►
From YouTube: Kingston, Ontario - Heritage Kingston - January 18, 2023
Description
Heritage Kingston meeting from January 18, 2023. For full meeting agenda visit https://bit.ly/3XmsqFT
A
A
I
need
to
start
by
recognizing
the
the
death
of
one
of
our
committee
members
of
Ted
Smith.
We
don't
have
details
of
of
a
funeral
or
of
anything.
Apart
from
the
the
notice
that
I
send
out
to
committee
members,
if
we
find
out
more,
we
certainly
will
be
sending
commiserations,
but
a
present
we
don't
know.
A
You
have
an
agenda:
do
I,
have
any
additions
to
the
agenda
I'm.
Looking
at
one
two
three
in
here
and
seeing
none
the
three
of
you
are
going
to
have
to
take
it
between
yourselves
to
move
and
second
things
this
morning,
a
mover
for
the
agenda
as
printed
done:
seconder,
counselor
osterhoff.
Thank
you
very
much
any
further
discussion
and
seeing
none
those
in
favor
and
you
have
an
agenda.
A
A
Looking
for
thank
you,
Janine
and
Council
ustoff
voting,
those
in
favor
of
those
minutes
as
printed
those
opposed.
Okay,
that
is
a
set
of
minutes
pecuniary
interest.
Is
there
any
known
at
present
and
I
will
make
my
usual
comment
that
if
it
appears
as
we
go
through
that
they
you
forgot
or
something
comes
up,
then
please
say
so,
just
as
fast
as
you
can
I
believe,
there
are
no
presentations
which
gets
us
right.
The
way
down
against
that
business.
B
Hope
everyone
had
a
nice
holiday
season
here,
so
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
111
Norman
Rogers
Drive.
This
is
a
significant
roof
and
property
renovation
proposal,
and
it's
colloquially
known
as
the
barn
which
I'll
be
referring
to
it
as
such.
Throughout
this
presentation-
and
that
is
the
historical
actual
barn
on
the
property-
has
its
name.
B
B
B
B
In
May
2022
prior
to
submitting
a
Heritage
permit,
the
applicant
has
assessed
the
roof
and
bar
a
roof
and
walls
of
the
barn
in
a
minimally
invasive
fashion,
in
line
with
best
practices
which
found
that
several
upgrades
and
Restorations
would
improve
the
structural
and
exterior
elements
of
the
building.
During
the
assessment,
the
applicant
undertook
a
historical
overview
of
the
property
and
found
some
photos
of
the
1961
roof,
which
you
can
see
above
here,
which
shows
the
finials
on
the
cupola's,
as
well
as
a
different
roof
finish
that
exists
today.
B
So
during
the
preliminary
assessment,
it
was
noted
that
the
cupola
louvers,
moldings
and
roof
roll
were
required,
like
required
like
for,
like
replacement
due
to
their
poor
condition.
While
this
may
likely
be
the
result
of
many
of
these
features,
repairable
features
should
be
restored
and
retained
where
possible.
This
is
a
condition
of
approval
further.
This
preliminary
assessment
includes
a
review
of
the
historic
photographs
and
images
of
the
property
and
the
surrounding
site.
B
Foreign
with
regard
to
the
various
removals
that
are
going
to
be
proposed
for
this
property.
This
include
this
has
the
this
is
shown
in
the
included
demolition
plan
on
the
slide
above.
This
includes
the
removal
of
two
non-original
and
unsympathetic
building
alterations,
namely
the
non-original,
but
still
semi-sympathetic
Stone
chimney
along
the
northeastern
elevation,
which
will
leave
only
one
course
above
the
Attic
Roof.
The
remaining
portion
of
the
chimney
will
be
capped
in
metal
and
will
match
the
color
of
the
new
roofing
system.
B
The
large
existing
antenna
has
a
large
black
silhouette
that
draws
attention
Towards
the
Sky
instead
of
the
building
itself,
when
the
antenna
is
removed
and
is
not
reinstated,
this
will
refocus
attention
out
of
the
building
itself
and
allow
it
to
better
blend
into
the
surrounding
landscape.
The
removal
of
this
antenna
will
greatly
improve
the
Heritage
value
of
this
property.
B
B
Even
if
this
is
a
re
reproduction
of
that
roof,
historically,
barns
have
had
standing
sea
metal,
roofs
with
appropriate
spacing
of
the
ribs.
So
a
new
standing
sea
metal
roof
system
should
still
preserve
the
Heritage
value
of
the
property,
while
maintaining
the
property
for
the
long
term.
