►
From YouTube: Built Heritage Sub-Committee – November 9, 2015
Description
Built Heritage Sub-Committee meeting – November 9, 2015 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
C
To
the
moon,
we're
gonna
get
started
here
at
this
meeting
of
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
so
we're
gonna
start
at
the
top
of
the
agenda.
We're
going
to
do
a
consent
agenda
which,
for
those
of
you
who
are
in
there
just
means
we're
gonna,
go
through
all
the
items
and
consider
those
quickly
that
don't
have
speakers
signed
up
and
then
come
back
to
the
items
that
require
greater
discussion.
C
B
Interest
declare
an
interest
in
item
number
two:
the
agenda,
which
is
the
application
for
demolition
and
construction
on
259
beechwood,
Avenue
I'm,
a
voting
member
of
the
residents
Association
heritage
subcommittee
and
a
subcommittee
about
its
the
development
review
committee,
of
which
I
am
a
member.
So
I'm
declaring
an
interest
on
that.
Okay,.
C
Thank
you
very
much
confirmation
of
minutes
from
our
meeting
on
the
13th
of
August.
Okay,
great.
Thank
you.
Okay
item
1
is
a
status
update.
The
update
on
increase
emotions
is
that
received,
received
right
item.
2
is
the
item
on
beach
with
a
member
small
but
just
referred
to
we're
gonna
hold
that
item
because
we
have
a
speaker
registered
item.
C
3
is
the
removal
I
have
35
to
4
mcbean
Street
from
the
City
of
Ottawa
Heritage
Register,
and
the
quick
context
to
that
is
that
were
being
asked
to
remove
that
since
staff
have
already
looked
at
the
the
property,
there
was
a
request
for
a
demolition
and
because
of
time
sensitivities
were
being
asked
to
remove
it
so
that
the
owner
doesn't
have
to
await
the
end
of
the
60-day
period.
But
the
important
part
here
is
that
staff
have
reviewed
the
property
and
deemed
it
not
worthy
of
designation.
C
So
is
that
item
code,
okay,
great
okay,
item
4
is
an
application
altered,
9d
Bolton
Street,
which
is
a
property
designated
under
five
of
the
entire
heritage
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
in
the
Lower
Town
West
Heritage
Conservation
District.
Is
that
item
carry
okay
great
okay
item?
Five
is
the
demolition
of
once
anyone
Bree
we're
gonna
hold
that
because
we
have
speakers
registered.
C
Item
six
is
the
designation
of
the
Boyd
house
at
173
hunt
Mayer
Drive,
we're
gonna
hold
that
because
staff
would
like
to
do
a
short
presentation
on
that
item:
item
seven,
which
is
the
application
to
demolish
the
bad.
The
Craig,
barn,
Vice
Chair
Petoskey
has
a
motion
on
that
item,
which
is
to
defer
consideration
of
this
agenda
item
so
I'm
gonna
ask
you
Vice
Chair
just
to
read
out
that
deferral
motion.
Thank
you.
Yes,.
D
It's
not
on
the
screen,
but
because
the
staff
recommendation
was
to
refuse
the
application
and
the
consultants
for
the
owners
ask
that
it
be
deferred.
The
motion
ends
up
being,
therefore,
be
it
resolved
that
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
to
defer
this
matter
to
the
December,
the
10th
2015
meeting
of
the
subcommittee.
Okay,.
C
So
we
did
have
one
speaker
signed
up
mister
to
both
noted
Ottawa
and
mr.
Tremblay
from
Photon.
Can
I
ask
both
of
you
if
we
we're
gonna
vote
on
this
deferral
motion,
which
means
that
your
speaker
slot
is
actually
only
under
FOIA,
so
I
presume
you
don't
need
to
speak
under
Farrell.
If
the
committee
passes
the
item
correct
okay,
heritage,
Ottawa.
C
C
So
again,
the
motion
on
the
table
is
for
deferral,
which
means
that
there's
not
going
to
be
a
substantive
discussion
of
the
item.
If
committee
passes
the
deferral
motion,
so
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know,
because
that
means
that
your
speaker
slot
is
actually
on
deferral,
not
on
the
substance
and
I'm.
Sorry
that
you
had
to
come
down
for
this
item,
because
you
probably
wanted
to
speak
to
the
substance
of
it
and
I
apologize
that
you
had
to
do
that
and
and
I
encourage
you
to
come
back
when
the
item
is
considered
next
time.
C
E
If
the
date
of
the
planning
committee
that
follows
the
December
built
header
subcommittee,
meeting,
January
26th,
and
so
that's
and
the
next
filter
sub-community
meeting
is
December.
What
did
you
see
at
the
10th?
Okay?
So
there's
plenty
of
time
for
the
discussion
that
happens
on
the
10th
to
be
present
and
considered
for
the
next
planning
committee
yeah.
Okay,
thanks.
C
Okay
with
that
to
the
deferral
motion,
is
that
carried
okay?
Okay,
thank
you
and
again,
thank
you
to
those
who
had
signed
up
to
speak
and,
lastly,
we
have
information
previously
distributed.
So
there
was
an
item
that
staff
circulated
the
demolition
of
285
role,
Broad
Street,
a
property
listed
on
the
City
of
Ottawa
Heritage
Register.
So
this
is
for
information
only
as
that
received
okay.
C
Why
don't
we
hold
that
item
and
roll
we'll
come
back
to
it
at
the
end,
then?
Okay,
so
with
that
we're
going
to
go
back
to
the
beginning
of
the
agenda
and
we're
going
to
start
with
item
number
two,
which
is
the
application
for
demolition
and
new
construction
at
2:59,
beechwood
Avenue,
we're
gonna,
have
staff
do
a
very
short
presentation
on
this
and
then,
as
I
said,
we
have
one
public
speaker
signed
up
over
to
you.
Please
and
thanks
sure.
E
So
the
application
that's
before
you
today
is
for
demolition
and
new
construction
of
a
building
at
2:59,
Beachwood
Avenue
the
existing
building
was
built,
circa
1951,
that's
the
one
and
a
half
story.
Building
being
proposed
building
is
a
two-story
flat-roofed,
three-door
Road.
This
is
the
site
plan.
Here
you
can
see
it
has
a
stated
renovation
in
the
front
and
rear
of
the
building.
This
was
done
to
help
retain
the
existing
landscaping.
These
are
some
of
the
elevations.
It
uses
primarily
natural
materials,
stone,
brick,
stucco
and
globe.
E
C
C
F
You
so
my
name
is
Susan
Ross
I
live
at
55,
Karuna
Avenue,
so
in
the
neighborhood
directly
to
the
north
of
the
property
and
from
there
I
currently
enjoy
a
wonderful
view
of
the
existing
houses
from
behind
and
threw
it
through
the
trees
all
around
it.
To
would
cemetery
so
there's
an
internal
point
of
view
here
and
I'm
a
neighbor.
F
Most
of
my
comments
are
actually
quite
positive,
so
some
part
of
us
is
for
the
record.
The
proponents
attitude
has
been
very
positive.
I've
met
with
him
twice:
that's
wonderful,
cooperative
and
neighborly,
and
I
really
appreciated
that
his
wanted
to
work
within
a
regulatory
context
in
terms
of
the
scale
of
the
development
in
terms
of
working
with
setbacks
and
the
materials
he's
taken
comments
from
from
a
number
of
different
attitudes.
I
understand,
I,
also
applied
the
use
of
a
more
modernist,
distinct
design.
That
said,
it
could
be
further
developed
on
the
back
and
the
sides.
