►
From YouTube: Built Heritage Sub-Committee – July 11, 2013
Description
Built Heritage Sub-Committee – July 11, 2013 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas
B
Okay,
thank
you,
everybody
for
your
patience
and
welcome
to
I.
Don't
know
what
the
number
is,
but
we've
had
a
few
now
number
five,
our
fifth
built
heritage
subcommittee
meeting
nice
to
see
you
all
today
here
in
July,
when
probably
some
people
would
rather
be
on
holidays.
We've
got
an
interesting
to
say,
to
put
it
mildly
agenda
for
today,
and
so
we're
going
to
get
started
with
it
right
off
the
bat
and
so
I'm
going
to
ask
and
I
know
that
there
are
declarations
of
interest
declarations
of
interest,
vice-chair
Pataki.
A
There's
a
madam
chair
on
two
items
and
I'd
like
to
read
my
declaration
of
interest:
I,
better
Podolski
declare
and
direct
pecuniary
interest
on
items
number
three
and
four
on
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
agenda
item
number
3,
designation
of
the
British
American
bank,
note,
company,
975,
Glaceon
Avenue
under
part,
four
of
Interior
Heritage
Act
and
number
four
application
to
alter
the
former
Carlton
County
Courthouse
and
the
former
cotton
county
registry
office.
Now,
together
known
as
arts,
court
properties
designated
under
part
for
the
entire
Heritage
Act.
A
According
to
the
plans
received
from
the
City
of
Ottawa
on
June
10th
2013
as
I
am
the
owner
about
Podolski
Associates,
Inc,
architects
and
my
firm
has
been
retained
to
provide
professional
services
in
relation
to
value
Podolski,
Associates,
Inc
architect,
the
two
above
items,
so
I
am
declaring
interest
on
those.
Thank.
B
You,
and
so
when
we
get
to
them
on
the
agenda
because
they
will
be
held
you'll
be
leaving.
Thank
you.
Just
I
could
have
probably
said
that
in
a
nicer
way,
but
I
think
that
we're
you
know
going
to
see
that
often
enough
that,
just
so
that
we
have
our
cards
on
the
table,
so
we
have
five
items
today
and
I'm
going
to
look
for
a
consent
agenda
on
any
items
that
can
be
considered
in
that
fashion,
so
we're.
But
first
of
all
we
have
the
confirmation
of
minutes.
B
B
Located
in
the
sparks
Street
Heritage,
Conservation,
District
and
designated
under
part
5
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
we're
going
to
have
a
motion
to
defer
this
item
and
I'd
like
to
thank
the
applicant
for
their
concurrence
in
doing
so.
What's
changed
since
the
report
went
live
on
the
city's
website
and
since
we
had
an
agenda
that
was
released,
is
that
we
no
longer
are
in
a
situation
where
we
are
protecting
a
facade.
B
We
are
now
going
to
be
looking
at
a
demolition
and
saving,
basically
the
windows,
and
so
having
that
new
report
that
we've
just
received
with
the
NCC
approval
this
week,
we
and
you
the
public-
have
not
had
an
opportunity
to
review
it
in
that
light.
So
I
think
that
councillor
is
a
councillor
Hobbs.
It
offered
to
do
that
or
its
vice-chair
paddle
ski
that's
going
to
move
the
deferral
now.
The
interesting
thing
is
is
that
our
meeting
is
in
their
next
meeting
September
12.
B
So
we
would
be
deferring
this
to
the
next
meeting
and
I've
asked
committee
if
September
5th
works
for
them,
because
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
the
September
5th?
Have
the
item
come
to
our
committee
on
that
date
so
that
the
next
week
on
the
10th
it
can
go
to
Planning
Committee
where
it
has
to
be
ratified,
and
then
we
would
ask
that
their
rules
be
waived
to
council
the
next
day.
I
think
that
because
the
applicant
has
been
very
reasonable
on
this
and
an
understanding
very
much
and
I
did
have
that
conversation
with
mr.
B
Rothwell
from
Ashcroft
that
he
understands
very
much
that
we
need
to
undertake
due
consideration,
as
does
our
public
okay,
everybody's
good
with
that
change,
is
September
5th.
Ok!
So
then
the
motion
for
defer
would
say
that
we
would
defer
this
item
until
that
date.
We
do
have
one
person
who
wants
to
speak
in
favor,
but
now
that
vice-chair
Petoskey
has
moved
the
deferral,
that's
what
you
would
be
speaking
to
so
did
you
want
to
speak
to
deferral
and
it
would
be
Michela
bulbus.
C
Be
delighted
to
but
was
just
looking
at
this
and
I
understood
that
the
facade
would
be
kept,
which
is
part
of
the
problem.
I
think
with
this
documentation
of
the
of
the
property
is
the
fire
of
the
City
Hall
back
in
the
1930s,
or
all
this
documentation
disappeared.
However,
we
have
a
lot
of
documentation
in
the
only
look
took
you
look.
B
C
Excuse
me
called
at
a
theater
near
you
where
he
did
the
history
of
the
various
theaters
and
whatnot
and
I
would
like
to
provide
a
bit
more
of
that
personal
stuff.
We
were
involved
with
queen
juliana
and
Prince
Barin,
heart
and
whatnot.
There's
some
wonderful
stories
which
enhance
the
heritage
of
sparc
Street,
which
I
think
is
missing
and
from
that
point
of
view,
what
I
was
going
to
speak
today,
not
realizing
that
facade
was
going
to
be
torn
down.
Is
that
in
number?
Five
in
the
second
item?
B
But
that
but
listen,
there's
some
I'm
really
glad
know
that
we're
having
this
pause
because
I
think
you're
going
to
add
so
much
to
the
discussion
and
I
know
that
Sally
is
going
to
be
absolutely
thrilled
to
be
talking
with
speaking
with
you
that
your
joy
in
her
face,
but
all
of
us
I
mean
having
that
extra
information
that
personal
information
is
so
valuable.
That's
why
we
have
a
built
heritage
committee
and
that's
why
so
many
people
in
the
in
the
communities
that
are
their
heritage
conservation
districts
are
so
engaged
telling.
B
The
story
is
a
huge
part
of
why
we're
here
and
making
sure
that
that
story
is
preserved,
so
I
think
you're
gonna
be
happy
also
with
what
you're
gonna
hear
from
the
vice-chair
Podolski,
because
in
addition
to
the
deferral,
he
has
another
motion
that
he's
putting
forward.
That
just
speaks
to
how
we
got
to
why
we're
here
today
and
having
to
make
this
decision
on
an
entirely
different
process
so
I.
Thank
you.
B
B
C
D
B
E
B
B
Thank
you
very
much
and
you
just
hooked
up
councillor
Hobbs
airs
on
that
one
for
sure
Thanks.
So
thank
you
so
I'm
going
to
before
we
vote
on
the
let's
put
in
the
deferral,
because
it
what
vice
chair
of
panel
ski
has,
doesn't
tie
together,
Tyus
to
the
deferral
so
on
the
deferral
until
September
5th,
and
thank
you
all
for
making
your
calendars
available
Carrie.
Thank
you
very
much.
No
vice-chair
Podolski!
Yes,.
A
A
A
The
letter
should
draw
the
NCCC
attention
through
the
Parks
Canada
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
historic
places
in
Canada,
particularly
standard
number
six,
which
requires
that
the
owner
quote,
protect
and,
if
necessary,
stabilize
an
historic
place
until
any
subsequent
intervention
is
undertaken.
