaks to that's just my perception, but I guess.

1:00:33Again, we're here to advise council.

1:00:36So, there was a motion, it would be too.

1:00:38There's, I don't want to write, I don't want to say this in a way that comes across as incredibly to, but it would be.

1:00:46I just think there was a failure to understand exactly.

1:00:50Where what part of the process of the Ontario heritage act was being.

1:00:56Voting on at what time and what level of.

1:01:00You know, advice, I think.

1:01:03Like, you know what I'm saying, so maybe this is something that is really just sell it.

1:01:08Okay, so if we're all okay with that everyone online, so we know that as well. What's the next item?

1:01:17Point of order, just I could if we.

1:01:23Because it's like, we didn't want to talk to her if we begin this is an item, are we obligated to finish this agenda?

1:01:32At this, through you just so.

1:01:37With the rules of the procedure, you know, I would look to staff to see if there's any timelines that we want to meet.

1:01:46And make sure we have that I'm pursuing for information that's 1 so.

1:01:50So it is on the agenda for council for the December 10th, the agenda or 2. So.

1:01:55I think this is the chance to have the comments go before council.

1:01:59Right, I was to.

1:02:02I think that we just reiterate that I'm concerned about the fact that we don't have.

1:02:09Um, the presence of the university or to come engineering here to directs. I have several questions that I can't direct to my concern would be that.

1:02:18As a member of this committee preparing comments and advice to council.

1:02:23Can we properly do that at this time?

1:02:27Given that they are present here and I know there may be a requirement for them to be here.

1:02:35But you understand where I'm coming from. So.

1:02:40If and again, I would like to just say that.

1:02:48You know, it's always a collaboration.

1:02:53For many members staff and council.

1:02:56The 5 and half forward what happens if we don't pass a motion on this item today? How does that impact?

1:03:06The council agenda, how does that impact our environment is under the legislation?

1:03:13My understanding is that this is the opportunity for us to provide any comments back. So, if we aren't able to today, then I think we've missed our offer.

1:03:22To me, as I understand, yeah, again, questions for you chair.

1:03:26So, I think that we're speaking, we don't support the motion in.

1:03:33In this item, we voted down.

1:03:38But we provide comments.

1:03:40Is that are those comments going to make their way to council then?

1:03:44Okay, including in the minutes and if it goes to council, I recommend a she have a delegate there to express. Sorry, Jack. You know, I'm done.

1:03:51If I recommend that here to go point delegate to.

1:03:57Okay, whatever committees, advice is 1, 10.

1:04:01I think we're getting ahead of ourselves talking about motion, but I.

1:04:06Yeah, that's what I recommend and I'm essentially following council direction at this point.

1:04:13The committee can definitely disagree with staff's reputation.

1:04:16So, we can have some further discussion then after we hear the delegations name.

1:04:22On the motion, is that all right?

1:04:25I'm just going to do a point of order because I'm just going to leave. I'm actually not on the committee anymore. So, we're.

1:04:32We're finished with the discussion of 2, 2, 1. So.

1:04:37My appointment was for 2 years as a non voting member. And so I'm going to.

1:04:44Goodbye and it's been a pleasure being on the committee for the last 2 years. Thank you. Bye bye.

1:04:57Hell, yeah, I see your hand up. Yeah, sorry. I was just going to throw in a comment. I really appreciate everything that's been said. I know we're.

1:05:07Running long on it. So, I'll be brief. I was just going to.

1:05:10You know, I heard what Kathy was saying about.

1:05:14The need for council to sort of hear out heritage wealth and consider the facts and work collaboratively.

1:05:22I have to just comment that.

1:05:27You know, when we have our mayor.

1:05:29Using the phrase tear it down.

1:05:32Back in October and well before anything was even discussed at council about Rutherford.

1:05:38It doesn't seem like a very collaborative process.

1:05:41And I'll just leave it at that.

1:05:43Okay, so now let's move on to the agenda item. So that we can.

1:05:52Have an opportunity to have enough time to put comments forward to council.

1:05:58So, I'll read out.

1:06:01So, 37 Christy Lee application to deconstruct and salvage the cultural heritage resource.

1:06:09And we'll start with a presentation from Jack and then we'll move on to the delegations.

1:06:14Oh, keep my comments very brief.

1:06:18As I as I noted, I'm essentially following council direction at this point and that was that the cell will steal.

1:06:25Be the only heritage attribute so to coma and the university submitted a conservation plan.

1:06:34And lining how the conservatory will be deconstructed now I use that term to be specific as to how the demolition will occur. I'm not trying to talk to you.

1:06:42Skate, but then the ocean is happening and if you read my report, I do say demolition.

1:06:47But I found that the conservation plan satisfies the council direction.

1:06:55So, I'm recommending that the construction proceed.

1:06:59I should note that this is not my, my preference. I, I, I recommended alongside the heritage committee a fulsome list of heritage attributes. But this is what we have in front of us today.

1:07:13Thanks, Dr. So long for the delegates for this item.

1:07:20I mean, would you like to go first? Okay.

1:07:25So, well, heritage committee members, thank you for having me as delegate today. I'm here to voice my concern about the proposed demolition of the weather for conservatory.

1:07:44I am a grad of a third generation well fight and an individual who is deeply about our community.

1:07:52What is the significance of the structure? The conservatory is 1 of the remaining examples of the few Pagoda style greenhouses in North America.

1:08:03The structure is emblematic of U of G's roots and history as Ontario's agricultural college.

1:08:10It is an iconic building that predates the founding of the university as we know it in 1964.

1:08:19U of G's plan, the U of G plans to demolish the structure in some correspondence. They refer to it as deconstruction.

1:08:28This irreplaceable asset was recently awarded 8 of the 9 provincially prescribed criteria for determining cultural heritage value.

1:08:42I just learned that few, if any other wealth structures power received an 8 of 9 ranking for their historical importance.

1:08:51As the city of wealth report notes, this structural asset offers, quote, design and physical value, historical and associated value and contextual value, and to quote, this asset is irreplaceable.

1:09:07The proposal to demolish and salvage parts of the skeleton does nothing to preserve the living history.

1:09:15The city of wealth has endured many regrettable losses through demolition of its historical structures. For example, whilst Carnegie library, which at the time of demolition was attributed to financial efficiencies.

1:09:31Can you imagine other world renowned and globally recognized academic institutions demolishing important historic and prominent buildings on their campus?

1:09:42There's a grassroots petition to raise the profile of the demolition plan and comments reflect the sentiment to this historic structure.

1:09:51As well, alumni are posting to social media, the grad picks in front of the glass greenhouse.

1:09:58I urge the leadership of this committee.

1:10:02And the U of G to have the courage to lead the preservation and protection of this important irreplaceable and historical asset for future generations.

1:10:15I urge the committee to refuse the application to support demolition. This is a legacy decision.

1:10:26Thank you.

1:10:28Do any members have any questions at this point? Alex?

1:10:32We're changing the delegate. Can you speak a little bit more about the grassroots? So is that petition? The cruise who's part of it? The size of it? Sure.

1:10:45So I, so I attended U of G and last week I walked around the campus and I walked around the structure.

1:10:54And I couldn't believe the demolition was even on the agenda or kind of talked of mind.

1:11:02And so my mom and I, we were sitting talking and we just thought, oh my gosh, like, how can this even be an application for such a prominent and important building? So on the petition is change.org.

1:11:16It was started, I think, November 28th. I think as of this morning, there were like 200 signatures on it. And I think it's really grassroots. So as people are hearing about the U of G's plan, they're signing. So you could go and read the petition, both signatures.

1:11:34As well as some comments and there really is the sentiment that.

1:11:38You know, oh my gosh, what are they doing? This is living history. We have to save this. This is my iconic piece of our community of our campus.

1:11:47So it's online change.org is the petition, you know, kind of whole site and there might be more now, but as of this morning, there were 200.

1:11:56Thank you. Um, through you, chair to delegate.

1:12:01So this petition started November 28th.

1:12:08Were you personally, were you aware of the.

1:12:12The meeting, the designation meeting that was with the council on the 13th.

1:12:18So, um, I, so this past weekend, I went to find the minutes of the meeting because I know it was a long meeting November 13th, right? And it went just past midnight and then they took a recess and restarted, I think, on November 26th.

1:12:33Um, but I don't see the meeting notes or the minutes posted of that meeting and so to, and maybe it's posted now, but as of yesterday around 3 o'clock, I didn't see it.

1:12:43And so kind of 2 year point about what was the decision that was made. I don't see it written.

1:12:49Now, would you.

1:12:52You know, because I'm hearing from you quite strongly about the position on this and it sounds like others would like.

1:12:58Uh, did you understand what was being discussed at that council meeting? Like, I'm just trying to understand where.

1:13:07Um, you or other public members might have felt their moment to really speak to the importance of this building.

1:13:16Um, provide those comments.

1:13:18I'm.

1:13:19I, so for myself, I'm not sure if others were really aware of the importance or of the significance of this decision that was being made.

1:13:29I'm not sure if other community community members were aware of this demolition.

1:13:36Being on council November 13th.

1:13:39Well, just to be clear, I don't believe that militia was on that council meeting, but.

1:13:44You know, the, the, the, the destination discussion.

1:13:47But, yeah, it's.

1:13:49Oh, sorry. Um.

1:13:52Like, you talked to the legacy buildings with universities. Are you aware of other greenhouses that have been saved?

1:14:01So, I believe there are 2, I think there's 1 in Toronto and 1 in Oshawa.

1:14:06And they have similar.

1:14:08Uh, they have been saved and 1 in Toronto right now is currently being saved.

1:14:16So, I would say there are examples around of other buildings, other structures similar to this that have not undergone demolition.

1:14:26And sorry, 1 last question.

1:14:29What do you see?

1:14:32What I think you've talked about this, but if you can just reiterate again, what is the importance of this building to you as an alumni?

1:14:40Head citizen, what do you see as the key?

1:14:44Importance of this building.

1:14:47So, I have a good question. I would say I'm a grad of U of G. I'm a 3rd generation wealth.

1:14:54Well, fight I think this building is irreplaceable and it's also emblematic.

1:15:01The University of Gwels Bounding as the Ontario agricultural college.

1:15:06So, it's not just for our current generations. I think it's for current and future generations that this is really.

1:15:13An important and iconic piece and they think in terms of how the city fits into this.

1:15:21Um, it's that, you know, this building, the structure with recently awarded 8 of the 9 provincially.

