►
From YouTube: Built Heritage Committee - June 13, 2023
Description
Built Heritage Committee
Meeting #: 6
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023
Time: 9:30 am
Location: Champlain Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West, and by electronic participation
Agenda: https://pub-ottawa.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=c4f835a1-3a16-4e13-8534-2b60d41b9ee1&Agenda=Agenda&lang=English
C
C
D
D
Well,
good
morning,
everybody
I
think
we
have
everybody
here
online,
so
I'd
like
to
welcome
you
to
the
built
Heritage
committee
meeting
of
June
13th
2023.
I'd
like
to
call
the
members
to
order.
This
hybrid
meeting
is
being
facilitated
through
zoom
and
is
being
held
on
the
traditional
territory
of
the
Algonquin
anishinaabe
Nation,
the
original
custodians
of
the
unseated
land
in
which
the
city
of
Ottawa
is
located.
We
extend
our
respect
to
all
First
Nations
Inuit
mati
peoples
for
their
valuable
past
and
present
contributions
to
this
land.
D
Since
this
meeting
of
the
committee
is
being
streamed,
live
on
the
Ottawa
city
council,
YouTube
channel
I'd
like
to
remind
participants
to
please
keep
your
microphones
muted
until
I
call
upon
you
to
speak
for
those
participating
here
in
the
committee
room.
Please
use
the
microphone
in
front
of
you
and
keep
your
computer
muted
I
will
provide
each
Committee
Member
with
the
opportunity
to
ask
questions
or
comment
on
each
item
in
the
order
in
which
they
raise
their
hand
in
Zoom
for
panelists
to
raise
hand.
D
Option
is
found
at
the
bottom
of
the
participants
list
for
those
calling
in
press
star
9.
To
raise
your
hand,
the
committee
coordinator
and
I
will
be
watching
for
those
cues.
Members
are
also
reminded
to
submit
any
motions,
visual
supports
or
Declarations
of
interest
in
writing
to
the
coordinator
at
their
earliest
opportunity.
Although
the
deadlines
have
passed
for
residents
to
register
to
speak
and
provide
written
submissions
to
this
committee,
they
can't
make
written
submissions
to
council.
D
If
you
have
technical
difficulty
signing
into
the
meeting,
you
can
contact
the
committee
coordinator
by
calling
613-580-2424
extension
22953
a
reminder
that,
if
participants
are
having
technical
issues
with
their
Zoom
connection,
they
may
call
in
using
the
backup
telephone
number
provided
by
the
coordinator
in
terms
of
regrets.
I've
received
no
regrets,
though
member
Madigan
did
inform
us
before
the
meeting
began,
that
he
has
a
work
commitment
at
10
A.M
and
hopes
to
join
the
zoom
meeting
afterwards.
D
D
D
Thank
you
so
much
once
again,
are
there
any
Declarations
of
Interest,
seeing
none
are
the
minutes
of
Tuesday
May
9
2023
confirmed
confirmed.
Thank
you.
Our
first
item
is
on
Bill
23
implementation
of
changes
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
act.
Before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
ask
Vice
chair
plant
to
read
in
a
technical,
Amendment
motion,
foreign.
D
Whereas
the
report
on
Bill
23
implementation
of
changes
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
act
proposes
changes
to
the
notice
bylaw
to
provide
for
certain
notices
to
be
on
the
city's
website
rather
than
newspapers,
and
whereas
the
notice
by
law
is
2002-522
and
as
amended
rather
than
2018
360,
which
is
cited
in
the
report,
therefore
be
it
resolved
that
the
references
to
bylaw
2018
360
be
replaced
with
reference
to
bylaw
2002
522,
as
amended.
Merci
beaucoup.
D
Thank
you
so
much
and
before
I
turn
it
over
to
staff
I'd
like
to
express
my
appreciation
to
our
heritage
planning
staff
for
all
their
hard
work
over
the
past
several
months
in
developing
this
implementation
plan
in
response
to
changes
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
As
we
know,
in
November
2022,
the
provincial
government
passed
Bill
23
the
more
homes
built
faster
act.
This
act
introduced
sweeping
changes
to
land
use
planning
across
Ontario
and
includes
amendments
to
several
distinct
pieces
of
legislation
related
to
the
land
use
planning
process
schedule.
D
Six
of
the
bill
includes
amendments
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
act,
which
makes
changes
to
several
processes
related
to
Heritage
properties.
Most
of
these
amendments
came
into
force
on
January,
1st,
2023
and
municipalities
are
required
to
comply
with
these
changes.
The
Amendments
impact
nearly
all
aspects
of
Heritage
conservation
across
Ontario
and
will
significantly
challenge
the
ability
of
municipalities,
including
the
city
of
Ottawa,
to
conserve
their
Heritage
resources.
The
report
that
staff
is
tabling
today
outlines
how
Bill
23
will
fundamentally
change
the
Heritage
planning
workload.
These
changes
will
require
several
actions
which
are
outlined
in
the
report.
D
The
most
significant
change
to
the
ACT
is
about
the
new
requirements
regarding
limiting
how
long
a
property
May
remain
on
the
Heritage
register,
without
designating
it.
This
will
require
all
municipalities
in
Ontario
to
review
their
registrars
and
begin
to
designate
their
list
of
properties.
This
is
the
direction
which
we
have
received
from
the
province.
Those
already
on
the
registrar
must
be
designated
within
the
two,
the
next
two
years,
or
they
will
be
removed
as
listed
properties
from
the
registrar
with
4
600
properties.
D
On
ottawa's
Heritage
registration,
registrar,
requiring
designation
by
the
end
of
2024
Heritage
planning
staff
will
have
an
exponential
increase
in
the
volume
of
their
work.
This
report
outlines
how
staff
will
address
this
Challenge
and
contains
relevant
background
information
about
Conformity
to
provincial
policy
and
the
process
for
public
consultation,
as
well
as
owner
consultation.
D
The
report
details
how
Heritage
staff
will
develop
a
streamlined
approach
without
compromising
either
their
analysis
and
evaluation
of
applications
or
the
professional
recommendations
that
they
provide
to
the
built
Heritage
committee
and
Council.
The
report
will
also
detail
how
existing
staff
resources
will
be
allocated
to
prioritize
properties
and
work
on
designation
assessments.
D
We
will
also
hear
the
recommendations
concerning
the
addition
of
new
staff
members
to
support
the
effort,
while
recognizing
the
significant
challenges
posed
by
the
amendments
to
the
ACT
I'm
supportive
of
the
direction
proposed
by
staff
as
the
most
effective
approach
to
address
concerns
regarding
development
and
demolition
of
listed
properties
through
prioritizing
certain
types
of
properties
for
designation
I.
Once
again,
thank
our
professional
Heritage
planning
staff
for
creating
this
detailed
response
to
Bill,
23
and
I
invite
staff
to
provide
an
overview
of
their
report.