F
There's
a
big
difference
in
the
development
of
the
design.
I
also
applaud
that
he's
working
with
a
landscape
designer
and
through
that
with
arborists,
and
that
they've
carried
out
at
a
true
inventory
and
an
assessment.
This
is
commendable,
so
I'm
making
these
points
partly
to
make
sure
these
kinds
of
ideas
are
included
in
other
projects.
The
Heritage
impact
assessment
was
also
completed
and
there's
a
bit
of
more
of
a
disappointment.
F
One
of
the
things
that
struck
me
and
I
realize
that
the
status
of
this
is
not
as
official
as
others
is
that
the
community
design
plan
is
not
being
listed
and
referred
to
as
well
as
other
documents
in
our
heritage
impact
assessments.
And
yet
those
design
plans
include
a
lot
of
community
discussion
about
what
has
value
in
the
neighborhood.
An
example
of
that
is
that
st.
Charles
Church
was
recognized
by
the
community
as
having
value
well
before
it
was
actually
designated.
F
So
in
this
convenience
particular
heritage
impact
assessment,
for
example,
the
Cameo
design
plan
is
not
actually
listed
as
a
reference.
It
is
both
sited,
but
with
apologies
to
my
colleagues
who
wrote
that
report
I
that
there
is
a
slight
inaccuracy
in
the
way
that
it
actually
refers
to
the
community
design
plan.
The
community
zine
plan
makes
clear
that
the
edge
of
the
traditional
Main
Street
is
the
intersection
of
Corona
and
Juliet,
with
beechwood
Avenue,
the
eastern
edge
of
the
idea
of
wood
becoming
a
kind
of
a
more
developed
area
and
the
last
property.
F
That's
within
that
traditional
Main
Street
idea
is
it's
the
property
right
to
the
to
the
west
of
this
property.
So
there's
reference
made
to
the
idea
of
the
traditional
Main
Street.
However,
there's
no
reference
made
in
the
impact
assessment
to
the
fact
that
there
is
an
idea
that
there
should
be
a
gateway
or
some
kind
of
approach
as
you
come
off
the
so-called
Parkway
of
Hemlock
into
the
village
that
there
isn't
really
an
idea
in
development
right
now
through
the
different
projects
that
are
being
seen.
F
That
would
help
to
reconcile
the
fact
that,
on
the
south
side
of
beechwood
Avenue
were
getting
10
story;
constructions
such
as
the
Cavanaugh,
with
two-story
commercial,
on
the
base
and
on
the
north
side,
first
at
Green,
Avenue
and
now
in
this
site,
we're
continuing
to
see
you
know,
residential
to
add
three
storey,
development
and
I.
Don't
think
we
really
are
seeing
a
vision
in
these
projects
and
how
they
go
forward.
I
think
we
need
to
to
look
at
that,
and
so
of
course
this
goes
beyond
the
context
of
this
project
right.
This
is
a
statement.
F
That's
why
I
say
it's
for
the
record:
I'm!
Not
against
the
project
itself
per
se,
but
I
feel
like
as
if
it
shows
a
kind
of
a
lack
of
a
larger
context
for
planning.
I.
Do,
however,
have
in
that
regard
one
additional
comment,
which
is
that,
to
my
mind,
even
if
we
were
to
say
the
traditional
Main
Street
goes
beyond
that
intersection
and
includes
that
property,
which
can
be
argued
that
it
should
three
story
are
sorry.
Three
rowhouses
two
stories
high
with
separate
garages
is
not
traditional,
Main
Street.
F
You
know
my
neighbors
who
talk
about
how
they
perceive
what
will
happen
to
beechwood
Avenue
speak
about
Bank
Street.
As
a
model,
you
don't
see
row
houses
with
separate
garages
going
into
a
traditional
Main
Street.
You
see
a
shop
along
the
bottom
and
housing
above,
maybe
even
higher
than
two
or
three
stories,
so
I
feel.
That
is
that
there
is
something
still
to
be
discussed
about.
F
What's
going
to
happen,
both
from
the
traditional
point
of
view
of
how
you
think
of
circulation
from
a
cultural
landscape,
point
of
view,
but
also
think
about
the
concerns
with
traffic,
with
intersections
with
bicycle
paths
that
are
planned
with
pedestrian
ways
and,
of
course,
with
beech
woods,
traffic
itself
and
I'm
done.
Thank.
C
You
very
much
for
those
comments.
Madras
and
I
can
say,
as
the
word
councillor
had,
not
in
the
capacity
as
chair.
That
I
agree
with
much
of
what
you're
saying
and
can
reassure
you
that
a
lot
of
thought
is
going
into
the
implementation
of
the
CDP
we're
working
on
trying
to
establish
a
gateway
feature
on
that
Eastern
approach
to
beechwood.
C
You've
raised
another
point
which
I
think
is
very
important:
that
the
applicant
in
this
case
is
not
required
to
seek
any
zoning
changes
because
the
applicant
is
allowed
to
build
ahead
and,
and
that
actually
speaks
to
the
point
you're
making
that
one
challenge
we
have
is
that
the
Rockland
Park
secondary
plan
does
not
permit
commercial
properties
period
and
I.
Think
you've
articulated
an
important
point
which
is
beechwood
as
a
traditional
Main.
C
Street
could
have
perhaps
a
slightly
different
treatment
than
merely
the
residential,
and
maybe
should,
by
that
president,
that's
not
permitted
under
the
Rockland
Park
secondary
plan
and
that's
a
conversation
that
I've
opened
up
with
the
rock
of
park
residents
association,
because
you've
raised
exactly
the
points
that
I
think
we
have
to
think
about
as
a
community.
So
I.
Thank
you
very
much
for
opening
up
that
conversation.
Are
there
any
questions
for
Miss
Ross,
seeing
none.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
this
morning.
C
C
G
Come
on
counselor
and
committee
members,
this
is
an
application
to
demolish
170,
biryeo
Street,
which
is
located
in
a
motel
on
West,
Heritage,
Conservation
District,
and
to
construct
a
park
at
in
its
place.
The
subject
property
is
located
was
this
working
various
the
subject?
Property
is
located
on
the
north
side
of
the
yard
street
between
a
low
rise
apartment
building
in
with
within
a
team
house
confess,
compacts
owned
by
och
are
community
housing,
and
this
is
from
a
the
consultant
on
the
project
and
supplied
this
picture.
So
this
shows
the
observing.
G
G
The
building
itself
found
was
initially
constructed
in
the
19th
century
and
burnt
down
and
was
reconstructed,
so
it
dates
from
the
early
20th
century.
It
is
one
and
a
half
story,
front
durable
structure,
typical
of
buildings
from
within
the
heritage
conservation
districts.
It
was
graded
as
a
cat
when
every
property
in
the
district
was
granted
during
the
process
of
creating
Heritage
Conservation
districts
in
the
1990s.
G
So
it
is
doesn't
matter
under
part
five
and
every
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
and
every
application
to
demolish
a
designated
heritage
building
requires
City
Council
approval
according
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
In
addition,
new
construction
in
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
also
requires
City
Council
approval,
so
the
project
requires
the
approval,
also
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
so
the
application
is
to
demolish
existing
building
and
to
construct
the
park
at
in
its
place.
G
G
Conservation
District
guidelines
for
Lowertown,
which
were
approved
by
council
as
of
the
districts
in
the
1990s.
One
of
the
recommendations
was
as
a
general
principle.
Demolition
of
structures
or
limit
within
the
district
will
not
be
recommended
for
approval
by
City
Council.