Importantly,
a
finalized
color
of
the
roofing
system
has
not
yet
been
determined.
Heritage
staff
will
be
consulted
prior
to
finalization
and
purpose
Purchase
of
this
final
color,
and
this
is
also
a
condition
of
approval.
B
The
existing
eavesdrops
and
downspouts
will
be
replaced
with
a
slightly
larger
system
in
the
same
color
as
the
roof.
The
snow
guards
will
be
replaced
with
a
new
aluminum
ones,
also
in
the
same
color
as
the
roof,
and
the
application
also
calls
for
the
replacement
flashing
and
a
new
cap
for
the
existing
vent
replacement,
snow
guards.
As
mentioned
earlier,
as
well
as
a
new
replacement
eavesdrop
system,
the
replacement
system
will
only
be
0
or
0.03
meters
wider
than
the
existing
system.
B
B
Finally,
the
preliminary
analysis
noted
the
building's
masonry
was
in
quote
generally
fair
condition,
but
has
localized
defects
that
require
attention.
In
this
case
there
is
mortar
loss,
localized,
cracking
of
limestone
walls
and
a
significant
displacement
and
cracking
of
the
coin.
Stones.
The
replacement,
slash
repair
of
ethical
City
masonry
must
follow
the
city's
masonry
policy.
This
is
also
a
condition
of
approval,
so
the
recommendation
included
is
in
the
associated
report
for
review,
and
it's
also
on
the
slide
above
you
here.
B
C
Yes,
thanks:
I'm,
certainly
pleased
with
the
plan
and
general
plans
to
renovate
this
important
building
and
I.
Think
I'm
pleased
with
the
details
that
we're
given
I
do
have
one
concern,
and
that
is
the
color
of
the
roof.
I
noticed
the
conditions
say
that
Heritage
staff
will
be
consulted.
What
that
means
is
that
the
Heritage
committee
will
not
be
consulted
and
I
think
that's
really
not
appropriate.
C
Colors
of
roofs
are
important
and
you
know
I
think
it's
unfortunate
that
we've
come
to
this
point
without
really
having
a
definite
color
in
mind.
I
think
in
my
report,
I
said
medium
or
dark
gray
would
be
certainly
appropriate,
but
you
know:
there's
there's
a
wide
range
of
possibilities
and
I
think
the
committee
should
have
some
input.
Thank
you.
A
E
E
D
G
Thank
you,
I'm
Jeff,
rumpel
I'm,
the
manager
of
facilities,
Construction
Services,
here
at
the
city
we
can
commit
to
a
color.
The
reason
we
didn't
was
we're
going
to
go
to
bed
and
see
what
product
the
the
contractor
selected
and
then
they
would
bring
us
the
color
samples,
but
we
could.
We
could
narrow
it
down
and
say
bring
us
the
color
samples
that
are
medium
to
dark
gray.
H
A
The
government
from
the
public
wish
to
speak.
Please
make
yourself
known
either
by
raising
a
hand
on
Zoom
or
raising
a
hand
here
and
seeing
none
look
then,
to
move
this
motion,
which
has
13
parts
and
10
conditions
to
it,
so
the
full
motion
unamended.
Looking
for
a
mover
Chancellor,
thank
you.
Looking
for
a
seconder
Don,
thank
you
just
beating
you,
councilor
oosterhoff,
on
the
floor.
A
I
I
I
I
The
complex
has
a
number
of
historic
features
that
are
outlined
in
your
agenda
package
as
a
couple
here,
including
the
health
giving
landscape
with
the
buildings
set
between
the
car
set
within
Gardens
and
the
green
Courtyard,
deeply
shaded
by
a
number
of
large
trees,
large
willow
trees,
and
what
we're
looking
at
today
is
an
application
regarding
these
trees.
These
are
the
large
willow
trees.
I
I
An
application
before
us
today
is
a
demolition
application
under
section
42
of
the
Heritage
act
to
remove
the
remaining
two
willow
trees
in
the
courtyard
area
of
this
complex.
The
a
tree
inspection
report
was
provided,
it's
included
in
your
agenda
and
notes
a
number
of
concerns
for
the
future
of
these
trees.
The
owners,
however,
are
committed
to
pruning
and
caring
for
the
trees
until
they
become
too
much
of
a
hazard
that
they
must
be
removed.
The
Heritage
approval
today
will
allow
the
owners
to
remove
these
trees
in
a
timely
fashion.
I
The
Annadale
complex
is
an
interesting
collection
of
buildings
from
multiple
eras
and
designed
by
some
of
Kingston's,
most
notable
Architects,
including
Coverdale,
Gage
and
drever.