D
D
So
today's
presentation
has
two
main
parts.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
I'm
going
to
first
review
and
summarize
the
relevant
legislative
background
and
amendments
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
act
stemming
from
Bill
23,
then
Leslie
is
going
to
go
over
the
contents
of
the
report
in
detail.
The
city's
implementation
strategy
and
next
slide.
Please.
D
So
Bill
23,
as
already
mentioned,
is
fairly
extensive,
impacting
many
different
pieces
of
provincial
legislation
most
relevant
to
the
work
that
the
Heritage
planning
Branch
at
the
city
of
Ottawa
does
are
three
major
amendments
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
act.
So
first,
some
key
changes
to
the
functions
of
the
Heritage
register,
particularly
pertaining
to
new
timelines
for
the
listing
on
the
register.
Second,
changes
to
the
prescribed
events
process,
including
some
limitations
to
when
designation,
can
occur
and
third
revisions
to
the
criteria
for
determining
cultural
heritage,
value
or
interest.
D
These
criteria
typically
referred
to
as
regulation
out
of
six
and
they've,
been
slightly
revised
through
bill
23..
So
I'll
start
by
reviewing
the
the
changes
to
the
register.
So
next
slide
please
so.
As
mentioned
already,
the
city
has
over
4
600
properties
listed
on
the
Heritage
register,
as
non-designated
properties.
Typically
you'll
hear
about
these
properties
referred
to
as
either
listed
or
registered
properties.
So,
prior
to
Bill
23,
the
Heritage
District
served
as
a
fairly
informal
method
for
recognizing
a
property's
Heritage
value
listing
on
the
register
and
then
establishing
interim
demolition
protection
for
the
property.
D
So
these
properties
on
list
on
the
register
do
not
have
any
restrictions
to
alterations.
However,
if
a
property
owner
wishes
to
demolish
a
list
of
property,
they
need
to
provide
the
city
with
60
days
notice
of
their
intent
to
demolish
this
60
days.
Period
serves
typically
as
a
pause
for
the
city
to
review
the
property
and
consider
potential
designation.
D
So,
as
shown
in
this
map,
the
Heritage
register
contains
many
buildings
spread
out
across
the
city.
So
this
the
changes
that
impact
the
hairdresser
do
impact
all
Awards
across
the
entire
city
and
next
slide.
Please,
and
just
this
slide,
shows
some
examples
of
listed
buildings,
so
you
can
see
there's
quite
a
range
of
buildings
that
are
included
on
our
register
from
churches
to
rural
Farm
properties
and
modern
apartments.
D
Most
properties
that
are
listed
were
added
to
the
register
through
the
Heritage
inventory
project,
which
was
a
comprehensive
city-wide
research
and
inventory
project
that
occurred
and
concluded
in
2019
and
next
slide.
Please
and
then
here's
just
a
few
additional
properties
so
showing
some
Apartments
other
rural
homes
and
then
residents
as
well
and
next
slide.
Please.
D
So
the
through
Bill
23,
the
function
of
the
Heritage
register
has
changed,
has
shifted
very
considerably.
There's
now
a
two-year
limitation
to
how
long
a
property
can
be
listed
on
the
Heritage
register.
If,
after
two
years,
the
city
has
not
formally
commenced
to
the
designation
process
for
a
property,
it
must
be
removed
from
the
register
further.
If
a
property
is
required
to
be
removed
from
the
register,
because
we
failed
to
meet
that
timeline,
it
cannot
be
relisted
for
a
period
of
five
years
and
next
slide.
D
Please-
and
this
graphic
just
shows
the
new
process
under
the
Ontario
hair
Jack
for
listing
and
removing
properties
from
the
register.
So
under
the
after
two
years
from
the
date
of
listing
a
property,
it
must
be
removed
if
a
notice
of
intention
designate,
which
is
essentially
the
the
first
formal
step
in
designated
property,
has
not
been
issued
for
properties
listed
prior
to
Bill
23,
coming
into
effect
on
January
1st
2023.
D
D
The
second
major
change
from
Bill
23
impacts
the
prescribed
event
process
so
prescribed
events
are
a
process
brought
into
the
Ontario
Heritage
act
as
part
of
a
previous
Bill
Bill
108
and
formally
tie
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
and
the
planning
act
together
so
prescribed
events
are
certain
applications
under
the
planning
act.
Zoning
bylaw
amendments,
official
plan
amendments
and
subdivision
applications
under
the
previous
OHA.
D
Once
one
of
these
applications
was
deemed
complete
a
90-day
timeline
started
within
this
timeline,
the
city
would
be
allowed
to
designate
a
property,
but
if
that
timeline
was
missed,
designation
was
not
permitted
until
the
planning
application
was
completely
finished
or
disposed
of
as
written
under
the
ACT
after
Bill
23.
This
process
remains
in
place
with
one
key
change.
Previously,
the
city
was
able
to
designate
any
property
within
this
timeline.
D
However,
now
only
properties
that
are
listed
on
the
register
at
the
time
of
the
planning
application
being
deemed
complete
are
able
to
be
designated
within
this
nine-day
timeline.
So
essentially,
this
means
that
the
city's
ability
to
designate
within
the
development
process
has
been
significantly
reduced
and,
as
such,
it's
likely
that
City
staff
will
bring
forward
an
increased
number
of
listings
at
a
quicker
Pace
than
before
likely
in
advance
of
planning
applications
and
next
slide.
Please
so
this
graphic
just
conveys
that
process.
D
So
the
criteria
under
regulation
on
a
six
have
been
slightly
revised.
So
on
the
left
here
you
can
see
the
old
categories
that
the
nine
criteria
were
previously
organized
under
so
designer
physical
value,
historical
or
associative
value
and
then
contextual
value
under
Bill
23.
These
categories
have
been
done
away
with,
and
the
criteria
have
just
been
listed,
one
through
nine.
The
substantive
contents
of
these
criteria
haven't
been
changed,
but
their
organization
has
shifted
and
next
slide,
please.
D
The
more
significant
change,
as
shown
in
this
graphic,
relates
to
sort
of
how
these
criteria
apply
within
the
designation
and
listing
process.
So
on
the
left,
you
can
see
part
four
individual
designations.
So
previously
the
sort
of
bar
for
designations
was
that
a
property
must
meet
one
or
more
criteria
and
under
Bill
23.
The
new
rule
is
that
properties
must
meet
two
or
more,
so
the
actual
standard
for
designation
has
increased
part
five
designations.
D
We've
lost
the
use
of
the
Heritage
register
as
a
monitoring
tool
and
it's
it's
shifted
essentially
to
a
step
within
the
designation
process
or
an
optional
step
within
the
designation
process.
The
ability
to
designate
during
the
development
process
has
been
restricted.
The
threshold
for
designation
and
listing
has
increased
and,
as
a
result
of
all
of
these
changes,
there's
a
significantly
increased
tracking
and
administrative
burden
that
will
go
back
to
staff
and
also
to
committee.