So
that's
one
piece
of
policy
that
we
looked
at
when
analyzing
this
project.
The
Official
Plan
also
provides
guidance
on
the
demolition
of
cultural
heritage,
resources
that
are
owned
by
the
city
and
the
section
two
point
five
point:
five
says.
G
As
the
owner
of
many
cultural
heritage
resources,
the
city
will
protect
improving,
manages
cultural
heritage
resources
in
a
manner
which
further
furthers
the
heritage
objectives
of
this
plan,
insensitive
in
such
an
example
of
leadership
for
the
community
in
the
conservation
of
heritage
resources.
So
again,
there
are
policies
that
require
the
city
to
by
example.
G
It
states
that
the
proposed
development
based
on
its
response,
the
existing
house
in
larger
district,
reflects
the
character
of
the
law.
Town
West,
Heritage,
Conservation
District
provides
unique
and
positive
new
heritage
resource
for
the
district
and
is
acceptable
in
this
unique
instance.
That
was
the
opinion
found
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
in
consultation
heritage
Ottawa
was
notified
of
the
application
within
30
meters
of
the
property
were
notified
of
the
application
and
offered
to
the
opportunity
to
comment.
In
addition,
the
Lowertown
Community
Association
undertook
on
its
own
to
organize
a
community
regarding
the
proposed
stop
demolition.
G
The
majority
of
those
in
attendance
had
no
objection
to
the
proposed
demolition.
Oh
my
that
most
of
the
residents
who
attended
the
meeting
organized
by
the
Community
Association
favored
another
option
for
the
land.
If
council
rejects
staff
recommendation,
which
was
a
community
garden,
so
the
community
would
prefer
a
garden
or
a
park
at.
G
The
potential
policy
statement,
which
also
requires
that
heritage
resources
be
conserved
and
the
guidelines
within
the
Lower
Town
West
community,
at
the
Lower
Town
West
Heritage
Conservation
District
study.
The
recommendation
is
to
refuse
the
debt
refuse
application
to
demolish
171
Boreas
trees,
as
we
have
refused
many
other
applications
from
other
from
private
private
property
owners
within
the
district.
We
are
inconsistent
and
refusing
this
application
to
demolish
and
it
because
we're
refusing
the
application
to
demolish.
G
We
therefore
recommend
the
refusal
of
the
application
for
new
construction,
because
the
new
construction
can't
be
undertaken
unless
the
law
is
vacant.
I
would
also
like
to
add,
within
year
on
you,
would've
read
within
your
reports.
There
is
a
condition
study
on
and
the
finding
of
that
condition.
Study
by
John
Cook
was
that
the
building
could
be
repaired
and
reused
for
for
its
original
purpose.
C
H
G
C
Thank
you
very
much
thanks
for
the
question,
okay,
so
going
to
our
list
of
public
delegations.
First
on
our
list
is
the
applicant,
so
we
have
members
of
staff
from
Ottawa
community
housing,
I'm,
not
sure
if
mr.
I
mean
is
here
and
speaking
to
the
item.
If
so,
please
feel
free
to
come
up.
Mister,
you
Dale
as
well
you're
our
four
speakers
on
the
list.
C
J
K
K
K
K
Challenging
situation
when
you're,
looking
at
the
potential
for
a
demolition
in
Heritage,
Conservation
District
I
happen
to
have
been
a
member.
The
team
that
did
the
study
in
a
volunteer
capacity
in
1993,
representing
here
in
Ottawa
and
lack
at
that
time,
along
with
the
out-of-town
consultant
that
undertook
the
study.
K
K
But
cooks
report,
which
is
more
precise
analysis
through
a
study
of
the
fabric
of
the
structure
of
the
building,
is
generally
considered
to
be
much
more
accurate
and,
as
staff
pointed
out,
probably
1920s
or
later
staffs
positions
that
takes
the
score
down
from
56
in
a
bit
down
to
I
believe
53
in
a
bit,
which
now
makes
it
very
very
close
to
that
51.
That
sort
of
fine
point
about
whether
it's
a
three
or
four,
which
most
people
consider
whether
it
has
value
for
the
district
or
not.
K
K
Extremely
degraded
and
the
folks
from
och
are
going
to
give
you
a
little
bit
more
detail
on
that.
The
structural
estimate
alone
for
repairs
is
between
100
and
150
thousand,
as
you
will
have
noted
in
that
report,
which
was
I
believe
distributed
to
you.
That's
just
what
structural
and
associated
elements.
K
We'll
see,
there's
an
extensive
heritage
interpretation
program
that
is
being
proposed
and
one
thing
that
the
clients
that
och
have
agreed
is
that
there's
some
open
space
at
the
back
of
the
park
at
which
is
currently
just
landscape,
open
space
and
that
they're
indicating
that
that
could
be,
in
fact,
a
small
community
garden
as
well
focus
on
mr.
bank,
we're
gonna
have
to
wrap
up
sorry
or
five
minutes
wrap.
Okay.
K
C
K
C
K
A
To
the
subcommittee
good
morning,
thank
you
mr.
chair,
my
name
is
clip
Udell
I'm,
the
executive
director
of
asset
management
on
Ottawa,
community
housing
and,
as
you
can
appreciate,
with
a
portfolio
as
large
as
ours,
there's
a
number
of
challenges
every
day,
and
one
thing
we
strive
to
do
is
retain
all
the
units
that
we
possibly
can,
but
with
capital
budget
dollars
of
approximately
$700
per
unit
per
year.
A
A
We
believe
that,
by
the
time
that
we're
done
with
this
building
were
to
do
all
the
things
we
need
to
do
in
terms
of
proper
means
of
egress,
as
well
as
doing
all
the
structural
rehabilitation
we'll
be
well
past,
$250,000
plus
it'll
be
a
fairly
large
annual
capital
repair
requirement
moving
forward.
So
that
was
one
particular
challenge.
A
When
we
looked
into
the
severance
and
possible
sublease
of
the
land,
we
received
legal
counsel,
who
will
be
speaking
to
you
after
I'm
done
indicated,
that
aftert
offered
a
number
of
challenges
and
was
not
viable,
so
that
and
is
how
we
landed
on
our
options
for
demolition.
But
we
fully
appreciated
that
this
is
a
heritage
district
and
we
felt
the
parkette
was
a
reasonable
compromise.
A
Given
the
challenges,
we
did
have
a
community
consultation
and
there
is
a
some
push
for
a
community
garden,
so
we
think
that
the
ultimate
solution
might
be
a
bit
of
a
hybrid
between
the
community
gardens
and
the
park
at
that.
You
see
today
so
that
may
be
scaled
back
a
bit
which
would
help
on
on
the
cost
associated
with
the
park
at
while
addressing
some
of
the
the
needs
of
the
tenants.
A
So
that
is
kind
of
how
we
landed
on
our
decision.
I
said
it's
challenging,
there's
an
opportunity
cost
any
time
we
invest
at
a
hundred
and
twenty
five
thousand
dollars.
We
can
build
a
single-family
home
to
current
coding
standards
with
full
accessibility.
So
anytime,
we
look
at
a
major
capital
investment
like
this.
We
have
to
look
at
the
opportunity
cost
to
our
waiting
list,
and
in
this
case
it
would
probably
be
two
units,
so
we
can
gain
appreciating
the
heritage
piece
we
felt
the
parkette
was
a
good
compromise.
A
A
A
B
It
seems
that
if
somebody,
if
a
private
sector
person
came
forward
with
a
designated
building,
we
would
expect
that
they
would
restore
it
and
preserve
it.