1:15:28Prescribed criteria for determining cultural heritage value.

1:15:32And so, 8 of 9 is a really big ranking and I think I said that, you know, a few, if any other wealth structures have have methods, ranking. This is a huge ranking.

1:15:44Thank you. Well, thank you so much for your time presentation. We really appreciate it. Thank you.

1:15:55Move on to the next.

1:15:58I'll get out. Good afternoon. Thank you.

1:16:03My name is Alex Smith and I speak for myself alone.

1:16:10Uh, members of heritage, well, chair staff.

1:16:14Um, you are being asked to endorse a process whereby the city designates a heritage property.

1:16:21Very significant property of that with an eye to immediately demolishing the very structure that was just.

1:16:30Designate I respectfully submitted this submitted this is in the front to logic and common sense.

1:16:37And to the intent of the heritage at the November 13 council planning meeting.

1:16:43Staff presented a very straightforward report recommending designation of 37 Kristi Lane with the long list of heritage attributes that have been thoughtfully compiled by this committee.

1:16:57Nothing in that report suggested that the end game is demolition of the structure that spring designated.

1:17:03Things began to unravel and staff advise council the creative solutions, including demolition of the building and using the steel elements to build a commemorative structure.

1:17:15Could be found if the property is only designated and the heritage attributes were limited to the salvage both steel elements.

1:17:25That advice in my respectful submission seems to suggest that the designation only applies to the heritage attributes.

1:17:33Ignoring the fact that section 39 of the heritage at permits the designation of a property and quote.

1:17:42The designation less heritage attributes, but it is the property that is designated.

1:17:50Not there to chat reviews.

1:17:53Well, and the public had no say in this decision because they had no notice that the staff would take a position that was contrary to the public staff position.

1:18:04The process today is no more satisfactory.

1:18:08You've been given 2 versions of what you're being asked to do today.

1:18:12The staff report in its recommendation section.

1:18:17Ask you to endorse the deconstruction of the conservative.

1:18:21And at the end of the report and the staff recommendation, you're being asked to recommend the demolition of the conservatory. I don't understand.

1:18:31Why you'd be asked to be to do 2 different things and I think they are to your.

1:18:37Further, the staff report provides no guidance in the process that's being authorized used to authorize your action.

1:18:44Are you responding to an application to alter the designated property under section 33 of the heritage act?

1:18:54Or an application to demolish or remove the designated property under section 34 of the heritage act?

1:19:01Or is this some other undefined process altogether?

1:19:06City staff published position is that a heritage permit is required to undertake changes to a designated property.

1:19:14And I would urge you to take a look at the heritage permit application guide, which is on the city site.

1:19:21I would urge you to ask yourselves, first of all, what is your authority to do what you're being asked to do?

1:19:29I further ask you to ask or urge you to ask yourself.

1:19:34Does what we're being asked to do, according with the intent of the heritage act?

1:19:39Finally, our city clerk takes the position that

1:19:46displayed motions are not the formal record of actions of council,

1:19:53but rather a tool to support council's consideration. And the record is the minutes prepared

1:20:00based on the totality of the meeting and the rulings of the chair.

1:20:06To the best of my knowledge, no minutes of council's motion to designate have been published.

1:20:13And so until those minutes are approved and published, you have no official guidance from city council on this issue.

1:20:22Finally, I just want to say my comments are sharply critical of positions taken by

1:20:29heritage staff. I want to hasten to add, in my view, heritage staff have been placed in an impossible position on this issue.

1:20:41The end result of the application on November the 13th was an ad hoc motion made up on the fly.

1:20:52And I daresay heritage staff had very little time to react.

1:20:58And in my respectful submission, heritage staff is unfortunate advice. I don't think reflects the intent of the heritage act,

1:21:09but I should add that I can fully understand how that happened.

1:21:13And as I said, I think heritage staff were placed out of the position. Thank you.

1:21:24Thanks Alex. Do I have any questions? Any members for Alex at this time?

1:21:33Thank you so much for your time, Alan. Okay, so I'll get it up to the members.

1:21:41If they have any other comments, questions, or write this item.

1:21:46And moving on to the advisory committee report under the purpose of the report,

1:21:52we have 90 days to council at 90 days to consult with the 12th or 24th.

1:21:58What's right to be up there with the dozen now for the summer meeting.

1:22:05We have 90 days. I can't be taken into a more thorough review. Certainly some of the questions, Mr.

1:22:11Spencer's raised. Okay. I'll let Jack answer that.

1:22:16That's in response to the engineering report that raises structural concerns with snow.

1:22:21So we have expedited this.

1:22:25If that means, you know, that we have to deal with today.

1:22:35It will be considered by council on December 10.

1:22:39And this is your opportunity to comment.

1:22:41Okay. But why? Why is it described as summer dance crop date?

1:22:47That's the soonest opportunity we can get this before council because of the public safety concerns raised in this style.

1:22:56And sorry, Jack, for you, chair.

1:23:00It's my understanding that that building is closed. Am I wrong? That's great. Okay. So in terms of the safety concerns, what are they?

1:23:07I defer that to the university.

1:23:10And they're not here to say answer. I did encourage them to delegate.

1:23:14Because I guess I would say that if the building is close to the public, it certainly could be roped off like we do with any other structure we're worried about.

1:23:24I'm not sure why this would need to be on council's agenda for December 10th and this discussion couldn't be carried over so that we could hear from the university.

1:23:33Memories of council raise concerns about the snow. So we felt it was important to bring it back to the city.

1:23:40And are you saying that based on the feedback you've heard today and the suggestion that we defer along as the building is is rubbed off?

1:23:48That could not be changed.

1:23:51So that what could not be that it going to council? Yeah, should I not go to council in January?

1:23:57No, we're ready to council on December 10th.

1:24:01I don't know if you want to have a comment or.

1:24:03Sorry, just add.

1:24:05When it went to council, there was kind of 2 motions floating out there. I refer to what that means is the downer motion and the error motion.

1:24:14If this goes forward without a recommendation from heritage 12, I don't know where it will end up. I'm just trying to.

1:24:24Be very open and honest and transparent. The motion and council could change.

1:24:30So, I just want to be very clear on that. I think you could have a motion that.

1:24:36Respectedly asked for more time. However, not granted, then hear your comments and it can.

1:24:41It can be either way that you supported or don't support it either way.

1:24:47But I would not want to have an absence. I think council's concern was is often.

1:24:52Delay in process and I would be concerned what what they would do. I don't know what have no insight. I've not talked to any of them about this.

1:25:02I just want to make sure that there's a voice of heritage wealth heard.

1:25:09Okay.

1:25:11Alex.

1:25:12Through you chair.

1:25:16Uh, is, is that a question?

1:25:21Uh, this refers back to an earlier question I had and again, I think in general, we're looking at a collaborative process to.

1:25:30Allow for discussion on this and I keep to have bring this.

1:25:34But from a legislation perspective.

1:25:39If this meeting doesn't carry the comments for a motion in regards to 3, 7, Kristi and most comments aren't available on the council agenda.

1:25:49Does that not the gate the ability for council?

1:25:54Like we have a fulfilled legislation at that point if you're no comments from heritage wealth.

1:25:59You know, us not passing motion does not.

1:26:03I just want to be clear that we're not saying we have no comments that just we simply decided not to have this conversation. So I want to just make that the duty to consult the heritage committee is met by this being on the agenda.

1:26:16It's not met by whether or not they are committee passes.

1:26:20Okay.

1:26:24For you chair, I'm working on an alternative.

1:26:33Motion that we have here just so that we can have some.

1:26:38Uh, feedback to council people.

1:26:42Do you have a couple of spaces 1 questions I'd like to ask with regards to this.

1:26:46So.

1:26:483, has 37 Kristi Lane been.

1:26:52Is there a designation by law that has been passed by council? No, it's a notice of intention to designate, but according to the entire objective is considered as.

1:27:03That's not.

1:27:05They can still object they can still object. Yeah.

1:27:09So, okay, there's a damage action.

1:27:12So, what was asked at the November 13th meeting? I just want to clear the understand what a notice of intention to designate that was only selling to both steel as a error to check.

1:27:24And maybe to have to that and acknowledge that the minutes are up yet.

1:27:29How drastic minutes for you to read with the recommendation.

1:27:33Sure.

1:27:34So, it reads that the city clerk be authorized to publish and serve notice of intention to designate 37 Kristi Lane, 4, and 29 of the Ontario heritage.

1:27:44That staff revised the heritage heritage attributes of the designation by law to be limited to salvageable steel elements of the conservatory structure.

1:27:55That the revised designation by law be brought before council for approval. If no objections are received within the 30 day attention period.

1:28:03Which is what we're in.

1:28:04And we'll acknowledge that the minutes are not up as the previous delegate stated. They're actually not approved until cancel. We'll just say you got approved here. But that's earlier today. So they would be up and draft form anyway.

1:28:15I can read that because that's what was asked, but we are working through some of the.

1:28:19New nuances that happened at that meeting as you realize, as a couple other reasons that went late, but it's the recess, not serious stuff.

1:28:26But as they would be posted, they would be drafted until council through the sub normally at their December council meeting would be at the time.

1:28:333, you chair clerks when, when would the minutes of that meeting be just.

1:28:40I would just say normally that process, you know, to go over to the following month's council meeting at the end of the month. So, this was the situation that we're in. I believe in December 11.

1:28:51Date is for council. That's when that really.

1:28:54So, because this is.

1:28:58This is where it gets really frustrating because the minutes for that was that that notice of intention doesn't.

1:29:06Aren't approved until after it's coming to council to actually have.

1:29:12The discussion to go.

1:29:15So, although the minutes are not approved and finalized by council, the actions from those motions, whether this item or any other item start at the time of that.

1:29:27And there's a by law either specifically for this item or what we call a.

1:29:34Consolidation by law where all of the actions of council that have been decided during that meeting are actually black.

1:29:42Right, so I agree with you that we don't have a set of approved minutes, but that doesn't mean that staff and not actually item.

1:29:51As soon as that decision is made and just to clarify so that the minutes would not be up on the.

1:29:59City website and thought after they can approve by council, that is not correct. No, we would get we try to get the minutes up as quickly in draft form as possible.

1:30:07And then we would go through the approval process very similar to what you do here at Heritage Welter's where we bring those draft minutes forward to council.

1:30:14They approve them and then cancel up if there's a signature process between there and.