So
with
that
I'm
going
to
pass
it
back
to
Leslie
who's
going
to
detail
the
actual
contents
of
their
parts.
D
D
The
second
is
details
about
administrative
and
procedural
changes,
and
the
third
is
to
revise
the
Branch's
work
plan.
If
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
so
the
first
recommendation
is
related
to
the
strategy
for
screening
and
prioritization
of
non-designated
properties
listed
on
the
register.
So
this
is
kind
of
the
big
chunk
of
work.
This
is
dealing
with
those
4
600
properties
between
now
and
December,.
A
Of
next
year,
as
Greg
said,
the
properties
are
city-wide,
we
won't
be
able
to
designate
them
all
and
in
fact
they
don't
all
Merit
designation
either.
So
we
we
do
have
to
sort
of
pick
and
choose,
and
so
for
the
past
several
months
we've
been
working
to
develop
a
screen,
screening
and
prioritization
strategy
for
these
properties.
So
I'm
going
to
go
through
that
now,
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide,.
A
E
E
Phases
so
the
first
phase
is
a
sort
of
I,
say
simple,
but
simple.
Yes,
no,
could
this
property
meet
the
criteria
under
regulation
906,
so
the
criteria
for
designation
that
Greg
just
outlined,
so
this
is
going
to
be
based
on
existing
data,
so
we
have
very
rich
data
from
the
Heritage
inventory
project
that
allows
us
to
know
a
bit
about
the
history
of
these
properties.
E
Any
info
we
might
have
on
file,
as
well
as
staff
expertise
both
on
the
criteria
and
on
the
contents
of
the
Heritage
register.
So
this
in
this
phase
we're
looking
at
all
4
600
properties,
the
results
will
be
a
yes
or
a
no,
so
properties
that
receive
a
yes
will
move
to
phase
two
properties
that
receive
a
no
will
be
recommended
either
for
removal
from
the
register
and
I'll
talk
a
bit
more
about
that
after
or
maybe
included
as
potential
Heritage
Conservation
District
study
areas
so
phase
two
prioritization.
E
So
this
is
all
of
the
properties
that
we
have
said.
Yes,
we
think
these
could
meet
the
criteria.
We
need
to
do
more
work
to
determine
if
we're
going
to
recommend
them
for
designation.
So,
in
order
to
prioritize
the
properties,
because
we
were
trying
to
do
a
rough
estimate
yesterday,
we're
expecting
probably
somewhere
between
five
and
800
properties
are
going
to
make
it
to
phase
two
out
of
the
4600
on
the
register
and
in
order
to
prioritize
those
properties,
we've
developed
a
strategy
based
on
our
official
plan
policies.
So
it
looks
at
four
categories.
E
The
first
is
risk,
so
this
is
is:
do
staff
know
that
the
property
is
subject
to
a
development
application?
Is
it
in
an
area
of
high
development
pressure?
Have
we
been
seeing
a
lot
of
demolition
permits,
so
we're
looking
at
those
sorts
of
Statistics
to
help
us
sort
of
assign
a
risk
value?
Obviously,
risk
can
change
day
by
day,
depending
on.
A
To
apply
to
this
project
we're
planning
to
work
with
appropriate
Community
groups
to
help
identify
those
important
places.
The
third
category
is
geography,
so
traditionally
most
of
our
designated
properties
are
located
within
the
urban
core
because
it
is
arguably
the
oldest
part
of
the
city,
but
we
do
also
recognize
that
we
need
to
do
more
work
in
our
rural
area,
since
amalgamation.
H
Of
the
city,
excuse
me
and
then
the
final
item
is
design,
so
Heritage
conservation
generally
has
you
know:
favored
High,
style,
architectural
Marvels
and,
and
you
know,
while
we're
trying
to
move
towards
telling
other
stories.
We
also
recognize
that
there
are
some
very
architecturally,
significant
properties
on
the
Heritage
register
that
are
not
yet
designated,
and
so
we
have
included
this
as
a
final
category
with
a
yes,
no
response.
H
So
once
everything
is
scored
through
these
categories,
we
will
have
a
list
that
will
rank
them
basically
Citywide
in
terms
of
prioritization.
The
next
step
in
the
process
will
be
to
develop
that
designation
work
plan.
So
that's
our
plan
for
this
summer,
which
will
include
consultation,
which
I'm
going
to
talk
about
a
little
bit
later,
but
also
engagement
with
all
the
ward,
counselors
and
members
of
this
committee
to
help
us
identify
priorities
in
your
communities
for
designation
as
well.
H
So
we're
going
to
have
a
multi-pronged
approach
to
Bringing
forward
as
many
designation
reports
as
we
can
in
the
next
18
months,
probably
multiple
designations
per
month,
beginning
this
September,
and
to
support
this
effort.
We've
created
two
temporary
researcher
positions
in
our
team,
so
we
have
two
new
positions
where
we
have
historians
who
are
able
to
work
on
basically
designation
research
full-time
to
help
support
the
increased
pressure
and
timelines.
H
I
However,
if
the
city
moves
to
remove
properties
from
the
register
prior
to
December,
31st
2024,
it
is
both
Heritage
and
legal
staff's
opinion
that
the
five-year
restriction
on
listing
does
not
apply.
So
it
is
Our
intention
to
try
to
remove
many
of
these
properties
from
the
register
prior
to
December
31st
2024,
even
though
that
will
remove
their
interim
protection.
It's
a
bit
of
a
trade-off
in
that
it
will.
It
will
preserve
the
city's
ability
to
re-list
these
properties
should
they
be
threatened
with
demolition.
I
So
we
will
be
bringing
forward
several
reports
over
the
next
12
months,
recommending
large
chunks
of
property
to
be
removed
from
the
register
as
we
move
towards
legislative
compliance
in
advance
of
that
December,
31st,
2024,
timeline
and
ultimately,
I
mean
I.
Think
in
the
end,
there
will
be
fewer
properties
on
the
register,
but
it'll
just
be
used
in
a
different
way.
Okay,
next
slide,
please
just
to
provide
a
very
brief
overview
on
sort
of
some
amendments
to
the
debt
Heritage
designation
process
regarding.
H
So
our
plan
is
that
once
we
have
the
research
prepared
and
we've
determined
that
a
property
meets
the
criteria
and
we'll
be
bringing
it
forward,
we
will
notify
the
property
owner
six
weeks
in
advance
a
minimum
of
six
weeks
in
advance
and
give
them
the
opportunity
to
have
a
meeting
with
staff
to
go
over
the
proposal
ensure
that
they
are
well
aware
of
how
they
can
engage
in
the
process.
They
can
make
an
appearance
at
this
committee
how
the
appeal
and
objection
process
works.
H
The
second
piece
is
looking
at
thematic
designation
reports.
So
I
spoke
a
little
bit
about
that
already,
so
perhaps
by
neighborhood,
by
building
typology
or
maybe,
if
there's
a
large
property
owner,
we're
going
to
do.