And
here
we
have
a
an
organization,
that's
associated
with
the
city
and
we're
being
told,
because
it's
an
old
building
and
has
the
problems
of
most
old
buildings
have.
We
should
approve
demolition
so
that
that's
my
concern,
I
think.
Thank
you.
C
H
A
H
I've
been
in
that
building
mr.
chair,
so
I,
just
let
you
know
I've
actually
looked
at
it,
and
a
lot
of
the
problems
have
to
do
with
the
fact
that
things
have
to
be
made
accessible
and
making
this
building
accessible.
When
I
looked
at
it
I,
don't
think
it's
physically
possible,
it's
a
very
small
building
to
start
with,
and
that's
one
of
the
problems
that
on
Tara
it
wasn't
that
it
was
in
such
bad
shape
and
neglected.
H
There
are
people
living
it
out
up
til
two
years
ago
and
had
been
maintained
at
that
time
for
three
years,
maybe
now
and
the,
and
it
was
at
that
time.
I
believe
that
it
was
decided
that
without
major
renovations
you
couldn't,
then
you
started
looking
at
these
different
options
that
you've
raised
three
different
options.
One
was
repairing
it.
We
used
to
mentioned
possibly
selling
it.
What's
the
problem
with
selling
it
I'll.
H
H
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
think
what
you're
saying
is
that
it
has
was
maintained
up
until
three
years
ago
when
people
were
living
in
it.
It's
just
in
the
recent
last
couple
of
years,
when
the
safety
issues
came
out,
they
do
Circuit
and
the
foundation
problems
that
you
decided
not
to
rent
it
out
again.
Yes,.
A
A
D
Just
a
question,
mr.
Udo
about
the
portfolio
of
the
Ottawa
community
house:
incorporation:
can
you
give
us
just
a
rough
idea
of
the
number
of
residential
units
in
the
portfolio
that
are
in
heritage
conservation
districts
or
that
are
individually
designated
under
part?
Four
then
carry
Heritage
Act.
We
just
like
to
get
an
idea
of
whether
or
not
this
is
an
unique
exception,
or
you
have
more
portfolio
that
might
be
subject
to
the
same
kind
of
question.
Actually,
the.
A
C
Seeing
no
other
questions,
thank
you,
mr.
Dale,
for
speaking
to
the
committee
this
morning,
next
on
our
list
of
speaker
is
David
genes
from
Heritage
Ottawa,
followed
by
those
Mackenzie
from
the
Lowertown
Community
Association,
so
yeah
you're
gonna
have
to
sign
up
mr.
genes
you're.
Next
and
I.
Don't
have
anyone
else
on
my
list,
so
you'll
have
to
sign
up
if
you
want
the
legal
counsel
to
come
forward
and
and
speak
so
mr.
genes.
L
Yes,
thank
you
chairs,
so
heritage
Ottawa
has
made
a
written
solution
in
support
of
the
staff
recommendation
and
we
we
just
want
to
point
out
a
couple
of
things.
One
is
that,
has
you
been
told
by
staff?
The
provincial
policy
statement
requires
conservation
of
heritage
resources
and,
although
you've
heard
some
question
about
whether
this
is
close
to
not
being
a
contributing
resource
for
the
for
the
district,
it
is
nevertheless
a
contributing
resource
at
the
moment,
even
though
it's
somewhat
isolated,
it's
a
reminder
of
the
residential
component
of
the
Lowertown
Heritage
Conservation
District.
L
It
does
not
contribute
to
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
what
that
building
does
and
what
that
building
would
do
if
it
were
conserved
restored.
You
know
what
you're
talking
about.
Obviously,
the
cost
of
the
the
fundamental
problems
with
structure
but
you're,
also
looking
at
avoiding
the
costs
of
demolition
and
disposal
of
all
those
materials
which
have
to
be
offset
against
the
cost
of
continuing
to
make
a
good
use
of
that
building,
whether
as
as
housing
or
whether
some
other
adaptive
reuse
would
be
feasible
in
that
location.
L
C
E
E
Review
of
the
history,
okay,
land
records
and
the
city
directories,
and
that
would
show
that,
at
this
site,
for
over
a
century,
a
tonsil
corner,
America
remarried
at
notre-dame
Cathedral
in
1853,
they
raised
their
eight
children
here,
he's
Irish,
Irish
settlers
and
Lowertown
were
active
in
st.
Brigid
parish
after
its
formation
in
1889
and
their
daughter.
Margaret
O'connor
was
the
last
owner
of
the
family
to
occupy
the
house,
and
she
lived
here
until
her
death
in
1954,
and
these
are
for
Nancy
Lachey's
research
notes.
E
So
it's
important
to
look
at
the
whole
of
that
neighborhood
on
the
side
of
the
street.
You
see
once
every
way
corner
house
there's
the
larger
one
anyway,
which
is
the
seniors
residence
and
then
on
the
other
side
of
the
seniors.
Residence
is
an
existing
Burkett
and
the
seniors
had
a
lot
of
problems
with
that.
Forget
it,
it's
unkempt
it's
seldom
used
and
it's
a
magnet
for
all
kinds
of
illegal
activities
that
are
very
upsetting
to
the
seniors.
E
So
you
can
understand,
they
would
come
to
them
and
say
or
get
the
reaction
was
there's
no
positive
and
with
regard
to
blue
by
green
space,
you
can
see
here
that
and
then
that
blob
of
green
doesn't
show
up
and
go,
but
I
put
it
there
to
show
the
report
yet
that's
unwelcome
and
then
just
behind
his
Cathcart
Square,
which
is
another
park
and
at
the
end
of
the
block
and
one
block
over
is
been
in
the
park.
So
we're
well
served
by
a
green
space
in
the
area,
but
certainly
there's
never
too
much.
E
So
the
two
commended
meetings
were
on
October
22nd
at
the
seniors
residence
more
than
50
people
attended,
and
then
this
was
followed
by
presentation
of
the
Lower
Town
Community
Association
went
to
a
meeting
on
October
the
26th.
The
people
came
to
speak
at
the
first
meeting
was
going
about
duck,
he's
a
Lower,
Town
building,
restorer
he's
done
the
raphe
house,
the
ocean
rose
Rosie
and
also
the
postal
union
will
sink.
He
spoke
and
he
in
his
experience,
buildings
in
actual
shape
than
this
have
been
successfully
restored.
E
Some
of
the
comments
that
we
heard
where
that
och
has
responsibility
to
protect
properties
in
the
HDD
just
as
any
other
owner.
The
engineering
report
appears
to
focus
on
the
worst
case
scenarios.
There's
no
urgency
from
a
structural
point
of
view
to
do
with
this
property.
Private
builder,
restores
in
Morton,
has
successfully
restored
and
renovated
buildings
in
natural
shape.
I
wish
you
make
every
effort
to
sever
the
property
and
sell
to
a
buyer
for
renovation.
We've
heard
that
this
has
so
far
as
a
dead
end.
E
There
hasn't
been
a
way
to
figure
out
how
they
do
that
recognition
of
heritage
is
important,
would
like
the
house
to
be
blocked
and
the
assurance
that
this
house
is
demolished.
Och
will
build
capacity
out
sewers
very
much
appreciate
it.
This
was
a
huge
issue
for
the
people
living
next
door
that
we
wouldn't
lose
capacity
unless
this
house,
some
of
your
comments
on
the
park,
I
should
ever
forget
forget
issues
another
park
at
once.
Every
one
borough
is
not
needed
or
desirable.
There's
overwhelming
support
for
community
garden
on
this
site.
