►
From YouTube: Kingston Ontario - Heritage Kingston - May 16, 2018
Description
Heritage Kingston meeting from May 16, 2018. For the full meeting agenda visit http://bit.ly/2BBx5OJ
A
Morning,
everyone
I
guess
we'll
get
started,
9:38,
there's
quite
a
bit
on
the
agenda,
but
I
think
we
should
be
okay
to
get
through
it
today.
Hopefully
so
you'd
call
the
meeting
to
order
and
just
to
let
everyone
know
that
the
last
couple
days
there's
been
two
resignations
so,
regretfully
announcing
patricia
fury
and
mike
megan
Kerrigan
have
left
the
committee.
A
This
from
a
procedural
standpoint,
doesn't
hurt
us
for
quorum
because
it
effectively
makes
the
size
of
the
committee
two
smaller,
so
quorum
is
half
of
the
committee
size
plus
one,
so
we're
okay.
That
way,
I
think
if
two
of
you
leave
before
the
end
of
today's
meeting,
though
the
meeting
would
end
so
that's
where
we're
at
for
quorum,
okay,
yeah,
I'm,
hoping
to
be
done
with
I,
always
hope
to
be
done
by
noon
and
we'll
see
how
we
do,
but
that's
effectively.
Quorum
is
five
and
we
have
six
right
now
and
counselor.
A
A
Okay,
before
we
pass
a
gender
I
should
just
say
that,
after
some
discussion
with
staff,
I
would
like
to
highlight
a
little
bit
more.
What
goes
on
at
the
working
group
level
involve
hopefully
have
a
discussion
here
about
it.
These
are
our
working
groups
with
a
lot
of
good
work
gets
done
often
because
the
working
group
reports
come
at
the
end
of
the
agenda.
Often
we're
kind
of
rushed
at
that
point
and
we
kind
of
go
through
it
and
we
don't
get
to
discuss
it.
A
If
that
is
the
case
today,
because
we
run
out
of
time,
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
we
actually
defer
those
items,
so
they
come
at
the
beginning
of
the
following
agenda
so
that
we
do
discuss
them.
Basically,
what
I'm
saying
is
I
mend
that
we
don't
gloss
over
the
detail,
that's
in
their
working
group
reports
that
we
need
to
be
fully
aware
of
what's
happening
there,
we're
kind
of
at
a
point
where
there's
almost
more
happening
at
the
working
group
level,
then
at
the
committee
level.
A
So
we
have
to
discuss
that
a
little
bit
because
we're
essentially
the
oversight
body
for
the
working
group.
So
we
have
to
be
well
aware
of
what's
happening
there.
So
what?
If,
if
the
time
is
late,
when
we
get
to
the
working
group
reports,
then
a
loss
for
deferral?
That's
what
that's!
Basically
all
I'm
saying
anything
else:
okay,
so
we'll
vote
on
the
agenda,
all
those
in
favor
and
that
carries
so.
The
agenda
is
as
printed
in
the
same
order,
and
now
we
have
the
minutes
from
April
18th.
B
A
D
Okay,
hi
everyone.
My
name
is
Julie
Foster
and
I'm,
the
manager
of
cultural
marketing
for
the
City
of
Kingston
and
I'm
also
responsible
for
the
public
art
portfolio.
So
I'm
here
today
to
speak
to
you
about
some,
follow
up
on
a
motion
that
came
to
council
in
April
from
councillor
cannon
around
the
beautification
of
the
parking
lot
right
here
you
probably
see
through
the
window
at
Ontario
and
Brock
Street.
D
In
the
brief
in
the
report
that
was
submitted
to
you,
there
are
some
details
in
there,
but
I
just
wanted
to
explain
to
you
a
little
bit
about
the
rationale
about
how
we've
kind
of
come
to
that.
So
this
parking
lot
was
acquired
by
the
City
of
Kingston,
I,
believe
in
October
of
2017
and
if
you're
familiar
with
it,
you'll
see,
there's
a
guardrail
there
with
some
with
some
posts.
The
spirit
of
the
motion
was
really
around
the
beautification
of
that
corner.
D
There
was
some
concern
specifically
from
councillor
kandan
that
we
have
a
lot
of
tourists
coming
down
here.
As
you
know,
in
the
summer,
and
if
you
are
standing
on
brock,
you
can
see
the
beautiful
buildings
there.
You
can
see
the
water,
you
can
see
the
crews,
you
can
see
the
park,
you
can
see
City
Hall
and
you
can
see
a
guard
rail
with
parked
cars
so
because
the
city
now
owns
this
parking
lot,
there
was
a
wish
to
have
something
really
kind
of
act
as
a
way
to
liven
up
that
space.
D
Part
of
the
the
challenge
with
this
is
the
timelines.
We
really
wanted
to
try
to
do
something
for
this
summer
and
we
only
had
a
few
months
so
right
here,
you
can
see
there's
a
few
things
that
we
had
to
consider
number
one
is
if
you're
coming
down
Ontario
Street
and
turning
on
to
Brock,
we
need
to
ensure
that
pedestrians
will
be
safe
and
also
making
sure
that
people
who
are
actually
walking
on
the
sidewalk
can
also
make
sure
that
they
have
an
unencumbered
view
on
the
side.
D
So
the
corner
right
there
on
Ontario
and
Brock,
we
were
advised
by
our
colleagues
in
engineering
to
have
three
meters
where
we
didn't
have
anything
there.
So
in
that
little
spot
that
corner
Public
Works
has
cleaned
up.
That
corner
will
be
putting
planters
there.
There's
also
a
sign
at
the
corner
that
was
hit
by
a
snow
plow,
which
has
now
been
constrained.
D
So
when
looking
at
this,
we
really
had
a
lot
of
challenges
on
the
other
side
of
the
of
the
transit
shelter.
There's
going
to
actually
be
a
drop
bike
spot
there,
and
also
these
these
guardrails
here,
really
we're
not
in
a
position
to
be
removing
them.
Quite
yet,
because
parking
and
transportation
services
are
really
trying
to
figure
out
how
they're
going
to
deal
with
this
parking
lot
in
the
future.
So
what
we
really
wanted
to
do
was
have
something
that
we
could
have.
D
That
would
be
a
bit
of
a
barrier,
but
also
making
sure
that
we're
kind
of
covering
the
cars,
but
that
we're
still
making
sure
that
there
is
accessible
access
to
the
parking
lot
and
to
the
the
transit
shelter.
So
we
looked
at
a
few
different
examples:
I
just
online
and
there's
really
a
lot
of
really
great
creative
examples
using
hoarding
and
using
fencing
to
show
photos
and
art
in
in
public
places.
So
this
was
one
example
that
we
saw
that
we
just
thought
was
really
interesting.
D
So
we
had
to
try
to
find
a
solution
that
would
go
be
a
temporary
solution
just
for
the
summer
that
would
go
in
between
the
guardrails
and
potentially
be
able
to
highlight
some
photography
of
the
natural
environment.
So
in
the
exhibits
any
of
the
report
you'll
see
the
draft
artist
call
that
highlights
what
we're
looking
for,
which
is
really
around
natural
photography,
to
highlight
the
the
landscapes
of
Kingston.
D
So
this
is
a
draft
engineer,
drawing
from
the
engineer
that
we've
contracted
to
work
on
this
and
really
what
we're
looking
at
is
the
development
of
a
custom
concrete
base
that
would
be
poured
and
then
we
would
have
frames
that
would
be
inlaid
into
the
base
and
then
within
each
with
each
base,
which
would
be
about
nine
feet.
It
would
be
placed
in
between
each
the
two
posts
and
then
of
those
three
sections.
D
So
we're
really
trying
to
get
this
done
for
the
summer
and
I
think
it's
been
a
little
bit
of
a
scramble
with
the
timelines,
but
I
feel
that
this
solution
here
will
really
help
beautify
the
area
and
again
we'll
take
it
out
at
the
end
of
October,
and
we
can
consult
with
the
community
at
that
point
to
see
if
they
thought
it
was
worthwhile
and
if
so,
we
can
actually
bring
it
back
next
year
and
do
a
call
to
feature
and
other
types
of
photography
or
public
art.
So
I
think
that's
it
for
my
presentation.
D
And
so
there
is
on
the
yeah
I
want
to
start
looking
the
wrong
way.
Sorry
so,
basically
yeah
City
acquired
that
parking
lot
from
a
private
developer
last
year,
and
so
it
really
is
a
very,
very
highly
trafficked
area.
So
each
of
the
bus
shelter
up
until
the
corner
of
Brock,
there
won't
be
anything
really
there.
So
we're
trying
to
place
these
bases
within
right
in
front
of
the
existing
guardrails.
So
there
would
be
no
issues
around
access
to
the
parking,
lot,
etc.
E
A
Just
okay,
so,
as
chair
of
the
committee
is
making
a
contextual
comment
so
you're.
Basically,
the
proposal
is
there's
the
engineering
side,
which
is
to
erect
the
structures
that
will
allow
for
photography
to
large
photographs
to
go
on
those
panels
and
then
the
way
we
would
our
input
would
be
along
the
lines
of.
Maybe
what
content
would
be
appropriate
in
the
setting
of
the
built
heritage?
That's
in
the
areas
that
sort
of
what
you're
looking
for
so.
D
We
have
consulted
with
the
public
art
working
group
which
reports
up
to
the
arts
Advisory
Committee,
and
they
really
we
had
talked
about
kind
of
what
the
was
going
to
be.
It
was
felt
around
that
group
that
anything
that
would
be
not
really
in
keeping
with
the
natural
kind
of
setting
might
not
be
a
good
choice
for
that
location
because
we
really
are
kind
of
in
the
heart
of
downtown.
So
certainly
if
there,
if
anyone
has
any,
you
know,
thoughts
of
you
know
if
it's
not
photography
or
something
else,
we
could
certainly
consider
that.