Designation
of
you
know:
five
Catholic
churches,
I'm
just
postulating
I,
don't
know
how
many
Catholic
churches,
but
that
sort
of
thing
we
may
do
those
in
in
streamline
report
format
next
slide.
Please.
H
So
I
spoke
a
little
bit
earlier
about
a
consultation
process,
so
we
we
do
have
this
statutory
timeline
that
we're
dealing
with,
but
we
also
recognize
the
importance
of
Heritage
conservation
in
the
community
and
really
that's
the
whole
reason
that
we
do.
This
is
to
protect
places
that
the
Community
Values,
so
we
have,
we
will
be
developing
a
strategy
for
consultation
with
Community
associations,
historical
societies
and
other
community
organizations,
as
well
as
the
development
of
a
volunteer
strategy.
H
Next
slide,
please
so
just
to
give
you
a
sense
here,
so
a
consultation
strategy
is
going.
It
won't
be
exhaustive,
unfortunately,
just
given
the
timelines,
but
our
plan
is
to
do
targeted
community
and
neighborhood
Outreach.
That
would
include
Heritage,
Ottawa,
Community
associations,
historical
societies,
the
various
groups
that
will
be
that
are
interested
in
Heritage
conservation
in
Ottawa.
H
We
will
also
be
doing
Outreach
to
members
of
bhsc
or
sorry
bhc
and
Ward
counselors
targeted
Outreach
to
identify
Community
priorities
for
designation,
broad
Outreach
to
groups
with
that
may
help
us
identify
properties
associated
with
underrepresented
communities
and
peoples
in
ottawa's.
History,
we're
thinking
of
doing
an
online
survey
to
interested
members
of
the
public
to
allow
them
to
identify
places
that
may
be
important
to
them,
as
well
as
Outreach
to
ottawa's
indigenous
communities,
which
is
a
bigger,
a
bigger
project
as
well.
H
So
we're
going
to
hopefully
do
this
over
the
course
of
the
summer
and
fall
and
that
will
help
us
further
refine
the
prioritization
for
designation
and
then
finally,
we
have
a
volunteer
strategy
that
we're
going
to
be
developing.
So
since
the
news
of
Bill
23
and
the
implications
have
come
out,
we've
received
many
offers
to
volunteer
from
Community
associations,
individuals.
A
Next
slide,
please
so
the
final
item
under
recommendation,
one
is
just
some
general
procedural
changes
to
address
resourcing
and
workload
implications.
So
streamlining
our
reports
and
notification,
letters
and
then
perhaps
the
piece
of
Interest
here
is
some
changes
to
the
pre-application
process,
so
pre-consultation
or
sorry,
pre-application
consultation
is
not
a
requirement
under
the
Heritage
act.
However,
it
is
something
that.
G
In
fact,
I
would
say:
95
percent
or
more
of
applicants
do
undertake
pre-consultation
with
staff
and
with
the
community
associations.
So
at
this
point
we
mirror
similar
to
the
planning
approach
where
we
invite
Community
associations
to
attend
pre-application
consultation
meetings
and
provide,
and
we
provide
comments
to
community
associations.
We're
recommending
some
changes
to
that
process
to
alleviate.
D
Some
of
the
sort
of
back
and
forth
that
occurs,
we
had
been
taking
this
approach
of
shared
comments
between
in
the
Community
Association
and
the
city
staff,
which
has
proven
useful
but
very
onerous
in
terms
of
the
back
and
forth,
and
the
timelines
and
the
and
very
detailed
comments.
So
now
we
are
proposing
to
invite
Community
associations
to
come
to
these
meetings.
Continue
that
approach
provide
written
and
verbal
comments
from
staff
include
the
Community
Association
on
those
comments,
and
then
the
Community
Association
can
provide
their.
G
Own
comments,
as
well
in
advance
of
the
the
application
being
submitted
next
slide.
Please
so
recommendation
two
are
a
series
of
sort
of
bylaw
and
procedure
amendments,
so
the
first
is
to
discontinue
the
use
of
the
Heritage
register
procedures.
So
Council
adopted
Heritage
register
procedures
in
2016.
staff
recommend
discontinuing
the.
D
Use
of
these
procedures,
as
the
Heritage
act
has
now
been
updated
to
have
more
detailed
requirements
around
processes
and
timelines.
The
big
change
here
is
that
counselors
will
no
longer
be
able
to
request
a
report
on
designation
when
an
application
to
demolish
comes
in
where
staff
are
not
recommending
designation.
D
G
G
D
C
K
Are
recommending
that
staff
be
directed
to
bring
forward
a
list
of
priority
hcd
studies
for
consideration
by
Council
mbhc
in
q1
of
2024,
we'll
work
with
Community
associations
and
Ward
counselors
to
focus
and
prioritize
areas
for
consideration,
and
we
will
also
include
the
various
hcd
studies
that
have
already
been
directed
by
Council
in
that
issue.
In
that
analysis,
so
the
the
direction
would
be
to
bring
forward
a
prioritized
work
plan
for
bhc
review
in
q1.
D
D
K
City
staff
for
several
years,
we
don't
want
to
lose
this
data
and
we
don't
all.
We
also
do
not
want
to
convey
the
message
to
the
public
that,
just
because
these
properties
have
been
removed
from
the
register
that
they
don't
have
any
cultural
heritage
value.
I
think
that
value
the
properties
are
removed
because
we're
required
to
remove
them,
they're
not
being
removed,
because
we
no
longer
collectively
as
a
city,
think.
D
K
D
Any
additional
efficiencies
that
may
be
found.
We
recommend
that
staff
be
directed
to
review
the
delegated
authority
bylaw
again,
even
though
it
was
just
recently
amended
in
light
of
Bill
23
to
see
if
there
are
additional
pieces
that
we
can
find
where
we
can
make
the
process
more
efficient
and
and
perhaps
take
some
of
the
workload
off
of
bhc,
which
will
have
a
heavy
agenda
in
the
coming
years.
K
I
think
next
Slide
the
conclusion
so
I
think
as
it's
clear,
the
impacts
of
legislation
are
far-reaching,
have
required
us
to
reconsider
how
the
branch
operates
through
the
recommendations.
In
this
report,
we've
attempted
to
find
a
balance
between
the
huge
pressure
we're
under
and
providing
the
best
service
to
the
public
and
the
best
expert
advice
to
build
Heritage
committee
and
City
Council
on
Heritage
matters,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions.
K
Thank
you
so
much
for
that
in-depth
presentation.
We
did
receive
correspondence
on
this
item
from
both
Heritage
Ottawa,
as
well
as
the
rocks
of
Park
Heritage
Outreach
committee,
and
we
do
have
a
number
of
registered
speakers.
We
have
two
registered
speakers.