So
that's
the
emotion
is.
B
It
up
on
the
screen,
it's
a
good
one.
Thank
you
and
I
think
it's
something.
That's
certainly
miss
Maitland.
You
must
be
happy
to
hear
that
yeah.
You
know
there
are.
We
are
hearing
this,
and
this
is
our
fifth
meeting
and
so
and
I
know
that
Lesley,
Ann
and
Sally
you,
you
see
this
all
the
time.
So
this
is
something
that
is
worth
doing
and
it's
not
worth
waiting
till
September,
and
it's
not
just
about
this
one
location
so
seconded
by
what
are
we
calling
you,
member
member,
trustee,
Smallwood
sandy?
A
B
B
What
we'll
do
is
we'll
next
week,
we'll
walk
it
onto
the
will,
ask
that
the
rules
be
waived
to
consider
it
doesn't
have
to
go
to
planning
committee
I,
don't
think!
No,
it
dozens
just
from
the
built
heritage,
yeah.
Okay!
So
we'll
do
that
next,
Wednesday!
Okay,
everybody
good!
All
right!
Thank
you!
So
now
onto
deja
vu
number
two
application
to
demolish
a
designated
building,
an
application
for
new
construction
at
325,
Dalhousie,
Dalhousie
property.
B
Just
because
people
say
it
both
ways:
a
property
located
in
the
Byward
market,
heritage,
conservation,
district
and
designated
under
part
five
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
and
on
this
one
we
do
have
speakers.
But
we
are
going
to
have
a
presentation.
Did
you
won't?
Do
a
presentation,
I
think
that
we
should
have
a
presentation,
because
this
is
a
change
from
what
we
had
approved
previously,
so
it
scoots.
If
you'd
like
to
proceed.
F
So
this
is
in
front
of
you
again
again
it
previously.
It
was
reconstruction,
new,
canoe,
construction
and
today,
of
the
application
in
front
of
you
is
for
demolition
and
new
construction
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
at
to
325
del
Dalhousie,
the
site
is
located
in
the
inner
byward
market,
Heritage
Conservation
District
at
the
corner
of
Dalhousie
and
York
Street.
It
is
the
site
of
the
union
to
Canada
building.
F
This
is
the
Byward
market,
Heritage
Conservation
District.
It
shows
and
the
boundaries
of
the
district.
It
also
shows
the
categories
of
the
buildings
that
lie
within
the
district
with
CAD
in
this
particular
building,
and
this
whole
block
face
where
it
is
located,
is
a
category
4.
So
between
George
in
York,
our
category
for
the
lowest
category
buildings,
every
building
in
the
district
was
scored
during
the
designation
process,
with
a
group
of
citizens
from
the
Byward
market
and
businessmen.
F
This
is
what
is
considered
the
heart
of
the
Byward
market,
the
the
the
character
defining
element
of
the
Byward
market
located
around
the
Byward
market
building
here
in
the
streets
that
face
it.
So
it's
that
the
highest
density
of
am
sussex
have
the
highest
density
of
higher
rated
buildings.
With
with
the
ratings
flowing
out
as
you
head,
especially
to
the
east,.
F
Sorry,
okay,
so
the
union
to
canada,
building
is
a
category
for
building,
as
I
just
mentioned
is
located
away
from
the
major
foci.
That's
supporting
the
Byward
market,
Heritage
Conservation
District
study.
It
was
designed
by
Lila
Pierre
Montreal
architects,
who
also
designed
a
couple
of
concrete
churches
and
a
chapel
here
in
Ottawa,
and
the
union
to
Canada
grew
from
a
mutual
aid
society
into
a
modern
mutual
insurance
company
and
this
structure
replaced
their
earlier
office.
Here
is
a
beber,
a
bird's
eye
view.
F
That's
a
bird's
eye
view
with
the
that's
a
so
this
is
again
York
Street,
George,
Street
parking
lots
to
the
east
development
of
the
condominium
was
part
of
this
project
to
the
south,
but
it's
not
in
heritage
district,
so
is
not
under
consideration.
Today.
This
is
the
former
Holiday
Inn.
Now
a
Marriott
in
the
Intel
housing
again
another
view
of
it
in
relation
to
the
the
heart
of
the
market.
So
it
is
located
to
the
east
from
the
street.
F
So
in
March
the
community
supported
the
cladding
of
the
building
and
and
the
addition
of
some
additional
Heights
at
the
top.
This.
This
new
proposal
is
to
completely
demolish
the
building
and
to
rebuild
on
the
site
with
a
structure
that
is
roughly
the
same
as
the
one
that
the
community
supported
in
March.
Although
it
will
be
lower,
it
will
be
forty
seven
point.
F
Four
meters
high
in
the
building
that
was
approved
in
March
is
was
15
million
story
meters
high,
and
so
this
is
a
change
they,
the
applicant,
determines
that
they
could
accommodate
the
use
of
the
the
hotel
use
in
in
a
new
structure
with
lower
floor
to
ceiling
heights
and
so
bring
the
height
of
the
building
down,
but
still
meet
their
goals
and
aspirations
for
the
use
of
this
building
as
a
hotel.
So
that
is
why
you
are
looking
at
it
today
again,
you
have
to
you're
looking
at
it
because
of
City
Council
approval.
F
This
is
the
initial
proposal.
The
current
uses,
the
current
proposal,
so
here
is
the
current
proposal.
What
you
see
here
is
building
and
also
the
the
major
change
from
what
was
approved
previously.
Is
this
four-story
section
to
the
south
with
the
entrance
to
the
open
parking?
So
this
is
not
a
door,
it's
not
an
opening
to
a
parking
lot.
It
is
a
surface
parking.
It
is
located
here.
So
this
is
the
height
that
I
quoted
and
then
to
the
top
of
the
mechanical
is
a
fifty
two
point.
F
Four
meters,
and
it
is
the
mechanical
penthouse-
is
deliberately
set
back
from
the
the
adult
housing
sites
through
minimizes.
The
its
impact
on
the
district
so
would
be
harder
to
see,
and
this
is
the
condo
building
which
is
outside
of
this,
of
the
district
and
outside
of
this
application
today,
here
you
have
it
in
the
street
view
showing
that
these
category
four
buildings
to
the
south
and
the
the
profiles
of
the
buildings
are
farther
east.
F
The
Byward
market
has
guidelines
that
regulate
to
new
construction,
and
the
recommendations
include
that
there
should
be
retail
at-grade,
with
secondary
cornices
to
separate
lower
floors
from
commercial
or
residential
above
a
horizontal
scale
and
columns
that
divide
the
front
into
smaller
spaces.
So
we'll
go
back
and
we
look
for
this
in
the
previous
version
and
so
and
the
architect
implemented
those
recommendations,
and
they
are
repeated
here
so
in
a
horizontal
cornice
and
dividing
the
front
into
smaller
store
spaces
that
mimic
the
rhythm
of
the
storefronts
in
the
Heritage
Conservation
District.
F
Just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
functioning
of
the
building
the
this
is
the
area
over
which
the
four
storeys
will
sit,
and
it
goes
into
an
area
with
a
four
surface
parking
and
then
links
through
to
the
proposed
residential
tower
and
again
I
included
this.
Although
this
version
doesn't
have
the
four
story,
but
just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
the
potential
development
of
the
site,
the
department
supports
the
new
proposal
because
it
will
improve
the
streetscape
ecology
of
Dalhousie
Street
at
street
level.
