►
From YouTube: Built Heritage Sub-Committee – March 26, 2015
Description
Built Heritage Sub-Committee meeting – March 26, 2015 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
B
Okay,
good
morning,
everybody
we're
gonna
get
started
so
welcome
to
this
meeting
of
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
which
is
starting
a
little
bit
earlier
than
normal
apologies
for
the
change
in
schedule.
We
have
two
regrets
this
morning:
members
small
small
wood
and
Quinn
who
could
not
join
us.
So
we'll
start
with
declarations
of
interest.
Any
declarations
of
interest
among
members
I
see
none
confirmation
of
minutes.
So
the
minutes
from
our
meeting
on
the
12th
of
February
2015,
okay,
great
okay.
B
We
have
two
communication
matters
to
mention
so
hairdos
matters
volume,
13
issue,
1
of
February
2015,
was
distributed,
as
was
heritage.
Stewards,
donor
news
2015,
so
I
just
would
mention
those.
So
we
have
three
substantive
items
to
go
through
this
morning.
We're
going
to
start.
We
have
speakers
for
the
second
and
third
and
no
speakers
registered
for
the
first.
So
we'll
start
with
item
1,
which
is
the
designation
of
the
City
of
Ottawa
workshop
7,
Bayview
Road
under
part
4
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
for
those
members
of
the
committee
who
were
here
last
time.
B
You
will
know
that
there
was
a
request,
a
motion
from
the
both
heritage
subcommittee
to
a
staff
to
bring
forward
a
recommendation
with
regard
to
7bv
Road
in
the
first
quarter
of
2015,
which
we've
managed
to
do
just
under
the
wire.
So
we've
received
comments
both
from
heritage
Ottawa
and
from
the
hindenburg
Community
Association
in
favor
of
the
recommendation
of
staff
to
support
designation,
so
I
a
question.
Yes,
please.
Yes,.
C
D
D
No,
as
I
said,
we
worked
very
closely
in
the
drafting
of
the
RFP,
with
the
staff
working
on
the
Innovation
Center
to
ensure
that
the
Heritage
interest
was
included
in
the
RFP.
The
draft
statement
of
reason
for
designation
was
included
in
the
RFP
and
we've
been
involved
in
the
process
all
along
so
I'm
not
concerned
about
any
contradictions.
There.
C
D
C
E
Just
a
comment:
I
think
that
this
is
a
compliment
to
me:
the
city
staff,
the
planning
staff
and
economic
development
that
the
report
recommending
designation
is
actually
coming
through
this
committee,
as
recommended
by
the
committee
last
year,
and
that
it
is
today
both
for
my
HIV
design/build,
RFP
submissions
and
I.
Think
that
this
is
showing
exemplary
behavior.
E
You
know
to
me
the
community
out
there
and
developers
out
there
that
designating
a
building
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
it
inhibits
the
economic
use
or
the
future
of
the
the
heritage
resource.
So
I
think
that
this
is
a
designation
to
remember
and
I
think
that
the
next
stage
will
be
City
will
be
reviewing
the
design-build
proposals
from
from
developer
contractors
that
the
Heritage
values
of
the
building
will
be
taken
into
account.
So
I
think
this
is
a
success
story.
B
Thank
you
other
questions
or
comments,
seeing
none.
The
recommendation
before
us
is
that
the
VA
HDC
recommend
a
planning
committee
recommend
that
council
issue
a
notice
of
attention
to
designate
the
City
of
Ottawa
workshops,
7
baby
Road
under
part
for
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
According
to
the
statement
of
cultural
heritage
value
attached
as
document
5,
okay,
okay,
great
thank
you.
B
Okay,
the
second
item
on
our
agenda
is
an
application
for
new
construction
at
two
three
nine
two,
two
forty
one
Bank
Street,
a
property
designated
under
part,
five
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
and
located
in
the
center
town
Heritage
Conservation
District.
So
we
have
a
staff
presentation
and
then
we
have
two
speakers
registered
so
Miss
Collins
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
for
the
presentation.
Please.
D
Thank
You
mr.
chair.
The
application
before
the
committee
today
is
for
new
construction
on
a
property
at
the
corner
of
bank
and
lisker
streets.
It's
up
the
south
east
corner.
If
the
lights
go
down
a
little
bit,
you
might
be
able
to
see
better.
It's
at
the
southeast
corner,
it's
located
within
the
center
town,
Heritage
Conservation
District.
D
D
The
building
itself,
which
is
no
longer
there
is,
was
a
category
four
building
within
the
Heritage
District.
It's
this
little
former
pizza
place
at
the
corner.
Due
to
a
mapping
error,
the
building
was
demolished
in
December,
with
a
a
legally
issued
building
permit,
but
without
heritage
approval
under
the
hair
eject.
We
have
worked
to
correct
that
problem
in
the
GIS
system,
and
luckily
this
was
a
category
four
building
that
we
would
not
have
objected
to
its
demolition.
In
any
case,
this
is
looking
across
the
street
at
the
site
after
the
demolition
of
the
buildings.
D
So
you
can
see
the
fencing
here
so
the
building
was
located
here.
This
is,
as
I
said,
it's
located
on
Bank
Street
and
there
are
several
historic
buildings
surrounding
it.
So
this
is
looking
to
the
southwest
at
two
to
42,
to
46
Bank
Street
and
to
50
Bank
Street,
which
a
category
two
and
three
building
respectively-
and
this
is
the
subject-
this
is
the
neighboring
property
to
the
south.
D
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
the
block
surrounding
this
property
has
a
very
high
level
of
integrity
and
reflects
the
late
19th
and
early
20th
century
character
of
historic
Bank
Street,
with
a
typical
sort
of
between
two
and
four
storey
scale,
with
ground-floor
retail
and
then
mixed-use
above
with
recessed
entrances,
the
use
of
red,
brick,
sorry,
symmetrical
facades
and
a
very,
even
rhythm
to
the
street.
This
is
directly
north
of
the
building.
Again,
this
one
has
been
painted
white,
but
it
does
reflect
the
typical
character
of
Bank
Street
in
this
particular
location.