The
first
is
David
Fleming
from
Heritage
Ottawa
just
wanted
to
ask
whether
Mr
Fleming
wanted
to
make
a
comment
on
this
item.
If
this
item
is
going
to
be
carried
or
not
sure,
absolutely.
D
Properties
and
very
early
on
in
the
process
once
our
fight
to
prevent
them
from
being
approved,
was
over.
That's
all
in
the
past
now
and
we
we
have
actually
met
toys
with
Miss
Collins
to
to
give
our
support
for
any
way
that
Heritage
ought
to
walk
and
assist
the
city
in
carrying
out
the
objectives
of
the
support.
D
But
I
think
it's
very
important,
given
the
decreased
timelines
or
approvals
for
official
plan
amendments
and
Zoning
by
law,
minute
that
that
we,
that
the
city
encourage
proponents
as
much
as
possible
to
do
some
pre-consultation
with
the
communities
that
has
worked
out
very
positively
in
the
past
and
I.
Think
it's
even
more
important
now
so
we're
on
side.
We.
K
K
Good
morning
good
morning,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
comments.
As
you
said,
my
name
is
Michelle
Heyman
and
I
am
Heritage
VP
for
the
Rock
Cliff
Park
residence.
Association
I
would
like
to
thank
Heritage
staff
for
this
report
and
all
the
recommendations
to
move
to
protect
Heritage
in
the
city
of
Ottawa.
In
particular,
we
would
like
to
thank
you
for
retaining
the
pre-consultation
process.
K
It
is
one
that
we
have
felt
has
had
a
great
success,
but
I
would
like
to
speak
to
the
recommendation
1e
regarding
pre-consultation
joint
comments.
So
we
understand
that,
given
the
restraints
of
build
23
that
streamlining
the
pre-consultation
process
is
necessary,
however,
we
would
like
to
respectfully
request.
D
That
Droid
comments
still
be
part
of
the
streamlined
process.
Submitting
joint
comments
at
the
pre-consultation
stage
is
extremely
important
is
at
this
point
that
both
the
Heritage
planner
and
the
Heritage
committee
have
the
greatest
ability
to
affect
an
application.
Joint
comments
have
more
gravitas,
working
together
with
the
Heritage
planner,
to
provide
comments
which
align
presents
clear
direction
to
the
applicant
comments
that
do
not
align
present
confusing
direction
for
the
applicant
and
may
result
in
producing
an
outcome
which
does
not
fully
reflect
the
community's
expectation
for
our
heritage.
D
D
K
L
Process
that
has
benefited
everyone,
but
I
also
respect
staff's
concern
about
how
time
consuming
and
at
times
onerous,
the
process
can
be,
which
is
why
it
has
led
to
them
actually
recommending
splitting
this.
So
I
have
a
very
specific
question
for
you.
You
did
say
that,
for
instance,
Radcliffe
has
committed.
L
D
L
Perhaps
we
can
act
in
partners
that
way
and
then
also
just
saying:
okay,
you
have
one
chance
to
or
one
meeting
and
it
lasts,
no
more
than,
let's
say
15
minutes
to
be
in
alignment
and
and
agree.
You
know
sometimes
I
realize
we
have
to
agree
to
disagree,
but
at
least
have
the
opportunity
to
to
take
a
few
minutes
to
say
look.
Can
we
agree
on
this?
L
A
I
Not
doesn't
carry
the
same
weight
as
as
the
direction
received
from
the
city
and
I
also
realized
that
we
haven't
lost
the
the
ability
to
comment
when
an
application
is
already
made.
However,
I
feel
that
so
much
of
so
much
work
and
and
expectations
are
already
quite
High
by
the
time.
The
application
stage
is
reached
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
and
expense
has
been
used,
and
there
is
a
reluctance,
then
to
be
able
to
have
an
effect
on
changes
that
that
we
suggest
okay.
I
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
deputation.
We
appreciate
your
comments.
Obviously,
the
the
input
from
Community
associations
is
is
very
important
and
I
think
that
this
is
a
process
where
we
are
seeking
some
calibration
and
I
think
we're
going
to
have
to
continue
to
calibrate
this
this
process
as
it
goes
forward.
So
we
appreciate
those
comments
very
impactful
and
very
meaningful
to
this
committee.
I
D
D
It's
a
real
rush
to
make
sure
that
we
preserve
the
Heritage
properties
that
are
so
important
to
our
neighborhoods
in
terms
of
counselor
and
Community
involvement.
So,
if
I
have
this
correct,
what
you're
saying
is
that
if
there's
a
building,
that's
not
designated
at
the
moment
and
that
holds
Community
significance,
people
better
get
on
that
now.
D
I
look
forward
to
the
Frankenstein
list,
yeah
for
those
of
us
who
are
new
counselors
too,
we
really
do
rely
on
the
knowledge
of
our
community
Heritage
Advocates.
Who
can
help
us
understand
the
significance
of
some
of
these
properties?
Is
there
any
impact
on
things
that
are
already
in
the
work
plan?
So
I
know
that
there's
a
Golden
Triangle
Heritage
Conservation
District
study.
That's
still
to
come.
Does
this
legislation
have
any
potential
impacts
on
that
study,
or
would
it
limit
what
a
Conservation
District
can
do?
D
There
are
no
particular
changes
for
Heritage
conservation
districts,
with
the
exception
of
the
new
criteria
that
now
apply
I,
don't
think
that
would
have
a
big
impact
on
Golden
Triangle
or
we
also
have
a
West
Center,
Town,
Dundonald,
Park
sort
of
hcd
on
our
work
plan
as
well.
That
being
said,
as
I
mentioned,
we're
going
to
identify
clusters
across
the
city
and
look
at
sort
of
prioritizing
hcd
studies.
D
Hcd
studies
are
very
onerous:
Heritage
Conservation,
District,
sorry
I'm
using
the
acronyms
they're
very
time
consuming
projects
so,
and
we
know
that
there
are
going
to
be
many
communities
who
are
interested
in
this
as
a
result
of
the
changes
coming
where
they're
losing
properties
that
are
on
the
register.
We've
had
Outreach
from
a
variety
of
community
associations
in
the
last
couple
of
months
asking
questions
about
hcds,
so
our
thought
was
to
sort
of
put
everything
in
the
hopper
together,
try
to
figure
out
what
is
the
highest
priority.
What's
the
highest
risk?
I
We've
seen
in
my
ward
with
that
qualified
building
for
Heritage
designation
priority
if
there's
potentially
demolition
order
so
risk
yes,
so
demolition,
obviously
is
a
risk,
would
would
elevated
in
the
priority.
That
being
said,
if
it's
condition
is
so
poor
that
it
requires
demolition,
it
may
be
a
hard
sell
to.
A
And
then,
after
that,
90
days,
if
we
didn't
meet
that,
then
we'd
be
unable
to
designate
until
that
application
was
disposed
of,
which
essentially
means
completed
and
and
finalized,
and
everything,
and
through
that
there's
the
potential
that
you
know
the
building
could
be
gone
after
that.