The
apartment
building
itself
actually
is
a
early
addition
to
the
region
in
1920s
and
was
sort
of.
It
was
unique
for
its
time
in
Kingston.
I
However,
given
the
seasonal
and
cyclical
nature
of
tree
feature
of
these
features,
a
formal
Heritage
approval
is
typically
not
required.
However,
as
we
noted,
these
particular
trees
have
a
significant
presence
and
contribute
to
the
overall
character
of
the
district
and
possibly
predate
many
of
the
buildings
in
the
district.
I
Section
42
of
the
ACT
requires
owners
of
properties
within
a
district
to
gain
approval
by
Council
to
alter
any
of
the
properties
to
alter
any
part
of
the
properties,
and
that
includes
Landscaping.
It
was
determined
that,
given
the
impact
of
of
this
removal
of
these
trees,
that
would
have
the
impact
it
would
have
on
the
district
and
character
of
The
District
formal
approval
through
Heritage
Act
is
prudent.
In
this
situation.
I
I
The
arborist
recommendation
is
to
plan
for
the
removal
of
these
trees
in
the
next
in
the
next
several
years.
They
recommend
that
extreme
reduction
pruning
be
undertaken
in
order
to
retain
the
trees
and
ensure
Public
Safety
in
the
short
term,
and
that
an
annual
program
of
inspection
to
evaluate
the
health
of
trees
be
established.
I
Staff
have
reviewed
the
information
provided
alongside
with
the
description
of
Heritage
value
for
the
district,
and
while
the
removal
of
trees
will
be
a
loss
to
the
Heritage
value
of
the
district.
Given
the
findings
of
the
arborist
report
and
the
associated
safety
concerns
with
these
trees,
staff
have
no
objection
to
their
removal
once
deemed
required
and
unavoidable
by
the
arborist,
which
is
a
condition
of
the
approval
you'll
see
in
a
sec.
The
retention
of
the
trees
in
the
interim,
with
a
program
of
monitoring
and
extensive
pruning
will
help
defer
this
loss
in
the
district.
I
So
this
application
was
circulated
to
our
our
number
of
agencies,
and
there
are
summary
of
comments
in
your
agenda
of
note.
I
would
point
to
the
comments
from
our
forestry
team.
Public
Works
forestry
has
reviewed
the
submitted
arborist
report
and
confirmed,
concurs
with
findings
and
recommendations
of
the
report.
I
Mr
chair
our
recommendations
are
before
you,
as
I
said,
they're
very
similar
to
a
part
four
recommendation,
and
there
are
a
number
of
conditions
associated
with
the
keeping
the
trees
in
safe
locations
as
well
as
gaining
proper
approvals
and
affecting
once
the
trees
are
to
be
removed.
So
we
can
the
pictures
again
so
I
have
any
questions.
Thank
you.
G
H
J
So
I
am
hopeful
that
these
trees
will
last
for
a
number
of
more
years,
but
that
also
we
can
expedite
matters
when
the
moment
comes,
that
we're
told
the
trees
really
cannot
just
be
pruned
to
remain
sufficiently
safe
and
that
they
do
have
to
be
removed.
So
that's
the
nature
of
the
application
which
I
thought
was
well
conveyed
already,
but.
C
I
guess
we
all
love
trees
and
we're
sorry
to
lose
them,
but
I
guess.
My
comment
which
are
made
and
dash
is
that
once
a
tree
is
seriously
declining
in
safety
and
in
appearance,
I
think
it's
best
to
make
a
quick
decision
and
plant
some
new
trees,
rather
than
going
to
an
expense
and
possible
dangers
of
sort
of
keeping
them
going
for
a
couple
more
years.
So
I'm
certainly
quite
happy
with
the
recommendation.
A
A
Ready
to
vote
no
any
further
discussion,
okay,
those
in
favor
of
as
everything
as
printed
those
opposed,
and
we
have
everybody
in
favor
there.
So
thank
you,
Patricia
Leighton
for
speaking
and
good
luck
with
this
project.
I
Think
We're,
all
sorry
to
see
that
has
to
happen,
but
that's
what
happens
with
trees.
Thank
you.
B
B
The
subject
property
is
located:
mid-block
between
Gore
and
Earl
Street
on
the
Eastern
side,
approximately
20
meters,
away
from
the
city;
sorry,
200
meters
away,
my
apologies
from
City
Park.
The
property
contains
a
two
and
a
half
story.