1:30:19And that would happen normally at the council meeting following the month that the meeting twice in this situation with December council.

1:30:26Okay, thank you for that clarity.

1:30:28The my issue and concern, I should say is that and again, we're getting into process rather than talking about the item.

1:30:38And what we're supposed to be discussing, but I'm concerned that the minutes, like I'm thinking about the public's ability to actually understand what's process is going on.

1:30:48And if they can't see the minutes from November 13th meeting.

1:30:52Within enough time before the December 10th meeting or December 11th meeting where it would be approved.

1:30:59And again, you're saying that maybe I can help Xerang that a little bit better.

1:31:03Um, council's direction and staff's action.

1:31:08Are not dictated based on approval minutes, but rather by a bylaw. That's how council does it work. It improves by law. That's where staff and action.

1:31:17In the absence of a specific bylaw for an agenda item on a council agenda.

1:31:22We have what we call confirmatory which confirms all other items as if they have their own.

1:31:28It was a confirmatory bylaw pass for the November 13th at and I apologize if I get the data on, but I think it was the November 26th.

1:31:38Um, for our continuation of the recess where that was.

1:31:43Okay, so that confirmatory bylaw passed, which included this information.

1:31:49And allow staff to continue on the work. So it's not the minutes that show you where the action is and what we can do is confirmatory by law or by law specific to the agenda items.

1:32:00So, the violence have been passed, they've been signed.

1:32:03And now staff are working with that direction.

1:32:06I think in my concern, I see your hand. My concern is that.

1:32:11And because we've heard from a delegate that trying to understand from the public's perspective.

1:32:16How to follow what is going on with this particular fight and because of the speed at which we're moving.

1:32:24I'm worried that we're leaving the public behind in their ability to understand.

1:32:28Well enough because they don't understand the rules. I'm not understanding rules very well.

1:32:34You know, like to understand where they're able to.

1:32:39Have their say and have their voice. We've confirmed it today that December 10 would be the meeting that the public should.

1:32:46Come out to and that's helpful, but I guess, yeah, I just.

1:32:50Referring to the issue of where the minutes were.

1:32:55Yeah, I'm just going to look over to Jack. Yes.

1:33:00I just wanted to note that the minutes haven't been published and it doesn't make has been published. So that that is publicly.

1:33:09Available. So, I just wanted to add a couple of things.

1:33:15I think Alex and tell me when you joined, we had a brief orientation where we talked about one of the rules.

1:33:21Of the committee being to amplify certain items in the media, which is something I cannot do as staff.

1:33:30Like, I would have loved if we had many delegates for the 37 Christie item on November 13.

1:33:36I would have been in a much stronger position as staff if I had public support behind me.

1:33:42But I was alone. It would be me and David.

1:33:45Right. And so with December 10th coming up, if that's something that the committee wants to do, you are able to.

1:33:52Amplify public support or marriage files.

1:34:01Chair, sorry, and just to confirm, I actually provided the wrong date.

1:34:05The November 13th special council meeting is where the confirmatory bylaw.

1:34:10For 37 Christie Lane in the past.

1:34:14That information is already up. Those minutes are done and that by law has been signed and sealed.

1:34:19And just quickly through to Jack's comments.

1:34:23Yeah, I mean, I think, I think out of all this discussion today, I think you're hearing.

1:34:30The committee members, I think, wanted to support you. I mean, it landed on your lap. So last minute that.

1:34:36I think a lot of us felt that it was going, we had sent.

1:34:40Our peace, like there was no need to necessarily reinforce the designation because it was so strong.

1:34:46So, I absolutely simplifies. I think if we had known again, it was so last night, I'd be known that this was even on the table.

1:34:55Procedurally, I think there would have been a showing support, but.

1:34:59I think we probably will be working the nation for.

1:35:03Somebody to be present that I can be later.

1:35:06I so I do have a question. Yeah, I mean, through you, chair.

1:35:12So property has no sub intention. It doesn't have gone out with the amendment from that council meeting.

1:35:23What is what exactly is this agenda item? Because it's listed as a deconstructing salvage and we're providing common, but is this a demolition permit application?

1:35:34Or is this a heritage permit application?

1:35:37This is an intention to demolish a cultural heritage resource. Right. And the university.

1:35:43I'm sorry, Jack, again, I didn't hear that intention to demolish a cultural heritage resource. Okay.

1:35:49That's the application that actually.

1:35:51And the university has filed this.

1:35:56Yeah, and.

1:35:58And they do that prior to a designation by law being written for property.

1:36:04Yes, they can even know that it's now considered like my understanding. Sorry. My understanding of how this all works is that because staff have indicted or sorry.

1:36:14Because council has indicated that they're looking to designate structure, it is considered designated. Yeah.

1:36:21But they can still apply for demolition permit, even if it's not the past. Yeah. So we, we relied on some precedence from other municipalities, the province that have permitted deconstruction of designated buildings with the salvage of certain heritage attributes.

1:36:39It is a unique scenario that we won't find ourselves in often in the committee, but there is precedent for it elsewhere.

1:36:47But just through the chair, in terms of the order of things, I think what Alex was saying is.

1:36:53The university was applying to demolish a cultural heritage resource prior to designation.

1:36:59Now that that resource has been designated, does that not change the process?

1:37:04Where they would have to now.

1:37:06The only difference is that before they were applying to demolish a listed building. Now they're applying to demolish a designated building. The process is relatively similar.

1:37:15So their paperwork doesn't need to change.

1:37:17They restart we required this mission of the conservation plan, which is what is attached to this item.

1:37:23But they don't have to.

1:37:28Like this process doesn't pause the demolition permit until after council has decided whether to designate or not.

1:37:34No, because sorry, Jack, but my understanding was when you guys received an application for demolition for a cultural heritage resource.

1:37:44That the city had the opportunity to then.

1:37:48Designate that resource or approve the application to demolish. I don't think 2 can happen at the same time, but.

1:37:54Please correct me and explain this down raw. That's why I brought up precedence and other municipalities. It can happen. It is rare. But.

1:38:03That's why that's why we required a conservation plan that I want how to be de-instructed, which is a form of demolition. There's companies that do deconstruction of properties. They just take it all. It is functionally demolished.

1:38:17But it's describing a process. And so.

1:38:21That is what the conservation plan aligns in alignment with council's direction that only salvageable steel be designated.

1:38:30Which in itself kind of.

1:38:33Approves demolition rate. It's if you're only identifying salvageable steel, you're presupposing that demolition is going to happen. That's why I say I am just following council's direction.

1:38:43That's why I said 3 chair.

1:38:48Understand, I think this is that the part of the issue here and I would also refer back to.

1:38:54I think I was made by Kristen during that number 13 meeting. Please correct me if I get any of this wrong.

1:39:01But with regards to council downers amendment and also works amendment.

1:39:09In some ways salvage deconstruction are at odds with designation and.

1:39:16Like, I here's a here's a question that maybe puts this into perspective.

1:39:22What what are we actually designating if we allow for this filling to be deconstructed?

1:39:31It's yeah, I mean, I can speak for council's direction. It is the salvageable steel.

1:39:38What I would say is that memorization though often a last resort is a form of conservation.

1:39:45Like it's seldom the preferred option.

1:39:48But it is a form of conservation and because.

1:39:52The cell jubile steel is designated. It means that there is some oversight from staff and some buy-in from the committee in this process.

1:40:00Otherwise, we wouldn't be involved. Again, this is what the designation gets for us is some say in the commemoration structure.

1:40:08Otherwise, we all just kind of take a step back and let the university do as it wants.

1:40:14Right, I fully like, I'm sorry that I understand you in the situation. I think.

1:40:22Because if I'm wrong at this meeting here, we're providing comment for a future council decision,

1:40:28which is essentially to provide part for designation for something that has not been constructed because it first has to be deconstructed and you know, they're taking whatever parts from that.

1:40:39And then there's a design process and something is going to go up. Yeah.

1:40:44And we're providing agreement on the part for designation for that.

1:40:50Prior to seeing what the commemoration is.

1:40:54Acknowledge that we're commenting on the deconstruction.

1:40:58Rather, you are commenting on the application to deconstruct today.

1:41:07Through you, chair. To me, this motion, we were asked for a motion

1:41:12supporting part for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act of that of that building as it's doing.

1:41:18And that's what we voted for. So to me, this is a reconsideration of a motion that has already passed.

1:41:25And I cannot vote to deconstruct that building.

1:41:31Plain examples.

1:41:32I don't understand.

1:41:33Yeah.

1:41:35And, you know, in terms of making sure that council hears that, obviously we could have it done. That's fine.

1:41:44But maybe an alternative motion is that heritage wealth recommends that council defer discussion

1:41:50related to any deconstruction of 37 Christie lane to their meeting in January in order to allow for

1:41:55public consultation and consideration of alternatives to demolition or deconstruction.

1:42:04Sorry, if you were to keep up.

1:42:09Heritage wealth recommends that council defer discussion.

1:42:13Related to any deconstruction of 37 Christie lane to their meeting in January.

1:42:182025.

1:42:19In order to allow for public consultation and consideration of alternatives to demolition or deconstruction.

1:42:26I'm okay to put forward that motion. However, I feel like because it is going into summer that we should put together a motion that speaks that we do not support.

1:42:42For that.

1:42:44And that makes sense just so we protect ourselves.

1:42:46I'm fully on board on that. I just think someone's going to say to us, we don't usually talk about what we're not doing. We have action. Is that what you're going to say?

1:42:54No, okay.

1:42:55Well, no, no, sir.

1:42:56Okay.

1:42:58I wasn't going to interrupt, but yes, you can you can pass.

1:43:01You can move your motion.

1:43:03Okay.

1:43:03You can include that type of language.

1:43:05Okay.

1:43:05It's up to you.

1:43:06Do you want to add that to this motion?

1:43:08Yeah.

1:43:09Yeah.

1:43:09So.

1:43:10Did you.

1:43:12So we could start with I have another paragraph.

1:43:16You have another, and then I would also, sorry, this before you finish, we're going to put forward an emotion as well.

1:43:21Um, a delegate to go to the summer 10th meeting.

1:43:25We can do that.

1:43:26Let's let's let's.

1:43:29Okay.

1:43:30So my original beginning heritage well supported staff's recommendation to council, which was to provide notice of intention to designate 37 Kristie Lane in its present form.

1:43:41Percewent to parkour of the Ontario Heritage Act.

1:43:44And then we could add heritage wealth does not support the construction of that building.