E
If
the
building
is
demolished
and
there's
significant
interest
in
having
this
Heritage
market
installed,
some
place
else
in
the
HDC
and
the
comment
that
you
might
grow
hybrid
are
the
Heritage
Park
gap
and
the
community
garden
I.
Don't
think,
really
deals
with
the
issue
that
the
neighbors
have
a
park.
Yet
that's
covered
and
comfortable
a
nice
place
to
be
is
a
magnet
for
the
kind
of
activities
that
they
find
there
distressing
that
go
on
in
the
pocket
adjacent
the
LCA
Heritage
Committee
position
is
we
support
the
staff
recommendation
to
refuse
the
application
for
demolition.
E
The
story
of
the
old
corner
family
has
relevance
to
Watertown
and
Humber
buildings
like
this
one
contribute
to
the
streetscape
in
our
lower
tongueless
heritage
conservation
district.
We
did
not
find
any
historical
evidence
that
this
building
is
a
complete
rebuild,
as
suggested
by
the
och
engineering
report.
There
are
indications
that
there
was
a
fire
in
part
of
the
building
at
one
time,
but
that's.
E
C
J
Good
morning,
mister
you
do
I'm.
My
name
is
Brian.
He
bare
I'm,
the
lawyer
for
och,
see
mister.
You
Dale
asked
me
to
speak
to
you
this
morning
in
connection
with
the
difficulties
that
would
be
encountered
if
the
property
were
to
be
to
be
sold
or
transferred
to
a
third
party,
not
not
currently
involved
in
the
ownership.
J
The
the
the
practice
of
auto
Community
Housing
is
that
each
year
as
their
upcoming
mortgages
come
to
maturity,
the
the
mortgages
are
refinanced,
with
infrastructure
Ontario
on
fixed
rate,
long
term
on
a
fixed-rate
long
term
basis,
so
that
the
property
that
were
dealing
with
here
this
morning
was
part
of
the
2013
financing
package
with
infrastructure.
Ontario
and
basically
the
the
loan
with
IO
is,
is
fixed
rate
long
term.
No
partial
discharges,
no
early
discharges.
If
anything
were
to
be
attempted
to
be
done
here.
J
By
way
of
freeing
this
property
or
obtaining
a
discharge
of
this
property.
From
the
the
overall
financing
package,
which
is
in
the
neighborhood
of
twenty
three
million
dollars,
there
would
have
to
be
an
application
made
to
the
infrastructure,
Ontario
Board
of
Directors.
It
would
be
considered
by
an
investment
committee,
and
the
investment
committee
could
consider
whether
they
wanted
to
give
a
partial
discharge
of
this
particular
unit
and,
if
so,
under
what
terms
and
conditions
for
sure.
J
C
J
J
To
do
that
lease,
but
the
question
is:
who
would
take
it
because
for
the
20-year
lease
there's
probably
no
way
that
you
could
finance
it?
So
you'd
have
to
take
it
20-year
lease,
then,
whatever
money
is
required
into
renovations
and
then
either
be
in
a
position
to
write
a
check
or
or
or
something
about
nature,
because
I,
don't
very
much
said.
Any
financial
institution
would
deal
with
that
on
a
20-year
basis.
D
Question
I
understand
that
you
lived
a
lawyer
for
Ottawa
community
housing,
part
of
a
community
house
and
actually
ask
you
your
opinion
about
compliance
with
the
provincial
policy
statement
on
heritage
conservation
or
the
City
of
Ottawa
Official
Plan,
because
you've
heard
from
the
staff
report
that
this
applies
to
och,
as
well
as
it
does
to
the
city,
but
leading
by
example,
and
I
wondered
whether
they
asked
you
for
your
opinion
there.
What
your
response
was
about.
Och
is
responsibility
to
comply
with
these
city
and
provincial
policies.
They.
H
Chair,
so
just
so
I
understand
correctly,
then,
you've
not
looked
into
or
asked
whether
either
the
financial
institution
that
holds
the
mortgage
or
infrastructure
Ontario,
whether
in
fact
there
would
be
a
penalty
you're
coming
here.
First
to
ask
us
to
demolish
a
heritage
building
I,
just
I'm,
just
trying
to
figure
out
whether
you've
gone
through
every
Avenue
possible.
So
do
you
we
know
for
certain
that
there
would
be
a
penalty
and
what
that
penalty
would
be
to
buy
out
the
mortgage.
J
B
C
J
C
C
H
I
know
this
is
a
difficult
one,
but
one
of
the
things
that
cities
do
is
they
evolve
over
time
and
then
things
get
changed
over
time.
This
particular
one
had
a
huge
change
done
about
40
years
ago.
One
everything
around
it
was
demolished
and
more
modern
buildings
build
all
around
it.
So
the
house
is
sort
of
sticking
in
the
middle
and
it's
throughout
their
example.
So
that's
happening.
H
The
problem
of
it
is,
is
that
it's
owned
by
where
the
nonprofit
Housing
Corporation,
whose
mandate
is
to
provide
housing
to
people
of
modest
income,
and
they
have
stretches
this
house,
because
these
are
very
vulnerable
populations.
That
was
pointed
out.
It's
such
that
you
can't
just
have
a
regular
house
that
a
normal
family
could
handle
and
do
the
extra
things
you
need
to
do
for
fire
escapes
and
things
like
that,
but
we
have
to
in
all
of
our
homes.
H
I
know
I
did
that
with
my
kids,
when
they
were
younger,
they
have
this
houses
really
needs
a
fire
escape
or
something
to
have,
because
it's
a
three-story
building
and
yes,
people
in
the
past
lived
that
way.
But
I've
read,
rules
and
regulations
have
changed
a
lot
now
and
particularly
for
public
housing
use.
You
have
a
much
higher
level
of
safety,
that's
required
than
would
be
for
even
privately
owned
renovate
a
house
today.
H
The
most
important
thing
for
och
is
in
fact
to
provide
the
housing,
and
this
this
has
been
a
kind
of
a
thorn
in
their
side
for
many
years.
I
know
when
I
shared
the
och
Housing
Board.
This
was
blazed
up,
which
is
why
I've
been
through
the
house
trying
to
figure
out
what
to
do
with
it.
They
spent
three
years
now,
looking
at
all
possible
alternatives
and
the
demolition
was
not
the
primary
focus
at
the
time.
It
was
one
that
they
looked
at.
Obviously
they
looked
hard
at
whether
they
could
restore
it.
H
The
money
they
get
for
housing
doesn't
include
extra
money
for
heritage,
restoration
and
I,
don't
see
where
they
get
that
money,
and
so,
unless
we
get
that
make
forcing
them
to
keep
this
house
just
means
it's
going
to
sit
there.
It's
that
kind
of.
If
you
go
and
take
a
look
at
it,
it's
got
parking
lot
all
the
way
around
it,
and
then
it's
right
up
against
the
apartment
building.
So
the
view
from
some
of
the
people's
views
from
the
apartment,
I
sort
of
blocked
by
it.
H
It's
not
one
that
is
actually
I,
think
adding
to
heritage
value
in
the
area,
because
it's
out
of
character
in
that
location.
So
I
really
think
because
of
the
merits
of
the
case
for
an
operational
point
of
view
that
there
are
sometimes
we
have
to
say.
Yes,
it
could
be
demolished
and
in
this
case,
having
been
in
the
building,
having
seen
how
bad
it
is,
I
certainly
wouldn't
want
to
live
there,
and
the
amount
of
work
required
because
of
the
particular
structure
is
more
than
many
other
buildings
would
be
that
I.