Building
with
three
with
a
three-story
tower
has
Seven
Bays
sits
on
a
high
story
foundation
with
pitched
face
coins
along
the
entire
height
of
the
facade,
the
subject
properties
designated
under
part
four
and
five,
and
the
above
slide
summarizes
the
important
to
the
property
similar
to
the
last
report.
B
The
addition
of
a
new
plaque
on
the
front
facade
of
47
Wellington
Street
will
have
a
neutral
Heritage
impact,
while
the
black
colored
plaque
may
appear
to
be
in
a
prominent
Place,
its
location
on
one
of
the
flanking
double
Bays
under
the
first
floor
window,
instead
of
the
central
Bay
ensures
that
the
visual
emphasis
remains
in
the
building's
massing
and
design.
The
plaques
location
also
avoids
key
Heritage
attributes,
while
also
being
in
a
reversible
alteration,
as
it
will
be
anchored
in
masonry
joints
in
accordance
with
the
city's
masonry
policy.
This
is
a
condition
of
approval.
B
C
Just
one
in
in
that
you
know
this
building
has
quite
a
long
history
and
served
many
functions
and
as
a
little
concerned
that
we
might
end
up
with
a
whole
row
of
plaques
for
their
different
functions
over
the
years
and
so
I
thought
this.
Is
there
really
should
be
an
opportunity
to
plan
ahead
and
maybe
have
one
one
large
plaque
with
more
history,
but
I
guess
we
can
leave
that
to
the
future,
but
I
thought
I
should
make
that
comment.
A
A
I
I
I
And
so
what
you
see
before
you
is
their
Now
application
under
section
42
for
alteration
new
construction
to
add
an
addition
to
the
to
the
house,
and
this
is
a
two-story
attached
garage
Edition
with
a
rooftop
patio.
It
extends
approximately
14
meters
from
the
west
side
of
the.
What
we're
calling
servants,
quarters
or
staff
quarters
of
the
rear
part
of
the
dwelling.
I
The
new
edition
will
include
a
two-car
drive-through
garage
connected
to
the
main
house
by
an
arch
breezeway.
The
second
floor
will
have
direct
access
to
the
rear
portion
of
the
main
dwelling,
in
addition,
is
to
be
clad
in
local
Limestone.
All
windows
are
to
be
wooden,
cladded
metal
and
in
an
off-white
color.
I
The
plans
include
a
conceptual
elevator
overrun,
which
you
may
have
noticed.
This
is
not
part
of
this
current
application.
However,
small
door
structure
is
proposed
above
the
roof
at
the
rear
staff
quarters
of
the
building
to
gain
access
to
the
rooftop
patio.
The
structure
is
to
be
clad
in
a
dark
metal
to
match
and
blend
in
with
the
roof.
I
Three
new
second
floor,
Windows,
which
you
can
see
in
the
bottom
of
that
plan
on
the
screen,
are
proposed
on
the
Southern
Wall
of
the
dwelling.
These
will
accommodate
three
new
sash
windows
wooden
again
with
metal
cladding
in
a
size
and
location
that
match
those.
On
the
first
floor,
including
the
use
of
stone,
Sills
jams
and
heads,
the
stone
and
metal
metal
fence
along
King,
Street
East
is
proposed
to
be
altered
to
create
access
to
the
new
garage,
the
top
of
the
screen.
I
The
opening
will
span
between
the
existing
pillars
or
new
posts
on
the
fence
about
five
meters
wide
on
the
western
edge
of
the
property
recessed
black
metal
gates,
either
swing
or
cantilevered.
With
simple
detailing
to
complement.
The
existing
iron
fence
are
proposed
for
both
pedestrian
and
vehicle
access,
and
it
is
hoped
that
Salvage
material
from
the
fence
will
be
incorporated
into
the
new
design.
I
I
Section
5
of
The
District
plan
was
next
to
slide
for
you
to
see
this
view
from
their
Street
and
view
from
Simcoe
Street
section.
Five
of
the
district
plan
establishes
policies
and
guidelines
related
to
building
alterations
and
additions.
Echoing
standard
11
of
the
parks
of
Canada
standards
and
guidelines,
section
52.2
of
the
district
plan,
provides
various
high-level
guidelines
related
to
additional
Heritage
buildings,
noting
that
new
additions
should
be
complementary
to
the
main
building
and
clearly
secondary
in
terms
of
their
size.
They
should
also
be
clearly
distinguishable
in
their
form
and
detailing
section.
I
522
also
directs
that
additions
should
be
located
away
from
the
Main
Street
facade
at
the
rear
of
the
building
and
not
add
to
the
width
of
the
front
of
the
building.