F
B
Thank
you
very
much,
so
we
do
have
speakers
and
before
we
do,
though,
I
think
that
it's
voice
chip
identity
has
got
a
change
or,
in
addition
to
one
of
two,
a
part
of
the
motion,
and
so
we're
just
retyping
it.
So
can
you
please,
you
know
we'll
just
hang
on
for
a
minute:
okay,
everybody,
because
I
think
I
want
you
to
see
it
up
on
the
screen.
B
Well,
having,
while
we're
waiting
for
that,
something
that
I
didn't
continue
to
do
with
the
carried
on
consent,
where
we
could,
we
do
have
the
declaration
of
interest
for
three
and
we
do
have
the
declaration
of
interest
for
four
we
will
be
holding
for
three.
We
have
a
deferral
motion,
so
both
of
those
are
being
held
anyways,
but
for
information
previously
distributed
I
just
wanted
to
have
the
demolition
of
90
Martin
Street
in
Rito
Goulburn.
B
This
is
a
it's
on
the
Heritage
Register,
but
according
to
our
rules,
that
means
that
the
owner
has
to
give
the
city
a
90
day
notice
before
they
can
demolish
it
and
that
so
I
only
roll
on
that.
So
is
everyone
fine
to
just
receive
that
as
information
okay,
so
that
one
is
finished
and
do
we
have
this
new
one
done?
Okay,.
B
B
B
Kyle
break
so
just
hang
on.
I
wanted
to
also
say
that
in
the
submissions
that
we've
received
and
comments
that
we've
heard,
people
are
saying
that
okay,
no
look
I'm,
not
saying
okay,
but
they're,
saying
with
the
change
in
height
coming
down.
How
do
we
confirm
that
you
all
need
to
know?
We
can't
do
that
at
this
can,
but
what
we
are
going
to
do
is
we're
going
to
move
a
motion
that
will
go
to
planning
on
Tuesday.
B
G
Good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
I'm
not
sound
very
pleased
to
hear
that
there'll
be
a
full
study
on
the
building.
It
sent
me
something
that
the
Community
Association
spent
a
lot
of
time
on,
and
we
think
it
once
said.
It's
very
unusual,
an
important
building
in
our
community
and
we
think
in
the
broader
context
of
the
architecture,
in
order
also
very
pleased
about
that,
and
also
they
pleased
that
we'll
be
able
to
confirm
that
the
height
will
remain
at
the
proposed
height
and
that
the
previously
approved
height
will
be
rescinded.
G
G
Would
you
see
an
opportunity
now
to
have
perhaps
some
design
changes
to
give
us
a
facade
that
would
integrate
more
with
the
with
the
heritage
nature
of
the
conservation
district?
That
has
history
has
been
singled
out
as
a
Main
Street
for
continuity
of
the
heritage
district
and
on
the
blocks
on
each
side.
We
have
some
very
nice.
G
Well,
we
have
some
very
buildings
that
integrate
very
well
with
this
plan
and
Mercury
building
on
on
the
one
side,
on
the
George
Street
block
and
on
the
row
of
small
commercial
structures
on
the
other
side
of
York
Street.
So
it
will
be
very
nice
if
we
took
the
opportunity
not
to
make
this
block
kind
of
a
wasteland
of
modern
structures,
but
rather
to
one
by
one,
as
those
buildings
are
built,
create
a
facade
that
is
consistent
with
the
but
the
sense
of
the
buildings
on
the
other
blocks.
G
G
G
After
all,
the
research
we've
done,
we've
discovered
the
background
to
this
building
and
the
innovative
aspects
of
it
for
it
to
go
down
in
history
as
the
class
for
building
and
I
hope
that
the
I
hope
that
there's
an
opportunity
to
where
is
it
that
when
the
when
the
Heritage
study
is,
is
completed,
I've,
given
you,
the
community
notes,
I,
think
and
of
course,
we're
biased,
I
think
they're
quite
fairly,
based
on
the
research
that
we've
done
from
primary
sources
and
I
hope
that
goes
some
way
to
pull
us
out
of
the
category.
For.
G
Thing
I
wanted
to
mention
was
these
targeted
strategies
that
are
in
the
in
the
official
plan
at
183,
which
suggests
that
council
should
look
at
this
whole
block
and
do
something
consistent
there.
We
spent
hours
of
staff,
time
the
developer
time
and
community
time
and
it's
draining
when
you're
trying
to
fight
for
every
single
building.
If
we
had
a
study
that
said
this
is
what
we
want.
This
block
to
look
like
this
is
how
it
will
integrate
into
the
main
streets.
G
B
You
and
I'm
going
to
ask
if
the
committee
has
any
questions
but
I'm
also
gonna
ask
miss
Coates
to
comment
on
some
of
the
that
comments
that
was
was
making
miss
McKenzie
was
making
about
that
more
fulsome.
Look
of
like
organizing
the
the
look
so
that
there's
a
complete
kind
of
like
we
talked
about
Complete
Streets
for
this
big,
complete
neighborhood.
F
Well,
the
house
Conservation
District
study
had
does
have
guidelines
for
the
development
of
new
construction
in
in
the
area,
and
is
it's
very
hard
to
apply
to
this
particular
building
because
of
its
height?
But
there
are
our
guidelines
and,
for
example,
in
the
next
block
north
there
have
been
buildings
that
have
been
built
at
our
brand
new,
but
but
you
know,
match
the
height
and
of
award-winning
buildings
in
terms
of
the
the
21:5:
that's
infill
development
for
housing.
So
it
doesn't
it's
not
really
applicable
in
this
instance.
F
So
I
can't
really
comment
on
that
and
then
the
other
is
I
need
to
sound
like
I'm
passing
about
the
other
as
a
planning,
study
and
I,
don't
know
where
that
is
on.
You
know
in
terms
of
the
the
department
in
where
they
are
going
with
that
particular
and
that
particular
piece
of
work,
because
it's
not
a
heritage
piece
of
work.
Okay,
so
I
apologize
that
I
don't
have
a
full
answer.
B
B
E
So
as
part
of
that
process,
you
know
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
project
that
that
you
know
as
a
hotel
project.
We've
targeted
sort
of
the
FIFA
World
Cup
is
a
date
to
get
it
open.
So
we've
tried
to
make
some.
You
know,
take
some
extra
steps
and
try
and
get
this
thing
finished
for
that,
and
we
know
we're
inside
of
two
years
from
now.
E
So
that
being
said,
we
have
not
reached
a
settlement,
and
at
this
stage
we
would
not
accept
I
guess
we
would
not
be
very
pleased
with
a
motion
that
would
cap
us
to
this
hat,
because
this
we
have
not
made
the
decision
which
building
is
actually
going
to
get
built.
Yet
so
at
this
stage
we
would
not
I
guess
a
lot
of
our
own
BK's
to
be
prejudiced
by
having
a
lower
height
put
on
it.
At
this
stage,.
B
H
Respect
to
height
this
committee
does
not
have
jurisdiction
over
zoning
matters,
and,
as
this
is
the
zoning
matter,
that's
presently
open
before
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board.
With
respect
to
negotiations
on
height,
it's
my
recommendation
that
this
committee
not
discussed
the
height
issue
and
certainly
with
respect
to
to
any
motion,
that's
passed,
restricting
the
height
it
may
be
considered
outside
of
this
committees.