1:43:49And then go on to say heritage wealth recommends that council defer discussion related to any deconstruction, et cetera.

1:43:55Okay.

1:43:57I have a comment roll of that motion.

1:43:59Um.

1:44:01Anyone?

1:44:02Yes, I am.

1:44:03I have a motion that I was hoping to bring forward, but I.

1:44:09Curious to get works advice on this because it may.

1:44:13Be at odds in some ways with your motion.

1:44:17Okay.

1:44:18Um.

1:44:19Because my concern is, is this is that and I have a couple more questions regarding the deconstruction that I would like to ask of staff, but.

1:44:29Um, my motion speaks towards.

1:44:34Advising council if they choose to go forward with a deconstruction.

1:44:39Um, demolition application.

1:44:45Can we have both emotion that says we do not support.

1:44:50The construction and also have motions that say.

1:44:55You know, should.

1:44:56Decide to do that we would advise this.

1:45:00Yeah, we can.

1:45:01Okay, so I would bring up motion forward and in terms of your proposed motion, which by the way, I think is.

1:45:06Uh, wise, um.

1:45:09Could we say something along the lines of in the event that the city chooses to proceed with allowing deconstruction of this building.

1:45:15In spite of 12 recommendation against it that all materials be preserved and say in the event that at some point the building is.

1:45:25Reconstructed, I don't know.

1:45:28Yeah, I think this speaks a little bit to the motions that I would bring forward, but I do.

1:45:35Like, are we tabling this motion right now or can we have a little bit more discussions that I am just trying to be positive at the time.

1:45:43We do need to bring up 1 item even if we don't get to all of them. Just if we don't put forward item number.

1:45:50Sorry, but.

1:45:53Um, 0.4 then we won't have a meeting and then you get at all. So we just we do need to vote on a schedule.

1:46:03So just trying to cox and we are 10, 13 minutes away from 2 o'clock.

1:46:09Um, so I would like to put forward your emotions with me. So.

1:46:16Yes, to put forward a motion to extend the meeting.

1:46:22To allow for it because I'm making my concern. I think this is underlying a lot of the discussion today is that this is very quick process going through. Yeah. And I really want to make sure that.

1:46:35You have time to capture the committee's advice and comments so that when it goes to council, they have as much as we can give them as much support we can give them.

1:46:45I don't want to rush that. Now I know everybody's got a busy day reaching into that.

1:46:53I would be happy before the meeting, but.

1:46:57And I know that we need to get 2.4 out, but procedurally this.

1:47:03Readers is can you pause this agenda item to.

1:47:08Deal with 2.4 or are we locked in now?

1:47:11Okay, no, so through chair.

1:47:16You can adjust the schedule of the agenda and actually the chair can make that call and there's no.

1:47:23Discriminate from the committee, we can move things around.

1:47:26If you were to extend the meeting beyond the clock, and we just look to the committee to determine whether or not you're actually going to have a quorum.

1:47:35That would be my concern because we do have a set schedule normally. So, yes, you can pass a motion to extend, but if you're not going to have more of them, then we brought the issue.

1:47:45Not being able to hold me.

1:47:48Right. So, so yes, we can we can pause on this. There's not there's currently nothing on the floor. We can move to 2.4.

1:47:57We can approve the schedule and then come back to this if you should.

1:48:03Thank you, sir chair, if I could just provide a comment to the rest of the committee members.

1:48:10I know people probably have a lot going on today on the plate.

1:48:14I'm extremely concerned that we.

1:48:17Need more time to discuss this to properly lay out motions and to vote on that.

1:48:23My understanding of the situation is that this is our only opportunity to do so.

1:48:29And that's.

1:48:32It's our best interest in the interest of supporting this building that we.

1:48:37Do as much as we can now.

1:48:43Okay, so let's click forward a motion.

1:48:47To see if people are able, many members are able to extend the meeting 1st.

1:48:54And then see where that takes us.

1:48:57Okay.

1:49:00So, we can propose a motion that Heritage 12 extends.

1:49:05The meeting until 2 30.

1:49:09I'm going to say 3 to 3. We still have.

1:49:12Okay.

1:49:14Until 3 o'clock, are we able to put in that motion of 5 minute recess?

1:49:19But you don't need to put it in motion.

1:49:22Just 5 minutes. Okay, so let's.

1:49:25The proposal motion that Heritage 12 extend the meeting until 3 p.m. today.

1:49:31I have a mover.

1:49:34Let's.

1:49:35We're going to.

1:49:35And I'll thank you.

1:49:36Okay.

1:49:37And then I'll.

1:49:41Sorry.

1:49:44Do I see any hand on line?

1:49:47In favor.

1:49:48Follow me.

1:49:50I'm not able to stay until 3. Will we still have quorum?

1:49:54We need 4 for quorum.

1:49:55So, yes, we will.

1:49:59So we're good.

1:49:59Laura.

1:50:00And David.

1:50:02Okay, so that's passed.

1:50:03I would just like to do a 5 minute.

1:50:07File rate.

1:50:08Right.

1:50:09If that's okay.

1:50:10I do need to move my car.

1:50:13All right.

1:50:14I would do that.

1:50:14I believe.

1:50:15Point of order.

1:50:17Can we are we still allowed to provide motions during the break to help speed up the process later on if we have prepared motions or does that have to happen within committee?

1:50:28If there's quorum, it's fine.

1:50:29Yeah.

1:50:29So, what we'll do is it won't be a formalized moving and seconding, but staff can definitely help you with the wording.

1:50:37And then when we get to the item, we can announce it or move in second.

1:50:40Yeah, it's more I just want to email you.

1:50:43Yeah, yeah, we can work on that.

1:51:04But should I?

1:51:07Here's an example.

1:51:08Okay.

1:51:18And.

1:51:20Is there a lawyer?

1:51:22I think that's some sort of.

1:51:25But.

1:51:29Maybe.

1:51:32Just.

1:51:34Jackson says.

1:51:35Okay.

1:51:36I had to sign the version.

1:51:38Not an ask.

1:51:39I'm going to ask you.

1:51:40Excuse me.

1:51:41Yes.

1:51:42Is it happy to sign the version?

1:51:45No, no.

1:51:46What I'm going to do involves the bottom end.

1:51:48I'm going to do that.

1:51:50I think we're going to start with C.

1:51:52It's a long character.

1:51:54Perhaps it is.

1:51:55It's a very long character.

1:52:05Perhaps it is.

1:52:07It's just a story.

1:52:09It's a very long character.

1:52:11Perhaps it is.

1:52:19Thank you.

1:52:20I think Mr. Chairman, I'm here to welcome people out.

1:52:22I'm here to welcome you to this town.

1:52:24I would say that perhaps the floor is yours.

1:52:27No, she's not.

1:52:28She's not.

1:52:28She's not.

1:52:29Just like you in the back, it's us.

1:52:31I think she is.

1:52:32Great.

1:52:33I'll have to make a decision if we have any questions.

1:52:35Yeah, what's the situation?

1:52:37No, I know the floor's yours.

1:52:39It's okay.

1:52:40I'll get you out of here.

1:52:41That's all.

1:52:42That's all.

1:52:43Sorry, what do you have?

1:52:44It looks for me.

1:52:45I think it's for you.

1:52:46It's for the people out there.

1:52:48It's a little.

1:52:49It is.

1:52:50It's a very.

1:52:51My last.

1:52:52Yeah.

1:52:53I think it was.

1:52:55I hope you can see how are you?

1:52:57I remember taking the truth.

1:52:59The inheritance.

1:53:00So.

1:53:01So.

1:53:03So.

1:53:04So.

1:53:05So.

1:53:06So.

1:53:07So.

1:53:08So.

1:53:09So.

1:53:10So.

1:53:11So.

1:53:12So.

1:53:13So.

1:53:14So.

1:53:15So.

1:53:16So.

1:53:17So.

1:53:18So.

1:53:19So, there are.

1:53:20So,

1:53:21there are.

1:53:22So.

1:53:23So,

1:53:24So,

1:53:25So it's solved.

1:53:26So,

1:53:27So it's solved.

1:53:28ancy.

1:53:29So you think like.

1:53:30So then they have off.

1:53:31The park.

1:53:32So it's settled into these events.

1:53:34I don't know.

1:53:35I've heard.

1:53:36I'm afraid they want to announce that.

1:53:38I mean, again, she's not going to do that.

1:53:41I guess.

1:53:42I'm going to take it. Okay. Yeah.

1:53:45Yeah.

1:53:47Okay.

1:53:49Okay.

1:53:51Why does that one?

1:53:53Yeah.

1:53:55Yeah.

1:53:57Okay.

1:53:59Yeah.

1:54:00I wanted to get, let's get.

1:54:02Yeah.

1:54:05Yeah.

1:54:08Yeah.

1:54:11Yeah.

1:54:14Sure.

1:54:16Okay.

1:54:18Yeah.

1:54:20Are you?

1:54:22Yeah.

1:54:24Yeah.

1:54:26Yeah.

1:54:28Yeah.

1:54:30Yeah.

1:54:33Yeah.

1:54:34Yeah.

1:54:36That's right.

1:54:39Yeah.

1:54:41Yeah.

1:54:42Yeah.

1:54:45Yeah.

1:54:48That was.

1:54:50Yeah.

1:54:52Yeah.

1:54:54Thank you.

1:54:56but like that.

1:54:57Right as well.

1:54:58Right.

1:54:59Yes.

1:55:00I think.

1:55:01But.

1:55:02Superb.

1:55:03Related to.

1:55:06Interpreter's.

1:55:08Related to.

1:55:10Yeah.

1:55:12Yeah.

1:55:14Yeah.

1:55:15Yeah.

1:55:16I'll be doing it.

1:55:17This.

1:55:48I think how much you would like to see us do what you would like to see us do.

1:55:53Whether it be a hot pot or a hot set of condiments, not a hot pot.

1:55:57I'll go tell you where I'm going.

1:55:59I'll tell you where I'm going.

1:56:01You know, so you're not going to visit me.

1:56:05Yeah, I'll tell you where I'm going.

1:56:07Fundamentally, they'll say,

1:56:08Great, we'll just get up and we'll just show you.

1:56:10Yeah, that's a slide.

1:56:12So, we'll just get up and we'll go.

1:56:14Yeah, because...

1:56:16Hi, I'm Elm Elm, I'm a student at Stanley.

1:56:18I'm a graduate.

1:56:20I'm a student at...