So
that's
where
that
sort
of
limitation
comes
in.
Hence
the
rush
anyway.
Thank
you
so
much
for
all
your
work.
A
Thank
you
so
much
councilor
troster
counselor
Lieber
thanks
we've
got
about
six
questions
which
are
essentially
just
for
my
own
clarification.
The
first
one
is
on
page
12.
You've
described
the
bulk
removal
process
and
staff's
assertion
that
we
can
do
so
in
order
to
retain
our
ability
to
to
put
them
back
on,
because
the
anniversary
date
won't
apply.
Is
that
a
risk
like
a
do
other
jurisdictions
share
the
same
view?
A
A
I.
Think
Mr
Mark's
advice
to
me
was
that
we
should
go
this
route,
but
that
we
won't
know
for
sure
until
somebody
tests
it
so
until
when
we
try
to
re-list
something
somebody
May
test
it
and
say
you
know
you,
but
our
our
sort
of
thought
is
that
the
trade-off
is
worth
it
in
terms
of
like
the
risk
reward
potential.
There's
no
good
solution
here,
essentially,
okay,
skip
that
one
actually
on
page
17.
A
The
sorry
public
consultation
strategy
in
the
first
bullet
speaks
to
targeted
Outreach
to
identify
a
community
designation
priorities.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you're
going
to
be
reaching
out
to
counselors
on
that
as
well.
Right,
yes,
counselor
I,
I
realized
this
morning
when
I
was
rereading
this,
that
we
accidentally
forgot
to
put
you
in
there,
but
it
we
will
absolutely
be
reaching
out
to
counselors
no
problem.
Thank
you
with
respect
to
the
shared
comments.
You
will
now
expect
Community
associations
to
provide
their
own
comments
to
the
applicant.
A
Will
they
know
who
the
applicant
is
and
how
to
reach
them.
Sometimes
reaching
Property
Owners
is
a
problem
for
communities.
Thank
you
for
the
question,
I
think.
Yes,
they
will
we'll
be
working
alongside
each
other.
Still
they
will.
They
will
continue
to
be
invited
to
the
pre-application
meeting.
They
will
see
the
city
staff
comments
and
then
they
can
provide
their
own
direct
comments
to
City
staff
and
we'll
forward
them
to
the
applicant
or
to
the
applicant
and
CCS.
A
C
You
know
what
happens
when
an
owner
submits
that
60-day
demolition
notice
and
as
I
read
this
paragraph
I
guess
I
interpreted
it
to
mean
that
the
ward
counselor
isn't
the
opinion
of
the
ward
counselor.
The
direction
of
the
ward
counselor
isn't
necessarily
going
to
be
sought
anymore.
So
in
past
a
60-day
notice
has
come
in.
C
You've
come
to
the
counselor
to
say
this
one's
marginal
we're
not
proposing
to
move
ahead
with
the
designation
unless
you'd
really
like
to,
and
then
there's
usually
a
productive
discussion
that
happens
as
to
whether
or
not
the
counselor
wants
to
kind
of
kind
of
ask
you
to
please
move
ahead
with
getting
the
materials
together
for
a
report.
You
suggested
that
that's
going
to
change,
but
your
comments
today
sounded
like
that's
not
going
to
change.
So
when
you
first
approach,
the
counselor
there's
been
a
60-day
demolition
notice.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question.
So
I
guess.
Maybe
if
we
use
an
example,
five
on
one
call
is
a
good
example.
So
for
those
who
are
not
members
of
the
committee
last
year
we
had
a
60-day
notice
came
in
for
a
demolition
of
a
property
and
counselor
leipers.
Ward
staff
did
not
recommend
designation
of
the
property,
but
counselor
in
his
community
felt
that
it
was
important.
So
we
brought
it.
Forward
councilor
requested
the
staffer
in
Florida
report
and
then,
ultimately,
the
property
was
designated,
objected,
appealed,
Etc.
C
So
the
way
the
process
we're
proposing
will
work
now
is
that
we
will
still
notify
the
ward
counselor
that
we've
received
a
60-day
notice.
We
will
still
provide
our
opinion
as
to
whether
or
not
the
property
has
value.
We
will
still
engage
in
a
conversation
with
the
counselor
and
I
think
it
just
won't
be,
and
maybe
actually,
if
I,
if
I
pause
and
go
back
and
and
go
to
other
examples.
C
So
we're
trying
to
eliminate
some
of
those
unnecessary
staff
reports,
essentially
in
the
instances
where
a
counselor
is
interested,
I
think
what
we
would
do
is
that
staff
would
not
write
a
report,
but
we
would
assist
the
counselor,
as
we
did
with
your
office
on
five
on
one
call
with
providing
you
with
the
research
that
we
have
undertaken
with.
Perhaps
drafting
motions
and
statements.
C
C
C
I
think
there
are
a
couple
of
things.
One
is
that
Ward,
15
and
Ward
17
are,
let's
say,
underrepresented
in
the
context
of
words,
12
13
and
14,
but
in
the
context
of
the
greater
City,
perhaps
not
underrepresented,
and
so
Greg
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
believe
in
our
in
our
because
we
use
Ward
15
as
our
sort
of
test
pilot
project
in
developing
this.
This
rubric
properties
located
in
an
underrepresented
border
neighborhood.
It
got
a
score
of
one.
A
Gets
a
score
of
one
if
it's
in
an
underrepresented,
so
we're
saying
it's
underrepresented,
but
it's
not
quite
as
represented,
let's
say
as
12
13
or
14..
Okay
I'll
I'll
be
curious
to
see
how
the
priorities
change
we're
going
to
have
an
opportunity
to
when
you
start
bringing
forward
those
bulk
refusals
or
not
bulk
refusal.
Sorry,
those
bulk
removals.
Thank
you.
We're
going
to
have
the
opportunity.
J
To
push
back
and
bring
motions
if
we
need
to
and
all
that
good
stuff,
so
it's
not
our
last
kick
at
the
can.
No,
of
course,
and
and
you
know
we
will
definitely-
we
haven't
fully
figured
out
the
best
way
to
share
these
lists,
whether
we
want
them
I,
don't
think
we
want
them
to
be
fully
public
at
this
point
as
we're.
A
Doing
our
analysis
but
I
think
through
consultation
with
four
counselors
and
communities,
we're
going
to
do
our
best
to
kind
of
help,
identify
priorities
and,
like
you
said,
you'll
have
another
chance
when
it
comes
to
committee.
Okay,
none
of
us
want
to
be
in
this
place
today,
but
I'll.
Let
go
the
chairs
thanks
to
to
staff
for
doing
a
lot
of
work
to
to
get.
F
F
The
first
question
that
I
have
is
regarding
the
screening
process,
so
you're,
looking
at
the
possibility
of
the
structure
satisfy
satisfying
at
least
two
of
the
nine
criterias
for
it
to
move
to
prioritization
is
that
is
that
correct?