D
So
the
application
before
the
committee
today
is
to
construct
the
new
building
on
the
site,
because
applications
for
new
construction
and
Harwich
districts
require
City
Council
approval
under
Section
41
of
the
Act,
so
the
application
is
to
construct
a
six-story
mixed-use
building
at
the
corner.
It
also
requires
site
plan,
control
and
minor
variances
to
the
zoning
bylaw.
D
D
This
is
the
Bank
Street
elevation
of
the
property.
As
I
said,
it's
a
six
story,
mixed-use
building,
so
it's
got
ground-floor
retail
three
stories
up
and
then
the
top
two
stories
are
step
back
and
this
is
to
help
sort
of
reflect
the
typical
character
of
Bank
Street,
which
is
generally
a
maximum
of
four
storeys.
D
D
D
So
the
guidelines
for
new
buildings
in
the
centers
on
heritage
conservation
district,
there
is
a
full
section
on
new
mixed-use
buildings
in
the
commercial
corridors
being
Bank
in
Allegan
streets.
So
here
it
says,
new
buildings
should
be
2
to
4
storeys
in
height
with
ground-floor
retail
commercial
residential
uses
above
so,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
this
building
is
6
storeys.
D
Additionally,
upper
floor
saw
facade
should
be
more
opaque,
with
smaller
openings
and
a
simple
rhythm,
the
use
of
a
cornice
or
parapet
at
the
roofline,
and
consideration
should
be
given
to
the
use
of
a
turret
or
other
corner
device.
Sorry
other
device
to
acknowledge
the
corner
presence,
as
I
mentioned,
the
form
scale,
massing
and
choice
of
materials
are
sympathetic
to
the
character
of
the
district.
D
However,
the
detailing
is
far
more
complex
than
elsewhere
in
the
HCD,
and
it
should
be
simplified
to
reflect
the
commercial
character
and
ensure
that
the
new
building
does
not
dominate
the
streetscape
and
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that.
When
I
talk
to
speak
to
the
standards
and
guidelines,
design,
modifications
will
be
required
to
address
the
issue
of
detailing
and
then
I
think.
The
final.
The
final
guideline
for
the
center
town
heritage
district
is
that
materials
colors
and
detailing
should
ensure
continuity
in
the
streetscape.
D
So
here,
as
I
said,
you've
got
red
and
buff
brick
limestone
wood,
metal
windows,
and
this
this
material
palette
is
compatible
with
materials
throughout
the
district.
However,
most
buildings
don't
feature
all
of
these
materials
at
once.
The
use
of
high
quality
materials
is
integral
to
the
success
of
this
design.
So
if
the
committee
approves
the
proposal,
tying
tying,
the
applicant
to
the
use
of
natural
materials
and
and
the
samples
that
have
been
provided
is
very
important
and
that
will
be
further
detailed
through
the
site
plan
process.
D
The
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
Historic
Places
in
Canada
were
approved
by
City
Council
in
2008
and
are
used
to
assess
all
new
all
applications
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
The
applicable
standards
here
are
consented
one
in
standard
11,
so
conserve
the
heritage,
value
of
historic
place
and
conserve
the
heritage
value
when
creating
any
new
additions
to
a
start
place.
D
So
it
notes
that
the
form
scale
of
massing
are
appropriate.
New
buildings
shall
be
subordinate
to
and
distinguishable
from
historic
buildings
in
the
HCD,
and
this
is
one
of
the
areas
where
we
have
some
concern.
The
building
has
some
historicists
detailing,
but
we
feel
that,
with
its
current
architectural
style,
it
will
not
be
subordinate
to
the
historic
buildings
in
the
HCD
and
it
should
it
will
be,
it
will
overwhelm
them
and
I.
D
Think
that's
we're
saying
the
additional
height
and
and
size
is
appropriate,
but
the
detailing
needs
to
be
brought
back
a
little
bit
in
order
to
allow
the
building
to
blend
better
with
the
streetscape
the
historicist
details
that
have
been
employed
in
the
building
folks,
they
heard
the
character
of
other
cities
and
they're
not
sympathetic
to
the
simple
character
of
Bank
Street.
In
the
HCD
there
was
a
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
proposed
provided
for
this
project,
as
staff
determined
that
the
project
had
the
potential
to
adversely
impact
the
character
of
the
Bank
Street.
D
D
In
terms
of
consultation,
council
mckinney
supports
his
application
heritage.
Ottawa
was
notified
of
the
application
and
supports
the
proposal.
I
believe
you
have
comments
from
as
well.
Neighbors
within
30
meters
of
the
property
were
notified,
that
the
application
offered
the
opportunity
to
comment
I,
don't
believe
any
comments
were
submitted
and
the
center
town,
Community
Association,
was
also
notified
of
the
application
and
they
did
not
submit
any
comments.
This
application
has
also
been
to
the
urban
design
review
panel
as
part
of
the
site
plan
process
and
the
I
have
the
comments
available
here.
D
If
anybody
would
like
to
see
them,
but
essentially
the
overview
panel
showed
many
of
the
same
concerns
that
staff
have
raised
in
in
the
report.
Under
the
Heritage
Act,
so
the
proposed
conditions
that
I've
been
talking
about
again
approval,
subject
to
other
related
planning
applications
and
then
design
refinements
has
followed,
and
these
are
more
detailed.
In
document
7
of
the
report,
the
ground-floor
entrances
are
to
be
recessed.
The
design
of
decorative
elements
is
to
be
simplified
to
more
accurately
reflect
the
character
of
the
district.
D
So,
to
conclude,
we
are
recommending
approval
of
the
application
subject
to
the
conditions
I've
just
outlined
and
detailed
in
document
7.
We
are
recommending
delegation
of
authority
for
these
design
changes
and
any
other
minor
design
changes
that
arise
through
the
process
to
the
general
manager
of
planning
and
growth
management
and
issuing
the
Heritage
permit
with
a
two-year
expiry
date
from
the
date
of
issuance
I'm.
Sorry
for
the
lengthy
presentation,
but
it's
was
a
bit
of
a
complicated
one.
No.
B
Thank
you
very
much
that
was,
that
was
very
useful.
We
do
as
I
mentioned
on
our
speakers
list.
We
have
two
two
speakers,
including
the
proponents
architect,
but
I
want
to
give
members
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
of
staff.