1:56:22...FAA.

1:56:24That is incredibly...

1:56:26...very...

1:56:28...very...

1:56:30...very...

1:56:32...very...

1:56:34Oh, no, that's not fair.

1:56:36I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:38It's...

1:56:40Right.

1:56:42Oh, no, it's not.

1:56:44Oh, yeah.

1:56:46I'm...

1:56:48I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:50I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:52I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:54I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:56I'm sorry, I'm afraid.

1:56:58If you did...

1:57:00No, wait, wait, wait, wait.

1:57:02Yeah, you told me that's not so...

1:57:04So, even though this was...

1:57:06I don't believe in machines.

1:57:08Right.

1:57:10I've been like this for hours already.

1:57:12I've been doing this for hours and two days.

1:57:14This is my question.

1:57:16Is that your question?

1:57:18Yeah, we do that.

1:57:20What's the number?

1:57:22I've heard some questions.

1:57:24Yeah, I thought we invited...

1:57:26Meeting in mid-20.

1:57:28It was about five and five.

1:57:30I've heard some questions.

1:57:32I've been studying this...

1:57:34Yes, I've been studying this.

1:57:36I don't count.

1:57:38I'm afraid.

1:58:11Thank you.

1:59:11I'm going to show you.

1:59:13Now, I'm just going to show you.

1:59:15I'm going to show you.

1:59:17I'm going to show you.

1:59:19I'm going to show you.

1:59:21I'm going to show you.

1:59:23Right.

1:59:25That's true.

1:59:29You can see.

1:59:34Laura, what if I can drop off.

1:59:36Yes, I did mention that.

1:59:38Okay, so we don't.

1:59:40We need to wait for.

1:59:42Well, I definitely.

1:59:44Come back.

1:59:46Your part.

1:59:48So.

1:59:50Welcome back everyone.

1:59:52He's taking that break.

1:59:54No, that's okay.

1:59:56Flodger.

1:59:58Okay, so.

2:00:02Would you.

2:00:04Alex from Miranda.

2:00:06Alex, I think he's going to email.

2:00:08Okay.

2:00:10What has turned into a pretty long motion.

2:00:12And then we can discuss it.

2:00:14Sorry, I'm just.

2:00:18My eyes.

2:00:20My eyes.

2:00:22I don't know if you mean that the motion.

2:00:47Last.

2:00:49With the miss.

2:00:51The last one.

2:00:54The very last one.

2:00:56Yep.

2:00:58I don't know what that needs to be in the motion.

2:01:00You know what I mean.

2:01:02Well, I think.

2:01:04Yeah, so.

2:01:06Okay. Okay. I need to get into.

2:01:35So, sorry, I was towards that.

2:01:37Well, that's it. Yeah.

2:01:39I think the first paragraph.

2:02:15But I have to.

2:02:17Okay.

2:02:19Well, we find.

2:02:45How much time do we have left?

2:02:47No, we're back.

2:02:49It's set.

2:02:51So.

2:02:53When you deal with 2.4, if you want to.

2:02:57Okay.

2:02:59Let's.

2:03:01The item 2.4.

2:03:03I'm also wondering.

2:03:05Many of lengthy.

2:03:07For any comments or questions regarding 99.

2:03:12We move to.

2:03:13I don't 3.1.

2:03:1599.

2:03:16Yeah.

2:03:17No, me.

2:03:18I have a lot of questions. Okay.

2:03:20Okay.

2:03:21I'm just, I know we have a delegate online here.

2:03:23So I just wanted to compensate of their time as well.

2:03:25But I don't want.

2:03:26I know that we have a lot of other items on the line right now.

2:03:30So let's jump to 2.4.

2:03:31Just so we can get a meeting scheduled for January.

2:03:34So.

2:03:35The proposed.

2:03:37So, Jack, would you like to.

2:03:39The spreadsheet basically speaks for itself,

2:03:42but didn't the same formula that we've used this year.

2:03:45First Monday of the month, generally.

2:03:47Exceptions holidays.

2:03:49I also listed the obligation dates for the initial and revised agenda.

2:03:53Just so the committee has those.

2:03:55Okay.

2:03:57Are there any comments from here?

2:03:59Yeah, just with regard to.

2:04:02Will we receive the revised agenda the Friday before and the meeting is on Monday.

2:04:06Sometimes there's just so much to do with the meeting.

2:04:08So I'm just going to go ahead and get a little bit of a break.

2:04:10I just wanted to make sure that we have a good time.

2:04:12So with regard to.

2:04:14Will we receive the revised agenda the Friday before and the meeting is on Monday.

2:04:18Sometimes it, there's just so much new material to read.

2:04:21That it's, it's tough to keep up. So I'm wondering if we could move that date.

2:04:25Back a little bit, whether I'm, you know, anyone can give their feedback here.

2:04:30But even if we received it.

2:04:32On the Monday or Tuesday before the meeting that would be.

2:04:36I'm going to digest it's difficult because that gap of seven days.

2:04:41Provides more time for more material to be submitted.

2:04:45So if we moved, like, if we did it on the Monday, that would mean the first one was published on the Friday and then you had 2 days and then revised it's published.

2:04:55So, how's the Jeff's and Jack, that would make it so we back up until like the Thursday.

2:05:00Instead of the Friday, I looked at courts. I don't know if there's procedural by law dictates.

2:05:05So procedural by law just has like.

2:05:08The end guidelines, there's nothing wrong with it happening before.

2:05:14I would just go back to staff to make sure that they have the appropriate time to give you the material.

2:05:20The reason there is the agenda and the revised is to give that opportunity for additional.

2:05:25And I know that time period is a good amount of time to make that.

2:05:29Definitely recognize the earlier in advance, you can get it the more time you have to digest and go with your questions.

2:05:37And I know this guy has happened between staff about using different techniques on an agenda. It's been 1 that we discussed using the 2025. So, I think you might find that.

2:05:47There'll be less items added on the revised anyway.

2:05:50As always trying to put all information on the agenda.

2:05:53But if staff have the ability to do it quicker, they're definitely.

2:05:57And I could live with Thursday, but.

2:06:00Yeah, I agree with that. I.

2:06:04Through you chair. Yeah, I think there.

2:06:10This meeting highlights how there can be an issue when, when several key items are missing from an agenda until the revised goes out and this meeting, we had.

2:06:203 days, it's really 67 hours on a weekend.

2:06:25That's hard for committee members to process and for like to formulate if they're delegated or not.

2:06:32So, if we can extend that, I think we're already in line with some or something. So, if we need to, I'm happy to propose.

2:06:40I'm sorry, I'm sorry to jump in here. Those revised dates based off the procedural by law.

2:06:48But committee doesn't have the ability to change the procedural by law. What it would be is our request to staff to be in advance of the deadlines that has each friend.

2:06:57But we can.

2:06:59We're not going to update that to say Thursday.

2:07:02If that makes sense.

2:07:04We're both sorry, the meeting takes place Thursday, not the revised agenda coming out with the revised and we can't change those revised agenda posting date.

2:07:12To be Thursdays because those are based on the particular by law and we are not going to change the procedural by law in this meeting. Right.

2:07:19Your request is that.

2:07:22To try and get the material in advance of the revised schedule, but staff still won't have the ability to bring it that way. If.

2:07:29It just happens to fall back. Sorry, I misrepresented myself here.

2:07:36So, currently the rise in China comes up to Friday before the week that the meeting is going to happen. Right.

2:07:42I am not proposing to change when the revised agenda comes in my holidays. I know that's okay. I, I guess, if we move the meeting from the Monday to.

2:07:54The Thursday following the revised agenda going out on the Friday, it would at least provide that much more time for us to.

2:08:01Ask questions of staff.

2:08:04You know, read into the documents allow for public to have a little bit more time to see the revised agenda and decide they delegate. So.

2:08:12Very, this is a fine line in that scenarios to revise the agenda is not fine. Like, it's not always have to be 3 days.

2:08:19No, no, it's it is the.

2:08:21It is on a day of the week prior to the meeting. I see. Okay.

2:08:26Listen, I've heard. Okay.

2:08:29All right. So, do we want to.

2:08:32Move that we change our meeting dates to Thursdays at lunch.

2:08:39I personally prefer either the mornings or the evenings, but I.

2:08:44It's okay if we just vote on just a Monday.

2:08:49The January meeting and then during that game, we talk about.

2:08:53The other other dates. It's okay just so we can save more time for.

2:08:58So we would be just 1 day for January.

2:09:03So the advice revised motion for this meeting would be we're voting just on the January meeting and then in the January meeting, we'll we'll we'll discuss time.

2:09:11And also weekday alteration and whatnot.

2:09:15Yeah, I just want to see.

2:09:18Like enough time now that we've put forward that we're going to be full group off. I want to save as much time.

2:09:24Okay. Thank you.

2:09:27Okay. Thank you.

2:09:30So the proposed motion would be that heritage wealth schedule the next meeting for January 13th.

2:09:382025.

2:09:40Do we have a mover for this?

2:09:44Okay, seconder, thank Brandon and David. Thank you and all in favor.

2:09:49Okay, so let's get back to item.

2:09:55Number 2.2.2.

2:10:00Okay, so I believe Alex you have emails.

2:10:06Here with those motions and was that that was in favor of Miranda's even up this with Miranda said as well. Yes.

2:10:13Now I.

2:10:15He's just in my first paragraph. Sorry. So the first paragraph was heritage wealth supported staffs.

2:10:21Recommendation to council, which was to provide notice of intention to designate 37 Christie Lane in its current form.

2:10:28Perfume to part 4 of the Ontario heritage act.

2:10:31And then the rest you proceed by email, I think.

2:10:39And do you have a clarifying question that is regarding 1 of the aspects of the motion that I would ask that.

2:10:49Because we can drive under the process that we're in with where like it's notice of intention to designate. It's not necessarily to be able to treat as such.

2:11:03What is council's ability to direct the university.

2:11:11Towards certain immediate remedial work that could be done on the structure.

2:11:19I'll be very specific here because this will be in the motion snow loads have been brought up as an issue.

2:11:25If say the last was allowed to be deconstructed.

2:11:31Distorted separate to the entire structure.

2:11:37That again, I was hoping to follow the spirits.

2:11:40Ask the question to them that help mitigate the threat of snow loads on the structure. And it's, it's, you know, such integrity.

2:11:49As well as there's some other.

2:11:52The engineers brought up that it regards to the meetings.