That's
correct,
yeah!
Okay,
thank
you.
Do
we
have
a
timeline
on
the
phase,
one
screening
and
the
phase
two
prioritization,
the
phase.
One
screening
is
basically
finished.
A
F
There
a
certain
amount
of
time
the
property
needs
to
be
on
the
register
listing
after
it
has
been
relisted
before
it
can
be
before
its
intent
for
designation
is
published.
No,
so
and
and
in
fact
we
don't
actually
even
have
to
list
something
to
designate
it,
so
we
can
still
move
directly
to
designation
unless
there
is
a
development
application.
So
the
only
requirement.
C
A
Move
to
designations
as
long
as
there's
no
planning
application,
if
there
is,
if
we
anticipate
a
planning
application,
I
expect
that
we
will
be
bringing
forward
a
motion
to
list
something
and
then
perhaps
the
following
month,
moving
to
designation,
because
we
will
have
a
limited
time
frame,
yeah
yeah
that
sounds
like
you.
Have
you
it'll
give
you
enough
time
to
do
that.
A
I
do
have
one
comment
regarding
prioritization
of
individual
designations,
since
the
city
is
planning
to
make
thematic
designation
reports
I
think
it's
also
important
to
prioritize
inclusion
of
specific
typology
structures
from
each
decade
in
which
that
typology
was
built
so
that,
at
the
end
of
the
exercise,
you
don't
only
have
the
best
examples
of
a
typology
on
the
designations,
but
also
the
development
of
that
typology
within
the
city.
Again,
these
can
be
part
of
the
Thematic
designations
which
are
being
planned
for
anyways.
A
To
conclude,
it's
a
very
well-oriented
report
and
a
great
plan
of
action
Kudos
in
that
especially
come
in
the
inclusion
of
typology
and
prioritization
and
maintaining
their
sense
of
pre-consultation
process.
The
city
has
clearly
worked
very
hard
for
and
it's
an
extremely
huge
undertaking,
but
the
plan
looks
really
promising.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
that
really
beneficial
input
and
for
those.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Chair
I
just
wanted
to
Echo
what
has
already
been
said
today
about
the
onerous
task
and
the
incredible
undertaking
for
staff
and
just
how
impressive
it
is
and
challenging
and
how
you
know.
You've
just
taken
the
lead
jumped
into
this
and
brought
forward
a
very
comprehensive
and
impressive
report
for
us
to
consider
today.
So
I
want
to
thank
you
very
much
and
let
you
know
how
appreciated
you
all
are
and
I
I
had.
A
A
Think
Pages,
20
and
21
of
your
report
talk
about
those
changes
and,
as
you
indicated,
to
councilor
Leeper,
there
is
still
sort
of
a
you
anticipate
an
engagement
process
of
some
type,
although
different
I
just
would
like
to
hear
if
you
could
elaborate
on
that
a
little
bit
more
and
perhaps,
if
there's
any
way
of
strengthening
the
wording
in
in
the
report,
so
that
it
reflects
the
continued
goal
of
engaging
with
the
community
in
a
more
specific
way.
So
take
it
away.
A
Thank
you.
The
pre-application
consultation
process
has
been
a
very
successful
process
since
we
implemented
it,
we
are
not
proposing
to
eliminate
that
process
at
all.
This
is
really
just
a
proposal
to
tweak
the
process,
so
the
major
elements
of
the
program
will
remain.
Community
associations
will
continue
to
be
invited
to
formal
pre-application
meetings
as
they
are
now.
They
will
be
able
to
provide
verbal
and
written
comments
and
will
continue
to
be
notified
when
an
application
is
actually
received.
A
So
when
the
pre-consultation
process
ends
and
a
formal
application
is
received,
we
do
intend
to
still
discuss
applications
with
communities.
The
main
change
is
this
idea
of
what
we've
been
calling
shared
comments,
and
so
in
the
past,
when
staff
have
provided
comments
at
pre-application
consultation,
it
has
been
related
to
what
are
the
application
requirements.
A
So
we
are
proposing
to
maintain
the
process,
maintain
the
channels
of
communication,
but
also
sort
of
strip
it
back
a
little
bit
to
not
be
a
basically
analysis
of
a
full
application
at
the
pre-consultation
stage.
So
I
I
want
to
assure
the
committee
that
you
know
our
intention
here
is
not
to
stymie
the
community
or
stymie
the
community's
participation
in
the
process
at
all.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
Just
one
more
thing
on
that
point,
I
do
recall
one
of
the
submissions
written
submissions
that
came
before
us.
There
even
was
a
suggestion
that
the
community's
comments
could
follow
staff
comments
in
the
reports
as
opposed
to
being
buried
further
along
as
they
had
been
prior
to
to
the
implementation
of
the
community
liaison
program.
A
So,
just
if,
if
those
kinds
of
that
that's
a
thoughtful
detail,
could
be
prioritized,
I
think
it
would
be
I
think
appreciated
at
the
community
level
as
well
like
sometimes
it's
Optics
as
much
as
anything
yeah
I
think
we
can
I
think
we
can
look
into
that.
I'd
have
to
discuss
it
with
legal
and
I
mean
I.
Think
the
other
piece
too,
the
community
piece
is
important,
but
at
the
same
time,
staff's
role
is
to
provide
expert
advice
to
city
council
as
professional
planners.
A
A
A
Historically,
Ottawa
has
achieved
this
through
listing
properties,
with
the
understanding
that
the
list
of
properties
would
remain
as
such
in
perpetuity
and
could
be
designated
later
when
required,
with
the
Amendments
made
to
to
the
ACT
through
Bill
23.
This
approach
is
no
longer
possible
due
to
the
time
limitations
placed
on
limited
on
properties
in
the
act,
as
we
had
just
heard.
This
means
that
municipalities
must
begin
to
pursue
designations
more
aggressively
to
fulfill
their
obligations
under
provincial
policy.
A
The
city
will
also
consider
using
volunteers
from
the
community
to
enhance
its
designation
efforts
and
I'm
really
excited
about
the
prospect
of
that
working
hand
in
hand
with
communities
who
value
these
properties
and
ensuring
that
we
emphasize
as
a
city
that
we
value
these
properties
as
well.
Once
again,
we
we
thank
Our
Heritage
staff,
for
this
in-depth
presentation
for
the
report
and
all
their
hard
work
is
the
motion
carry
Carrie.
Thank
you.
That
was
the
amending
motion.
Is
the
report
carried
Terry
Eric?
A
Thank
you
so
much,
and
this
report
will
be
submitted
to
Ottawa
city
council
tomorrow
for
consideration
and
I'm
pleased
that
that
consideration
will
take
place
as
well
in
conjunction
with
the
planning
considerations
that
we'll
be
going
to
council
tomorrow.
The
next
item
in
front
of
us
is
applications
to
alter
233,
Argyle
Avenue
and
330
McLeod
Street
Properties
designated
under
part
five
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Acts.