Jurisdiction.
Well,.
B
What
is
outside
that's
this
committees,
jurisdiction,
which
is
why
we
were
going
to
ask
the
Planning
Committee
to
deal
with
that
which
is
not
outside
their
jurisdiction,
but
I
know
because
I'm,
the
vice
chair
of
planning,
that,
having
that
hat
on
and
now
having
the
information
about
the
entire
municipal
board,
that's
a
game!
Changer,
that's
really
a
deal
changer.
So
what
I'm
saying
is
I,
don't
want
the
door
to
be
shut
on
the
height
that's
currently
allowed.
B
H
B
Okay
but
you're
not
answering
my
question
because
I
need
to
know
a
mechanism,
I
think
everybody
here
does
we
know
we
can't
it's
not
it's
not
I
roll
it
it
needs
to.
There
needs
to
be.
There
needs
to
be
a
condition
of
demolition
or
something
like
that.
I
know
we
cannot
deal
with
that.
I
am
sensitive
to
the
OMB,
but
there
must
be
away
that
if
we
approve
the
demolition
today,
obviously
the
OMB
is
still
going
on.
B
B
So
therefore
we're
going
to
take
a
leap
of
faith,
basically
on
the
fact
that,
having
listened
to
the
all
the
delegations
and
the
community
and
allowing
a
demolition
we
are
taking,
probably
I
can't
speak
for
everybody,
but
I'm
looking
around
and
I
would
think
that
probably
the
nods
are
there.
The
fact
that
we
would
accept
the
demolition,
and
one
of
the
reasons
would
be
that
we
reduction
in
height
okay.
So
how
do
we
deal
with
the
fact
that
if
we,
what
supersedes
the
other
does
a
demolition
still
go
forward?
B
If
the
OMB
comes
back
rules
entirely
in
Claridge's,
favor
does
Claridge,
then
in
a
position
whether
what
they're
going
to
be
able
to
build
is
what
we
actually
approved
back
in
March,
or
would
they
be
able
to
approve?
Do
the
demolition
with
the
height
as
it
was
approved
in
March,
which
is
the
one
that,
because
otherwise,
you
know
I'm
thinking
to
myself
like
are
we?
Is
this
the
right
thing
to
be
doing
today?
Madam.
F
Chair
can
I
just
interject
that
if
today
you're
a
approving
set
of
joint
a
recommendation
tied
to
plan.
So
you
are
fight.
So
if
it
were
to
be
higher
if
they
were
to
come
back
and
it
were
to
be
hired
another
real
application
and
have
grounds
to
refuse
it,
because
the
demolition
was
premised
on
this
height
because
we
tie
it
to
plants
that.
H
Is
correct
for
the
the
Heritage
jurisdiction?
What
I'm
understanding
is
that
there
are
settlement
discussions
going
on
with
respect
to
this
particular
height
and
I
I,
don't
believe
that
I
seem
as
Bradley
in
in
the
audience,
if
that's,
who
is
taking
this
matter
forward
to
the
OMB,
and
so
I
would
like
to
take
five
minutes
just
simply
to
see
where
we
are
in
terms
of
the
appeal
in
front
of
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board
before
I
provide
an
answer
to
committee
on
whether
or
not
this
could
affect
their
settlement
negotiations.
Okay,.
B
This
is
where
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
go
to
the
corner
or
something
maybe
go,
get
a
coffee
in
the
kitchen.
No
thanks,
because
we
are
going
to
have
a
motion
from
that
vice-chair
Donsky
I
told
you.
This
was
a
convoluted
meeting.
Okay,
we
are
barely
on
the
on
item
number
three,
which
is
the
designation
of
the
British
American
bank.
Note
company,
which
vice-chair
produce
key,
has
already
declared
an
interest
and
has
left
the
building
on
we're
doing
a
motion
from
councillor
Hobbs
at
the
request
of
the
applicant
I
killed
her
arms.
G
Thanks,
madam
chair,
this
motion
is
to
not
just
read
it,
whereas
the
Canadian
bank
note
company
has
recently
acquired
the
former
British
American
bank
note
property
and
whereas
the
representatives
from
the
Canadian
company
will
not
be
available
to
attend
the
meetings
of
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
of
July,
11th
or
September.
12Th,
therefore,
be
it
resolved
that
the
designation
of
the
British
American
bank
note
company
at
975,
Gladstone
Avenue
under
part
4
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
be
deferred
to
the
October
10th
2013
built
heritage
subcommittee
meeting.
D
A
G
Sure
thanks,
madam
chair
this.
This
particular
property
is
in
ketchup
reward
and
that
bank
no
no
companies
are
actually
and
the
Canadian
bank.
Note
company
has
a
very
beautiful
property
on
on
Richmond
Road,
and
you
know
what
I
I
don't
believe.
We're
in
any
risk
here
is.
They
are
very
interested
in
running
from
my
knowledge
and
running
the
British
American
bank,
note
company,
which
was
their
competitor
in
the
past,
so
so
I
wouldn't
see
any
problem
from
the
perspective
of
the
businesses
and
in
any
threat
of
the
heritage
that
issues
by.
B
H
G
B
Is
the
Thursday
for
the
Friday,
perfect,
okay,
October,
the
10th?
Sorry
I
thought
you
said
September,
so
it
scary
good,
so
I
would
just
did
you
want
to
fill
in
the
time
or
something
Leslie?
No,
okay,
we're
gonna
wait!
A
few
minutes
we're
actually
going
to
wait
until
we
get
to
the
legal
comes
back
into
the
room
because
I
don't
think
we
can
move
forward
until
we
have
that
information
as
a
committee.
B
So
we're
still
in
recess
on
item
number
two
and
we
do
have
delegations
on
item
number
four
and
we're
having
a
presentation
on
the
Carlton
County
Courthouse,
the
new
arts
court.
So
perhaps
do
we
have
any
information
on
the
conference
for
this
fall,
the
Heritage
Conference?
Anybody
do
you?
Why
don't
you
update
us
on
them?
What
am
I?
Looking
at
you
like
a
rapier
in.
I
Committee,
a
thank
you,
madam
chair
yeah.
The
Heritage
Canada
Foundation
is
celebrating
its
40th
anniversary
this
year
and
will
be
hosting
the
annual
conference
in
Ottawa
at
the
dates
are
October
31st
through
to
November
2nd
at
the
Chateau
Laurier
Hotel.
We,
the
organization,
will
have
a
number
of
guest
speakers.
Some
international,
mostly
national.
I
There
are
going
to
be
a
number
of
workshops
and
tours
that
have
an
Ottawa
focus,
taking
advantage
of
our
location
in
the
city
in
the
national
capital,
from
both
a
sort
of
town
and
Crown
perspective,
and
certainly
the
registration
early
registration
rates
are
now
in
place.
From
what
I
understand
and
I
know,
the
organization
is
encouraging
Otto
WANZ
to
participate
in
an
opportunity
to
have
a
national
heritage
conference
in
their
City.
B
That
I
I
think
I've
asked
you
for
the
information
on
the
registration
that
but
I
really
think
that
there's
a
value
in
this
brand-new
committee,
especially
since
it's
in
Ottawa
there's
value
in
seeing
what
the
registration
fees
are,
because
that
would
be
the
only
cost.
It's
not
like.
There's
hotel
room,
there's
not
travel
mileage
and
we.