H
B
I
think
we
should
support
the
staff
recommendation
and
I
think
we've
heard
that
there
are.
There
clearly
is
another
option,
since
they
would
have
to
get
permission
from
the
landowner
to
demolish
the
existing
house.
It
would
seem
to
me
the
first
step
that
they
should
take
is
seek
permission
from
the
lender,
to
sever
and
solve
the
existing
house.
I
think
we
fraida
can
be
restored
and
I
certainly
know,
there's
lots
of
examples
of
houses
of
worship.
B
D
Mr.
chair
I
strongly
support
the
staff
recommendation
to
refuse
this
application.
I
think
that
the
the
city's
Official
Plan
policy
clearly
says
that
the
city
has
to
be
exemplary
in
its
heritage,
conservation
activities
and
I
think
that
that
alone
is
a
reason
to
really
make
every
effort
by
och
to
find
a
way
to
adapt
and
restore
this
building.
There's
a
couple
of
points
that
I
think
deserve
to
be
made.
One
is
that
an
argument
was
made
that
it
is
isolated
and
therefore
the
conservation
district
guidelines
don't
apply.
D
I
think
that
this
morning
we
dealt
with
an
application
at
90
Bolton,
which
is
a
single
house
on
the
corner
of
an
entire
block
where
Bingham
Park
is
it's
surrounded
by
a
parking
lot
that
the
hospital
has,
if
anything
is
isolated
that
were
little
building
is
isolated.
A
couple
of
years
ago
the
owners
came
in
and
asked
for
permission
to
demolish
it
and
the
city
staff
strongly
recommend
that
against
it.
D
What
we
see
now
is
that
the
owner
has
renovated
it
and
is
putting
an
addition
on
it
and
I
think
that
that's
certainly
property,
which
is
much
more
isolated
from
the
context
of
the
Lowertown
heritage
district.
Then
this
one
is
but
in
the
second
point
that
I
think
is
worth
observing
is
that
the
school
board
came
number
of
months
ago
with
the
plea
to
permit
them
to
demolish
Broadview
school.
They
said
that
if
we
didn't
demolish
the
Rodri
school,
just
we
couldn't
jeopardize
a
new
school.
D
What
they
do
with
it
was
unsafe
for
students,
but
the
city
designated
it
anyway
and
to
come
to
this
meeting
and
have
City
Council
permit
one
of
its
own
agencies
to
demolish
a
building
in
the
heritage
district,
while
refusing
the
school
board
or
sometimes
refusing
the
NCC
or
the
University
of
Ottawa.
I,
think
that
this
is
really
consistent,
and
we
have
to
really
be
clear
about
this.
So
I
support
the
staff
recommendation.
M
Mr.
Krishna
unintelligible
chunky
facility,
I
know
Rosario
Alisha
pool
a
cognitive
analysis,
recap:
a
dimension
learner,
cottage
Cannella
biological
New,
Territories
de
Mesilla.
Miss
guarantee
in
a
car
seat
proposed
a
that
Nadia
osmocon
without
district
FS
water
view
provides
security.
Crewe
this
parcel
the
terrain
if
we
time
star,
Canopus,
sakura-san,
11,
element,
3
and
a
discharge,
contingency
renounce
Auckland
area.
So,
as
my
community
at
our
the
FC
was
this
absolute
Ariella
premier
who
can
keep
overseeing
this,
is
or
shall
see
an
opportunity
pass.
M
C
Ok,
so
you've
heard
from
counselor
Louie,
who
is
recommending
to
the
committee
that
we
defer
this
item
to
permit
och
to
undertake
more
comprehensive
discussions
with
infrastructure
Ontario,
with
review
to
getting
more
precise
figures
on
what
the
administrative
costs
would
be.
Should
this
parcel
be
severed,
I
forgot,
I'm,
certainly
open
to
that
I
think
it's
with
a
view
to
trying
to
find
a
solution
to
what
he
accurately
describes
as
not
an
easy
situation.
C
So
so
we
have
councillor
Moffat,
who
is
moving
deferral
so
essentially
the
item
before
us
is
that
that
the
item
be
deferred
and
I
think
perhaps
it
makes
sense
to
say
the
next
meeting
is
December
10th
I'm
happy
to
move
it
to
our
January
meeting.
If
we
think
that
more
than
two
or
three
weeks
is
required,
maybe
I
can
ask
informally
if
mister
you
Dale.
C
G
Is
already
agreed
because
this
has
already
been
deferred
once
I'm
just
looking
through
my
notes,
I
think
I
only
seem
to
it
electronically,
but
I
think
we've
already
got
to
the
end
of
January
2016.
So
if
perhaps
they
can
confirm
because
I
don't
know
whether
I
took
it
to
the
end
of
February
at
the
end
of
January,
but
certainly
it's
within
the
next
two
meetings.
Okay,.
C
D
Granting
the
extension,
which
I
think
is
a
wise
idea
to
give
some
more
time
I,
would
recommend
to
och
that
they
broadened
the
terms
of
the
research
that
they
do
not
just
to
seek
what
infrastructure
Ontario
might
think,
but
to
look
at
viable
options
for
renovating
or
leasing
or
some
other
strategy
that
maintains
the
building
as
residential
use
and
maintains
it
as
part
of
the
heritage
district.
So
I
think
that
I
would
to
agree
to
explore
that
as
well
as
exploring
the
financial
things
with
infrastructure
Ontario.
If.
C
I
can
just
add
to
that.
The
one
comment
that
I
was
going
to
make
on
the
substance,
but
I
now
won't
because
of
deferral
is
before
us,
but
just
a
second.
What
the
vice
chair
has
said.
It's
clear
from
what
we
heard
this
morning.
That
och
was
prepared
to
invest
one
hundred
and
twenty
five,
two
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
in
a
park
ad.
C
If
you
add
the
costs
of
demolition
to
that,
were
probably
in
the
range
of
the
low
two
hundred
thousand
s,
we've
heard,
the
cost
of
restoration
could
be
a
little
bit
more,
but
is
in
the
$200,000
range,
so
in
terms
of
layout
we're
talking
about
two
figures
that
are
relatively
close
and
in
light
of
the
fact
that
mr.
UDL
reported
that
it
costs
over
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
these
days
to
price
a
single-family,
the
residents
that
and
given
that
the
Delta
between
our
Park
at
and
restoration
is
less
than
that.
C
Then
it
strikes
me
that
the
financial
approach
here
does
merit
consideration
along
the
lines
of
what
the
vice-chair
just
suggested.
So
that's
the
only
thing,
I'll
say
in
terms
of
guidance
och
for
its
discussions
with
infrastructure
Ontario,
so
on
councilor
Moffitt's,
defer
emotion!
Is
that
care?
Okay?
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,.
I
Good
morning
mr.
chair
members
of
the
committee
I,
couldn't
let
you
off
a
meeting
without
hearing
from
me.
The
report
will
free
today
is
the
designation
of
the
Boyd
house
at
173,
hot
Mar
drive
under
prep
for
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
Some
of
the
members
of
the
committee
who
were
on
the
committee
during
the
last
term
of
council
may
remember
this.
I
One
I
will
give
you
a
little
bit
of
background
for
those
who
are
not
familiar
with
it
so
just
to
situate
the
property
it's
located
in
the
West
End
near
the
canyon,
tire
center,
the
the
Auto
Mall.
So
here's
the
property
right
here
this
is
hot.
My
drive
and
the
highway
is
here
just
to
give
you
an
idea.