A
Thank
you,
Mr
chair.
It's
a
little
bit
more
of
a
straightforward
item
for
the
second
item
of
the
day,
but
good
morning
again
so
I'll
be
discussing
our
alterations
proposed
at
233,
Argyle,
Avenue
and
330
McLeod
Street
in
the
center
Town
Heritage
Conservation
District,
and
just
a
little
bit
of
background
before
we
start
on
this
item.
A
A
So,
just
to
provide
some
context,
this
property
is
located
between
bank
and
O'connor
Street,
roughly
mid
Block
in
the
center
Town
Heritage
Conservation
District,
233
Argyle
and
330
McLeod.
They
abut
at
their
rear
yards,
and
originally
this
application
was
proposed
sort
of
as
one
unified
development,
which
is
why
the
this
application
has
been
carried
forward
with
the
two
addresses
together
and
next
slide.
Please
and
then
just
a
bit
for
a
bit
of
additional
context,
so
233
arga
on
the
left.
A
There
that's
a
two
and
a
half
story,
red
brick
house,
pretty
typical
for
Center
town
and
it's
considered
a
character-defining
resource
under
the
center
town,
hcd
and
then
330
McLeod
on
the
right.
That's
a
four-story,
modern
apartment
building
considered
a
non-contributing
building
under
the
hcd
233
Argo
currently
is
used
as
an
office
building
and
those
office
uses
will
continue
in
addition
to
room
residential
units
proposed
and
330.
Mcleod
is
also
an
apartment.
Building
with
rooming
units
and
room
units
will
be.
A
The
proposal
are
the
proposed
use
for
the
new
edition
as
well
and
excellent,
please
so
just
to
give
a
little
bit
of
additional
context.
So
this
is
located
near
the
southern
border
of
the
center
Town
hcd
plan,
and
the
proposed
development
is
subject
to
the
policies
of
the
center
town
and
mental
Park
hcd
plan
and
next
slide.
Please.
So
this
shows
sort
of
an
isometric
View
at
233
Argyle.
A
So
this
proposal
is
currently
also
subject
to
an
active
zoning,
biolumit
application,
which
will
be
planning
and
housing
committee
on
the
21st
of
this
month.
So
the
proposal
is
to
add
a
three-story
13-unit
rear
Edition,
with
residential
units
to
the
rear
of
the
existing
building,
so
retaining
the
existing
red,
brick
building
and
adding
that
addition
onto
the
rear.
A
So
the
clotting
material,
as
you
can
see,
on
the
sort
of
interior
side
yard
there,
where
there's
a
bit
of
a
access
area,
is
a
cloud
in
red
brick
to
match
the
existing
building
and
the
other
cladding.
Is
it's
a
white
and
beige
panel,
and
just
to
note,
I've
confirmed
this
with
the
architect,
but
the
panel
that
sort
of
appears
green
on
these
renderings
is
actually
intended
to
be
more
of
a
brown
or
a
sandstone
and
next
slide.
A
Please
and
here's
a
view
of
the
front
of
the
proposal,
so,
as
you
can
see,
there
aren't
any
substantive
changes
to
the
front
of
the
building.
The
applicant
has
indicated
that
they
will
be
undertaking
some
restoration
work,
just
sort
of
General
repairs
and
upkeep,
particularly
around
that
porch
and
a
second
story
deck.
So
one
of
the
conditions
that
we've
recommended
is
that
final
details
of
those
come
in
advance
of
the
building
permit,
so
that
we
can
ensure
that
appropriate
metrics
are
being
taken
for
building
conservation
on
this
property
here
and
next
slide.
Please.
A
So
here's
just
a
closer
look
at
the
interior
at
233
Argyle.
So
you
can
see
The,
Red,
Bullet,
red
brick
cladding
on
the
proposed
Edition
and
then
next
slide.
Please
and
then
again,
here's
the
opposite
side
yard,
with
the
panels
that
are
proposed
and
next
slide.
Please
and
now
this
is
a
330
McLeod.
So
this
is
the
existing
apartment
building
and
you
can
see
that
there
is
the
addition
proposed
that
the
rear,
which
will
add
on
an
additional
30
rooming
house
units
from
a
streetscape
perspective.
A
The
the
most
substantive
change
is
the
rooftop
access
sort
of
towards
the
front
of
330
McLeod,
and
you
can
see
that
there's
a
staircase
access,
that's
clad
in
a
brick
matching
that
at
the
existing
building
and
I'll
go
on
to
the
next
slide.
Please
and
here's
a
rendering
of
what
that
would
look
like,
just
as
you
can
see
the
the
proposed
brick
matches
that
at
the
existing
building,
so
very
minimal
impacts
to
the
streetscape
proposed
through
this
application
and
next
slide
please
and
then.
A
Finally,
here's
just
a
a
view
of
the
property
as
well
as
proposed,
and
next
slide,
please
and
then
finally
for
consultation.
So
the
war
council
truster
is
aware
of
this
application,
as
is
heraj
Ottawa,
and
since
this
has
been
subject,
this
is
subject
to
a
zoning,
bylaw
Amendment
application
and
is
also
subject
to
site
plan.
There's
been
a
number
of
pre-consultation
meetings
this
prop.
This
application
in
various
forms
has
been
around
since
roughly
September
2019,
so
there's
been
fairly
extensive,
pre-consultation.
A
That's
involved
the
Community
Association,
as
well
as
planning
staff
and
other
professional
staff
with
the
city
and
in
terms
of
recommendations
on
the
next
slide.
Please
so,
as
mentioned
so
we're
recommending
that
this
application
be
approved
to
alter
both
233
Argyle
and
330
McLeod,
with
the
condition
that
the
applicant
does
provide
final
details
of
the
conservation
and
restoration
work
to
be
undertaken
at
233,
Argyle
Avenue
prior
to
the
issuance
of
a
building
permit
and
next
slide.
Please
and
then.
A
Finally,
as
is
typical
for
these
applications,
just
delegating
Authority
for
minor
design,
changes
to
the
general
manager
and
approving
the
issuance
of
Heritage
permits
for
these
properties
with
a
two-year
expiry
and
next
and
excuse
me
next
slide.
Please-
and
that
concludes
the
presentation
on
this
item.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
that
presentation.
A
A
Yes,
thank
you
chair.
Just
a
couple
minor
points.
Looking
at
the
the
presentations
deck
that
was
provided,
the
existing
building
at
233,
Argyle
Heritage,
building
the
foundations
known
as
being
brick
as
I
understand
the
graphical
Legend
shown
on
the
drawings,
I
think
for
the
period
that
billion
would
have
a
stone
foundation.
It's
just
you
know
we
should
be
able
to
get
the
the
details
correct
and
that
might
influence
the
choice
of
the
material
for
foundations.
For
the
addition,
I
know
that
was
picked
up
by
Elon
before.