B
See
if
we
can
find
some
funding
for
that
and
and
then
once
he
has,
that
information
he'll
put
a
shout
out
to
see
who's
available
on
those
dates
and
if
there's
any
information
yet
on
the
programming
yes
I
saw,
perhaps
some
people
could
be
selective
and
say
geez
I'm
only
available
in
the
moment.
The
fear.
A
E
B
B
B
The
belt
energy
subcommittee
recommend
that
planning
committee
recommend
to
council
that
the
alternative
proposal
presented
by
Claridge
in
Mayport
the
one
before
us
today,
ACS
2013,
Pai
PGM
zero
one,
four
five
item
agenda,
5,
July,
11th
2013,
is
acceptable
and
it
is
acknowledged
that
the
former
approval
on
this
site
by
Planning
Committee
remains
acceptable.
So
what's
that
saying?
Is
that
whatever
we
do
today,
we
are
making
an
approval
or
not,
that
the
demolition
be
based
on
this
report.
B
It
also
says
that
the
former
application
which
we
dealt
with
in
March
and
planning
committee
did
as
well,
which
is
currently
before
the
OMB,
is
also
alive
and
well,
maybe
not
well
either
one
of
them
but
they're
both
they're
both
viable
and
they
remain
acceptable.
So,
as
a
result,
both
proposals
have
been
reviewed
and
once
the
outstanding
issues
have
been
completed
concluded-
and
this
is
what's
important-
I
think
for
all
of
us.
Claridge
will
return
to
this
committee
on
which
of
the
alternatives
will
be
pursued.
B
Okay,
so
that
is
our
motion,
and
so
the
public
I
think
it's
up
on
the
screen
for
for
you
to
see
and
for
Claridge
to
see
as
well.
Okay,
so
we're
not
it's
up
on
that,
it's
on
the
TV
screens
for
them,
okay,
and
for
us
it's
right
here,
alright!
So,
let's
get
back
to
where
we
were.
Thank
you
for
your
patience.
Everybody
at
the
end
of
we
can
vote
on
this
right
now,
but
I'm
rather
wait
until
we
make
a
decision.
Okay
and
we'll.
B
Okay,
they're
ready
to
ask
questions:
do
we
have
questions
based
on
only
the
application?
Is
we
have
it
before
us
and
the
we
were
in
and
which
reminds
me
we
do
have
the
amendment
from
Vice
Chair
Podolski
on
item
number,
five,
so
I'm,
hoping
that
you
would
call
that
and
anybody
have
any
questions
based
on
the
demolition
or
and
this
report
as
it
stands
before
us.
F
I
click,
but
yeah
can
I
clarify
one
thing
through
you,
madam
chair,
is
that
the
only
appeal
is
not
related
to
the
heritage.
Application
is
related
to
the
rezoning
yeah,
so
just
to
clarify
that
the
heritage
application
was
not
appealed
because
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
only
the
owner
can
appeal
and
the
and
since
committee
and
council
supported
the
owners
position,
there
is
no
reason
for
the
owner
to
appeal
right.
B
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
extra
due
diligence.
Thank
you
and
thanks
for
the
clarification.
So
we
have
no
more
speakers
on
this
item.
We
have
the
report,
as
at
has
had
the
opportunity
to
read
it,
and
we
have
the
recommendation
on
the
amendment
so
I'm
going
to
go
on
the
amendment
first,
which
was
just
to
clarify.
B
That's
on
on
item
number
five,
where
we
asked
for
the
Podolski
motion
which
spoke
to
where
is
it
yeah
direct
planning
and
growth
managers
will
complete
a
full
Heritage
study
of
Union
du
Canada
for
archiving
and
to
include
the
deposit
and
archival
record
of
the
existing
building
plans
and
install
an
interpretive
exhibit
in
a
prominent
public
area
as
a
condition
of
site
plan.
Approval
is
that
amendment
carried
carry
okay
on
the
motion
as
amended
Carrie.
B
Thank
you
and
the
other
thing
that
we
have
to
do
now
is
on
the
motion
that
we
got
post
having
the
recess
the
one
that
I
read
out.
The
built
heritage
subcommittee
recommend
planning
committee
recommend
to
council
that
the
alternative
proposal
presented
by
Claridge
in
this
date
that
we've
just
approved
is
acceptable
and
it
is
acknowledged
because
it's
not
going
it
does
not
go
to
planning
committee
just
to
be
clear.
It
doesn't
go
to
planning
committee
right
now.
B
H
B
H
A
B
A
B
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
so
aren't
you
the
application
to
alter
the
former
Carlton
County
Courthouse
in
the
former
Carlton
County
Registry
Office,
now,
together
known
as
arts
court
properties
designated
under
part,
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
according
to
plans
received
from
the
City
of
Ottawa
on
June,
the
10th
2013.
B
All
right
so
just
for
miss
Coutts
is
getting
ready
because
we
are
having
a
presentation,
I'm
sure
that
some
of
you
are
wondering
mate.
Perhaps
why
we're
actually
discussing
this
today
because,
as
you
know,
just
this
week,
we
did
hear
from
Canada's
heritage
department
at
further
to
our
application
for
funding
for
nine
million
dollars,
which
we've
been
waiting
for
on.
B
Quite
honestly,
we've
been
waiting
for
that
and
they've
come
back
and
said,
they're
giving
us
nothing,
and
yet
we're
going
to
continue
with
our
process
today
and
we're
going
to
continue
on
Tuesday
at
planning
committee
as
well
that
because
the
Heritage
element
is
just
one
piece
of
the
process
and
that's
what's
before
us
today.
So
that's
not
changing
we're
going
to
continue
to
work
as
a
city
to
look
for
funding
for
this
very
important
project.
It
is
a
very
important
project.
G
F
F
So
this
application
in
front
is
in
front
of
you
today,
as
an
application
to
alter
a
part
for
building.
Part
of
four
buildings
are
individually
designated
buildings,
whereas
the
last
one
we
were
looking
at
was
part
of
a
Heritage
Conservation
District.
So
an
arts
court
consists
of
two
designated
buildings
and
we
refer
to
it
as
one,
but
it
is,
in
fact
the
former
courthouse
and
a
former
registry
building
the
location
of
Arts
Court
is
is
at
a
Daly
Nicholas
and
Waller.
F
The
the
project
front,
doors
face
Daly,
and
it
will
take
up
a
large
portion
of
this
area
and
also
go
over
here.
It
is
it
is.
This
is
the
Sandy
Hill
West
Heritage,
Conservation
District,
and
the
reason
that
it
is
daunted
is
because
it
has
a
heritage
overlay
which
is
part
of
the
zoning
bylaw
on
the
property.
So
here
are
the
current
conditions,
the
property
as
I
say
this
is
the
where'd
it
go.
F
This
is
the
arts,
the
former
Carlton
County
Courthouse,
and
this
is
the
former
registry
building
and
they
were
built
as
independent
buildings,
but
eventually
linked,
and
then
these
additions
were
made
in
the
1950s
and
are
not
included
in
the
Heritage.
Conservation
are
not
included
as
designated
buildings,
and
this
is
the
youth
hostel,
which
is
a
separate
building
and
not
included
in
the
project,
but
is
immediately
adjacent
to
the
project,
and
it
is
also
a
designated
building
the,
and
this
is
why
this
saw
gallery,
etc.
F
So
the
whole
complex
of
two
buildings
joined
by
the
50s
building,
serves
as
arts
course.