It
is
a
firm
former
farm
property
with
a
single
farmhouse
on
the
site.
So
just
as
a
way
of
background
in
September
2013,
a
demolition
permit,
application
was
submitted
for
this
property.
It
was
not
designated.
I
Staff
were
circulated
on
the
demolition
permit,
because
the
building
was
on
the
City
of
Ottawa
heritage
references.
We
reviewed
the
permit
reviewed
the
building
determined
that
we
felt
the
building
had
some
significance
and,
as
a
result,
brought
forward
a
report
to
this
committee
recommending
that
the
building
be
designated
at
that
time.
The
committee
deferred
consideration
of
the
designation
and
instead
out
of
the
building
to
the
City
of
Ottawa,
Heritage
Register
and
directed
staff
to
work
with
the
property
owner
regarding
a
proposed
development
of
the
site,
so
that
was
in
November
of
2013.
I
So
for
the
last
couple
of
years
we
have
been
working
with
the
property
owner
and
their
consultant
on
a
plan
of
sub
use.
Zoning
bylaw
amendments
that
include
retention
of
the
building.
So
this
report
is
now
coming
forward
to
designate
the
building
and
the
application
for
zoning.
Bylaw
amendment
will
be
on
the
December
agenda
of
the
Planning
Committee,
along
with
this
item
from
this
committee.
Just
to
give
you
a
quick
idea
of
the
draft
plan
of
subdivision.
I
This
is
not
that
helpful
in
terms
of
getting
an
idea
of
how
the
development
might
occur,
but
this
block
here
has
been
set
aside
for
the
for
the
building.
So
you
can
see
it's
a
relatively
generous
walk.
I
know
it's
a
large
property,
but
we
when
we're
dealing
with
these
developments
in
a
suburban
context
and
for
for
our
farmland,
we
try
to
have
some
semblance
of
context
in
terms
of
a
relatively
large
block.
I
The
lever
piece
here
that
is
part
of
a
context
of
the
property
but
is
not
recommended
for
inclusion
in
the
designation
but
will
be
retained,
is
the
hedgerow
that's
along
the
northern
property
line,
because
it's
part
of
the
sort
of
formal,
formal,
rural
landscape
that
you
would
see
there.
This
gives
you
a
little
bit
of
a
better
idea
of
how
this
is
a
concept
but
how
the
property
may
develop.
So
here's
the
existing
house
proposed
park
here,
here's
the
hedgerow
to
be
retained
and
then
commercial
fronting
on
to
hunt
ma.
I
I
I
It's
a
Gothic,
Revival,
stone,
farmhouse,
steeply,
pitched
gable,
roofs,
decorative
large
board
and
porches.
It's
got
a
lot
of
mature
trees
around
it.
So
that's
part
of
the
part
of
the
process,
as
the
development
occurs,
we'll
be
trying
to
retain
some
of
those
trees
down
the
road.
Just
some
more
images.
I
So
internal
regulation,
Oh
906,
as
you
know,
requires
that
a
property
meet
one
of
the
following
criteria:
design
a
physical
value,
associative
or
historical
value
or
contextual
value,
I'll
just
go
through
the
criteria
and
how
this
building
meets
them
so
from
design
value.
It's
a
good
example
of
a
late
19th
century
Gothic,
Revival
farmhouse,
as
I
mentioned
some
of
those
details
with
stone,
construction,
the
coins
on
the
corners
arched
windows
and
the
decorative
bargeboard.
I
It
has
historical
associated
value
for
its
long
term
association
with
the
Boyd
family
from
the
time
of
its
construction
in
eighteen,
six
until
the
1970s
and
is
associated
with
the
theme
of
the
early
settlement
of
Huntley
Township
by
Irish
Protestants
in
the
nineteenth
century
and
then
finally,
it's
contextual
value.
While
the
area
is
being
developed
and
we've
been
discussing
this
a
little
bit
already
this
morning,
but
it's
an
important
reminder
of
the
agricultural
history
of
humpin
Township
and
should
be
retained
in
any
future
development.
I
For
some
reason,
that's
I'm
going
backwards.
I'm!
Sorry!
So
in
conclusion,
the
Department
recommends
the
issuance
of
a
notice
of
intention
to
designate
the
property
on
the
purp
floor
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
According
to
the
statement
of
Heritage
character
attached
to
the
staff
report,
is
document
5
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
the
committee
might
have.
C
L
The
only
thing
I
would
like
to
point
out
is
something
for
this
committee,
and
that
is
that
had
the
building
being
designated
when
the
proposal
came
forward
before
we
would
have
been
in
a
much
better
position
to
protect
it
over
the
intervening
years
there
it's
in
an
isolated
location
that
has
been
vandalism,
it
hasn't
been
subject
to
the
same
kind
of
controls
that
would
apply
had
it
been
designated.
So
really
that's
the
only
point
we're
very
pleased
to
see
the
designation
going
forward.
L
C
I
Yes,
I
believe
what
mr.
Deane's
is
referring
to
is
the
enforcement
of
the
property
standards
by
law
for
vacant
buildings,
but
there
had
been
an
agreement
on
the
part
of
the
property
owner
to
maintain
the
building
as
best
as
possible.
Unfortunately,
it's
vacant
and
and,
as
mr.
Gean
said,
it's
in
a
difficult
location
and
that
it's
far
back
from
the
road
and
very
isolated.
So
it's
my
understanding
and
my
thought
that
the
owner
has
been
doing
sort
of
their
best
to
maintain
a
vacant
building.
Okay,.
C
B
I
B
Is
mixed
use
mixed
use?
Okay
in
terms
of
the
comments
by
the
public
delegation,
mr.
genes,
about
the
maintenance
of
the
building
going
forward
are
now
going
forward,
but
in
the
past
do
you
mention
that
the
owner
did
work
with
the
city
in
order
to
try
to
maintain
that
building
going
forward
from
the
day
the
vendor
doesn't
happen?
Did
we
not
end
of
my
memory
selects
food?
B
You
know
it
indicates
to
me,
and
maybe
you
can
correct
me
back
in
2013
when
the
item
came
to
committee,
we
had
asked
the
owner
at
the
time
to
make
sure
that
there
was
visual
presence
in
terms
of
the
property
with
cameras
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
Do
you
know
if
those
were
followed
up
with
by
the
owner.
I
Mr.
chair
I,
don't
recall
the
requirement
for
cameras,
etc.
There
was
a.
There
was
a
request,
after
after
everything
in
2013
to
ensure
the
building
was
boarded
up
and
maintained,
and
that
sort
of
thing
and
and
I
had
checked
in
with
the
property
owner
several
times
over
the
course
of
the
last
couple
of
years
and
confirmed
that
that
was
the
case.
But
I
mean
this
recent
vandalism
that
was
sort
of
over
this
summer
I
think
that's,
you
know,
I'm
not
really
sure
what
the
solution
is.
I
D
Just
a
question
to
Leslie
the
this
looks
like
I'm
going
to
support
the
staff
recommendation.
But
it
looks
like
the
outcome
of
the
process
is
a
very
positive
thing
for
both
heritage
planning
and
land
use
planning
and
can
I
ask
whether
the
owners
of
the
property
are
a
supportive
of
the
designation
and
if
they
are
I,
think
that
what
is
reflected
in
the
LAT
in
the
sub
land
of
subdivision
plan
and
the
concept
plan
is
that
the
heritage
resources
are
quite
beautifully
organized
to
complement
the
subdivision.
D
And
the
subdivision
appears
that
it
is
going
to
benefit
from
the
iconic
presence
of
this
residence.