Now,
please
hold
off
with
comments
until
afterwards
about
any
questions
of
miss
Collins
before
we
hear
from
our
guest
speakers.
D
F
B
F
B
F
F
I
might
just
begin
if
that's
okay,
I
just
want
to
begin
with
how
excited
we
are
with
the
project
and
how
pleased
we
are
that
we
have
the
support
of
the
Community
Association,
the
Business
Association
heritage,
Ottawa
and
recognition
by
Julie
Harris
and
her
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
Just
to
give
you
an
overview
of
the
process,
we
submitted
the
site
plan.
Application
back
in
June
of
2014
comments
from
circulation
have
since
been
received
and
responded
through
a
formal
resubmission.
F
The
building
design
has
also
gone
through
the
urban
design
review
panel
and
the
comments
of
the
panel
have
been
incorporated
into
the
design
where
possible.
Some
minor
variances
were
also
identified,
and
the
application
is
being
reviewed,
reviewed
by
the
committee
of
adjustment
to
be
heard
on
April
15th.
The
application
and
building
design
has
therefore
gone
through
subsidy,
we'll
review
through
numerous
ongoing
processes
through
the
planning
department,
urban
design,
review
panel
heritage
and
committee
of
adjustment.
F
Our
team
has
been
doing
our
best
to
address
all
of
the
comments
which
can
occasionally
contradict
each
other,
while
maintaining
the
integrity
of
the
design
and
the
project
as
a
whole.
With
that
in
mind,
we
are
pleased
that
the
recommendation
to
the
committee
is
for
approval
and
I
will
now
loud
tone
to
go
through
the
recommended
conditions
and
where
we
have
some
concerns.
G
Good
morning,
thank
you
for
being
here
for
giving
us
an
opportunity,
so
we
are
grateful
that
the
committee
overall
supports
the
overall
application.
We
do
have
some
concerns
about
the
conditions.
As
noted,
we
did
go
through
the
urban
design
review
panel,
one
of
the
verbal
comments
that
never
made
it
into
print
we
found
rather
surprising
and-
and
that
was
that
Ottawa
doesn't
have
a
history
of
nicely
detailed,
brick
buildings.
G
That
notwithstanding,
we
did
go
through
after
the
urban
design
review
panel
comments
and
did
take
to
heart
some
of
those
comments
and
did
work
with
staff
to
make
modifications
the
design
to
simplify
the
design.
The
cornices
have
been
simplified.
Various
details
and
elements
have
been
simplified
throughout,
so
we
have
already
been
through
that
revision
process
and
we
are
attempting
to
maintain
the
integrity
at
the
architectural
design.
G
Some
of
the
specifics
and
I'll
try
to
skip
ahead.
If
I
get
this
to
some
of
the
specifics,
so
one
of
the
conditions,
the
first
condition
is
that
there
is
the
front
of
the
building
at
the
entrances
to
be
recessed,
so
the
front
of
the
building
the
entrances
are
already
recessed.
So
this
is
the
adjacent
go
back
here,
so
this
is
the
adjacent
building
that
is
sort
of
has
the
most
architectural
cues
that
we
can
look
at
with
the
adjacent
structures.
G
So
this
is
the
adjacent
structure
there
we
go
and
you
can
see
at
the
existing
front.
Entrance
is
recessed
about
a
metre
from
the
entrance.
These
are
you
know,
later
additions
and
modifications
to
the
ground
floor.
Our
building
entrance
is
already
recessed
one
meter.
Oh,
this
didn't
quite
work
out,
so
our
building
fund
entrance
has
already
recessed
at
the
entranceway
a
full
meter
from
the
property
line.
So
we've
already
the
fact
that
the
entranceway
is
a
recessed.
G
We
don't
really
see
the
particular
value
in
that
if
we
recessed
these
front
entrances,
an
extra
half
meter
a
meter,
we're
not
sure
that
that
would
have
a
positive
impact
other
than
reducing
available
floor
space,
we're
still
maintaining
the
entrance
way
close
to
the
front
street
and
and
providing
that.
The
second
concern,
second
condition
is
that
the
details
of
male
railings
and
so
forth,
as
I
said,
have
already
been
simplified.
So
when
I
go
here
to
the
building
elevations,
there
we
go.
G
Some
of
the
other
comments
that
you
know
we
should
have
expressed
horizontality
well,
we
already
have
the
break-up
that
is
suggested
that
the
ground
floor,
commercial,
be
separated
from
the
residential
floors,
as
well
as
a
cornice
of
the
fourth
floor,
adding
additional
cornices
or
horizontal
detailing
in
between
levels.
At
this
you
know
third
floor
second
floor
as
well.
We
think
would
have
a
negative
impact,
because
this
is,
we
think,
is
a
quite
simple
rhythm
of
of
base
and
pilasters.
G
G
We
would
question
whether
or
not
how
we
could
best
resolve
that
if
we
reduce
the
windows
by
10
percent
or
5
percent
or
11
percent,
or
what
number
we
would
agree
to
and
that
that
becomes
then
a
value
based
qualitative
discussion.
That
is,
we
would
like
to
see
some
some
consistency,
and
so
we
believe
that
we've
already
made
modifications
to
this
design
and
are
meaning
the
intent
of
providing
punched
windows
ie,
not
contemporary
curtain
wall,
in
terms
of
design,
simplification
that
does
not
outshine
the
adjacent
existing
character.
G
One
of
I
guess
at
one
of
our
concerns
is
that
the
existing
adjacent
character,
while
historic,
does
have
some
detailing,
but
it
is
quite
modest.
There
is
brick
detailing
at
the
top,
but
it
is
quite
opaque
white
flat.
There
are
large
windows.
There
is
very
simple
detailing
of
some
of
the
cornices
and,
as
we
look
at
some
of
this
detailing,
it
is
quite
modest
which
is
consistent
with
sort
of
the
turn-of-the-century.
G
You
know
fairly
modest
construction
detailing
and
for
our
new
building
to
be
less
than
this
would
set
a
lower
design
excellence
dead.
Excuse
me,
a
lower
design,
excellent
standard,
then
I
think,
is
the
goal
of
the
city
that
if
these
existing
structures
become
the
the
bar
of
what
is
accepted,
we
would
not
want
to
be
less
than
existing.