D
D
It's
like
an
Instagram
Abal
kind
of
nation,
and
so
we
thought
that,
because
there
we
do
have
so
many
great
photographers
in
Kingston,
it
might
be
another
type
of
art
to
to
highlight,
but
certainly
if
it,
if
anyone
had
any
other
suggestions
around
other
types
of
art,
we
could
certainly
consider
that
and
also
potentially
next
year,
have
a
different
type
of
medium
on
those
on
those
panels.
So.
A
D
Yes,
and
the
good
thing
about
this
design
is
that
it's
it's
fairly
portable,
so
they're,
actually
they
can
just
be
easily
removed
on
site
and
used
in
other
locations.
We'd
have
to
obviously
just
double
check
with
the
engineer
in
terms
of
safety,
etc,
but
I
think
that
this
is
a
really
good
compromise
for
something
that's
temporary
and
to
kind
of
test
it
out
and
see
what
the
public
thinks.
D
A
And
I'll,
just
maybe
get
the
conversation
started
by
saying.
My
first
thing
that
jumps
to
mind
is
something
else:
we've
passed
recently
or
the
council
passed
that
we
talked
about,
or
at
least
had
the
opportunity
to
which
was
the
public
lighting
of
City
Hall,
the
upgrades
to
the
lighting
system
and
the
colored
lighting
that
City
Hall
now
has
so
at
that
time
people
mentioned
I
mean
this
is
like
micro,
said
center
of
downtown.
The
city
hall
itself
is
a
tourist
attraction.
A
The
public
lighting
had
to
be
compatible
with
the
heritage
and
we
I
know
there
was
some
concerns
expressed
here.
This
is
right,
next
door
to
City
Hall
same
immediate
location
right
besides
Market
Square
as
well.
Market
Square
itself
is
a
Heritage
Conservation
District,
so
the
architecture
of
Market
Square
has
already
been
being
protected
by
by
our
legislation.
This
is
the
border
of
that.
So
we
have
an
opportunity
to
say
what
we
think.
A
What
types
of
exhibits
would
be
compatible
with
that
Heritage
context,
essentially
with
the
City
Hall
here
and
with
Market
Square
and
and
what
that
represents.
I'm
only
would
comment
that
I'm,
okay
with
the
suggestion
of
trying
natural
landscapes,
because
they
do
not
clash
with
the
heritage,
the
built
heritage.
That
I
mean.
Let's
face
it.
The
architecture
is
in
itself
a
type
of
exhibit
in
a
way
for
the
tourists
right
I
mean
they
come
and
they
look
at
the
buildings.
A
A
C
A
D
D
A
G
Just
a
quick
question
about
the
the
panels
that
are
going
up,
I'm,
looking
at
page
196
and
I,
see
that
it
partially
obscures
the
view
of
the
car
park,
but
not
wholly
I
mean
there.
You
still
have
an
area
where
you
see
cars
and
is
there
a
particular
reason
for
that?
Just
would
seem
as
if
to
actually
have
that
go
right
down
from
the
from
the
opening
at
the
beginning
of
the
car
park
right
down
to
the
end
of
it
seemed
to
really
blank
off
the
car
park.
Yes,.
D
So
there
was
some
burns
around
access
to
her,
so
that
was
part
of
the
reason
why
we
weren't
going
all
that
way
and
as
I
mentioned
on
the
other
side
of
the
transit
shelter,
there's
going
to
be
a
drop
bike
zone
that
will
basically
go
to
the
end
of
that
guardrail
and
then
on
the
other
side,
we
need
to
keep
there's
actually
a
bit
of
a
stone
wall.
That's
on
the
corner
that
is
adjacent
to
the
start
of
the
guardrail.
So
we
wanted.
D
A
D
A
A
A
Next
item
would
be
business,
so
this
is
the
regular
business
section.
There's
nothing
under
the
first
three
subheadings
under
statutory
business.
As
usual.
There's
several
items
I
believe
there's
nine.
The
first
one
is
an
application
for
a
heritage
permit
1401,
highway
2
and
mr.
leery
will
be
introducing
the
item.
H
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
so
this
property's
at
1401,
highway
2,
it's
known
locally
as
the
Milton
cemetery,
it's
located
more
than
half
a
kilometre
south
of
Highway
2
on
a
30-foot
high
bluff,
overlooking
the
st.
Lawrence
River,
it's
a
City
of
Kingston
own
property
and
over
the
last
year,
or
so
the
applicants
have
been
investigating
the
condition
of
the
existing
stone
vault
on
this
property,
with
the
assistance
of
architectural
sands.
H
A
back
and
engineer
Michael
dent
as
well
as
historian
Craig
Sims,
as
it
has
been
determined
that
this
vault
is
now
in
an
advanced
stage
of
a
disrepair,
particularly
with
respect
to
the
foundation
in
the
north
wall
and
the
roof
structure.
The
property
itself
is
designated
under
part
four
of
the
Heritage
Act
back
in
1984.
It
was
originally
owned
on
land
Sarris,
originally
established
on
lands
by
Thomas
owned
by
Thomas
Milton
in
1820.
H
The
application
before
us
is
under
section
33,
the
Heritage
Act
for
alteration.
The
applicants
have
to
have
requesting
approval
to
repair
and
stabilize
the
structure,
including
an
option
to
completely
disassemble
and
rebuild
the
structure
on
a
new,
concrete
foundation
and
they're
investigating
other
options
whereby
the
foundation
walls
can
be
replaced
in
sissu.
H
So
this
is
the
new
building
a
stage
3.
Our
collage
Achilles
Essman
was
completed
by
past
recovery
archaeological
services
in
order
to
determine
the
location
of
any
nearby
burials
and
to
properly
map
a
area
to
to
work
without
disturbing
any
of
those
burials.
That's
what
you
see
here
in
terms
of
our
review,
the
according
to
the
the
submission
by
the
applicant.
H
H
The
applicants
are
looking
at
an
option
now
to
disassemble
and
reassemble
building
on
one
continuous
foundation
in
order
to
keep
it
stable
on
the
surface
and
on
the
ground
staff.
No
ball
stuff,
encouraged
the
applicants
to
restore
and
stabilize
the
structure
in
stitch
you.
It
is
understood
that
the
subject
property
is
not
an
act
of
public
resource.
H
This
vault
itself
is
no
longer
as
no
longer
has
a
service
or
a
practical
purpose,
and
its
value
is
as
a
historical
artifact
or
a
monument
and
a
heritage
attribute
of
this
Pioneer
Cemetery,
the
dimensions,
design
and
characteristics
of
the
structure
have
been
carefully
recorded
and
the
below-grade
archaeological
resources
have
been
assessed
and
documented
and
staff
support.
The
applicants
proposed
plans
to
repair
and
rebuild
this
structure.
We
circulated
this
to
the
usual
agencies.
A
building
permit
is
required
and
we
received
no
other
substantial
comments.
The
committee
was
circulated
through
and
we
received
no
no
concerns.
A
H
I
Okay,
yeah,
so
I've
just
got
a
brief
presentation
that
explains
some
of
the
investigation
and
the
thinking
and
the
options
that
we
considered
in
putting
together
this
proposal.
So
this
is
just
a
view
of
it.
I
know
some
of
you
have
gone
to
see
it
I'm,
not
sure
everyone
has
been
incredibly
beautiful
site
and,
as
Ryan
noted,
it's
in
the
Milton
Cemetery
on
the
river
east
of
town,
the
vault
yeah
there's
a
plan
of
it.
I
So
the
first
thing
that
we
did
when
we
started
the
project
with
Neal
and
his
team
in
the
city
is
a
archeological
investigation
and
one
of
the
important
things
that
had
to
be
done
was
convincing.
The
ministry
that's
responsible
for
the
cemeteries
that
the
vault
actually
had
heritage
value
and
was
worth
maintaining,
because
the
initial
response
was
cemeteries,
Trump,
heritage
cemeteries
are
the
most
important
thing
and
the
vault
is
not
actually
that
important.
I
I
We
also,
as
Ryan
noted,
we
have
on
our
team
structural
engineer,
Mike
dent
heritage
consultant,
Craig
Sims,
who
most
of
you
know
quite
well.
We
also
had
discussions
with
and
brought
him
in
to
do
some
to
assist
with
the
investigation,
Patrick,
Jenkins
heritage,
Mason
and
so
part
of
Craig's
work.
He
spoke
to
Bob
Cardwell
and
got
information
about
the
project
that
was
done
in
the
1980s,
and
these
are
photographs
that
were
taken
at
that
time
that
Bob
provided.
You
can
see
the
photograph
at
the
bottom
on
the
west
side
of
the
vault.
I
It
was
a
very
large
tree
stump
that
was
growing
into
the
vault,
and
so
it
was
necessary
at
that
time
to
take
down
approximately
a
half
of
the
of
the
building,
save
the
stones
and
then
put
them
back
and
to
reconstruct
the
vault.
So
that
work
was
done
at
that
time.
But
it
was
not
a
complete
rebuild.
You
can
see
the
northeast
corner,
which
is
the
upper
part
of
that
lower
photograph.
I
That
wall
was
not
taken
down
below
grade
and
you
can
see
here's
some
of
the
restoration
work
done
at
that
time,
and
the
original
building
was
almost
a
dry
stone
wall.
There
was
limited
mortar
and
in
investigating
some
of
the
foundation
walls
below
ground.
We
can
see
some
of
the
original
mortar
and
how
little
of
it
there
actually
was.
I
So
these
are
photographs
that
were
taken
after
test
pits
were
dug
and
showing
some
of
the
conditions
underground.
Okay,
so
if
you
go
there
now,
some
of
the
foundation
walls
underground
are
no
longer
visible.
The
other
condition
is
the
roof
that
was
rebuilt
in
the
1980s,
has
largely
failed,
and
so
it
does
need
replacement.
I
This
is
a
photograph
of
the
back
wall
or
the
north
wall
of
the
vault
below
ground.
You
can
see
it
extends
very,
not
very
far
below
ground
and
you
have
a
series
of
open
joints
and
it's
in
this
corner
that
we
have
the
largest
cracks
that
move
through
the
entire
walls
of
the
building
and
there's
the
north
east
corner
of
the
wall.