2:11:56I'll look to Steven for assistance on this, but it's my understanding that council cannot direct property owner to undertake any specific.

2:12:06Activity like that.

2:12:11They cannot tell them they have to support the steel structures or glass or to salvage the glass.

2:12:17Unless the glass were included.

2:12:20As a heritage attribute, then there could be a conditional, but that could be a condition of approval.

2:12:27Demo should curtain right so council could.

2:12:34Indicate to the university that as an item of good faith, they could pursue recommendations. They have from an engineer's report. Right. They, they encourage the university.

2:12:45They can encourage so Alex, would you like to read out in full? Maybe your proposed.

2:12:58Motion that you sent to the clerks, but can you just.

2:13:03Read it slow so I can all digest it. Yeah, I don't know. Will they be able to see it on their screen or some all in and we'll get that up on the screen. Yeah, that would be all visualize.

2:13:17Good night. Thank you very well. This on this screen. That possible. Yeah. Okay. Ask a question.

2:13:24I think it's all the comparisons aren't even brought up with the kid bar.

2:13:31So the property owners in that case have voluntarily decided to support the structure of the bar.

2:13:39And that was a result of mediation.

2:13:44Through through the chair that particular case was came out of minutes of settlement.

2:13:51Okay, so it went to the.

2:13:55Out of that, that's the result. Yeah.

2:13:59So, was that an encouragement on the part of council that was then discussed at the oil. I know you.

2:14:10Well, that that hearing has been adjourned without date returns. So I can actually comment on the detail.

2:14:20As an example.

2:14:23Yeah, maybe let's stick to, I know we're trying to find examples to kind of use as precedent, but maybe let's stick to.

2:14:30And that's possible.

2:14:34And before just working on bringing up screen here.

2:14:38No, if I could ask maybe to fill it out through the chair to staff. What is.

2:14:58The purview of the property standards bylaws with regards to.

2:15:02In encouraging property over to.

2:15:10Do certain maintenance first.

2:15:14Through the chair, I think I have to say I can't speak for properties.

2:15:22There's that that is their purview.

2:15:27The proper standards plan through and to.

2:15:42The committee will get this up on the screen very shortly. Let's give it a moment.

2:15:47But I want to speak about 1 of the items that you have here.

2:15:51The last paragraph, anything's the delegate.

2:15:54My recommendation would be actually to remove that we have a.

2:15:58Templated motion for that type of.

2:16:02So, yeah, okay. So we'll take that 1 out and then a following whatever.

2:16:08Motion that a perfect way will then come to a second motion, which will be.

2:16:13Okay, great. Thank you.

2:16:15And then I'll also say.

2:16:23Right, and you had a permit that you did before, if you could provide that.

2:16:28You want me to see me? That works for you and you can get it above there. But right now this motion will not have that content. Okay.

2:16:36Through chair, Alex, if you want to go ahead and read your motion. Okay. Thank you.

2:17:20Through chair, so.

2:17:23My motion reads or the motion reads.

2:17:26That heritage wall does not support demolition or reconstruction of 37 Kristina.

2:17:33That heritage wall buys this council to defer discussion related to deconstruction demolition of 37 Kristine Lane to their January 2025 planning meeting.

2:17:46In order to allow for greater public consultation and consideration of alternatives to deconstruction demolition.

2:17:54That heritage wall advise council that no deconstruction application be granted until after a design for the commemorative structure is completed.

2:18:04It has been reviewed by staff heritage golf and council.

2:18:08That heritage wall advise council to and can I.

2:18:14Men this on the flight encourage.

2:18:16To encourage the university to complete immediate maintenance items outlined by Tacoma engineering's report.

2:18:26Regarding the painting and protection of steel components to protect further loss of heritage elements.

2:18:33That the glass be removed temporarily and stored.

2:18:37To prevent further damage from snow loads.

2:18:41That heritage golf advise council that the limestone, which was salvaged from the non extend.

2:18:47OAC barns and localized to wealth.

2:18:50He included in the list of heritage attributes informing the deconstruction and design of a commemorative structure.

2:18:57It's potential salvage. It's potential for salvage being identified by the engineering report.

2:19:03That heritage golf advise council to include the glass as a heritage attribute and salvageable material.

2:19:10That heritage golf advise council that as much of this salvageable salvageable material be retained.

2:19:16And that all salvageable material be used in the design of the commemorative structure and not some as indicated by the university's letter.

2:19:25The report was published in July of the year 19, 2024.

2:19:29That council.

2:19:31Should encourage university.

2:19:35To complete both a pre deconstruction and post deconstruction, salvageable material audit using a cap certified professional.

2:19:44And that these reports be provided to council staff.

2:19:49And heritage golf.

2:19:51Happy to answer any questions.

2:19:54Do any of you have any questions for regarding.

2:20:03This motion.

2:20:06Maybe I just advise something here. So.

2:20:10This paragraph.

2:20:13The third one from the bottom and the second one from the bottom.

2:20:17It might make sense to preempt that with.

2:20:21Advice to revise.

2:20:25And some intention to designate.

2:20:27Just because that's what those 2 are doing. So, it would just be clear right now.

2:20:31Yeah, it's safe. Yeah, I see. Just just.

2:20:34Yeah, that's yeah.

2:20:36So that you would see that heritage golf advise council to.

2:20:43Amend the notice of intention to designate to include the following in its heritage attribute this.

2:20:50Okay, so at this point, are there any other common questions?

2:21:24Any members probably.

2:21:27I don't see your hand up either. No, okay.

2:21:30Okay, okay. So.

2:21:33Let's move forward on voting.

2:21:36Just to interrupt here, the thing that was not included that we just received.

2:21:42And I would yeah, it was the little preamble at the top. So I'm just going to leave that as well and I'll read it off.

2:21:48Just so everybody's aware, but it says.

2:21:52Heritage golf supported staff's recommendation to council to provide notice of intention to designate 37 gritty lane.

2:21:58In its current form, pursuing to part 4 of the Ontario heritage act.

2:22:02And then everything was right.

2:22:06So, can I get a mover for this motion? Alex, a seconder.

2:22:17Even at all in favor. Okay, so this motion.

2:22:24That's passed. I think that's the longest.

2:22:27I don't want to. Yes.

2:22:30Okay.

2:22:32So, I think that's the motion for you, chair point of order. Do we need to vote on the motion that was in the agenda?

2:22:41Yeah, no, you don't go to any motion that you see in front of you on any agenda is always just a recommendation. There's no requirement for you to do that.

2:22:50I will also note that I think it was a desire to appoint a delegate.

2:22:56So, I think that's the motion here that heritage global points to delegate on behalf of the committee on the 37 gritty lane application to construct a cultural heritage resource.

2:23:061.4 that's 514 at the December 20, 24 council planning meeting. So, if you'd like to nominate somebody from the committee.

2:23:17We have any volunteers. I'm sure. Okay.

2:23:23Do we need to read it out and follow up with us?

2:23:26Okay.

2:23:28Okay, we have a mover for this. Okay, we're done. Second, David. Okay. All in favor.

2:23:33I was and so that's been moved.

2:23:37Are we able to move on to another item?

2:23:40Then or.

2:23:42There's no other questions. Once it's been moved, be.

2:23:45Okay. So, I'd like to move on then to.

2:23:51Item 3.1. So, that's 99 multi road west.

2:23:56So, I do have a conflict of interest for this item. So, I'm going to step out and I'm going to hand it over to David.

2:24:03Sure.

2:24:26And.

2:24:27We're going to start with, uh, to hear from Stephen. We could start the new deal. And then I'll.

2:24:35Thank you, David. Good. Just give me the ability to share.

2:25:04Again, thank you, David. Through you as the chair.

2:25:09Be happy to I'm going to make a very.

2:25:13Expedited presentation.

2:25:16I'll start out by just reading the staff's recommendation, which as the clerk has just confirmed is really informed just of a recommendation to the committee.

2:25:27And that's the heritage golf supports the heritage attributes identified at 99 all be road west as they would find in staff reports for the December 2nd.

2:25:36And secondly, that pairs both recommends the city council give notice of its intention to designate 99 multi road west pursuant to part 4 section 29 of the Ontario giant.

2:25:49What I would like to do is just, and can I jump around a little bit on our report, not on the screen, but just reading out a few things.

2:25:59And I'll start off by saying.

2:26:03We're just reiterating to the committee.

2:26:07That this heritage wealth meeting of September 9th. Heritage wealth has already supported staffs recommended.

2:26:15Statement of significance a little bit here to catch.

2:26:19But in the meantime, there's been discussion between heritage planning staff and the proponent or property owner.

2:26:28Which staff feel have come up with preferred and staffs pending.

2:26:34List of heritage attributes.

2:26:36And that's what's presented here today in the report.

2:26:40And I'd like to just read out those attributes, which here on the screen.

2:26:49And so the following elements of the property should be considered as heritage attributes in the designation in the part 4. So that would be the original 1.5.

2:27:00One and a half story building form. And the gable roof massing of 1840s farmhouse.

2:27:06The original exterior limestone walls, including original limestone coins, cornerstones.

2:27:13window openings and there is an indigenous report that has been provided by the boundary owner

2:27:21that points out those original windows or suggests that the windows and namely they would be the two

2:27:28small rectangular openings in the gable of the south facade facing Malpy Road. The first story

2:27:36rectangular window opening on the northernmost portion of the east facade, a small rectangular

2:27:42window opening in the gable of the north facade and also the first story rectangular window opening

2:27:49on the southernmost portion of the west facade. I hope that's clearer than that but I'm also hopeful

2:27:59that the committee members said it seems to read this report ahead of time. What is being

2:28:05recommended as well is what elements are not considered to be heritage or should not be considered

2:28:10to be heritage attributes and those would be the existing window frames or Bain's doors or hardware,

2:28:17existing chimneys and any other windows that aren't identified in the previous

2:28:25and also finally the vegetation or fields and topography surrounding residents.

2:28:33I wanted to point out that in the discussion with the property owner, property owners offered

2:28:38themselves a drawing which indicated a lot for what may eventually in future may become an actual

2:28:49real property lot that would contain the built heritage resource.

2:28:58So with these discussions with the current owner, we have actually

2:29:04concurred and agreed on the information that's been presented in this report and I'd also like

2:29:09to add that the property owner has now indicated that they won't be objecting to the notice of

2:29:15attention to that. I'm happy to answer any questions or put any visuals on the screen if

2:29:22need be but I'm happy to. Would anyone have any questions or do you? Through you chair. Yeah.