We're
not
saying
that
this
is
terrible.
B
B
Are
they're
all
pose
a
question
of
my
own,
then
in
terms
of
the
conditions
that
staff
have
outlined,
that
we
approve
in
document
seven.
Are
there
any
that
that
you
feel
I
mean
you
outlined
some
of
the
key
conditions
with
which
you
had
difficulty?
Are
there
any
which
you
think
could
be
worked
out
in
terms
of
future
iterations
or
modifications
of
the
plant.
G
Speaking
on
behalf
of
my
client,
we
could
recess
the
front
doors
further,
though,
as
I
said,
they're
already
entrances
on
Bank
Street
are
already
recessed
ammeter.
If
there
was
a
decision
to
recess
them
a
metre
and
a
half,
and
we
could
all
agree
that
a
metre
and
a
half
was
acceptable,
we
could
agree
on
a
metre
and
a
half,
but
is
a
meter
and
a
half
appreciably
better
than
a
metre?
Is
that
two
meters
is
it?
Three
meters
is
five
meters.
We
don't
know
what
the
specifics
are.
G
So
we
would
like
there
to
be
something
firmed
that
we
could
agree
in
a
public
forum
that
you
know
has
had
the
opportunity
for
everybody
to
fete,
but
a
number
that
is
reasonable
and
why,
as
I
said,
we
already
recessed
this
ammeter.
So
is
it
a
metre
and
a
half?
Is
that
what
a
reasonable
number
is?
We
just
like
that
to
be
clear
so
that
everybody
understands
what
the
decisions?
G
H
Thank
you.
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
do
support
this
application.
I
think
it's
a
great
building
I
think
it
will
do
a
lot
for
that
corner
of
Bank
and
whisker
and
I'm
excited
to
see
it
happen.
Actually,
just
picking
up
on
what
chair
miss
Baum
asked
in
terms
of
the
the
conditions.
I
personally,
don't
have
an
issue
with
the
they're
recessed
entrance.
I.
Think
that
one
meter
versus
one-and-a-half
meter
is
is
fine.
H
H
That's
the
the
second
Villa
a
bullet
under
condition
be
continued.
Can
you
just
explain
how
you
feel
your
because
that's
that's
the
only
one
that
stands
out
a
bit
for
me.
Can
you
explain
how
your
application
stands
to
a
wood
when
meet
this
requirement?
How
is
this
when
you
compared
your
building,
because
I
agree
with
you
when
you
compared
your
building
to
the
buildings
around
it
in
terms
of
the
some
of
the
design
elements,
I
thought
that
it
did
fit
quite
closely,
but
I.
Just
wonder
that
second
bullet.
H
G
I
think
that
the
challenge,
sorry
I,
think
that
the
challenge
becomes
if
we
were
to
introduce
a
horizontal
element,
for
example
at
matching
the
parapet
of
the
adjacent
structure.
Across
this
line
we
will
be
breaking
the
front
facade
which
currently
has,
in
my
personal
humble
opinion
as
an
architect,
some
quite
nice
proportions.
There
is
a
nice
proportion
to
this
Bay
that
is
already
separated
by
a
horizontal
element
at
the
commercial
section,
as
well
as
at
the
roof
level.
There's
a
programmatic
relationship
that
this
line
is
commercial.
G
This
is
residential,
so
adding
a
pet
or
cornice
line
along
this
line
or
along
both
lines.
Programmatically
doesn't
do
anything.
He
just
becomes
something
that's
kind
of
glued
on.
It
doesn't
differentiate
between
materials.
It
doesn't
have
a
positive
impact.
There
is
already,
and
you
could
argue
that
there
is
a
horizontal
element
between
each
Bay
with
these
carved
limes
panels.
Detailed
sales,
detailed
cornices,
impacted
sales,
there's
already
a
horizontal
element,
we're
not
talking
about
a
continuous
ribbon
of
vertical
curtain
wall,
so
I
mean
we
could
glue
on
a
cornice
across
this
point.
G
If
that
was
beneficial,
but
it
doesn't
add
anything,
there
is
a
relationship
that
there
is.
You
know
a
nice,
a
nice
punch
series
of
punch
windows,
this
pair
of
bays,
reflects
sort
of
the
golden
section.
This
pair
of
Bay's
reflects
again
that
sort
of
golden
section
that
ideal
1
to
6,
sorry,
one
to
1.6
kind
of
ratio.
G
We
added
horizontal
elements.
It
would
not
only
eliminate
the
possibility
of
these
of
carved
limestone
like
we're
retaining
that
skill
of
masonry
and
limestone.
That
is,
that
is
reflective
of
a
high
quality
building.
We
would
eliminate
the
ability
to
do
that
or
create
something
small
and
then
the
vertical
pilasters
would
be
interrupt
that
unless
we
eliminate
the
vertical
pilasters,
which
sort
of
defeats
the
purpose
and
is
inconsistent,
where
we
have
vertical
pillars
on.
D
Sure
no
problem,
the
way
the
conditions
were
written
was
by
going
through
both
the
standards
and
guidelines,
but
also
the
the
guidelines
for
the
center
town,
Heritage
Conservation
District,
which
are
approved
by
council
and
those
are
the
guidelines
that
were
used
in
assessing
the
application.
So
there
was
no
weighting
given
to
those
guidelines
within
the
center
town,
Heritage,
Conservation,
District
study.
D
That
being
said,
I
think
you
know
the
the
two
key
points
in
my
opinion-
and
this
was
one
of
them-
was
reflected
at
least
through
the
urban
design
review
panel
as
well
was
just
the
level
of
detail.
So
the
urban
design
view
panel
just
read
to
you,
says
the
building
succeeds
in
picking
up
the
historical
proportion
of
walls
and
windows,
but
has
tried
to
incorporate
too
many
small,
conflicting
heritage
details.
So
here
we're
seeing-
and
we
would
agree
with
that-
so
here
we're
seeing
these
curved
limestone
panels
with
a
fan
motif.
D
You
can't
really
see
them
in
this
image
because
it's
a
bit
small,
a
metal
railing
with
also
with
a
sort
of
fan
motif
these
sort
of
elements,
all
the
different
materials,
the
different
windows,
the
parapets,
the
cornices.