I
So
we
looked
at
with
craig
and
patrick
and
mike
a
number
of
options
on
how
to
restore
the
vault
and
one
of
the
feedback
from
Neil's
team.
Is
that
it's
very
difficult
for
the
city
to
go
back
every
couple
of
years
and
do
repair
work
or
maintenance
work
and
what
they
really
looking
for
is
a
solution
that
would
stabilize
the
building
and
allow
maintenance
work
to
be
minimized
moving
forward.
And
so
after
we
considered
really
two
options.
I
One
would
be
to
partly
would
be
to
repair
the
build
of
the
walls
as
they
are
and
partly
rebuild
parts
of
the
walls
and
a
section.
A
second
option
would
be
if
you
carefully
record
the
stones,
take
everything
down,
but
a
continuous,
concrete
foundation
under
the
entire
vault
and
then
rebuild
above
that,
and
this
foundation
wall
would
be
completely
below
grade
and
therefore
invisible.
I
I
So
in
order
to
minimize
ongoing
maintenance
work
and
stabilize
the
building,
the
best
option
would
be
to
build
a
continuous,
reinforced,
concrete
foundation
under
the
entire
vault,
which
would
be
invisible
to
view
and
build
above
that
part
of
the
issue
with
the
existing
building.
Is
you
have
a
mix
of
conditions?
You
have
the
foundation
walls
below
grade
that
are
essentially
dry
stone
wall.
I
Then
you
have
above
that
the
rebuilt
walls
from
the
1980s
which
used
by
current
standards
at
the
time
they
used.
What
was
the
best
thinking
for
mortar
mixes
by
current
standards,
it's
harder
than
we
would
typically
do
in
a
restoration
work
now,
and
so
you
have
a
fairly
rigid
wall
sitting
on
a
very
unstable
wall
which
is
sitting
on
soil,
which
is
quite
wet
and
has
no
frost
protection,
and
so,
while
generally
good
practice
would
be
to
rebuild
as
little
as
possible
reuse
the
existing
material
as
as
much
as
possible
do
minimal
intervention.
I
In
this
particular
case.
The
conclusion
of
the
team
is
that
the
best
solution
in
the
long
term
would
be
to
completely
rebuild
it,
particularly
when
you
consider
that
you
have
to
rebuild
the
wall
or
the
sorry
of
the
roof
and
so
to
rebuild
the
roof
over
a
partially
restored
wall
and
then
come
back
and
need
to
do.
Additional
work
in
the
future
seem
to
be,
in
the
long
term,
a
less
cost-effective
and
a
better
way
to
manage
the
building.
I
Of
the
of
the
thinking
or
the
reason
behind
the
approach,
the
work
would
be
done
next
spring,
so
the
idea
was
that
we'll
go
through
the
budget
process.
This
year,
city
budget
process
finalized
the
approach,
then
in
the
late
winter
of
next
year,
attend
to
the
project
and
then
do
the
work
in
the
ideal
conditions
next
spring
and
early
summer.
Thank.
A
I
I
C
C
I
A
I,
go
any
further
out
my
attention
procedure
that
we
don't
swallow
and
then
it's
the
same
for
all
applications,
so
questions
from
members
of
the
committee
to
staff
only
and
then
members
of
public
in
applicants
can
speak
but
everybody's
five
minutes,
so
we've
we've
reached
that
time.
Now.
If
there
are
further
questions,
you
need
to
make
up
your
decision.
Your
decision
is
whether
to
recommend
approval
of
the
permit
right,
so
those
questions
really
should
be
directed
at
staff
and
and
then
we
still
have
to
let
other
members
of
the
public
speak.
A
H
B
B
You
know
less
than
is
being
proposed,
but
you
know
and
I
think
you
you
mentioned
in
your
analysis,
that
there
are
still
ongoing
consideration
of
the
different
options.
So
what
puzzles
me
is
well
I'd
like
to
know
what
is
the
state
of
those
other
considerations,
for
example,
gather
Patrick
Jenkins
has
been
involved
in
this,
but
we
don't
have
any
input
from
him
and
it
seems
inappropriate
to
me
that
we're
being
asked
to
approve
I
guess,
you
might
say,
an
extreme
solution
to
the
problem
without
knowing
enough
about
the
alternatives
scenarios.
H
J
I
think
we
have
to
have
the
flexibility
to
be
able
to
make
the
judgment
call
as
to
whether
we
keep
going
take
it
all
down
and
rebuild
it
all
up
in
a
good
fashion
or
whether
we
can
restrict
ourselves
to
the
most
severe
locations
which
are
really
the
ones
that
were
essentially
not
repaired.
Originally
so
I
think
that's
the
answer
to
that
question.
Okay,.
A
So
it's
chair,
I
would
like
the
committee
and
focus
on
the
input
that
is
being
sought.
That
is,
we
do
not
control
the
of
how
to
what
extent
the
the
final
reconstruction
takes,
because
the
proponent
and
the
parks
department
will
need
to
make
that
decision
at
a
future
time
as
the
work
when
the
work
is
underway.
So
not
only
so.
A
Basically,
we
don't
have
the
answer
to
some
of
your
questions
dawn
about
what
options
have
been
considered
because
they're
not
at
that
point
yet
and
that's
why
the
recommendation
asks
for
approval
to
alterations
to
include
the
repair,
and/or
full
reconstruction.
So
that's,
what's
a
little
bit
odd
about
this.
A
Permit
application
and
I
guess
just
to
confirm
if
staff
could
tell
me,
am
I
correct
in
assuming
that
a
heritage
permit
is
valid
if,
if
it's,
if
it's
sort
of
unspecified
of
because
it
is
an
important
heritage
question,
whether
or
not
full
reconstruction
is
done-
is
a
huge
permit
under
the
Heritage
Act
valid.
If
that
leeway
is
left
in
the
recommendation.
H
Yes,
mr.
chair,
it
is
a
what's
before
us
is
an
application
to
repair
this
structure
and
that
could
involve
a
complete
rebuild
and
that's
that's.
What
being
sought,
so
the
Heritage
permit
would
be
to
allow
the
complete
undertaking
to
to
restore
this
building
to
a
stable
condition,
so
it
would
include
whatever
means
necessary.
We've
tried
to
do
a
lab
rate
on
that
in
the
motion.
So,
okay.
A
So
the
options
that
you
have
as
members
of
the
committee
after
what
are
the
questions
we'll
get
to
deliberations?
What
we're
not
yet
your
options
are
to
support
the
current
recommendation
as
is
or
amend
it
amend
it
because
it's
a
part,
floor
application
and
get
the
recommendation
that
we
make
council
we're
allowed
to
amend.
This
is
not
a
part
file
application.
K
Pd
City
of
Kingston,
adding
one
because
of
anybody.
Who's
tried
to
deal
with
the
with
cemeteries
knows
that
you've
got
a
whole
set
of
different
regulations,
and
anybody
who
knows
that
you're
dealing
with
stuff,
which
is
still
uncovered
underground,
knows
that
there's
a
further
complication
and
I
would
hope
that
what
you
just
said
that
you
you've
approved
this
in
principle
but
I,
wonder
if
you
can
add
in
the
recommendations
that
there
be
regular
reports
back
to
this
committee.
A
H
Only
to
say
mr.
chair
that
this
is
a
part
four
and
if
committee
wishes
to
add
a
condition,
they
certainly
can
in
that
respect
our
Parks
Department
communicate
well
with
us,
so
so
I'm
sure
they'll
keep
us
in
the
loop.
But
if
the
committee
would
like
a
report
back
then
I
imagine
you
can
add
that
there's
a
condition.
A
H
A
Thank
you
all
right,
so
we
need
a
mover
and
seconder
for
the
recommendation,
so
we
can
debate
move
by
Mack
seconded
by
Katherine.
So
the
recommendation
is
that
we
approve
the
permit
and
I'll
say
it
again:
alterations
to
include
the
repair
and/or,
full
reconstruction
of
the
stone,
former
storage
vault,
and
there
are
three
conditions
included:
building
permit
the
masonry
works
according
to
the
policy
and
the
I
guess,
most
the
specific
one
which
is
number
three.
The
repaired
we
construct
a
building
shall
match
the
existing
in
form
and
detailing
who
wants
to
go
first
done,
I.
B
B
Even
you
know
if
it's
torn
down
and
rebuilt
you're
still
losing
the
authenticity
of
the
structure,
and
so
the
proposed
solution
is
kind
of
the
gold
standard
for
building
construction.
But
it's
not
the
gold
standard
for
heritage
conservation,
I
think
I
think
we
all
recognize.
That
would
be
preferable
to
do
kind
of
gentler
renovation
that
doesn't
have
such
a
serious
effect
on
the
on
the
structure.
B
There's
no
way
you
can
get
machines
in
there
there's
very
little
space
between
these
grave
markers.
Everything
has
to
be
done
carefully
by
hand
and
archaeologist
is
supposed
to
be
present
during
all
of
this
I
think
the
cost
will
be
out
of
sight
totally
unreasonable
the
city
or
somebody
has
to
make
decisions
about.
Is
it
worth
doing
this
amount
of
work
for
this
building?
And
you
know
quite
honestly,
they
made
well.
A
B
That
that's
true
but
I,
don't
think
you
can.
You
know
the
Heritage
quality
of
the
results
is
bound
to
depend
on
the
money
nor
the
budget.
Normally
we
don't
anyway.
I
think
you
understand
the
points,
but
I
would
certainly
favor
an
approach
which
costs
much
less
and
maybe
you'll
have
to
come
back
every
five
or
ten
years
and
do
a
bit
more
repointing
I.
Think
you
know
to
me
from
the
interior.
B
I
thought
the
interior
walls
look
pretty
pretty
solid,
and
so
you
could
maybe
just
do
some
underpinning
from
the
inside,
which
wouldn't
disturb
the
the
cemetery
area
and
some
repointing
around
the
outside
and
that'll
be
good
for
another
20-30
years.