The
the
descriptions
of
the
reasons
that
these
two
buildings
are
designated,
as
included
in
your
report,
but
basically
I
think
the
important
thing
to
remember
and
what
it
has
informed.
The
project
that
has
gone
through
this
system
is
that
dealing
was
very
orderly,
classically
inspired
buildings
that
have
central
corridors
and
in
very
classical
details
such
as
pediments
and
and
our
pillows
etc.
F
So
again,
it
is
to
alter
these
properties
under
the
Heritage.
Act.
Here
is
an
historical
photo
because
everybody
loves
historical
photos.
So
this
is
the
original
building
in
within
I
would
think
ten
years
of
its
construction
and
the
registry
office
would
have
been
over
over
here,
and
it
is
remarkably
similar
today
because
there's
no
longer
courthouse,
we
don't
have
justice,
we
don't
have
her
on
the
top
anymore
and
there
have
been
changes
at
grade,
but
it
is
remarkably
similar
to
it
was
over
a
hundred
years
ago.
F
So
the
application
again
is
to
alter
Arts
Court
to
allow
the
construction
of
an
addition,
which
is
a
very
large
and
complicated
addition
at
which
will
is
comprised
of
a
new
Ottawa
Art
Gallery,
a
black
box
theater
for
the
University
of
Ottawa,
a
23-story
tower
which
will
is
going
out
for
RFP.
It
will
not
be
residential
hotel
office,
it
hasn't
hasn't,
been
determined
and,
and
then
there's
a
link
to
from
the
designated
structures
to
the
new
I,
say
buildings,
but
really
the
new
parts
of
the
building
because
they
are
all
joined.
F
So
here
is
the
site
plan
which
will
help
you
understand
how
complicated
this
is.
So
this
is
the
existing
Arts
Court
heritage
sections
here.
This
is
the
50s
part
that
I
showed
you
earlier
here,
and
all
of
this
to
the
east
of
this
line
is
the
new
construction,
and
this
is
the
youth
hostel
the
former
jail.
So
that
is
also
included
in
your
report.
You
might
want
to
actually
turn
to
it,
because
then
you
can
figure
out
where
we're
going
when
we
go
through
this
lines.
F
F
It
originally
had
a
gable
end,
but
it
was
squared
off
some
time
in
the
last
century
and
so
here,
and
so
that
is
that
building
and
it's
it's
closer
to
front
lot
line
than
arts
courts,
so
it
makes
a
little
bit
of
an
L
and
then
so
here
we
have
the
this
is
the
the
link
from
the
heritage
buildings
to
the
new
section,
the
entrance
to
the
complex
and
the
Ottawa
Art
Gallery.
This
is
the
Ottawa
Art
Gallery,
and
here-
and
this
is
the
proposed
tower-
and
this
is
University
of
Ottawa
space.
F
The
architecture
is
also
here
today,
so
he
can
correct
all
my
errors
in
terms
of
use.
This
is
the
view
north,
so
the
back
of
the
Ottawa
Art
Gallery
and
the
proposed
tower
and
the
the
youth
hostel
from
so
from
the
south.
You
cannot
see
the
heritage
buildings,
but
you
certainly
can
see
the
additions
to
the
property
here
is
this
has
evolved
since
here,
but
I
think
it's
very
important
for
the
committee
to
understand
the
link.
F
So
this
is
the
heritage
building
here
the
registry
office
and
what
we,
what
what
we
were
looking
for
and
what
we
were
in
discussion
for
many
years
about,
was
making
sure
that
the
new
and
the
old
does
according
to
standards
and
guidelines
and
accepted
heritage
practice
were
clearly
distinct
from
one
another
and
that
there
was
a
break
between
the
complex
of
heritage,
buildings
and
the
complex
of
new
buildings,
so
we've
so
this
glass,
a
link
between
the
two
serves
that
purpose.
One
of
the
other
things
is
that
it
is
an
extremely.
F
Complex
site,
but
if
you
actually
look
at
at
lines
and
again
remember
Classical,
Revival,
so
very,
very
organized
and
the
lines
and
alignment
from
the
arts
court
on
the
rest
of
the
building
took
its
cues
from
from
certain
design
elements.
So
you
can
see
here
again
the
base
of
the
pediment
the
these
window
lines.
So
it
does.
It
does
line
up
again,
I've
included
some
elevations
because
anyway,
so
this
is.
F
Facing
conic
East,
this
is
the
West
elevation.
This
is
the
7th
anyway.
So
so
again,
what
we
were
looking
at
is
again
today
we're
approving
the
application
issuing
the
Heritage
permit
with
a
two-year
expiry
date
we
might
want
to
given
the
funding
situation.
That
I
might
ask
you
to
maybe
make
that
three.
Just
so
there's
ample
time
to
to
gather
up
the
funds
and
then
not
have
the
Heritage
permit
expire
and
then
delegate
authority
for
minor
design
changes.
F
This
is
we
always
put
in
our
applications
so
that
you
know
if
one
of
the
windows
changes
a
bit,
we
don't
have
to
come
back
to
built
heritage
subcommittee
every
time
again.
What
did
we
look
at?
We
always
look
because
part
four
buildings,
don't
have
heritage
district
guidelines,
etc
there
one
at
a
time.
F
So
we
refer
to
the
standards
and
guidelines
of
Parks
Canada
that
were
approved,
adopted
by
City
Council
as
the
standards
that
we
use
when
evaluating
heritage
buildings
again
just
quickly
conserve
the
value
of
a
place,
conserve
changes
that
have
that
over
time
have
become
character,
defining,
which
is
why
you
know.
One
said
why
don't
we
take
the
registry
office
and
give
it
back
its
gable
aunt
roof,
because
the
change
is
now
part
of
the
building
conserves
the
Heritage
value
by
adopting
an
approach
calling
for
a
minimal
intervention.
F
Again,
that's
why
we
separated
the
new
from
the
old
was
the
link
so
there's
very
little
actually
touching
the
heritage,
the
hair
to
the
designated
properties
and
conserve
and
conserve
the
value
when,
when
you're
looking
at
new
additions-
and
then
there
are
guidelines,
there
are
many
many
guidelines,
but
basically
they're
about
retaining
built
form
uses
that
are
appropriate.
Well,
the
the
use
of
this
has
long
been
abandoned
was
a
courthouse.
F
Now
it's
an
arts
institution
that
will
continue
to
be
an
arts
institution
and
then
drawing
a
clear
distinction
between
the
new
and
the
old
construction,
which
is
what
is
done
by
you
know,
taking
taking
the
cues
from
the
alignments
that
I
showed
you,
but
clearly
not
trying
to
build
a
19th
century
courthouse
again
for
an
arts
institution.
It
is
all
new
in
terms
of
consultation,
education,
Ottawa
was
notified
of
the
application,
and
its
comments
are
in
in
the
staff
report.
F
Neighbors
within
30
meters
were
notified
and
actually
Sandy
Hill
was
notified,
plus
because
there
is
a
rezoning,
etc.
That's
going
on
with
this
there
was.
There
were
public
meetings,
one
in
arts
court
that
discussed
both
the
heritage
and
the
rezoning
and
another
for
the
community.
I
apologize
I
made
that
print
too
small.
So
the
department
supports
the
application
because
it
meets
the
standards
and
guidelines
it
uses
the
height
form
and
massing
of
the
site's
cultural
heritage.