There's
just
too
much
going
on
and
we
think
it's
we're
not
suggesting
that
it
needs
to
be
more
modest
than
the
modest
vernacular
commercial
buildings
of
Bank
Street,
but
it
needs
to
be
at
least
you
know,
sort
of
as
modest
I
guess
or
it
needs
to
be
more
of
a
background.
Building
I
guess
is
where
we're
going.
D
D
This
is
the
photo
that
the
applicant
showed
us.
Well,
it's
not
great.
It's
not
a
great
photo
actually,
but
it's
not
so
much
just
pulling
the
door
in
it's
the
idea
of
the
traditional
storefront
pattern,
which
is
a
window
with
a
bulkhead
underneath
and
an
angled
wall
that
recesses
into
an
entrance
and
then
an
angled
wall
back
out
and
another
window.
So
it's
it's
its
window
door
window
as
opposed
to
a
big
window
and
then
door.
D
So
it's
that
is
a
very
prominent
characteristic
of
the
Bank
Street
heritage
district
and
it's
something
that
we
think
is
very
important.
So
those
would
be
the
two
things
that
I
think
are
the
most
important
I
think
the
idea
of
the
verticality
could
be
partially
mitigated
through
the
refinement
of
the
design
details
of
the
simplification
of
the
design
details,
because
one
of
the
things
I'll
just
go
to
the
elevation.
D
H
Thank
you,
so
just
I
just
want
to
be
able
to
understand,
because
so,
when
you
say
the
design,
simplifications
and
doesn't
sure
if
I
understand
what
that
means,
are
you
talking
about
removing
the
things
like
the
motifs
and
the
you
know
the
fancy
kind
of
brickwork
or
you're
talking
about
satisfying
it
with
the
you
know,
strengthening
of
the
horizontal
lines
I'm
just
not
because
it
just
seems
to
be
a
bit
nebulous
to
me
anyway:
I'm
just
not
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
entirely.
Certain
I
think
that
I
I
agree
with
you.
H
Whenever
I
look
at
you
know
a
new
building
that
fits
within
our
conservation
heritage.
District
well,
I
wanted
to
look
modern
while
I
understand
that
there
will
be
some,
you
know
it
will.
It
will
look
different
than
something
that
was
built.
You
know
many
years
ago,
I
still
like
that
that,
obviously
it's
why
we
have
heritage
districts.
We
want.
We
want
our
buildings
to
blend
and
and
to
and
to
keep
that
character
of
the
neighborhood
but
I'm,
just
not
sure
which
one
is
going
to
satisfy
that.
D
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
essentially
the
reason
we
didn't
prescribe
exactly
what
we
wanted
the
applicant
to
do
is
because
we
didn't
want
to
dictate
the
design
in
specifics.
We
wanted
to
allow
the
opportunity
to
come
to
an
agreement
with
the
with
the
applicant,
if
counsel
were
to
approve
the
the
conditions
that
we've
outlined.
So
that's
that's
the
reason
that
we
hadn't
sort
of
laid
out
what
we
thought
it
might
be
because
we
didn't
want
to
completely
design
the
building
for
them.
D
So
my
thought
is
that
the
removal
simplification
of
some
of
these
design
elements
like
the
curved
stone
panels
or
the
railings
could
could
assist
them
in
in
establishing
that
horizontality
and
mitigating
some
of
the
other
concerns
that
we
have
we.
We
are
not
opposed
to
the
idea
that
this
is
a
historic
historicist
building.
We
just
think
that
if,
if
a
building
is
going
to
evoke
a
historic
style
in
Ottawa,
it
should
evoke
a
historic
style
of
Ottawa,
and
at
this
point
we
don't
feel
that
this
building
does
that.
H
H
D
E
Thank
you,
I
have
a
few
questions,
I
guess
one
of
the
ones
that
I
think
needs
to
be
I,
guess
more
fully
explored
here.
It
has
to
do
with
the
fact
that
it
appears
that
the
staff
support
and
the
building
conforms
to
the
form
and
massing
district.
Now,
in
terms
of
the
committee
adjustment,
the
application
is
the
application
related
to
extra
stories.
Is
there
more
hype
being
asked
for?
D
Three
mr.
chair,
the
committee
of
adjustment
application
would
not
its
approval,
would
not
impact
the
conditions
that
we've
proposed
and,
in
fact,
we've
proposed
that
if
the
committee
of
adjustment
goes
forward
with
an
approval
prior
to
this,
getting
to
council
that
they
tie
it
sort
of
generally
to
plans
in
the
instance
that
the
plans
change
so
I
believe
and
I'm
just
going
on
memory.
The
minor
variances
for
a
small
variance
to
the
height.
But
it's
not
extra
stories
or
anything
like
that.
It's
quite
a
small
thing.
E
E
Now
this
is
a
very
curious
comment,
because
what
you
see
on
Bank
Street
is
not
unfamiliar.
What
you
see
in
Main,
Street,
America
may
speak
Canada,
I!
Think
that's
one
of
the
things
that
we
notice
about
you
aren't
traditional
Main
streets
in
North
America
and
that
there's
a
lot
of
shared
detailing
and
I
would
like
to
understand
what
he
is
million
about
this
building,
that
it
does
not
fit
to
Ottawa
but
fits
somehow
in
other
cities.
I
think
that
part
of
this
committee,
part
of
this
public
hearing
is
educational
and
I.
E
D
As
has
been
said
numerous
times
this
morning,
the
historic
character
of
Bank
Street
is
that
of
a
nine
late,
nineteenth
and
early
twentieth
century
commercial
street,
with
fairly
vernacular
and
modest
buildings.
We
don't
have
on
Bank
Street
the
very
sort
of
high
style,
commercial
buildings
that
would
be
that
are
found
in
other
cities.
So
that's
where
that
that
question
that
comment
comes
from
is
that
this
building
has
a
very
the
proposed
building
has
a
very
historicist
character,
but
it's
not
reflecting
the
history
of
Ottawa
or
buildings
and
Meneses
airily
fit
in
terms
of
its
detailing.
D
So
that's
that's
the
comment
of
where
it
comes
from.
We
never
had.
There
are
very
few
buildings
that
I
can
think
of.
Perhaps
Somerset
House
is
one
I
can
think
of
that
had
some.