So
I'd
like
to
have
that
kind
of
information,
so
that
the
committee
can
make
the
appropriate
decision.
C
C
A
A
A
Essentially,
what
dawn
has
already
said
could
be
boil
down
to
the
question
of?
Is
the
value
of
a
fully
reconstructed
vault
here,
significant
enough
to
justify
the
cost,
the
reconstruction
and
to
sacrifice
the
authenticity
of
what
is
remaining?
That
is
the
original.
Now
that's
the
question.
So,
let's
just
recap
what
we
know:
one
of
the
walls
has
already
been
reconstructed.
A
The
foundation
has
never
been
reconstructed
yes,
proposed
that
a
modern
foundation,
concrete
foundation
be
placed
underneath
invisibly
and
then
everything
reconstructed,
but
what
you'll
have
is
a
fully
reconstructed
structure
in
the
same
shape
of
a
heritage
structure.
So
this
is
what
we
have
we
have
to
in
the
context
of
what
precedent
are
we
are.
We
are
we
setting
as
the
Heritage
Committee.
If
we
say
you
can
reconstruct
a
structure
and
maintain
some
authenticity.
We
need
to
weigh
in
on
that.
A
We
need
to
give
our
opinion
on
that,
because
there
will
be
applicants
that
own
heritage
homes
in
heritage,
districts
or
outside
of
heritage
districts
that
are
going
to
suggest
the
same
thing.
In
fact,
we've
dealt
with
one
a
couple
years
ago:
they're
gonna
suggest
because
for
engineering
reasons
they
need
to
reconstruct,
and
we
will
we
at
that
time
said.
A
A
We
can't
stray
too
far
from
that
principle
now
here
we've
got
an
extreme
example,
as
Mac
mentioned
right
that
an
extreme
example
where
it
may
well
be
of
all
the
cases
we
look
at
one
of
the
most
justified
for
a
modern
foundation
and
the
structure
is
small
enough
to
suggest
that
that's
even
feasible,
but
the
cost
will
be
significant
and
that's
the
missing
piece.
So
I
think
I
agree
with
both
you
and
I.
Think.
What
we
really
need
to
do
is
defer
this
and
have
staff
come
back
with
cost
estimates
of
the
two
main
options.
A
Reconstruction
versus
repair
and
the
repair
estimate
has
to
be
has
to
contain
a
periodic
element
to
it.
So
how
often
and
that's
a
very
difficult
estimate
as
to
Matoo
make,
but
how
often
will
need
to
be
repaired
and
what
will
be
the
cost
and
the
cost,
of
course
will
go
up
with
time.
We
need
be
able
to
compare
apples
to
apples
when
we
recommend
this
to
council
at
the
end
of
the
day
councils
gonna
really
want,
then
not
the
the
hard
fact
the.
What
are
our
two
choices?
A
There's
clearly
two
choices
here
and
we
don't
have
enough
information
to
make
the
decision
today.
So
the
decision
we're
really
making
is,
do
we
go
ahead
and
and
Trust
the
process
and
give
the
permit.
Let
them
figure
it
out
and
and
take
our
hands
off
or
do
we
keep
involved
stay
involved,
ask
for
deferral
and
and
get
that
cost
estimate
of
the
two
options
before
we
make
the
decision
before
we
make
the
recommendation
to
Council
so
I
guess
and
that's
someone
else
has
something
to
say:
I'm
going
to
move
deferral.
A
L
A
Does
anyone
want
to
say
anything
before
I
move
deferral,
because
once
you
do
that,
that's
the
direction
that
you
go
in
and
you
have
to
decide
on
that
before
anything
else
happens,
it's
seeing.
None
we'll
take
a
short
recess.
I'll
talk
to
staff
and
I'll
write
a
deferral
motion,
and
then
we
can
debate
that.
Thank
you,
okay,
thank
you
for
your
patience.
A
Yes,
vice
chair,
okay,
so
I
have
an
amendment.
It's
not
a
deferral
turns
out
with
discussing
with
staff
that
cost
estimates
are
not
feasible
at
this
time.
That
would
be
of
any
use,
it
would
be
to
it.
They
wouldn't
be
very
accurate
so
and
that-
and
the
consequence
is
we
will
find
out
with
I've
got
another
way
of
getting
that
information
in
that
is
with
a
reporting
back
addition,
so
I've
got
an
amendment
that
adds
a
clause
at
the
end
of
the
recommendation.
A
That
reads
as
follows:
where
removed
the
word
end
and
replaced
with
the
sentence
with
the
understanding
that
repair
is
the
preferred
option
and
that
reconstruction
will
only
be
considered
as
a
last
resort
and
then
the
conditions
add
the
condition
number
for
that
staff
report
back
to
Heritage
Kingston
regarding
the
direction
the
project
takes.
So
that's
my
that's.
My
amendment
I
need
a
seconder
seconded
by
Dawn
the
now,
because
I
made
the
motion
I'm
no
longer
so
dawn
you're.
The
chair.
A
A
Just
obviously
they're
sort
of
self-explanatory,
we
need
to
always
recommend
repair
when
possible.
That's
what
Don
started
out
by
saying,
even
in
his
comments,
I
think
that's
correct!
That's
what
we
have
to
recommend
to
council.
So
we
do
that
by
spelling
out
that
repair
is
the
preferred
option
and
that
reconstruction
is
a
last
resort.
B
A
A
The
only
thing
that
passed
was
the
amendment.
Now
we
have
to
vote
on
the
amended
recommendation
so
Katherine
we
have
amended
the
recommendation.
I'll
read
the
full
recommendation,
so
this
is
more
voting
on
that
has
recommended
council
that
alterations
to
the
property
at
1401
highway
to
be
approved
in
accordance
to
the
details
described
in
the
application,
with
set
alterations
to
include
the
repair
and
our
full
reconstruction
of
the
stone,
former
storage
vault,
with
the
understanding
that
the
repair
is
that
repairs
the
preferred
option
and
that
reconstruction
will
only
be
considered
as
a
last
resort.
A
The
approve
of
the
alterations
to
be
subjective,
the
following
conditions:
1
2
3
same
as
in
the
package
and
then
added
condition,
number
4-
that
staff
report
back
to
urge
Kingston
regarding
the
direction
the
project
takes.
Any
final
discussion
I'll
call
the
vote
on
the
recommendation,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
and
that
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
and.
M
A
N
All
right
so
we're
we're
I'm
presenting
509
highway
15,
which
is
located
on
the
east
side
of
highway
15
north
of
Upper,
Brewers
loc,
so
quite
far,
north
of
highway
15.
The
subject
property
contains
one
and
a
half
story
detached
brick
dwelling
referred
to
as
the
Murray
house,
and
we've
had
an
application
for
alteration
under
section
33
and
demolition
under
Section
34
of
the
interior,
Heritage
Act.
N
So
the
subject
property
was
designated
under
part
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
in
1984,
and
it
was
constructed
in
1870
1877
for
John
Murray.
As
I
mentioned,
someone
in
a
1
hat
1
and
a
1/2
storey
dwelling
constructive
red
brick
and
the
house
consists
consists
of
a
main
rectangular
block
with
a
clapboard
rectangular
ring
at
the
rear
forming
a
t-shaped
floorplan.
N
So
some
of
the
other
heritage
attribute
since
they're
not
listed
in
the
older
designating
bylaw
include
the
dental
cornice
under
the
projecting
wood
eaves,
the
wooden
sash
windows
wooden
lug
sails
brick
arches
over
the
windows.
The
original
entranceway
opening
decorative
Verge
board,
trim
on
the
front
Gable
and
a
semi-elliptical
window
with
original
glazing
and
the
front
gable
window.
N
So
there's
three
areas
of
work
proposed
in
this
heritage:
permit
application
a
demolition
of
the
rear,
wood
frame
addition
and
demolition.
This
I
have
an
external
cement
block,
chimney
extensive
brickwork,
repair
and
repointing,
as
well
as
alterations
to
the
garage
or
drive
said
and
I
just
want
to
mention
that,
in
addition
to
this
heritage
permit
before
you,
staff
are
also
processing
a
delegated
authority
heritage,
permit,
which
generally
relates
to
repairs
and
alterations
to
windows,
doors
use,
decorative
trim
walkways
and
steps
humility.
N
So
a
report
by
Rob
Robert
Cardwell
provides
an
analysis
of
the
history
of
this
rear
wood
frame
Edition,
which
is
based
on
sound
research
and
a
physical
examination
of
this
structure.
The
1984
designation
by
law
to
suggest
that
this
rear
addition
may
be
the
original
building
on
the
site
and
predate
the
main
brick
house.
However,
Robert
Cardwell
demonstrates,
through
his
examination
of
the
1860
walling
County
map
and
the
1851
in
1861
censuses,
that
an
older
one-story
log
building
once
stood
in
the
approximate
location
of
that
main
brick
house.
N
So
through
on-site
investigations,
he
also
concluded
that
the
existing
addition
is
likely
elite,
1800s
or
early
1900
structure
based
on
its
construction,
material
and
details
and,
moreover,
inside
the
additions
attic
space
where
the
roof
meets
the
southern
wall.
There
were
two
clear
imprints
imprints
of
previous
rear
edition,
roof
lines.
Staff
visited
the
site
on
April
9th
and
it
is
clear
that
this
extension
or
addition
on
the
back
is
in
very
poor
condition.
The
joist
ends
are
floating
free
of
the
foundation
in
several
places,
and
the
structure
does
appear
to
be
compromised.
N
N
This
cement
block
chimney
that
you
see
on
the
screen
on
the
West
elevation
is
a
relatively
modern
insertion
and
again
it's
in
at
the
time
that
it
was
constructed.
It
actually
necessitated
the
removal
of
a
section
of
the
original
wood
Eve
with
a
soffit
and
facia
on
the
dental
frieze
board.
So
it's
removal
and
repair
of
the
even
dental
frieze
board
will
actually
be
an
enhancement
to
the
heritage,
value
of
the
property.