2:29:32So just to clarify, so at this meeting, this agenda item, are we agreeing to the

2:29:45heritage attributes as listed in this report? Through the chair, that's correct. For a follow-up

2:29:53question, is it common for notice of attention to designated or designated bylaws to include a

2:30:06list of non-heritage attributes and is there other instances in this city of a designation by law

2:30:14including specifically things like specific non-included heritage attributes? Through the chair,

2:30:22that has been a common practice. Well, actually I shouldn't say common practice but it has been

2:30:26practiced that the city of Guelph has used to be specific as to, A, what is protected by the bylaw

2:30:35and what is not. I can think of several examples in our existing, our long list of heritage destination

2:30:44bylaws and what in particular for 27 Barbara Avenue, I have a wild which is a designation that

2:30:52happened some years ago, early designation. And just as an example with the building, it was

2:31:00stated that the front part of the building was what was a cultural heritage value and not

2:31:06the rear. So that has been done before and there was, there was reason enough to include that in

2:31:15the recommendation or at least in the staff discussion. It's not unusual and staff don't

2:31:22have any concerns if that's something that might be written into notice of attention.

2:31:29Thank you. Yeah, I wanted to confirm that this was, we were setting a precedent with how

2:31:36heritage attributes are identified or chosen to be left off the designation.

2:31:46For those items that are identified as non, not to be listed as heritage attributes,

2:31:56in the future with the property owner, if they're doing work with regards to those elements,

2:32:01they are me saying you don't have to go through heritage permit application because this deals

2:32:08with something that's specifically listed as not a heritage attribute of the building.

2:32:21Just to go back to, I just realized I need to share. That's the truth with like any

2:32:30anything that's not a heritage attribute may not necessitate a heritage permit.

2:32:35Right. Just this property owner because this property is likely to be developed in the future,

2:32:45they want to precise clarity on what was being designated and what was not. So that's,

2:32:49that's why we have the list of what is and what is not. Just to provide clarity so that moving

2:32:54forward, there's no ambiguity about what is covered under the bylaw.

2:32:59Yeah, I accept that. And I think this is where I want to make sure that we're aware of exactly what

2:33:07we're agreeing to in the future that could happen with the property.

2:33:14There, I do have comments about the wording of some of the attributes to provide more clarity

2:33:22in that regard. The two small rectangular opens in the gable of the silver facade

2:33:29should include on the second story to clarify the position. Similarly, the smaller angular

2:33:37window between the gable and the north facade on the second story that we bring in more in

2:33:43one of the other attributes as they're written. I do have a question for you to share.

2:33:54Can staff speak to why the doorway entrance on the south facade

2:34:04is not included as one of the heritage attributes? I think I asked this because it is one of the

2:34:11features that is identifiable in the older photographs. And I think at one point it was

2:34:18identified in relation to the large stone that was above. So I would like to understand why

2:34:26that's not included. Through the chair, I'm glad you asked that because I'd like to be able to say

2:34:36I know exactly what that opening is or was when it was built. And I'd like to be able to confirm

2:34:45what sort of lintel supports the load over top of that door opening in what is obviously a very

2:34:51thick wall and a stone and mortar. But at this time, I can't actually say the only thing I can say

2:34:58for sure is that in a photograph, or two photographs that we've come up with in our research,

2:35:05photographs that we feel are probably dating to the 1970s, like definitely later 20th century

2:35:11photographs, they show that opening with a very blurry version of a large lintel stone.

2:35:20That's all I have to go on it. So I couldn't say with any confidence what that heritage

2:35:26attribute is. And even if it's an original, I think that you'll find that the outcome of the

2:35:32discussion with the owners was that what we could agree on was we're trying to protect

2:35:37what's original of the stone house. So not having the ability to confirm that doorway,

2:35:45I didn't feel comfortable including it as a heritage attribute.

2:35:50And yeah, this isn't meant to be really staffed over the content. Because you guys have these

2:36:00conversations with the property owner. I'm left to ask you to understand how the work happened.

2:36:07If we arrived at these attributes, I would just provide a small comment, but it'll pass

2:36:15to somebody else if they want to speak. But I believe part of what we established at a prior

2:36:23meeting with regards to the long be that the value of this property is not high.

2:36:33Because there's a near over top, it doesn't detract from its value.

2:36:40But now we're in the tricky situation of having to identify physical attributes.

2:36:46And we're not fully aware of that veneer. What is not maybe one issue I have is,

2:36:57is there windows or doorways that are covered by the veneer that we simply cannot see?

2:37:02And are we missing out on the opportunity to include that part of that information

2:37:15if we agree to this attribute list as it is presented at present? And I will probably be

2:37:22praying for an emotion that we devise. That's all that, you know, a future date of the veneer

2:37:31were to come off. Because again, it's about the property and not the owner. I mean, that gives

2:37:37us a chance to say, like, let's look at it again, because we only have the existing condition to

2:37:42go off of what I would hate to miss things because we can't see it.

2:37:48Can you just just comment? In terms of the list, it says shape the location of window openings,

2:37:56including I don't know if adding the words but not limited to would satisfy your concern.

2:38:08I would only wonder, and this would be a question for the

2:38:16probably the delegate if they feel it can speak to it is if that

2:38:21runs contrary to their desire to have certain openings from like left on the other bit list.

2:38:30But I can't speak to their position on that. So I guess I guess you're using me.

2:38:39Yeah, I will know that there is a delegate the property owners heritage consultant is on the line.

2:38:49They're available for questions.

2:38:59With the extent to the heritage attribute that not being listed, which is the vegetation field

2:39:06to talk about the how does this interact with

2:39:12other planning processes with regards to things like the tree by law or site reviews.

2:39:19This is getting severed at future date. I'm also concerned when I read that that nothing left

2:39:27specifically off the heritage attribute list that there might be something there that should be on

2:39:34the list. I don't wish to

2:39:37be consistent on suggesting conspiracy but we would be transparent either through what is quite

2:39:42a broad statement of saying we don't want to touch anything else.

2:39:52Mr. Chair,

2:39:55here we are. Thanks. Through you Mr. Chair, the property owner or the proponent has

2:40:04come up with a property lot with a lot sketch and that's that I found that quite helpful and I

2:40:11believe that the owner found it helpful too because as Jack had mentioned, what the purpose of the

2:40:18discussions was trying to make it very clear on in everyone's mind what's within and what's outside of

2:40:26the area of significance, the real property and the buildings or structures there on it.

2:40:32Just how does what does the nation's actually protect. The final heritage

2:40:40attribute saying vegetation, fields and topography surrounding the residents.

2:40:47It's my was my impression that it was other elements of the lot proposed

2:40:56are not listed as absolute. We can't really speak to the veritable attributes or things that aren't

2:41:06meant to be veritable attributes beyond the real property that's being contemplated for designation.

2:41:13So really what we're we wanted to make sure that the property owner was clear that we're really

2:41:17just talking about a lot that this built heritage resource is is on and so that's why they wanted

2:41:25to make sure that they identified that relatively small lot not identifying a lot that's the entirety

2:41:31of 99 mall in west which as you can understand and has been displayed in previous presentations

2:41:38by staff it's huge area. This is meant to it actually ironically it is meant to limit

2:41:46this list of heritage as opposed to including like not be limited to it's really the other way

2:41:53around heritage. We wanted to make sure that staff is supportive of them that the and we ideally

2:42:00we want would like the owner to be supporting those that's proposed and that seems to be what

2:42:06occurred. Yeah now just to speak to previous point that you made Alex it's always possible for the

2:42:14the owner of the city to to introduce the the idea of amending or making changes to heritage

2:42:21designation by a lot if new information comes out that's always possible if something gets

2:42:26uncovered in the future about the but the Scott Farnows that's something that that could always

2:42:33be added as a heritage to be protected if it's been discovered. Right through you chair to

2:42:42Stephen just to clarify so the I guess normally why I'm saying that it wouldn't really because

2:42:52there's no the vegetation stuff doesn't speak to the designation of the building

2:42:57it wouldn't be required to be listed as a heritage attribute. I guess this is a question for

2:43:08property owner is the reason that the vegetation topography and it's included is because this is

2:43:14they want to make it easier to get to a later potential stage of severing the lot.

2:43:23I guess why include the list of non heritage attributes if we are only capturing the ones

2:43:31in the specified heritage attributes. I appreciate that they've come and are willing to

2:43:37doesn't even probably get the attributes as listed but I haven't got a difficult time understanding

2:43:43the necessity to list non heritage attributes rather than just have a set of this is a big

2:43:50attribute to the chair this isn't a requirement to have what's in and what's out right it's it was

2:43:59at the request of the owner for comment so heritage by and staff we don't feel we have any concerns

2:44:06because a it's been done before but also b it doesn't doesn't conflict with the intentions of

2:44:14it's to the project.

2:44:16Anything we have to do we're ready to quit now we have to do the self-advance.

2:44:24No I um any other questions?

2:44:30I'm glad you're here.

2:44:34Can you have the on my last film?

2:44:40Are you?

2:44:42I think he's first on the list so be delighted to hear any comments.

2:44:52Thank you Mr. Chair. I'm also here with last year Jones and I'm not sure over there at last year do you want to start with anything?

2:44:58Thank you Mr. Chair and committee for allowing us to delegate.

2:45:07Sorry everyone I'm home with a stick to our today so.

2:45:16Lash do you want to respond to anything specifically from the committee discussion?

2:45:22I think I would just like to reiterate what Steven said.

2:45:32Are you having problems hearing Lasha?

2:45:34I am.

2:45:36Yes.

2:45:37Lasha.

2:45:39I'm sorry.

2:45:41I'm sorry.

2:45:43I'm sorry.

2:45:45I'm sorry.

2:45:47I'm sorry.

2:45:49No you're very faint. I'm not sure whether it's your headset.

2:45:53I don't have a headset in.

2:45:55That's better wherever you're speaking to. It's probably your microphone on your computer maybe.

2:45:59Okay. I will try. Is this okay?

2:46:01Yes.

2:46:03Okay. I think I just want to reiterate. Thank you.

2:46:05I understand that.

2:46:07I think we've had a lot of discussion about this and we'll get to it.

2:46:10So I'll just comment on the questions that everyone is in agreement on the,

2:46:14the reason for including things that are not at not attributes is just because the

2:46:17property owner wants absolute clarity on what is and is not considered an attribute.