You
know
elaborate
detailing
that
that
would
be
closer
to
reflecting
this,
but
there
aren't
very
many
sort
of
high
style
commercial
buildings
in
the
downtown
core
that
I
can
think
of.
E
It
can't
be
a
background
building,
so
their
difficulties
with
the
comments,
because
there's
no
really
clear
direction
other
than
simplifying,
which
is
quite
nebulous
and
so
I'm
asking
these
questions
to
help
us
all
understand
what
the
architects
and
what
the
owner
really
should
be
doing
to
you
know
to
fit
the
standards
and
guidelines.
What
we
have,
of
course
is.
We
have
support
from
heritage
Ottawa
that
has
studied
that
you
know
Center
Town,
Community,
Association
and
the
heritage
consultant
to
set
it
fits.
Is
this
that
not
true
have
I
got
that
wrong?
I
Unders
centre
town
didn't
comment
back
to
us.
They
might
have
commented
back
to
the
architect
that
we
didn't
hear
from
them.
Plus
heritage
Ottawa
supports
the
staff
recommendation,
so
there's
a
difference
between
the
staff
recommendation
and
if
you
look
at
the
correspondence
that
you
were
received,
that's
what
that's
what
it
says
that
was
received
today,
Oh
yesterday,
I
think
that
is
rosemary.
E
D
B
Other
questions
for
staff:
okay,
now
is
the
opportunity
for
general
comments,
and
maybe
I'll
start
just
by
saying
I
think
where
I'm
struggling
and
where
I'm
hearing,
maybe
some
struggling
from
other
members
is.
If
you
look
at
the
character,
defining
elements
section
in
the
statement
of
significance
of
the
HCD,
you
know
there
are
a
series
of
different
elements
there,
and
it
is
true
that
some
are
matters
of
interpretation.
For
example,
one
of
the
principles
is
the
htd
is
characterized
by
its
very
business.
B
B
So
in
some
instances
I
think
we
have
a
situation
where
the
applicant
is
very
much
respecting
this
more
heterogeneous
spirit
of
the
HCD,
yet
I
think
staff,
you
know,
are
also
interpreting,
perhaps
the
more
the
more
detailed
or
the
more
strict
elements
of
DHCD
in
order
to
try
and
get
to
a
building
which
is
in
conformity
in
all
of
its
forms.
So
that's
how
I'm
interpreting
the
struggle
a
little
bit.
B
I
must
admit
that
and
there's
nothing
staff
can
actually
do
about
this,
but
the
fact
that
the
HCD
seems
to
prohibit
and
attempt
to
improve
or
embellish
the
architecture
in
a
way
that
does
represent
a
new
form
and
reflects
the
varied
style.
I
think
is
a
little
bit
unfortunate
because
it
suggests
we
can
never
have
a
landmark
building.
However,
you
define
that
in
the
HCD,
but
that
isn't
that
isn't
staffs
fault.
That's
an
issue
for
the
HD
DHCD
document.
B
H
Thank
You
chip
I
do
want
to
relay
that.
You
know.
I
do
think
that
this
this
is
a
good
building.
I
think
that
it
will.
You
know
greatly
enhance
that
that
corner
of
Bank,
Street,
Bank
and
whisker
that
that
that
full
corner-
you
know
it
does
from
people
I've
spoken
to
in
the
community.
They
you
know
certainly
do
feel
that
it
reflects
the
the
character
of
Bank
Street
fits
with
our
you
know,
traditional
traditional
Main,
Street
conditions,
I
guess
you
know
I'm
looking
at
now
and
I
am
struggling.
H
As
you
know,
some
of
my
my
colleagues
are
here
I
like
to
to
move.
If
I
can
that
that
we
remove
document
seven,
the
conditions
in
in
the
document
I
would
be
comfortable
with
approving
the
application
for
the
new
construction,
removing
those
conditions
out
of
document
seven
and
the
one
be
simplification
of
the
design
details,
and
you
know,
delegate
authority
for
the
minor
design
changes
to
the
to
the
general
manager
for
planning
and
growth
management.
You
know
you
know
asking
that
you
know
the
proponents
obviously
enter
into
enter
into
this
in
good
faith.
H
I
think
that
they
have,
and
up
until
now,
as
I
watch,
this
move
through
the
different
iterations
I
felt
that
they,
you
know,
certainly
did
come
to
the
table
and
and
made
some
good
changes
to
the
design.
So
you
know
in
terms
of
the
specific
design
details
you
know,
I'm
going
to
move
that
we
again
remove
document,
seven
delegate,
the
authority
for
minor
design,
change
to
the
general
manager
and
that's.
B
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
from
what
I
understand
counselor
at
McKinney.
You
are
proposing
that
we
amend
paragraph
1
of
the
recommendation
in
such
a
way
as
that
we
would
remove
the
words
detailed
in
document
7
and
then
we
would
remove
subparagraph
B,
but
the
other
elements
of
the
motion
would
be
retained.
Is
that
a
correct
interpretation
of
your
intentions.
H
H
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
ask
friends
from
legal
to
opine,
I
think
what
that
would
require.
Maybe
is
a
slight
change
to
paragraph
3
delegate
authority
for
minor
design
changes,
something
like
including
the
elements
presented
in
document
7,
comma
yeah,
taking
into
consideration
the
elements
outlined
in
document
7,
comma
to
the
general
manager.
But
that
would
be
more
of
guidance.
B
It
wouldn't
be
a
condition
of
the
approval,
so
I
think
the
message
to
to
the
proponent
would
be
that
we
would
like
the
proponent
to
consider
some
of
the
key
elements
like
the
entranceways
which
staff
have
have
recommended
so
I'm,
going
to
ask
our
colleagues
from
the
legal
department.
If
you
can
help
us
out.
Mr.
A
Chair
with
respect
to
the
proposed
motion,
so
that
I
can
clarify
document.
7
also
refers
to
the
additional
planning
approvals
that
need
to
be
provided
and
so
I
think
in
order
to
effect
the
change
that
the
committee
is
looking
at.
We
would
have
a
motion,
whereas
the
report
recommends
approval
of
the
application
with
conditions
as
detailed
in
document
7
of
the
report,
and
whereas
further
submissions
have
been
made.