N
The
Murray
house
is
in
need
of
extensive
brickwork,
repair
and
repointing,
which
is
why
it
is
actually
a
part
of
this
heritage,
full
heritage,
permanent,
not
a
part
of
the
delegated
authority
by
law.
Basically,
there
are
areas
where
bricks
are
falling
out.
Many
of
the
jack
arches
about
the
windows
are
deteriorated.
Bricks
I've
actually
come
out,
so
they
actually,
they
need
to
be
rebuilt,
and
every
single
elevation
of
this
building
requires
repointing
other
mortar
joints.
N
This
work
is
necessary
for
the
long-term
conservation
of
this
property
and,
lastly,
the
proposed
alterations
to
the
drive
shed
are
compatible
with
the
form
and
massing
of
the
garage
and
will
be
an
enhancement
to
overall
cultural
heritage
value.
The
property,
particularly
the
removal
of
that
blue
vinyl,
siding
included
in
this
application
era,
proposed
new
metal
roof,
as
well
as
new
garage
doors,
and
it's
just
worth.
C
When
I
look
at
that
drafted,
show
the
the
brick
arts
is
falling
above
the
windows
it
looked
to
me
like
it
was
a
like
wasn't
being
arts
was
just
flat
and
I
wonder
whether
there's
a
steel
angle
in
there
or
doesn't
see
me
there
surgery,
there's
no
arts
work
well.
What
is
it
was
holding
that
up,
which
is
part
of
me,
might
failed,
obviously,
pit.
C
O
O
C
O
And
with
in
keeping
with
the
the
building
really,
we
believe
that
the
only
reason
that
those
upper
visitors
cracked
like
that
was
because
the
the
soffit
was
cut
out
and
the
dental
freeze
board
so
that
that
brick
chimney
could
go
through
and
what
has
happened
is
water
is
migrated
down
into
the
brickwork
there
from
from
the
roof
line
and
caused
that
cracking.
So
we
believe
that
for
possibly
over
a
hundred
years,
the
bricks
were
fine
in
that
location.
It's.
C
B
N
A
A
A
B
Want
to
emphasis
is
something
that
I've
already
mentioned.
Sorta
speak
that
these
the
repairs
to
the
brickwork
are
quite
substantial
and
I.
Think
there
really
should
be
a
I
think
that
should
be
part
of
the
building
permit
application
and
also
there
should
be
a
report
from
knowledgeable
Mason
on
how
the
repairs
are
going
to
be
carried
out
so
and
also
you
know.
We
know
that
there
are
Masons
and
Masons,
and
some
there's
some
masonry
work
that
we
see
in
the
city
is
really
disappointing.
B
A
N
So
45
King
Street
is
located
on
the
south
side
of
King
Street
East
in
the
old
Sydenham
Heritage
Conservation
District.
The
subject
property
contains
a
detached
two-story
stone
house
designed
by
John
Power
in
the
cottage
ornate
style
and
constructed
circa
1853.
So
we've
received
an
application
for
alteration
under
section
42
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
to
gain
approval
to
remove
the
existing
concrete
brick
chimneys
on
the
east
and
west
elevations
and
to
build
two
new
double
flue
brick
chimneys
with
stone
or
cast
concrete
caps
in
an
in
an
historically
appropriate
design.
N
So
45
King
Street
East
is
rated
as
significant
in
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
plan.
We
know
that
it
was
designed
by
John
power,
well-known
architect,
local
architect
and
constructed
in
1853,
specifically
called
out
in
its
description
is
the
west
wall,
which
has
a
large
central
chimney.
Breast
which
rises
through
the
hipped
roof
to
wide
brick
double
chimney
with
decorated
panels
below
the
cap
and
slender
to
knee
pots.
An
identical
chimney
is
on
the
east
wall.
N
So
the
current
concrete
brick
chimneys
on
the
east
and
west
elevations,
as
you
saw
in
the
previous
slide,
are
not
original
to
the
1853
construction
or
historic
by
design,
as
Patrick
Jenkins
explains
in
his
supporting
information
report.
The
description
of
the
chimneys
that
are
that
is
in
the
old
Sydenham
HTT
plan
is
largely
taken
from
Margaret
anguses
list
of
buildings
of
architectural
historical
significance.
N
This
description
that
we
see
does
not
match
the
current
existing
chimneys,
but
rather
describes
the
double
brick
chimneys
that
can
be
seen
in
a
December
13th
1928
Whig
standard
photo
clipping
on
the
left
there
again.
Mr.
Jenkins
research
also
infers
that
the
original
chimneys
appeared
had
been
partially
rebuilt
at
some
point
prior
to
the
1960s,
when
a
photograph
by
George
Lilly
shows
double
brick
chimneys
like
the
1928
image,
but
slightly
different
corbelling
brick
details
and
also
different,
also
a
short
and
lower
space
between
the
chimney
columns,
which
is
the
right
hand.
N
Image
staff
have
reviewed
the
proposed
design
of
of
the
proposed
new
replacement
chimneys
and
find
it
to
be
based
on
sound
background
research
and
analysis,
including
well,
documented
evidence
as
purpose
as
proposed.
The
design
closely
resembles
the
double
flue
brick
chimneys,
as
illustrated
in
1928
photograph.
The
design
for
each
chimney,
east
and
west
includes
a
double
flue,
brick
chimney
and
silver
buff
brick
with
recessed
decorative
details,
potentially
in
a
buff
tone,
brick
as
well
as
a
recessed
panel
at
the
base
to
create
shadow
effect
and
tooth
corbels
under
the
cap.
N
The
cap
will
either
be
stone
or
cast
concrete.
Each
double
flue
chimney
will
be
5
foot
4
inch
wide
and
121
inches
tall
as
both
an
individually
significant
building
and
a
significant
building
in
the
old
Sydenham
HCD.
The
proposed
replacement
of
the
concrete
brick
chimneys
historically
appropriate
and
design
clay
brick
chimneys
is
an
enhancement
of
the
designated
building
and
a
substantial
contribution
to
the
cultural
heritage
value
of
the
district.
N
The
proposal
strongly
supports
the
goal
for
heritage
buildings
of
the
district
plan,
which
states
the
goal
to
conserve
and
enhance
existing
built
heritage
resources
and
protect
them
from
inappropriate
change,
changes
or
demolition
by
encouraging
retention.
A
restoration
of
original
features
of
heritage
buildings
based
on
archival
and
pictorial
evidence
this.
So
this
is
a
clear
example
of
that
goal.
N
All
works
are
to
be
completed
in
accordance
with
the
city's
policy
on
may
3,
restoration
and
heritage
buildings
and
best
practices
and
heritage
conservation.
So
upon
review
of
all
of
our
submitted
materials
staff
have
no
concerns
with
the
proposed
application
and
here's
our
approval,
subject
to
the
following
condition.
A
K
A
N
A
N
C
N
P
So
with
the
light
buff
it's
creamy,
but
not
as
creamy
as
the
the
stock
bricks
that
are
available,
but
it
has
a
slightly
higher
MPAs.
What
reason
why
I'm
choosing
it?
It's
got
an
MPA
of
30
rather
than
20,
which
the
the
other
bricks
have.
So
there's
a
little
bit
lighter
a
little
in
the
lighter
tones,
then
cream
tones.
So
but
it's
creamy
to
to
buff
tone,
brick
similar
to
the
tones
of
the
brick
I.
C
A
Okay
need
a
mover
to
seconder
for
the
recommendation
move
by
Katherine,
second
by
dawn,
so
this
is
part
five.
So
we
were
support.
We're
saying
that
we
support
Council's
approval,
it's
of
a
council
that
makes
the
gifts
the
approval,
so
the
alterations
has
described
and
the
conditions
there's
just
the
one
condition,
but
masonary
works
so
yeah,
it's
it's
a
year
in
question,
so
I'll
just
call
the
vote,
all
those
in
favor
and
that
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
and
good
luck.
A
This
next
one's
the
one
for
you
Mac
to
leave
the
room
or
to
leave
the
room,
the
horseshoe
yeah.
You
have
to
leave
the
room
and
then,
if
they're,
okay,
that's
it!
You
have
to
be
okay,
so
ninety-two,
Sydenham,
Street,
we've
seen
this
property
before
so
I'm.
Assuming
the
the
introduction
will
be
relatively
brief,
so
we
can
see
where
we're
at
at
this
point
in
time.
H
H
The
applicant
was
before
the
committee
in
March
for
a
similar
proposal
to
repair
the
wood
steps
and
replace
them
with
a
concrete
limestone
cloud,
concrete
step
they've
with
currently
withdrawn
that
application
that
resubmitted
now
and
requesting
a
galvanized
steel
steps,
railings
and
landings
painted
bark
in
the
dimensions
of
the
existing
so
be
exactly
the
same
size
as
what
is
there
today
and
we
received
very
little
comments,
I
think
from
circulating
agencies.
The
building
permit
is
required.
H
H
So
there's
not
in
their
current
plan,
staff
have
included
a
condition
recommending
that
they
consider
doing
some
repairs
to
it,
which
would
necessitate
a
further
permit
under
the
Heritage
Act.
However,
that's
not
part
of
the
scope
that
is
before
committee
today,
so
we
should
share.
We
recommend
approval
of
this
application
and
the
recommendations
before
you.
Thank.
A
You
I
see
a
couple
of
you
made
comments
in
and
they've
been
summarized
I
have.
Are
those
comments,
satisfactory
dawn
and
Jane?
Okay,
members
of
the
public
have
a
chance
to
comment.
Ask
questions
seeing
none
so
we've
got,
the
recommendation
needs
to
be
moved
in
seconded
again.
This
is
part
5,
so
we
support
Council's
approval
of
the
following
and
it's
you
know
the
the
installation
of
the
front
staircase
and
the
as
it
says
in
there
in
the
package
who
would
like
to
move
this
move
by
Dawn
seconded
by
Katherine.
A
B
It
is
a
comment:
I
guess
it
of
our
staff.