F
B
You
very
much
miss
Coates
and
just
before
you
ask
a
question,
I
will
say
that
we
have
no.
We
only
registered,
we
speaker
speaker,
we
have
is
Mitchell
Hall,
who
is
the
architect
and
is
here
for
questions
if
we
have
them
specific
to
his
work.
So
we
do
have
some
questions
so
we'll
call
him
forward
if
you
want,
but
first
of
all,
I'll
go
to
councillor
Clark
Thank.
F
F
F
F
And
so
there
is-
and
this
is
the
gallery,
so
there
is
a
gap.
This
is
the
historic
wall.
That's
actually
brings
up
an
interesting
point.
There
was
concerned
in
the
department
about
what's
blocking
the
wall,
and
so
there
the
ground
floor
of
the
lhe
is
glass.
So
when
you're
standing
inside
you'll
be
able
to
see
out
to
the
heritage
of
all
the
traditional
wall
that
encircled
the
jail
yard,
because
of
the
youth
also
was
a
former
jail,
so
it
is
not.
F
B
I
Have
a
question
about
materials:
I
noticed
that
there
there's
a
lot
of
glass
visible
but
and
of
course
the
tower
is
kind
of
yet
to
be
determined.
It's
just
a
mock-up,
but
can
you
elaborate
a
little
bit
more
mr.
Cootes
just
mentioned
that
the
materials
are
in
keeping
with
the
stone
of
the
heritage
properties,
heritage
structures,
certainly.
D
Introduce
myself,
my
name
is
Mitchell
Hall
and
with
KPMG
architects
on
the
design
architect.
So
it's
an
interesting
question
you
raised
about
materiality
it's
it's
obviously
very
modern
architecture.
There
is
a
lot
of
glass.
It's
intended
to
be
kind
of
compatible
and
complimentary.
The
the
kind
of
green
row
of
elements
there's
one
in
the
in
the
image
right
there.
D
That
actually
is
the
volume
of
the
black
box
theater
for
the
University
of
Ottawa,
and
it
is
similarly
treated
architectural
II
to
the
wall
that
Sally
referred
to
in
the
North
Court,
which
is
essentially
an
IV
colored
wall.
But
the
material
of
the
rods
themselves
is
a
burnished
concrete
block.
So
it's
kind
of
a
modern
take
or
a
modern
interpretation
on
a
stone.
D
We
think
that
that,
ideally,
a
kind
of
charcoal
gray,
so
it
doesn't
match
the
heritage
buildings,
but
it's
complimentary
and
it's
kind
of
similar,
but
a
modern
interpretation,
so
I
think
that's
an
important
idea
and
it
kind
of
relates
to
the
to
the
kind
of
the
podium.
What's
called
the
podium
level.
D
Architectural
elements
are
nice
to
the
elements
the
the
the
the
glass
atrium
that
you
see
in
the
background
is
intended
as
a
reveal
between
the
new
and
the
old
architecture
that
so
it
kind
of
creates
a
really
wonderful,
multi-storied
light-filled
space
that
acts
as
the
new
entrance
for
the
entire
Arts
Court
complex.
One
of
the
things
that
Sally
referred
to
earlier
was
the
integration
and
the
new.
D
In
the
I
mean
the
concept
was
to
kind
of
reimagine
an
arts
community
where
there
weren't
these
kind
of
distinct
elements,
but
they
were
very
much
integrated
but
distinct
in
their
architecture.
On
the
modernist
I,
don't
you
know
I,
don't
know
how
to
do
classical
architecture,
but
I
certainly
understand
it.
So
the
zinc
box
is
actually
a
very
dark
gray
as
well.
It's
metallic
and
it's
again
intended
to
kind
of
be
a
modern
expression.
D
That's
the
multi-purpose
room
and
screening
room,
so
it's
a
actually
really
important
a
venue
for
for
art
to
be
a
performing
or
visual.
The
the
auto
art
gallery,
which
is
the
boxing
behind
you,
probably
notice,
is
kind
of
adapted
perforated
screen.
The
motivation
for
that
was
actually
the
Firestone
house
and
I'm
not
sure,
if
you're
familiar
with
that,
but
it's
a
it's
a
reference
to
the
original
masonry
screen
and
eventually
taken
the
the
design
of
that
screen
and
kind
of
abstracted
it
and
superimposed
it
onto
metal.
D
So
that's
a
that's
a
like
a
rail
or
a
veil
that
surrounds
the
box
of
the
gallery
and
it's
held
off
the
surface.
So
maybe
Sally.
If
you
can
go
back
tour,
they
actually
the
image
on
the
right.
So
you
can
see
that
we've
been
very
strategic
about
kind
of
creating
these
apertures
and
the
art
gallery
is
you
know
most
most
art
galleries?
Are
these
kind
of
introspective
black
boxes
right?
You
don't
you
don't
know
what's
happening
inside.
So
it's
really
interesting
about
the
art
gallery.
D
Is
the
opportunity
to
celebrate
art
in
the
Elevation
itself
so
that
not
opening
that
oculus
up
at
the
top?
The
fourth
floor
is
their
administration's:
there's
a
balcony
in
a
conference
room
that
they
will
kind
of
lease
out
and
there's
a
great
view
towards
the
canal,
but
the
lower
space
is
actually
called
a
project
or
a
project.
Room
and
there'll
be
visual
arts
that
will
actually
be
projected
onto
the
glass
I.
D
So
the
web
gallery
is
very
much
interested
in
you
know
having
an
identity
in
this
complex
and,
and
so
the
motivation
architecture
was
to
kind
of
create
these
volumes
or
these
pieces
that
responded
to
the
kind
of
value
metrics
of
the
heritage
building,
but
also
created
identity.
So
the
art
gallery
is
very
clear
box.
The
the
University
of
Ottawa
has
their
very
clear.
You
know
black
box
theater,
but
this
was
all
about
kind
of
creating
identity
for
the
various
elements,
while
kind
of
being
sympathetic
to
the
overall
composition.
A
I'm
not
sure,
maybe
those
questions
for
Sally,
but
maybe
not
I
wondered
is
it
there
is,
is
the
idea
that,
because
this
is
going
to
be
a
joint
venture
right,
public-private
partnership,
that
was
my
understanding
of
this,
so
is
it?
Is
it
the
intent
that
this
plan
will
be
adopted
by
whoever
the
private
partner
is
without
alteration?
I
had
originally
thought
that
this
was
just
sort
of
a
guideline,
but
it
sounds
like
this
is
what
we
did
we,
the
city
expects,
will
be
built
eventually.
Thank
you.
F
D
Perhaps
add
to
that
I
think
that
the
the
institutions
as
well
as
the
city
are
very
interested
in
kind
of
a
certainty
of
outcome,
and
it
is
kind
of
like
a
3p
but
not
quite
a
sort
of
a
combination
between
the
design-build
and
3p,
and
the
intention
is
to
produce
a
Prescriptives
back.
That
would
require
the
design
of
the
cultural
components
to
be
maintained
more
or
less
the
way
they.
D
Obviously
there
will
be
minor
modifications,
but
there
unfortunately
they'll
be
another
architect
involved
and
they
will
take
on
the
design
and
they
will
evolve
it
through
working
drawings
when
we're
taking
it
to
the
design
development
but
Sally's
quite
right.
The
idea,
the
tower
is
really
the
opportunity
for
the
developer,
that's
what
they
get
with
their
air
rights.