Therefore,
we
can
amend
document
7
condition
B
specifically,
so
that,
rather
than
saying
it
addresses
the
following
design
issues
that
they
consult
with
staff.
A
A
Also
draft
it
so
that
we
can
look
it
for
the
record
mr.
chair,
but
the
recommendation
would
be
to
approve
the
application
subject
to
the
following
conditions
as
detailed
in
document
7,
so
that
still
includes
a
and
B
on
the
first
page
and
the
delegation
of
authority
from
minor
design
changes,
including
those
outlined
in
document
7.
We
would
change
that
to
2,
consider
those
outlined
in
document
7
and
then
document
7
condition.
B
would
be
amended
to
delete
the
word.
The
further
to
delete
the
phrase.
A
B
B
C
H
It
is,
it
is
I,
think
that
you
know
the
proponent
has.
You
know,
worked
with
staff
through
this
process
in
good
faith.
You
know
my
community
likes
this
building
I
like
the
building.
It's
again,
it
fits
within
the
the
center
town
heritage
district,
and
you
know
it's
it's
good
for
our
traditional
Main
Street.
So
a
good
looking
building.
C
C
Also
says,
and
the
engines
a
little
more
I
always
like
to
go
into
an
entrance
front,
protect
it
from
the
weather
when
I'm
going
into
the
building
I.
That's
what
they're
there
for
it
anyway
I
back
back
of
a
handle
onto
that
I'm
sure,
but
it
is
and
I
think
the
point
that
area
you
made
that
we're
almost
sanitizing
the
buildings
by
having
them
all
follow
all
these
rules.
So
we
don't
get
a
spectacular
building,
and
yet,
when
these
buildings
were
built
in
the
past,
they
weren't
all
the
same.
C
E
Like
to
also
say
that
I
support
the
councilors,
amended
motion,
I
think
that
what
is
at
stake
here
is
that
we
have
the
standards
and
guidelines
for
short
places
in
Canada
we
had
apply
here.
We
have
the
center
town,
Heritage
Conservation
District,
and
we
have
guidelines
that
go
with
that.
We've
had
a
dialogue
between
the
developer
and
his
architectural
team
and
planner
with
city
staff.
They
went
to
the
urban
design
review
panel,
which
provides
their
comments
to
the
heritage
staff
here,
because
this
is
Sinan
heritage,
district
and
we've
got
here.
The
staff
comments
on
it.
E
E
Think
that,
since
we're
not
talking
about
lowering
it
to
three
stories,
in
which
case
it
would
be
a
background
building
or
a
kitchen
industry
facade
when
dealing
with
a
six
story
building-
and
my
view
is
that
we
should
you
know,
trust
the
training
of
the
architect
and
have
it
a
consistent
statement
in
this
case,
it's
using
his
sources
details,
but
there's
nothing
evil
about
that.
There's
nothing
illegal
about
that.
E
B
B
Chair,
ok,
mr.
Moffet,
ok,
ok,
well,
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
is
general
support
for
the
idea.
I
think
it
should
be
said
that
there
has
been
an
expression
or
a
realization
that,
given
that
Bank
Street
is
a
traditional
Main
Street
and
the
main
point
of
interaction
for
a
majority
of
the
people
walking
along
the
street
will
be
the
retail
spaces
along
along
the
first
floor.
I
do
hear
an
interest
in
ensuring
that
the
entrances
do
reflect
the
pattern
in
spirit
that
we
see
on
a
traditional
Main
Street.
So
my
view
is
I.
B
Don't
want
to
complicate
the
proposed
motion
by
speaking
specifically
about
about
that
point,
but
since
the
proponents
architect
is
still
here,
I
would
hope
that
that
that
they
would
take
into
account
the
conversation
here
and
realize
that
a
preoccupation
of
of
the
committee
this
morning,
even
though,
were
prepared.
It
sounds
like
two
to
approve
the
application
without
the
document.
B
Seven
conditions
that
we
would
hope
that
the
the
proponent
would
enter
into
discussions
with
staff
in
in
good
faith
in
terms
of
assuring
that
traditional
Main
Street
pattern
that
we
want
to
see
on
that
portion
of
the
block
is
respected
and
maintained.
So
that's
my
view
on
the
matter,
as
we
await
the
final
motion
and
I'm
not
so
happy
to
approve
as
read
out
if
it's
easier
than.
B
Okay,
we've
got
it
so
here
here
we
go,
I'll
read
it
out,
whereas
report
number
a
CES,
2014,
etc,
etc.
It
recommends
approval
of
the
application
with
conditions
as
detailed
and
documents
of
another
report
and
whereas
for
the
submissions
have
been
made
in
respect
of
the
application.
Now,
therefore
be
it
resolved
the
document,
seven
condition
B
paragraph
to
be
amended
by
deleting
the
phrase
are
to
be
addressed
and
replacing
it
with.
B
The
phrase
are
to
be
considered
and
that
recommendation
three
be
amended
to
read
delegated
authority
for
minor
design
changes
in
consideration
with
those
I
think
we
need
elements
outlined
in
document,
seven
to
the
general
manager,
planning
and
growth
management
department.
So
that
is
the
motion
before
us
put
forward
by
councillor
McKenney
carried
okay.
Thank
you
very
much
and
apologies
to
the
public
for
the
technical
delays
we're
going
to
move
on
then
to
our
last
substantive
item
on
the
agenda.
B
I
B
Okay,
well,
for
just
for
the
purposes
of
background
I.
Think
as
as
members
are
away,
seven
Clarence
Street
is
located
in
the
Byward
market
edge,
Conservation
District.
This
is
an
application
from
the
National
Capital
Commission,
which,
as
I
said,
was
before
the
committee
during
during
2014.
This
is
a
revised
proposal.
I
think
we
have.
B
B
C
It's
just
looking
at
there's
a
lot
of
blank
walls
on
this
building.
I
just
was
wondering.
Does
that
expect
it
in
this
area?
These
there's
a
lot
of
you
know:
we'd
go
in
on
air
of
loan
of
the
market
area.
There's
lots
of
windows
and
things
like
this.
Maybe
it's
just
the
way
these
designs
are
put
in
the
report,
because
their
drawings
not.