There
is
a
condition
that
a
building
permit
shall
be
obtained,
and
the
building
department
effect
made
a
comment
that
the
guardrail,
the
garden
handrail,
must
comply
with
the
Ontario
Building
Code,
including
the
triangular
space,
and
it
looks
to
me
as
if
it
doesn't
apply
it,
doesn't
comply
so
I'm
kind
of
puzzled.
B
Why
the
applicants
have
not
responded,
maybe
they
maybe
they
think
it's
okay,
but
somebody
from
the
building
inspector
is
going
to
come
along
with
a
four
inch
ball
and
see
if
all
fit
through
that
gap
and
if
it
goes
through
the
gap,
though,
require
it
to
be
changed.
In
the
case
of
a
wrought-iron
thing,
a
wrought-iron
staircase,
the
changes
will
be
pretty
noticeable
and
so
I
guess
I
really
should
have
asked
staff
what
what
the
applicants
are.
How
are
they
going
to
deal
with
this.
A
E
A
A
H
Thank
You
mr.
chair
and
I
must
admit:
I
am
going
to
be
fumbling
through
this
a
little
bit
my
counterpart
had
to
run
for
our
family
emergency,
so
I
will
I'll
do
my
best.
She
has
laid
out
the
description
of
this
property
in
your
report.
It
is
part
of
the
Sydenham
district.
It's
designated
under
part.
Five.
The
Heritage
value
and
attributes
are
in
your
agenda
package.
H
There
are
also
a
new
hip
roof
dormer
that
is
going
to
the
rear
of
the
roofline
new
metal
shingles
on
the
roof
and
a
new
metal
sheeting
over
the
or
the
eyebrow
dormer
at
the
front,
and
a
small
skylight
on
the
side
of
the
building,
prick,
repairs
and
lintels
wood
shingles
is
necessary
and
new
ease,
troughs
and
downspouts
on
this
building.
So
the
building
is
this
one
before
you,
staff
have
reviewed
this
and
on
our
supportive
of
these
alterations
in
their
totality.
H
There
are
a
number
of
conditions
in
in
the
recommendation
that
will
draw
your
attention
to
require
you
know,
including
our
requirement
standard
ones
for
building
permits
and
and
compliance
with
the
window
and
masonry
policy.
There
are
minor
details
to
be
determined
as
far
as
some
of
the
shingle
colors
and
and
such
so
that
is
also
included
as
a
condition
in
terms
of
comments
received.
Of
course,
building
permits
are
required.
There
are
a
number
of
summarized
in
your
agenda
package
and
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
substantial
concerns.
H
A
You
so
again
dawn
you
made
comments
and
where
they
accurately
record
okay,
there
is
now
members
of
the
public
may
address
committee,
and
that
includes
the
applicants.
This
would
be
the
time
to
dress
a
committee.
If
seeing
no
comments,
no
one
wish
to
speak.
We
will
move
to
the
recommendation
so
again,
heritage,
cakes
and
supports
Council's
approval
and
it's
the
Heritage
permit.
There
is
a
variety
of
work
there.
It's
all
summarized
says:
Ryan
just
did
there.
A
B
Is
really
a
question
to
staff,
but
I?
Don't
think
you
asked
us
if
we
could
questions
condition.
Seven,
it
says:
planning
staff
should
be
circulated.
The
drawings
elsewhere
in
the
agenda
says:
planning's
stuff
shall
be
circulated,
drawings
and
design.
I
think
Michelle
is
probably
the
better
word.
There
is
any
particular
reason
why
it's
changed
to
should.
Instead
of
shell
Oh.
A
C
Migration,
maybe
I
missed
that
he
said
they're
going
to
use
a
metal
shingle
on
the
roof,
so
that
I
hear
that
correctly
I,
just
wonder
what
metal
shingles
they're
talking
about
what
it
can
look
like
you
know.
You
know
that
there
there's
tons
of
variations
that
historic
or
you
know
just
like
bit-
information
on
that.
If
I
could.
M
So
the
intention
is
to
use
a
flat
metal
shingle
with
as
little
kind
of
profile
as
possible.
I
haven't
actually
found
the
specific
product
that
I
want
to
use.
Yet
when
I
was
speaking
with,
Alex
I
think
that's
captured
in
the
conditions
that
yet
condition
five
that
I'll
run
a
sample
by
staff
before
proceeding,
but
in
general
to
answer
your
question,
something
that
is
reasonably
smooth
and.
M
And
reasonably
efficiently
in
obtrusive
the
idea
there's
currently
ashphalt
shingles
on
the
roof.
We
are
the
the
roof.
Joist
cavities
are
insulated
with
moldy
pink
bat
that
came
with
the
house
when
we
moved
in.
So
our
intention
is
to
rip
that
out
and
put
in
spray
foam
insulation.
My
sense
is
that,
under
with
that
unvented
roof
cavity
in
order
to
have
the
shingles
have
a
reasonable
life
span,
I'd
like
to
go
with
a
metal
product
rather
than
asphalt,
that'll
really
heat
up.
So
that's
the
reason.
M
A
A
The
selected
metal
roofing
is
which
we've
just
heard
has
not
been
selected
yet
for
the
out
bride
woman
she'll
be
provided
to
the
planning
staff
for
review
to
ensure
minimal
impact
to
the
Heritage
attributes.
He's
planning
Sanford
Kay,
with
sharing
that
information
with
the
committee
member.
When
we
get
that
information.
A
H
H
It
was
reviewed
as
part
of
the
cultural
heritage,
property
evaluation
project
in
2015
and
was
evaluated
under
on
the
entire
regulation
906
and
has
met
those
requirements.
The
Zecharia
David
farmhouse
is
a
good
example
of
a
mid
19th
century
stone,
vernacular
farmhouse
zechariah
and
francis
david
and
their
nine
kids
lived
in
this
house.
It
was
built
in
the
1850s
to
replace
their
log
cabin
and
then
they
farmed
the
land
for
many
years.
H
The
working
group,
historic
heritage
properties
working
group
has
reviewed
the
draft
by
law
and
our
support
of
the
bylaw
itself
and
staff
recommend
that
the
Notice
of
Intent
be
served
on
the
owners
and
should
no
notice
of
appeal
begin
that
the
designated
bylaw
be
given
three
readings
by
council.
Thank
you.
A
Members
of
the
committee
have
a
chance
to
ask
questions,
see
none
members
of
public
have
a
chance
to
comment
or
ask
questions,
see
none.
We
move
the
recommendation,
which
is,
as
you
see
it's
basically
the
usual
format,
one
cause
for
the
designation
itself
and
one
cause
for
the
notice
of
objection
wording.
It's
the
same
with
every
designation
who
wants
to
move
the
recommendation
with,
by
dawn
seconded
by
Jane
any
comment:
okay,
let's
call
the
vote,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
and
that
carries
unanimously
number
7
heritage,
free
consultation,
application,
81,
83,
King,
Street,
East,
I,.
H
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
will
shortly
turn
this
over
to
the
applicants,
who
will
walk
you
through
their
their
plans.
The
property
that
you'll
be
looking
at
is
is
that
81
83
King
Street
East
it's
designated
under
both
parts
four
and
part
five.
It's
a
bit
of
a
landmark
property
he's
just
across
from
City
Park
on
the
corner
of
Maitland.
It
was
originally
built
in
the
1840s
for
John
Watkins
who's.
H
The
the
name
of
the
Watkins
wing
of
the
original
Hospital
kgh,
Hospital
I,
have
was
had
serious
alteration,
significant
alterations
done
in
the
1880s
and
has
since
since
had
a
number
of
alterations.
So
the
the
new
owner
has
a
number
of
plans
that
I
they'll
share
with
them
there.
Their
team
from
Alexander,
Wilson,
architects
and
Andre
Shimon
are
here
and.
A
Mr.
Newman
is
gonna
say
a
couple
words
before
we
hear
from
the
applicants
just
to
remind
the
committee,
but
the
process
of
pre
consultations.
This
is
like
a
friendly
process
where
we
can
interact
with
the
applicants
before
the
application
is
actually
made,
but
I
understand.
There
is
some
concern
about
getting
started
on
on
the
exciting
work,
so
go
ahead.
Mr.
Newton.
E
E
I
will
certainly
do
that
and
that
may
dictate
whether
or
not
we're
comfortable
bringing
a
recommendation
forward
in
June.
So
we
are
moving
this
forward
with
some
urgency,
or
at
least
some
desire
to
be
expeditious,
but
till
we
recognize
that
there's
a
need
to
consider
and
take
pause
in
the
comments
we
get
today.
So
anyway,
with
that
I'll
introduce
mr.
Derbyshire
to
present
his
vision
for
the
property
Thanks.
Q
Good
morning,
everyone,
mr.
chairman
committee,
members
city
officials
and
guests
I'm
delighted
to
be
able
to
be
here
with
you
today
and
to
share
a
little
bit
about
kind
of
what
we're
thinking
about
with
the
DNA
of
this
property
I'm
very
quickly,
gonna
be
out,
distanced
by
any
of
your
questions,
given
what
I've
seen
here
earlier.
So
in
just
a
very
brief
moment,
I'll
turn
it
over
to
our
architects
and
historian
to
really
be
able
to
bring
this
more
to
life
for
you.
Q
But
if
you'll
indulge
me
just
for
a
moment,
I
wanted
to
share
with
you
sort
of
our
attachment
to
this
property.
I
know
some
of
you
have
heard
this
so
I
apologize
for
the
redundancy,
but
you
know
this.
My
wife
and
I
are,
and
our
three
boys
are
very
excited
returning
back
home
to
Kingston.
You
know
this
has
been
where
our
families
live
for
generations
and,
as
sometimes
happens,
you
leave
for
work,
but
when
we
were
given
the
opportunity
to
return
to
any
place,
we
could
wanted
to
live.
You
know
it
certainly
was
Kingston.
Q
We
didn't
even
have
to
pause
for
a
moment
to
know
that
it
is
where
we
wanted
to
be
and
interesting
enough
at
the
look
the
house
we
had
in
mind
also
was
equally
as
obvious
to
us.
Little
did.