If
located
on
the
side
of
the
building,
they
should
be
clearly
set
back
from
the
face
of
the
Heritage
structure
to
maintain
its
prominence
and
should
avoid
causing
irreversible
changes
to
the
original
building.
I
The
new
two-story
addition
is
proposed
to
be
added
to
the
historic
staff
quarters
located
to
the
rear
of
the
main
dwelling.
The
new
addition
will
be
set
back
more
than
23
meters
or
over
75
feet
from
the
King
Street
East
lot
line,
and
over
15
meters
from
the
north
wall
of
the
main
dwelling
front
wall.
The
main
dwelling
thus
conserving
and
highlighting
the
prominence
of
the
Heritage
building
on
the
street.
The
inclusion
of
the
arch,
Breezeway
and
glass
railings
will
help
break
up
the
massing
of
the
new
addition.
I
Further,
if
removed
in
the
future
of
the
western
side
of
the
staff
quarters,
could
be
restored
to
its
original
form.
The
Proposal
includes
a
variety
of
new
windows
in
the
new
edition.
The
three
new
windows
on
the
second
floor
of
the
rear
stock
quarters
section
532,
provides
guidance
on
window
alterations
to
existing
window
openings
and
directs
not
to
alter
location,
size
and
shape
of
existing
Windows.
I
Well
not
noted,
specifically
as
Heritage
attributes,
the
existing
openings
and
fenestration
pattern
on
the
building
are
prominent
features.
The
doorway
and
second
floor
window
opening
in
the
in
the
first
Bay
of
the
staff
quarters
will
need
to
be
altered
in
length
to
accommodate
the
proposed
floor
levels
and
to
create
a
second
floor
access
to
the
addition.
The
width
of
the
openings
are
not
not
proposed
to
change.
I
Section
542
permits
large
areas
of
glazing
visible
from
the
street
at
rear
editions
located
on
Corner
Lots.
The
new
edition
includes
a
series
of
of
new
windows,
which
you
can
see
in
the
plan
here
visible
from
the
street,
but
set
back
23
meters
from
King
Street
in
the
rear
portion
of
the
property,
and
while
the
new
windows
appear
extensive
on
the
plans,
the
applicant
has
confirmed
that
each
window
will
be
separated
by
a
20
centimeter
or
eight
inch
wide
wooden
mullion
with
a
bead
or
bullnose
round
edge
profile.
I
Notwithstanding
the
hcd
policy,
compliance
in
this
matter
staffs
continue
to
have
some
reservations
with
respect
to
the
appropriateness
of
the
solid
to
void
ratio
on
this
elevation
and
except
for
the
the
two
large
bay
windows
on
the
main
building.
The
majority
of
the
fenestration
on
the
main
building
is
comp
is
comprised
of
double
and
single
Windows.
I
Existing
historic
landscape
structures
such
as
the
stone
and
iron
fence,
are
noted
as
Heritage
attributes
in
the
district.
They
are
considered
part
of
the
cultural
landscape,
treatment
of
the
district
by
Framing,
large
Landmark
properties
and
adding
to
the
interest,
interest,
Heritage
character
and
picturesque
qualities
of
Old
City.
I
The
iron
and
the
iron
perimeter
fence,
with
its
Limestone
base,
extends
along
King
Street.
The
property
its
construction
date
is
is
unknown,
but
its
contribution
to
the
district
with
other
historic
landscape
features
is
noted
in
the
district
plan.
Defense
is
approximately
40
meters
or
130
feet.
Long
stands
about
1.6
or
5
feet,
or
six
meters
or
five
feet
tall
with
a
decorative
iron
newel
posts
pillars
placed
regularly
at
about
five
meter
intervals.
I
There's
a
thick
hedge
extends
the
full
length
on
the
inside
of
the
fence.
The
Abacus,
proposing
to
disassemble
a
portion
of
this
fence
near
the
western
edge
of
the
property
between
new
posts
and
at
a
verticular
driveway,
leading
to
the
new
garage.
A
cantilevered
or
swing
gate
is
proposed
to
control,
vehicular
access
and
a
second
pedestrian
gate
is
also
proposed,
leading
to
the
front
door.
The
gates
are
being
black
metal,
designed
to
complement
into
the
design
of
the
existing
fence,
where
possible.
I
Portions
of
the
existing
fence
in
stone
base
will
be
reused
in
the
reconfigured
structure.
The
perimeter
fence
is
a
is
an
impressive
structure
that
contributes
to
the
district,
and
it
adds
to
the
prominence
of
this
landmark
building
of
it's
roughly
40
meters.