I
Council
I'll
just
explain
this
is
glass,
as
is
this,
and
there
were
concerns
with
the
previous
drawings
that
were
in
front
of
committee
last
year
that
there
was
too
much
glass
and
not
enough
wall.
So
part
of
the
response
on
the
part
of
the
applicant
was
to
reduce
the
amount
of
glass
and
increase
the
stone.
So
this
is
now
stone
and
then
along
the
side,
the
window
wraps
around,
but
this
had
been
glass
before
now.
I
This
is
stone,
so
that
was
to
reflect-
and
this
is
stone
here
that
was
to
reflect
the
concerns
of
the
of
the
community
and
chemo.
During
the
discussions
at
the
NCC
had
with
members
of
the
community,
they
had
four
meetings
and
this
was
they
kind
of
ratio
of
glass
to
stone
that
was
deemed
to
be
appropriate.
So
it's.
I
In
a
black
and
white
picture,
actually
I
can
you
can
see
here?
This
is
etched
glass
and
this
is
stone,
so
it
is,
is
a
contemporary
intervention
in
India
in
the
Heritage
Conservation
districts,
with
a
mix
of
glass
and
stone
that
reflects
the
community
community's
concerns
with
the
previous
design
and.
C
I
C
I
I
C
E
I'm
mr.
I
just
like
to
say
that
I
would
be
very
happy
to
move
the
staff
report,
as
is,
and
with
a
few
comments.
There
are
some
really
interesting
lessons
learned
for
the
for
the
heritage
policies
of
the
city
in
the
capital
by
this
case
study
I
think
that
it
is
worth
remembering
that
the
building
that
was
in
this
place
before
seven
Clarence
was
this
sort
was
an
integral
part
of
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
and
it
had
to
be
demolished.
E
You
know
on
the
advice
of
the
NCC's
engineering
consultants,
because
these
stone
walls
were
failing
and
I
think
that
this
was
regrettable
and
I
think
that
one
of
the
lessons
learned
here
is
that,
if
any
owner,
in
this
case
the
NCC
having
the
building
and
being
stewards
of
this
property
on
the
property
son
Sussex
for
the
last
50
years,
if
they
allowed
this
building
to
deteriorate.
This
really
is
the
case
of
demolition
by
neglect.
And
it's
regrettable
now
and
I.
Think.
E
The
lessons
learned
here,
certainly
by
the
NCC,
is
that
they
have
to
be
better
stewards
of
their
portfolio
of
heritage
buildings,
so
that
this
does
not
happen
again.
The
second
lesson
learned
here
is
that
the
design
that
they
submitted
you
know
last
year
has
gone
through
a
series
of
iterations
from
with
the
benefit
of
consultation
with
the
public
and
our
the
NCC
is
to
be
congratulated
for
making
a
real
effort
to
consult
with
the
community
and
to
consult
with
the
various
stakeholders
that
have
been
involved,
and
they
certainly
have
listened.
E
They
have,
you
know,
appointed
an
architect,
anthony
leaning,
that's
here,
that,
through
this
process,
has
really
and
been
able
to
create
an
outstanding
piece
of
contemporary
architecture
that
really
does
fit
in
heritage.
District
I
think
one
of
the
things
that,
but
it's
not
really
mentioned
in
either
the
cultural
heritage.
Impact
statement
then
or
the
report
is
that
the
height
of
the
building
was
reduced
from
what
it
had
before,
so
that
the
views
of
the
mansard
roofs
of
the
adjacent
building
on
the
corner
of
Clarence
reader
are
now
visible
from
Clarence
Street.
E
And
this
is
a
great
move
and
it
showed
that
the
architect
and
the
NCC
were
listening,
that
they
understood
the
components
of
the
recognized
building
on
the
corner
and
that
the
use
of
stone
and
glass
and
proportions
that
they
have
I
think
helps
create
a
signature
building
out
of
a
building.
That
was
a
background
building
before
and
bearing
in
mind
what
we
just
heard
in
the
last
file.
There's
nothing
wrong
with
signature
buildings
in
the
city.
E
The
final
point
that
I'd
made
is
that
the
NCC
has
expressed
under
the
team
regime
the
desire
to
be
exemplary
and
liebherr
in
heritage
conservation
and
by
having
consulted
the
community.
They
have
demonstrated
this.
The
committee
receive
asked
that
they
get
comments
from
the
federal
heritage
building
Review
office.
On
this
proposal,
I've
read
the
report.
The
report
says
that
the
inci
made
an
effort
to
contact
people
and
ask
them
to
review
it.
People
said
well,
it's
not
in
our
jurisdiction,
because
the
building
itself
is
not
recognized.
E
Quite
frankly,
I,
don't
think
that's
good
enough
for
an
institution
that
wants
to
be
exempt
3.
The
NCC
has
made
suggestions
to
other
institutions
to
voluntarily
go
to
febrile
on
buildings
that
were
not
designated
and
I
think
that
there
should
be
the
consistent
principle
of
following
your
own
advice
but
I.
Having
said
all
that,
I
think
that
the
private
market
heritage
district
will
be
blessed
by
this
intervention
and
I
look
forward
to
it
being
constructed
as
soon
as
possible.
Thank
you.
B
Okay,
if
there
are
no
other
comments,
then
we
can
turn
to
the
motion,
which
is
that
we
recommend
the
planning
committee
recommend
that
council
approved
the
construction
of
the
new
structure
of
seven
clients
according
to
plans
by
CSV
architects
received
as
part
of
the
application
on
February
3rd
delegate
authority
for
minor
design
changes
to
the
general
manager
planning
in
both
management
and
issue,
the
Heritage
permit,
with
a
two-year
expiration
date
from
the
date
of
issuance
carried
okay.
Great.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
that
concludes
the
discussion
of
the
substantive
items
on
our
agenda.
B
B
It
is
my
intention
to
bring
forward
the
the
results
of
our
facilitated
session
at
our
next
meeting
on
April,
9th,
so
I
hope
to
have
for
you,
then
my
sense
to
try
and
capture
the
discussion
we
had
and
some
ideas
on
possible
next
steps.
So
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
move
to
adjourn.
Okay,
okay,
sure,
thank
you
very
much
to
the
members
of
the
public
for
joining
us.