We
know
the
journey
that
we
had
undergo
over
the
last
couple
of
years
to
get
to
this
point
in
front
of
you
today.
It
has
been
a
journey
for
us
for
over
the
last
two
years
to
be
able
to
be
here,
but
the
indulgence
if
I
go
back
in
time.
Q
You
know
I
proposed
to
my
wife
on
the
day
that
I
proposed
my
wife.
Now
this
is
an
interesting
story,
I
think
nonetheless,
but
you
may
all
find
it
not
so
much,
but
the
day
I
proposed
to
my
wife,
we
were
had
going
tending
church
at
st.
George's
as
we've
done
for
years
and
years
and
years,
and
we
went
to
Morrison's.
Q
Her
breakfast
walked
down
to
Mirnyi
Tower
I,
proposed
to
her
at
Mirnyi
Tower,
where
my
father
had
proposed
to
my
mom
and
we
walked
back
up
King
Street
and
she
had
said
yes
by
that
time,
so
that
was
I
was
relaxed
at
that
moment,
and
it
was
you
know,
certainly
you
know
a
good
moment.
We
stopped
outside
of
81
Kings
Street,
and
this
had
been
a
house
that
we
had
always
loved
and
as
students
with
debt
up
to
here
it
was
something
completely
out
of
the
realm
of
what
we
ever
would
have
dreamed
a
possibility.
Q
You
know,
and
my
commitment
to
her
that
day
is
I,
will
work
hard
I'll
do
what
I
need
to
do
and
someday
we'll
have
a
house
as
nice
as
that
one
and
you
know
it
sure
enough,
as
life
takes
you
on
a
journey
and
25
years
later.
You
know
we're
at
a
point
that
you
we've
now
purchased
this
house
and
if
any
of
you
know
the
western
birds,
it
took
us
two
years
to
get
to
that
point.
You
know
hon
so
loved
that
house.
Q
You
know
that
ability
to
really
get
it
and
to
reimagine
it
from
what
it
is
today
is
an
8
unit.
Apartment
building
back
to
a
single
family
home
has
taken
some
real
imagination.
Is
we
start
to
think
our
way
through
and
some
real
research
and
some
real
contemplation,
and
when
Greg
mentioned
it's
been
in
deter
process,
I
think
Ron,
iteration
46,
you
know
it
really
has
been
in
real
time,
and
you
know
the
city
has,
you
know,
has
just
been
very
collaborative
and
very
wonderful
work
for
us
to
work
with.
Q
You
know
through
the
process
they've
made
themselves
very
available.
Ryan
you
and
Alex
especially
have
just
been
terrific
partners
in
helping
us
learn
in
helping
us
go
towards
the
general
direction
to
really
bring
back
life
to
the
DNA
of
this.
What
I
think
is
truly
a
wonderful
property,
so
I
will
stop
talking
now,
because
you
want
to
get
on
to
the
what
matters
most
and
will
I
turn
it
over
to
Sandy,
perfect.
R
Hello,
I'm
Jen
I'm,
one
of
the
architects
at
Alexander,
Wilson
architect,
like
with
previous
Seeley,
said,
we've
been
going
back
and
forth,
based
on
initial
comments
from
you
guys,
as
well
as
meetings
with
heritage,
so
I
just
wanted
to
hand
out
the
most
recent
rendition
of
where
the
property
is
at.
So
we
can
have
a
current
conversation.
S
Good
morning,
everyone,
my
name-
is
sandy
Wilson,
I'm,
the
architect
from
Alexander,
Wilson,
architect
and
I'm,
joined
by
Jane
DeMint
or
was
Ellis
an
architect.
My
office,
the
Derbyshire
is
Ryan
Page
and
mr.
Newman,
the
it's
been
a
really
interesting
process.
We've
been
moving
through
for
the
last
couple
of
months
as
we
try
and
tackle
the
many
different
characters
of
this
building
that,
in
the
various
time
zones
which
it
represents,
as
Ryan
was
saying,
the
building
was
first
started
in
1840
and
was
a
two-story
brick
building,
which
is
worthy.
S
S
Another
iteration
there
too,
which
is
another
layer,
was
added
in
1929
when
the
building
was
converted
from
a
single-family
home
to
an
apartment
building,
and
so
this
is
the
West
elevation
you
can
see
on.
The
bottom
is
a
kind
of
a
rack
of
one-story,
of
which
we
think
was
probably
poured
concrete,
and
this
was
added
onto
so
that
they
could
add
bathrooms
kitchens.
Maybe
they
may
be
extending
the
the
bedrooms
and
this
wraps
around
the
far
side.
S
Where
you
gonna
once
again
see
the
that
wrap
is
a
one-story
and
which
is
porches
and
additions
again
to
make
that
an
apartment
building.
The
back
is
kind
of
apart
in
terms
of
that
Queen
Anne
style,
but
there's
I
think
there's
lots
of
opportunities
for
expressing
what
was
there
originally,
both
in
terms
of
the
1886
Queen
end,
as
well
as
the
modern
ease
of
the
building
to
make
it
into
a
a
comfortable,
modern,
single-family
home.
So
the
this.
S
Think
we'll
leave
those
images
up.
You've
got
a
paper
copies
of
your
in
there.
It's
probably
better
that
we
make
this
a
question.
You
ask
us
some
questions.
If
there's
anything
which
we
can
clarify
in
your
minds,
we
would
like
to
get
your
feedback,
so
we
can
come
back
to
the
the
in
in
June
for
for
a
decision
and
it
might
be
a
committee
conditions.
Add
on
to
it
the.
A
R
B
R
The
existing
North
elevations
I've
done
up
a
photo
that
really
looks
at
what
sort
of
alterations,
so
we
can
go
through
it.
So
a
piece
by
piece
and
better
understand
with
this
project.
There's
a
lot
going
on.
So
it's
hard
to
sort
of
communicate
everything
we're
doing
on
all
the
different
facades
for
the
the
King
Street
facade.
This
is
the
most
prominent
facade,
and
this
is
the
one
we're
really
focusing
on
restoration.
R
R
So
in
terms
of
what
we're
rehabilitation
we're
looking
at
the
way
here,
we
go
these
these
two
windows,
replacing
them
the
ridge.
Are
there
currently
aluminum,
clad,
no
longer
the
original
windows,
so
we
would
like
to
replace
them
back
to
the
original
size
and
based
on
the
patterning
of
the
the
dormer
on
the
other
side.
R
We're
also
looking
at
removing
this
part
right
here
between
the
one
and
a
half
story
building
and
the
garage
from
the
fire
maps
we
can
tell
this
was
an
original.
This
has
been
infill,
probably
some
time
due
to
the
apartment,
additions
and
we'd
like
to
put
a
addition
here
with
a
height,
appropriate
roof
to
connect
the
garage
and
this
one
and
a
half
story
building.
We
would
also
like
to
extend
the
garage
out.
R
Currently
it
takes
up
30
of
120
feet
of
the
front
facade
and
we
would
like
to
push
out
the
garage,
so
this
pulls
out
and
turn
the
face
so
you're
entering
from
the
west
side
or
east
side
on
our
website
just
to
de-emphasize
the
garage
and
within
that
we've
been
working
with
heritage,
to
look
at
how
to
mitigate
that.
So
we've
been
how
we're
doing
our
planting
and
such
it's
to
minimize
a
view
of
the
garage
from
the
streetscapes
and
later
on
in
the
package,
there's
a
massing
diagram
that
looks
at
exactly
that.
R
We
also
feel
like
that,
adds
a
sort
of
connection
between
the
old
and
the
new.
That's
going
to
happen
to
this
building,
as
was
previously
stated,
this
is
an
apartment
building
and
as
such,
bringing
back
and
revealing
the
historical
nature
has
been
definitely
a
task
for
us.
Let's
see
if
I
can
scroll
down
so
yeah.
R
One
of
the
things
that
was
brought
up
in
our
initial
comments
was
the
stucco
on
the
main
building
and
how
that
it's
very
prominently.
Queen
and
originally
we
had
wanted
to
remove
that
and
show
the
18:41
after
consultation
with
heritage,
and
regarding
your
guys's
comments,
you
realize
that
the
stucco
there
does
add
a
lot
at
differentiates
the
original
building
from
any
new
brick
edition.
So.
R
R
So
the
Maitland
facade
is
probably
the
most
altered
of
all
the
facades
from
the
1886.
If
we
look
at
the
nice
lovely
image
in
your
report,
we
can
see
that
well.
The
entire
first
floor
is
from
the
1920s
addition
to
make
space
for
bathrooms
and
kitchens
for
the
apartments,
as
well
as
the
fire
escape,
was
added
fire
shutters
over
the
windows.
These
windows
on
the
second
floor
actually
vinyl.
They
were
placed
I,
don't
know
in
the
last
10-15
years.
R
So
our
challenge
within
this
facade,
it
is
a
Street
facade,
it's
not
the
most
prominent
facade,
which
would
be
the
King
facade,
but
we
still
were
looking
to.
How
do
we
rehabilitate
this?
How
does
this
become
a
functional
space
within
the
inside
be
coming
back
to
something
that
can
be
used
by
a
single
family?
But
how
do
we
do
that
within
the
context
of
celebrating
historical
features
of
this?
R
R
A
A
A
R
A
A
A
R
If
you
guys
do
flip
to
that
page,
it
does
show
what
the
existing
building
the
drawings
are,
and,
if
you
flip
again
so
I
guess
yesterday,
we
just
wanted
to
sort
of
show
where
we've
been
and
where
we're,
where
we're
going.
I
guess
with
the
project.
If
you
flip
to
the
next
page,
you'll
see
the
earlier
rendition
of
this
facade.
This
is
where
we
are
now
so
we
had
looked
at
something
that
was
higher.
That
was
wider
and
really
with
consultation.
R
R
You
can
compare
the
two
if
you
would,
like
that's
life,
put
them
in
a
package,
easy
comparison
as
well
as,
if
you
flip
to
the
next
page,
we
have
a
massing
diagram.
They
again
was
provided
to
the
city,
but
not
within
this
package
or
within
the
submission
for
for
heritage
that
looked
at.