Only
five
meters
of
the
structure
or
about
12
percent
is
being
altered
in
any
way.
The
remaining
35
meters
or
115
feet
will
remain
unchanged.
I
The
portion
to
be
removed
will
be
reconfigured
to
create
a
recessed
entrance
using
as
much
solid
material
as
possible
in
accordance
with
guideline
414
of
the
federal
standards
and
guidelines,
fences
help
to
Define
and
organize
the
space
of
an
H
of
hcd
or
cultural
landscape
they're,
often
designed
and
built
together
with
buildings,
Excel
buildings
themselves.
As
a
cohesive
group,
this
fence
clearly
separates
the
private
outdoor
space
of
the
property
from
The
Busy
public
thoroughfare
of
King
Street
East,
and
has
done
so.
I
Presumably
for
many
decades,
the
iron
and
stone
fence
plays
an
important
role
in
the
character
of
The
District.
It's
design
and
materiality
contribute
to
the
prominence
of
the
dwelling
and
its
presence
on
one
of
Kingston's
main
thorough
Affairs.
The
fence
defines
a
boundary
between
public
and
private
and,
together
with
the
stone
wall
and
Simcoe
Street
adds
to
the
interest
and
historic
character.
The
intersection
The
Proposal
alterations
to
the
western
edge
of
this
fence
will
not
impact
these
noted
traits.
I
I
We
circulated
this
application
to
our
technical
colleagues.
Engineering
I,
just
wanted
to
note,
has
requested
a
grading
plan.
The
plan
is
to
show
that
there
are
no
adverse
impacts
to
adjacent
properties.
They
are
also
wanted
to
note
that
the
there
could
be
no
obstruction
of
The
Pedestrian
sidewalk
for
cars
queuing
in
front
of
the
gate
when
it's
closed
and
staff
have
included
conditions
of
approval
here
into
to
ensure
that
these
requirements
are
are
addressed.
I
This
application
was,
of
course,
submitted
for
the
committee
to
provide
comments.
We
received
two
comments
from
committee
members.
Those
were
submitted
to
the
applicants
and
noted
real,
no,
no
real
concerns,
so
Mr
chair.
Our
recommendations
are
on
the
screen
they
spend
over
three
slides.
There
are
17
conditions
associated
with
this
complex
application,
but
ultimately
Mr
chair,
we
recommend
approval
conditional
to
those
subject
to
those
conditions.
Thank
you.
Well,.
A
K
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
first
of
all,
I'd
like
to
thank
Ryan
for
that
extensive
description
of
the
complex
nature
of
what's
proposed
for
this
building.
I
I
certainly
appreciate
it
and
it
was
carefully
put
together
and
I.
Don't
believe,
I
have
anything
to
add
to
that,
but
I'm
here
to
answer
questions
and
in
the
event
that
there
are
questions
related
to
planning,
we
do
have
to
we're
going
through
a
planning
application
as
well.
Mark
tau
is
on
Zoom
listening
and
he's
able
to
answer
any
questions.
K
A
A
C
C
K
Thanks
Dan,
we
are
considering
that
seriously
we'll
be
showing
we
have
any
some
discussions
with
Ryan
about
that
and
probably
develop
sketches
of
what
that
would
look
like
I
was.
There
are
probably
other
features,
other
details
that
have
to
be
put
together
with
regard
to
this
stone
wall,
cladding
and
well.
A
series
of
details
that
I'll
have
to
go
over
I
would
like
to
go
over
with
with
staff
as
we
develop
the
documents
and
the
designers
is
one
of
the
areas
that
we're
looking
at.
E
A
A
Beautifully
written
mind
you
so
thank
you
final
comments
and
seeing
no
movement
anywhere
and
need
a
mover
and
a
secondary
to
approve
the
four
part
motion
and
the
17
conditions
attached
to
it,
moved
by
done
seconded
by
councilor
Glenn.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Council
as
well
calling
the
vote
then
those
in
favor
those
opposed
that
is
carried
and
I
just
add
a
congratulations
that
I
know.
This
has
taken
a
long
time
to
get
this
far
and
it's
nice
to
see
it
finally
moving
onward,
so
we
go
to
78.
B
B
B
The
subject
property
is
located:
mid-block
between
King
Street,
East
and
Wellington
Street
on
the
southern
side
and
is
located
approximately
200
meters
from
City
Park.
Oh,
my
apologies.
The
property
contains
a
building
that
comprises
one
half
of
the
hammer
dressed
Stone
two
and
a
half
story
duplex
with
a
pair
of
chimneys
on
the
Northwestern
facade.