D
There's,
obviously
parking
below
that
would
be
related
to
that
and
I
think
that
it's
very
important
that
the
city
understand
that
there
needs
to
be
some
form
of
control
over
the
outcome
of
the
tower,
because
it
could
be
problematic.
Otherwise,
the
challenge
is
that
it
could
be
a
hotel
or
it
could
be
a
condominium.
The
office
is
on
the
table,
however.
I
think
that
the
floor
plate,
which
really
I
mean
as
showing,
is
about
8,000
square
feet.
D
It
can't
really
be
much
bigger
with
over
whelming
the
cultural
components
that
doesn't
lend
itself
well
to
an
office
tower,
so
I
mean.
Ideally,
this
would
be
a
hotel,
condo
or
combination
thereof,
and
we've
had
meetings
with
a
number
of
potential
developers.
Who've
shown
real
interest
in
this
project
and
our
comfort
we've
done
actually
layouts
for
them.
So
there
there's
a
real
comfort
level
with
the
tower,
but
I
think
that
there
needs
to
be
the
city
needs
to
to
ensure
a
certain
level
of
design
control
over
the
tower.
It
would
be
my
personal
opinion
yeah.
F
And
when
the
final
design
of
the
tower
appears,
if
it
is
substantially
different
than
we
would
take
it
through
as
another
application
under
the
Heritage
Act
it
now,
it
is
conceptual
a
lot
about
the
height,
because
that's
what
the
rezoning,
which
is
going
to
planning
committee
next
week
addresses
that
height.
But
you
know
I
think
that
there
would
be
another
application,
because
we
delegate
minor
changes.
B
Good
good
everyone,
no
more
questions
well
I,
want
to
say
Thank
You
mr.
Hall,
for
coming
today
from
Toronto
and
really
appreciate
that
I
know
that
the
city
like
I
said
earlier
was
really
really
proud
of
this
project,
and
we've
been
invested
in
working
on
it
for
many
years
now.
So
thank
you
to
staff
and
thank
you
to
everybody.
That's
participated.
I
I
The
visibility
of
the
building
from
the
looking
at
it
from
the
west
side
and
the
north
sides,
I
haven't
seen
a
perspective
from
let's
say
if
you
were
standing
at
the
corner
of
the
daily
and
Nicholas
looking
directly
at
the
west
side,
I
would
say
basically
any
view
of
the
heritage
buildings
would
be
eliminated.
There's
from
this
angle,
I
can
envision
that
you
would
not
see
any
of
those
hair
structures
so.
F
So
yeah,
so
this
is
yes,
so
this
is
Waller.
This
is
the
youth
hostel,
so
you
can
see
the
youth
hostel
now.
That
is
true.
Now
what
you
see
from
here
is
the
backs
of
the
Arts
Court
building,
and
so
you
wouldn't
see
the
heritage
building
on
your
feet
now,
because
what
if
you
were
standing
here,
because
what
you
see
is
the
1950's
addition
to
it
so
and
also
this
site
for
many
years,
was
the
site
of
a
of
a
police
station.
F
I
I
guess
in
some
ways,
I
know
that
the
old
jail
is
not
part
of
this
project,
but
I'm
really
thinking
of
that
building
when
I
make
that
comment.
Okay,
because
it
is
part
of
the
complex,
even
though
it's
not
going
to
be
affected
directly,
nothing
is
going
to
be
built
up
a
Jason
to
it
or
etc.
But
that
is
a
fairly
historic
facade
that,
as
you
mentioned
earlier,
are
the
doors
that
the
Gallo
doors
etc.
Yeah.
F
And
you
can
see
them
from
here,
but
if
you're
standing
to
rest,
you
can't
see
them
but
I,
but
there
was
also
the
the
efforts
made.
So
this
is
going
to
be
a
glass
wall,
so
when
you're
inside
inside
the
building
you
can
see-
and
there
is
a
separation
between
between
the
west
wall
of
the
new
addition
and
the
and
the
because
it
already
exists,
there
is
this
that
the
the
East
facade
of
the
youth
hostel
does
not
sit
at
lot
line.
It
is
set
back,
but
if
you're
standing
here
it
will
not.
F
You
cannot
deny
that
you
will
not
be
able
to
see
the
back
of
the
youth
also,
and
you
will
not
where
you
once
could
see
the
50s
portion
of
the
building
here
and
perhaps
a
you
know,
little
roof
peak.
You
will
not
be
able
to
see
that
the
view
from
Nicholas
will
remain
the
same,
that
it
will
have
a
different
background
view.
I
should
also
add
that
the
tower
here
is
located
in
such
a
way
is
that
it
protects
the
view
plane
to
Parliament
Hill.
F
D
B
D
D
This
is
basic,
that's
that's
from
Barry's
report,
but
basically
that's
our
Sketchup
model.
I
mean
we're
happy
to
provide
views
if
you
need
them,
but
but
essentially
that
view
is
from
across
the
street,
so
you're
standing
in
front
of
the
parking
garage
looking
back
and
I
think
that
you
know
that
the
idea
of
the
North
Court,
which
is
actually
really
important,
architectural
II
in
terms
of
creating
a
new
identity
for
entrance
a
new
identity
for
the
complex,
actually
relieves.
D
The
the
the
space
around
the
registry
offices
quite
frankly
celebrates
it
and
allows
it
to
be
as
visible
as
it
is
today.
If
you
were
standing
on
the
south
west
corner
of
Daley
and
you're
right,
you
would
have
somewhat
of
them
obstructed
view,
but
you
would,
as
you
move
along
the
street
or
across
the
street,
you
would
very
much
see
the
heritage
architecture.
The
jail
is
a
different
story.
I
think
the
the
galleries
is
a
tricky
challenge.
D
I
mean,
quite
frankly,
I
worked
on
the
Don
jail
in
Toronto,
and
you
know
that's
kind
of
hallowed
ground
and
we
discussed
a
number
of
options
as
to
how
to
manage
that
and
as
opposed
to
like,
rather
than
make
a
spectacle
of
it
preserve
its
kind
of
history
and
allow
it
to
be
viewed,
but
in
a
very
kind
of
discrete
and
and
respectful
way
and
I.
Think
that
that's
the
intention
here
with
the
gallows
we've
talked
about
a
couple
of
different
options.
D
Sally
mentioned
that
we
kind
of
used
the
heritage
where
the
slide
literally
slide
into
the
base
of
the
building
and
almost
prop
up
the
volume
kind
of
visually.
So
the
idea
with
the
gallows
is
that
you
know
we
can
do
it
a
couple
of
ways.
We
can
either
have
some
kind
of
aperture
in
that
stair
that
you
see
in
the
corner.
So
as
you
move
up
adjacent
to
the
stonewall,
you
arrive
at
a
landing
that
then
looks
out
at
the
gallows,
or
we
could
do
that
internally
within
the
gallery.
D
D
D
B
You're
welcome
and
thank
you
Sally
for
your
work,
Thank
You
bliss
for
coming
today
to
back
us
up
on
any
questions
that
really
don't
belong
at
this
committee,
but
which
always
seem
to
arise
anyway.
So
on
that
the
application
as
it
carried.
Thank
you
thanks
everybody.
So
surprisingly,
it's
about
quite
11:30
and
we're
still
here
any
inquiries
notices
of
motion.
Now,
gentlemen,
bye,
Jane,
okay,
great
thank
you.