2:46:21As Steven mentioned, this property is going to be developed, but in the future,

2:46:25but probably not for a very long time.

2:46:27So we do want to have things in there because we know that staff,

2:46:32you know, may change.

2:46:33as to what the attributes and what the significance of the property is so that there's no room

2:46:38for misinterpretation or miscommunication in the future.

2:46:45I think, Mr. Chair, we just add to that in terms of the area that we're talking about

2:46:53and potential severance or as a lot was so that we were talking about the land immediately

2:47:01around the existing heritage attribute as opposed to what Stephen had said was the whole

2:47:08property and so that was the importance of that.

2:47:12How this lot is ultimately, whether it's part of the subdivision, whether it's a severance

2:47:18in advance, we'll need to consider everything as part of this and including servicing as

2:47:25part of the future development of the subdivision and this immediate property.

2:47:32Very good question before I go to our speaker, Andy or Mr. Golden.

2:47:39Sorry, I do have one.

2:47:46So if this committee was not in support of the list of non-parachute attributes, how

2:47:59would that impact the property owner's desire to now see this as the exact contingent?

2:48:11Lash, do you want to answer that?

2:48:18Do you want me to answer that?

2:48:20Whichever one you want.

2:48:22Well, I'll take it.

2:48:24I'll let Lash have.

2:48:25I think the certainty of things that are not part of the important to our team at this

2:48:34point so that there is no ambiguity as we move forward.

2:48:38I'm not sure of what you're driving at, but I'm happy to respond to it once you tell me.

2:48:45Lasha?

2:48:46Yeah, and I think we would defer to staff too.

2:48:50I mean staff has no issues with the list of attributes and we anticipate that that's what

2:48:57would still be recommended to council from staff's perspective if the committee has a

2:49:03different opinion then we may have to take that back to the property owner for additional discussion.

2:49:12You follow?

2:49:14Through you, chair.

2:49:16I think my only concern, we discussed this already, but maybe we should reiterate is that if we support the

2:49:24heritage action routes as written, are we closing the door on discussing those items that are not

2:49:33considered heritage judge means that a later date through a regular heritage permit application process.

2:49:38Like there's no, nothing's on the table to change the building at present.

2:49:44So I am somewhat uncomfortable to say these are off the table from now on without a clear

2:49:56plan as to any changes to that building.

2:49:58I know the property owners looking for clarity, but I also don't want to delegate away.

2:50:05This advisory committee's ability to provide comment and further date if an actual heritage permit application addressing those specific items comes forward.

2:50:19I just feel like we would be washing our hands of this.

2:50:25And we felt it's written through the chair.

2:50:31Alex, may I ask you what of the elements that are being does not being heritage attributes. Which of those do you feel would potentially in the future become something that would be a legitimate heritage attribute?

2:50:53I guess my issue to staff.

2:50:58My issue is on the principle of process. I individually have no concerns, but I would hate to handcuff.

2:51:13The committee later meeting, which I may not even present.

2:51:18Just again, it's not to do with the personal issues I have. I am just uncomfortable from a procedural side of things to close the door or potentially close the door on a meaningful conversation at a time where a heritage permit application has been submitted to the city.

2:51:37I don't wish just to be taken as an indication of ill will towards the property owner. I'm quite pleased that they are wanting to come to the table now.

2:51:49I don't want to be causing friction on that account, but I also.

2:51:56I'm realizing that future meeting or this committee might go. Well, why did we say yes to all of these not being included when they could have had that conversation at that time?

2:52:09Because it may be that none of these are important enough to retain, but I just simply don't feel I have the.

2:52:17Information to say whether or not that is the case.

2:52:21He got an opponent for you. If I may make a quick comment. So, in terms of heritage, I think it's really important to connect them to the heritage value of a building.

2:52:34The fundamental heritage value of this structure is that it is 1 of the earliest stone farmhouses in Pus lunch.

2:52:42We are I'm satisfied that the stone form of the structure is thoroughly protected in this by law.

2:52:50And so, for me, I think that including.

2:52:54These all specifying what is not considered a heritage attribute is worth the owner support for this designation.

2:53:02And so I just caution the committee when we worked with.

2:53:06A property owner to obtain their support. That can be quite fragile. So.

2:53:12Just the cognizant of that.

2:53:15That's just just my advice. Like, I think this is a good, good news story and an example of something that.

2:53:21You know, we have both made some compromises and come out with something that is storyable by staff and by the property.

2:53:29I will, I will not agree any motion to change the.

2:53:34I'm sorry.

2:53:36Here.

2:53:38Through going.

2:53:43Sorry guys, I wasn't sure if you were talking to me, I was just going to comment that.

2:53:50It makes perfect sense to me that they would want things to be really specific.

2:53:54I also take the point that.

2:53:57This is the kind of development that could take so long that none of us may be around. So, I'm, I'm very satisfied with it and it made.

2:54:07The rationale for including what's not included made a lot of sense to me.

2:54:15I'm sorry.

2:54:17I had a comment.

2:54:19We have.

2:54:21The motion.

2:54:23I will have to bring that.

2:54:25Well, again, that here at 12 reports the area.

2:54:29Identify for 99.

2:54:31West is our client to the staff report date of December to 24.

2:54:36And that here at 12 recommends that should be complicated.

2:54:39What is the intention to do that?

2:54:41And you might involve the road west pursuant to part 4.

2:54:44We have it's the area.

2:54:46Period.

2:54:47To be further discussion on.

2:54:50I'll move it.

2:54:53Okay. We'll wait for the secretary.

2:54:57Thank you Kelly.

2:54:59All in favor.

2:55:02Thank you.

2:55:08Thank you. Mr. Chair. Members of committee.

2:55:11Thank you.

2:55:13Thank you.

2:55:15Thank you.

2:55:17So, I don't have any.

2:55:19Comments or any announcements to make before German.

2:55:46I know of those.

2:55:48We're moving the item that we're going to move the item.

2:55:57We can.

2:55:58For.

2:55:59Well, I'll ask Steven.

2:56:01I have a 2.3.

2:56:03The heritage and that assessment.

2:56:04And we have the designation strategy because there are 2 remaining items.

2:56:09The strategy can be deferred until January.

2:56:12It's never timeline.

2:56:13I don't have any concerns about.

2:56:15Putting off your road.

2:56:19We did have the member of the structure.

2:56:22The older earlier in the meeting, but unfortunately.

2:56:28Stable to the expanding.

2:56:30So.

2:56:31I don't think there's any concerns if this is.

2:56:35Okay.

2:56:36So, let's table that item then.

2:56:38To the next her.

2:56:4012 meetings. So every 2.3.

2:56:42We will move to the January.

2:56:4420.

2:56:4525.

2:56:46We'll move to the January.

2:56:47We'll move to the January.

2:56:4920.

2:56:5020.

2:56:5120.

2:56:5220.

2:56:5320.

2:56:5420.

2:56:5520.

2:56:5620.

2:56:5720.

2:56:5820.

2:56:5920.

2:57:0020.

2:57:0120.

2:57:0220.

2:57:0320.

2:57:0420.

2:57:0520.

2:57:0620.

2:57:0720.

2:57:0920.

2:57:1020.

2:57:1120.

2:57:1220.

2:57:1320.

2:57:1420.

2:57:19Any language questions?

2:57:20Already 25 parents.

2:57:21Well, the meeting.

2:57:22Just put it down in July, the 3 o'clock timeline, reset.

2:57:24Promotion.

2:57:25And then we'll also move item.

2:57:262.5.

2:57:27January, January.

2:57:28245 meeting.

2:57:29And then so.

2:57:30So, and so this update, we don't provide any comments or questions. So this is just, you write an update. So we'll have time later period to be able to write comments and questions.

2:57:42Okay, well, through you, chair.

2:57:46Yeah, I'll just, just a few comments that believe the committee is likely already aware.

2:57:52So, yeah, we now know the outcome of the November 13th to 26th meeting of council regarding.

2:58:00The draft of the material form to our heritage conservation district plan and guidelines.

2:58:06So council has passed 2 motions and you're probably aware of it.

2:58:12What I wanted to say is that we're, and you're, you're aware as well the tax been canvassing committee members or if an available date or.

2:58:26A special workshop, I've been told I need to interrupt you. Um, just so I can create a motion to just extend the meeting by 5 minutes to give me time to talk.

2:58:36If that's okay, I'll give you 10 minutes. I don't want to cut you short because it's 10 minutes. Okay. Oh, it's more than 10 minutes. Yeah. Okay. So, I'm just going to put forward a motion to extend the meeting today to 3.

2:58:49And on me. Okay, sorry, Stephen.

2:58:53No, I apologize. I should have been more brief, but.

2:58:57But just suffice to say that I believe the committee members are considering 2 possible dates for a special meeting to discuss the draft.

2:59:07Here is district plan for the formatory area.

2:59:11So that we can start staff can start gathering commentary from the committee members on the draft that's been circulating.

2:59:19And.

2:59:20And also that the other aspects of consultation can move it as well.

2:59:26That's all. So, I don't need to 1 minute.

2:59:32Okay, I can fill the time just a quick clarification question. So, we need to decide on that special meeting date.

2:59:43This meeting or is I'll hand this committee that on my.

2:59:50Do we have to have a specific motion?

2:59:53We just all say yes and then forget. Yeah.

2:59:57Easy.

3:00:00We're going to be avoiding the 2.

3:00:06Well, so through the chair.

3:00:13No, there's no specific mandate to have a member of council sit on the committee.

3:00:18This was in council mine and staff money a 1 time thing.

3:00:23The motion that was passed, the staff mandate and that was it.

3:00:27And it's actually staff's recommendation to not have a member of council on that committee.

3:00:34I know that councillor John or may have been.

3:00:39Valuable to the committee and that's a great thing, but we think moving forward that there's no.

3:00:50Alex in the respect of that, I hear she left quite quickly, but.

3:00:55And I can't speak to all committed members, but we just like to thank.

3:01:00Counselor downer for participation in the committee.

3:01:04Her insight is valuable and.

3:01:09Yeah, we can capture that some way or just provide that as a comment to her. I'm ready to read that as well.

3:01:17Okay, so.

3:01:21Let's move to a German then.

3:01:25So, I'm someone to move the German.

3:01:30Red, uh, seven directors.

3:01:33Okay, so the meeting has been adjourned and the next meeting will be on January.

3:01:4113, 2025.

3:01:44Here, that's 2. Yes.