And
it's
probably
a
very
good
exemplar
for
when
we
deal
with
the
590
Hazeltine
at
the
next
meeting.
But
could
you
just
say
a
little
bit
about
the
owners
activities
and
the
way
which
they
planned?
The
subdivision
at
which
they
support
the
designation.
I
Mr.
chair
I
think
I
wouldn't
want
to
put
words
in
the
owners
mouth
as
to
whether
or
not
they're
supportive
I
would
suggest
that
they're
not
objecting,
but
they
have
worked
very,
very
well
with
the
city
in
terms
of
ensuring
the
retention
of
the
of
the
property.
As
part
of
the
subdivision,
it's
been
a
very
interesting
sort
of
philosophical
to
be
about
how
to
meaningfully
incorporate
a
heritage
building
into
a
suburban
development
and
how
to
retain
some
sort
of
context
when
the
context
is
affirm-
and
it's
not
obviously
not
going
to
be
a
farm
anymore.
N
Initially
I
spoke
to
the
committee
about
a
year
ago
to
ask
for
that
flexibility
and
asked
the
committee
not
to
designate
and
despite
the
comments
from
heritage,
auto
I
think
that
they,
the
fact
that
the
building
was
not
designated
at
that
time,
provided
us
with
a
better
framework
to
work
with
staff
and
resolve
some
issues.
At
the
time
the
designation
in
front
of
the
committee
was
to
designate
I,
can't
remember
two
to
four
acres
of
area.
N
We
weren't
there,
yet
we
weren't
sure
how
big
that
block
should
be
to
preserve
the
heritage
structure,
we've
sized
that
block
to
retain
some
existing
trees
that
were
also
identified
as
part
of
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
We
chose
to
preserve
the
hedgerow
on
the
northern
portion
because
it
did
have
some
significance,
all
of
those
things
weren't
before
the
committee,
when
we,
when
we
came
here
a
year
ago.
So
we
had
asked
for
that
flexibility
to
explore
those
issues.
For
instance,
the
park
wasn't
in
front
of
the
Heritage
structure.
It
was
inside
the
block.
N
It
was
more
central
to
the
property.
We
actually
thought
it
had
value
more
centrally
located,
but
through
the
discussions
with
heritage
staff,
one
of
the
reasons
we
moved
the
park
was
to
have
it
immediately
across
from
it
to
open
up
views
when
you're
coming
down
the
public
road
which
mimics
the
driveway
that
historically
served
the
the
farmhouse
and
some
previous
barns
on
the
property.
N
C
B
B
Because
if
you
look
at
the
slide
that
Miss
Collins
presented
right
on
the
screen,
the
three
six
seven
or
six
of
buildings,
they
are
sounding
it
or
supposed
to
be
all
six-story
apartment
buildings.
So
just
to
give
you
that
context,
also
so
anyways.
Thank
you
to
the
committee
this
morning
and
reserve
my
comments
at
that
point.
Thank
you.
Thank.
C
You
councillor
Qadri,
so
no
other
questions
or
comments.
Therefore,
on
the
motion
carried
okay.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
to
staff.
So
our
final
item
before
us
was
the
information
previously
distributed.
Member
Quinn
had
a
question
with
regard
to
the
demolition
of
285
will
broad
procedurally.
In
order
to
have
a
discussion,
we
just
have
to
pass
a
procedural
memo
to
allow
us
to
do
that.
So.
C
E
You
mr.
chair,
you
know,
I
was
just
this
house
is
part
of
the
Sandy
Hill
cultural
heritage,
character
area,
which
was
just
as
a
fairly
recent
creation
and
having
driven
by
it
again
this
morning,
on
my
way
in
I
can't
help
feeling
that
it's
really
it's
too
bad-
that
we
can't
take
this
further,
that
this
is
because
of
the
nature
of
the
boundary
and
the
lack
of
legislative
muscle
behind
the
cultural
area,
designation
as
opposed
to
an
HCD
part
five.
E
This
is
a
very
first
that
kind
of
thing
that
concerned
me
when
the
decision
was
to
go
with
the
cultural
area,
that
this
kind
of
item
would
come
before
us
and
I
just
wanted
to
draw
on
for
the
record
to
draw
attention
to
the
fact
that
this
is
indeed
happened
to
me,
it's
a
terrible
loss
for
will
brought
that's.
That
block
is
really.
C
You
I
mean
it's
a
valid
point.
Maybe
staff
can
respond
to
the
question
as
to
whether
there
was
a
perhaps
more
comprehensive
conversation
with
the
applicant
in
light
of
the
cultural
heritage,
a
character
area?
Could
you
just
maybe
recount
a
little
bit
how
the
back-and-forth
was
different
in
this
case,
given
that
the
guidelines
are
in
place
as
to
before?
That
was
the
case,
so.
I
Before
the
cultural
heritage
character
area
was
put
in
place,
and
this
building
was
added
to
the
City
of
Ottawa
Heritage
Register,
we
would
never
have
even
been
invited
to
a
pre
consultation
on
this
property.
So
when
the
applicant
came
in
and
organized
a
pre
consultation
with
one
of
our
land
use
planners
to
discuss
a
redevelopment
of
the
site
we
I
was
invited
to
the
meeting
went
to
the
meeting.
Of
course
encouraged
them
strongly
to
retain
the
building
and
talked
about
ways
in
which
they
could
adapt
it
for
a
new
use.
I
You
know
build
an
addition
at
the
rear
or
whatever
was
it
was
their
opinion
that
it
was
not
feasible
for
for
their
goals
of
their
project,
so
I
informed
them
that
they
had
to
provide
the
60
days
notice
and
that
anything
that's
built
in
its
place
will
have
to
be
reviewed
in
the
context
of
the
guidelines
for
the
character
area
for
new
buildings.
So
I
agree
with
you.
This
is
a
very
solid
block.
I
C
I
C
Yeah
I
think.
Ultimately,
the
challenge
is,
and
my
recollection
of
our
recommendation
when
we
passed
the
sending
of
cultural
heritage
area
is
those
going
to
be
further
work
on
identifying
the
potential
establishment
to
future
Heritage,
Conservation,
District,
so
I.
Think
member
Quinn
is
right
to
point
out
that
the
calculate
which
occurred
really
didn't
per
se,
save
this
building
in
this
case,
but
there
will
be
further
work
done
in
terms
of
looking
at
whether
there
should
be
expansions
or
new
HT
DS
created,
but
thank
you
for
raising
that
any
other
comments
on
that
item.
Seeing
none!
C
Okay!
Thank
you
very
much.
I!
Don't
think
we
need
to
do
anything
on
that
item,
so
we
have
any
notices
of
motion
for
the
next
meeting.
I
see
none
any
enquiries,
none
the
only
item
under
other
business
that
I
wanted
to
mention
was
I
wanted
to
note
that
the
city
has
recently
posted
its
heard.
It's
conservation
districts
on
the
Ottawa
dossier
website
using
an
innovative
technology
called
story,
maps
and
I
had
a
chance
to
look
at
it
at
the
end
of
last
week.
C
It
does
a
great
job
of
mapping,
text
and
images
and
video
content
and
is
a
very
attractive
way
of
I.
Think
increasing
the
public's
knowledge
of
heritage
conservation
in
our
city.
So
I
wanted
to
note
this
tool
and
thank
Sarah
Richardson
and
others
in
PGM
who
put
this
together.
My
only
observation
is
I
think
we
should
celebrate
this
in
an
easier
way
to
find
it
took
us
about
eight
or
nine
clicks
to
get
there.