So
the
idea
was
to
to
push
out
that
gable
even
a
little
bit
further
and
to
add
that
bay
window
to
sort
of
soften
the
facade.
R
M
R
A
Just
pointed
out
to
the
committee,
so
there's
three
pages
in
a
row
and
they're
dated
and
you'll
see
all
on
the
right,
all
in
May,
so
May
3rd,
May,
11th,
May,
16th,
the
dates
bottom
right
and
the
one
with
no
color
it's
dated.
May
16th
is
new
to
me,
even
because
I've
met
with
them
yesterday
and
that's
based
on
the
comps.
Since
we
had
yesterday.
That's
what
she
was
just
saying
about
the
the
roof
detail,
so
there
go
ahead.
Thank.
R
You
so
we
can
move,
then,
if
you
would
like
to
the
rear
facade,
the
South
facade,
which
is
a
I,
mean
historically
it's
sort
of
an
ramshackled.
We
would
like
to
make
it
again.
Another
prominent
facade
within
the
building.
I
mean
there
we
go
so
it
has
a
lot
of
work
going
on
on
it
not
being
well
on
the
streets.
R
We
still
wanted
it
to
have
the
presence
of
the
other
facade.
So
within
that
we
also
removing
the
1920s
editions
the
fire
escapes.
We
are
extending
out
this
dormer
too,
so
that
it's
at
the
same
elevation
as
the
actually
even
yeah
as
the
other
gable
right.
Here
we
are
also
so
from
the
other
side
we
lost.
The
historic
porch
was
with
one
of
the
attributes
of
that
facade
and
we
didn't.
R
We
wanted
to
still
retain
it
in
some
form,
even
though
that
doesn't
I
mean
from
for
my
heritage
standpoint,
we've
demolished
it,
but
for
our
own
sort
of
nod
to
it
and
wanting
to
keep
that
detail
alive
in
some
way,
we've
relocated
it
to
the
South
facade
where
you
can
get
water
views
from
it.
So
this
Gable
gets
a
little
bit
of
a
hipped
roof
to
account
for
that.
We
are
again
taking
away
at
the
fire
escape
we're
adding
two
new
dormers
on
the
one
and
a
half
story
portion
here.
R
A
E
Through
here
mister,
thank
you
I,
like
I,
appreciate
we're
gonna
lose
quorum.
Essentially
in
six
minutes.
The
director
has
the
discretion
here
to
bring
complex
applications
to
the
committee
by
way
of
a
pre
consultation.
The
intention
here
today
was
to
present
a
complex
project
to
the
committee
and
in
doing
so,
get
feedback
on
specific
components
of
the
proposal.
I
wonder
if
Jen
could
flip
to
this
image
here.
E
I
just
really
want
to
point
members
of
the
committee
to
a
couple
aspects
of
this
proposal
that
staff
have
had
to
take
a
great
deal
of
time
and
consideration
in
in
the
in
doing
a
critical
review,
so
the
porch
that
you
see
that
exists
there
today
and
the
pitched
roof
that
projects
out
of
out
of
the
building
there's
well.
These
are
original
attributes
to
the
building.
E
These
are
attributes
that
will
be
either
removed
or
altered
as
a
result
of
the
proposal,
and
so
we
have
looked
at
all
of
the
alterations
proposed
to
this
property
on
and
on
balance.
Staff
are
now
in
a
position
where
we
are
comfortable
with
the
final
iterations
of
the
drawings
that
are
in
front
of
you
today,
but
that
is
the
result
of
giving
consideration
to
all
of
the
other
improvements
to
this.
This
property
that
have
been
presented
through
this
project.
A
And
you've
got
the
so
if
we
just
sort
of
maybe
I
could
help
too
the.
So.
To
summarize,
there's
the
large
new
build
on
the
Maitland
Street
side
right,
which
will
be
a
library
I,
was
told
yesterday
with
the
large
window
there.
That's
the
West
elevation
right,
replacing
a
bunch
of
non
heritage
features
and
fire
escape.
That
is
existing
right
more
to
the
point
of
heritage
preservation.
Is
this?
A
These
features
here
that
you
see
on
this
on
the
on
this
picture,
so
the
stuff
in
red
is,
is,
is
being
removed
right
and
the
gable
shape
of
that
original
feature
there.
The
top
gable,
which,
as
I
repeat,
is
not
actually
above
the
roofline
of
the
main
house.
It's
below
it's
just
a
perspective
that
gable
shape
will
move
forward
with
the
new,
with
the
new
proposed
addition,
which
will
be,
which
you
can
see
where.
A
A
That's
an
addition,
and
the
original
porch
and
gable
that
you
see
there,
which
are
could
be
say
we
would
like
to
preserve.
One
of
them
is
being
moved
to
the
south.
That's
the
porch
should
be
moved
to
the
South
elevation
as
a
new
build,
but
basically
the
same
feature
or
a
similar
feature
on
the
south
and
then
the
gable
is
being
moved
forward.
Do
you
see?
What's
happened
there.
A
R
B
It
is
such
a
complex
project
and
a
lot
of
it
is
really
wonderful,
but
I
think
people
have
put
their
finger
on
the
West
gable
as
being
an
issue.
That
is
is
a
concern
partly
because
it
the
proposal,
does
change
the
massing
of
the
of
the
original
of
the
Queen
Ann
structure
quite
substantially
and
I
guess.
My
first
reaction
is
yeah.
If
it's
it's
okay,
it's
good
that
it's
below
the
roofline
of
the
main
roof
I
still
concerned
that
it
projects
so
far.
B
A
Sorry
and
then
the
other
aspect,
if,
if
you
like,
is
the
suggestion
that
the
second-story
porch
that
you
see
there
reappears
on
the
South
elevation
facing
the
Yacht
Club
also
facing
the
water,
which
is
actually
a
more
logical
spot
for
an
outdoor
space
and
so
that
I
guess
the
question
would
be:
does
that
sign
satisfactory,
fit
in
with
the
Queen
Island
Revival
motif
and
with
the
knowledge
that
that
rear
elevation,
the
South
elevation
is
really
very
little
remains
from
the
original.
So
you
could
see
that
as
an
improvement,
I
suppose
any
comments
about
that
idea.
A
A
Seeing
nodding,
that's
a
good
sign
all
right,
so
I
guess
to
repeat
what
mr.
Newman
said:
there
is
an
opportunity
through
to
put
in
comments
multiple
times,
so
maybe
if
you
need
to
sit
down
and
absorb
the
material
and
and
go
through
the
process,
so
what
I
would
ask
is
that
because
of
the
yes
miss
Agnew,
maybe
you
can
help
me
Frank
sure.
L
But
you
know
in
light
of
the
time
and
realizing
this
is
a
very
important
conversation
and
that
there's
critical
feedback
that
we
need
from
the
committee
staff
are
also
able
to
facilitate
more
of
a
small
meeting
or
individual
meetings
with
members
of
the
committee
to
sit
down
and
hear
your
feedback
specifically,
if
that's
helpful,
we're
happy
to
do
that
at
your
convenience
and
can
do
that
immediately.
Following
this
meeting.
Looking
at
some
dates
for
availability
to
do
that.
A
That
really
defines
the
cultural
value
of
the
structure
and
then
the
90
years
of
apartment
dwelling
that
went
on
in
the
meantime
preserving
an
astonishing
amount
of
the
original
value.
Although
you
wouldn't
necessarily
think
that
would
be
the
case.
I
think
that's
a
little
bit
of
luck
on
based
on
the
owners
of
the
structure
over
the
years.
I
know
that
it
was
owned
for
thus
40
years
by
the
Weston
Burks,
and
they
didn't
really
they
pretty.
It's
not
shown
here.
A
But
a
lot
of
the
interior
is
very
well
preserved
and
and
maintains
the
value
of
the
home
and
allows
it
to
revert
back
to
its
intended
use
as
a
single-family
home,
which
is
the
most
exciting
thing
about
this
whole
project.
So
I
found
myself
thinking
about
it,
so
maybe
you
may
need
a
bit
of
time,
but
the
feedback
that
you
offer
will
be
very
useful
because,
as
you
can
see,
even
from
yesterday,
they've
already
made
new
suggestions
to
the
design.
So
this
is
a
live,
live
like
real
time
process
that
we
can
participate
in.
A
So
if
you
really
have
anything
to
say,
encourage
you
to
take
a
good
look
at
it
and
and
meet
with
staff
and
get
your
feedback
in
I,
guess
the
time
constraint
or
under
now
it
makes
it
difficult
to
make
meaningful
contributions.
But
maybe
we
can
consider
this
as
the
introduction
to
the
problem
and
if
there's
anything
in
preliminary
comments,
you
go
ahead.
Otherwise,
there's
a
lot.
There
will
be
time
to
give
feedback
over
the
next
few
days.
Yes,
Jane.
A
Yes,
so
from
our
point
of
view,
would
be
the
hedge
district
plan
and
what
you
know
with
the
Yaak
up
there
and
the
the
rest
of
the
maintenance
street
neighbors,
you
know
sort
of
how
that
character
is
affected
by
the
proposed
work
right.
That's
everything
that
we
say
has
to
be
in
that
context,
so
you
probably
need
to
go
back
to
the
Heritage
District
plan.
Read
read:
what's
in
there
about
that's
relevant
to
to
this
application
and
really
compare
it.
Unfortunately,
sorry
to
put
you
all
on
the
spot,
but
basically
we
have
to
do.
A
M
C
R
A
Hasn't
spoken
today,
but
yesterday
I
mean
there
is
a
huge
amount
of
information
in
the
background.
The
historical
context
of
this
building
as
well
so
I
encourage
you
to
read
through.
That
is
when
you
get
the
chance
yeah.
So
where
does
the
pre
consultation?
So
the
process
has
started
if
they're
ready
and
if
staff
are
comfortable
with
it
going
forward,
it
will
come
back
in
June
as
a
formal
application,
so
you've
got
the
next
week
or
two
to
interact
with
staff.