B
B
Foreign
to
focus
first
on
the
rear,
editions
and
alterations
the
rear,
shed,
normer
width
increase
will
not
be
visible
from
the
public
Realm
on
either
side
of
the
Main
Street
and
in
the
street.
Behind
it,
the
rear
yard
alterations
should
be
sympathetic
too,
or
maintain
the
property's
Heritage
value
so
long
as
they
are
appropriately
attached
to
the
southwestern
chimney.
As
long
as
the
conditions
are
followed
in
this
permit,
these
changes
to
the
chimney
will
be
reversible
and
will
maintain
an
understanding
of
the
original
roof
pitch.
B
The
proposed
Dormer
extension
will
be
at
or
below
the
roof
line.
The
Dormer
incorporates
a
reveal
for
the
southwestern
chimney,
and
the
proposed
windows
will
either
will
not
be
visible
from
the
public
realm
and
they
will
be
either
restored
if
possible,
or
be
an
appropriate
aluminum,
clad
wood
window
that
emulates
the
existing
rear,
Dormer
wooden
windows.
B
In
terms
of
proposing
or
expanding
rear,
shed
Dormers
in
general
in
the
old
Sydney
Heritage
Conservation
District,
the
plan's
guidelines,
no
bad
quote
shed
Dormers
are
not
recommended
further.
The
plan's
policy
section
notes
that
roof
roof
profiles
visible
from
the
street
should
remain
unaltered
and
additions
will
be
permitted
at
the
rear
of
the
existing
mid-block
buildings,
provided
zoning
is
permitting
in
this
case
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
plan
does
not
prohibit
shed
Dormers.
B
It
only
discourages
them
largely
due
to
the
visual
impact
on
the
district,
as
the
proposed
shed
Dormer
does
not
disrupt
the
roof
profile
visible
from
the
street
is
proposed
at
the
rear
of
a
mid-block
building.
The
shed
Dormer
expansion
appears
permitted
by
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
plan
regarding
the
flat
roof.
The
continued
use
of
black
roof
membrane
on
the
entire
Dormer
will
allow
for
visual
consistency
with
the
existing
shed
Dormer
and
also
a
clear
indication
of
the
recent
addition.
Although
a
different
type
of
roofing
would
have
been
preferred.
B
However,
there
are
two
parts
of
the
application
that
will
require
further
review
by
staff,
namely
how
the
Dormer
will
be
attached
to
the
southwestern
chimney
and
the
location,
design
and
color
of
the
two
roof
vents
that
will
need
to
be
relocated
to
allow
the
inclusion
of
the
Dormer
extension.
The
applicant
is
noted
that
the
Dormer
will
likely
need
a
wood
ledger
to
connect
to
the
roof
to
the
chimney
and
to
facilitate
this
connection,
the
applicant
must
follow
the
city's
masonry
policy.
B
Further,
the
applicant
will
consult
with
their
staff
on
the
finalized
connection
method,
both
of
which
are
conditioned
of
approval.
Finally,
the
roof,
vent,
location,
design
and
color
are
yet
to
be
determined,
but
will
be
outside
of
the
public
View
and
will
need
further
review,
slash
approval
by
staff
prior
installation.
This
also
is
a
condition
of
approval.
B
A
H
A
F
Perfect
hi,
my
name
is
Mike
Preston
and
I'm,
the
agent
for
Ben
and
Lindsay
ritzma,
the
owners
of
78
Gore
Street
I,
don't
really
have
much
to
add
I
I
understand.
There
was
a
comment
from
one
member
I
think
Mr
Taylor
about
possibly
pulling
that
Dormer
back
from
the
chimney,
while
I
understand
that
desire
doing
that
would
create
a
number
of
issues.
F
First
off
that
chimney
is
about
two
feet
thick
and
that's
the
thickness
of
the
side
exterior
wall,
so
that
that's
where
we're
planning
to
attach
the
Dormer
and
use
for
bearing.
So
if
we
pull
it
back,
it's
going
to
create
a
point
load
kind
of
in
the
middle
of
the
room,
which
would
add
extra
cost
to
figure
that
out.
We'd
also
have
to
pull
it
back
at
least
two
to
three
feet,
just
to
avoid
snow
and
debris,
and
things
like
that
from
piling
up
between
the
chimney
and
the
Dormer.
F
Also,
it's
it's
right
now
that
that
room
is
pretty
small
room.
It's
about
10
by
12,
with
a
very
low
slope
ceiling.
So,
in
order
to
make
this
proposal
worthwhile
really
really
need
to
do
it
right
across
to
maximize
the
benefits,
so
I
think
because
this
won't
be
seen
from
the
street
and
it's
you
know
it's
sorry
I'm
losing
my
track
here,
because
it
won't
be
seen
and
I
think
it
makes
most
sense
to
build
it
as
drawn
and
that's
most,
the
benefits
of
the
promotional.
C
Thanks
well,
as
we
know,
shed
Dormers
are
a
bit
tricky
in
this
district
and
but
I
have
no
problems
with
this
particular
application,
because
the
shed
Dormer
is
in
the
rear
is
essentially
invisible
and
they're.
Quite
now,
quite
a
number
of
precedents
where
we've
allowed
shed
Dormers
in
the
rear
that
have
very
low
visibility.
So
on
that
point,
I
I'm
I
think
it's
acceptable.
But
I
am
really
quite
concerned.
C
As
Mr
Preston
noted
that
the
new
edition
it
kind
of
wraps
around
this
beautiful
stone
chimney,
and
although
he
mentioned
that
there's
some
technical
difficulties
in
pulling
it
back,
I
I
guess
we
lost
Bruce,
Downey
but
I'm
sure
there's
plenty
of
expertise
in
the
city
that
could
make
that
Dormer
wall
end
up
flush
with
the
stone
chimney.
So
you
only
lose
a
few
few
inches
of
space
and
you
retain
the
appearance,
the
undisturbed
appearance
of
this
beautiful
chimney.
So
I
I
really
feel
fairly
strongly
about
this.
C
C
Yeah
that'll
do
that's
a
bit
small,
but
you
can
see
how
it
the
the
Dormer
kind
of
wraps
around
the
chimney
and
all
I'm
suggesting
that
is
it
be
the
outer
wall.
The
door
will
be
flush
with
the
side
of
the
chimney,
and
that
chimney
is
a
really
significant
Heritage
attribute,
and
you
know,
I
think
we
you
know
in
this
business
we're
always
looking
for
compromises
and
as
I
say,
I
think
we
can
accept
the
shared
Dormer,
but
I
don't
think
it
should
wrap
around
and
obscure
part
of
the
stone
chimney.
C
So
as
I
say
we
this
committee
does
not
have
the
power
to
amend
the
application.
Council
does
I
presume,
as
it
stands,
I'm
afraid
I'm
going
to
vote
against
the
application.
Just
to
show
that
this
point
I
think
is
an
important
point
or
one
other
thing
to
mention.
I
noticed
that
the
comment
from
the
planning
division
mentions
that
the
Dormer
doesn't
satisfy
the
dorm
or
by
law
and
that
a
minor
variance
will
be
required.
C
C
A
Thank
you
John
just
to
explain
to
to
the
two
visitors,
since
this
is
an
application
within
the
Heritage
District.
We
are
not
able
to
amend
the
proposal,
so
you
won't
need
the
vaults
for
or
against
and
Don's
point
being
that
if
it
was
outside
the
district,
he
would
try
to
make
an
amendment
since
it
is
within
the
district.
We
cannot
make
that
Amendment.
Other
members
of
the
committee
wishing
to
comment
here-
yes,
Jennifer.
L
If
you
look
through
the
pictures,
I
think
that
this
even
like
on
an
angle
looking
into
it
I,
don't
think
you'll
notice
that
the
wall
is
is
built
in
and
I
think
the
placement
of
the
wall
actually
could
add
Heritage
value
to
the
interior,
because
it
allows
that
chimney
to
be
exposed
from
the
interior.
If
you
have
the
wall
proud
of
it,
then
you
wouldn't
get
that
sort
of
added
benefit,
so
I,
actually
like
the
placement
of
it.
L
E
A
Thank
you
very
much
other
okay,
seeing
none.
We
need
a
mover
and
a
seconder
for
the
motion
as
printed
nine
parts
and
eight
conditions,
Council
ustaf,
moons,
Jennifer
seconds
further
discussion,
seeing
none
those
in
favor
those
opposed
that
carries
five
to
one.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you,
Miss
ritzner.
Thank
you,
sir.
A
Correspondence,
you
see
the
newsletters
from
the
interior
of
actually
two
of
them
from
the
interior,
Heritage
Trust
and
brings
us
down
to
the
next
and
what
will
be
the
final
meeting
of
this
committee
on
February,
15th
and
I
would
remind
those
of
you
who
have
not
yet
applied
for
either
of
the
new,
the
Heritage
Properties
or
the
heritage
program
committee.
To
do
so,
preferably
this
week.