►
From YouTube: Built Heritage Sub-Committee – August 13, 2015
Description
Built Heritage Sub-Committee meeting – August 13, 2015 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
C
D
C
Thank
you
any
others.
Seeing
none
conformation
minutes
from
my
meeting
of
11th
June
2015,
okay,
okay,
okay,
we've
got
a
communications
from
the
National
Center
on
the
architectural
rejuvenation
project,
so
that
was
received
from
all
members.
Thank
you
to
staff
for
that.
So
moving
to
the
substantive
agenda,
we're
going
to
go
through
the
consent
agenda,
because
I
think
there's
a
number
of
items
we
should
be
able
to
carry
for
which
we
don't
have
public
delegations
registered
so
beginning
with
the
status
update
of
inquiries
in
motions
for
the
period
ending
31
July
2015.
C
Is
this
received
great
okay
application
number
two
application
I
want
you
to
daily
Avenue.
We
have
public
delegations
signed
up,
so
we
will
hold
that
item
item
number
three,
which
is
the
designation
of
the
Champlain
oil
company
service
station.
We
have
public
delegations
registered
for
that,
so
we
will
hold
item
number
four,
which
is
the
designation
of
37
or
ellipse
of
house.
C
We
do
have
delegation
signed
up
but
they're
in
support
and
the
staff
recommendation
is
to
designate
so
my
question
for
the
committee
is:
are
there
any
questions
or
is
there
need
for
discussion
on
this
item?
Or
can
this
item
be
carried
okay?
Great?
So
that
is
carried
and
sorry
for
the
public
delegation.
Who've
come
from
the
hunter
Rapids,
Community
Association
and
from
heritage
Ottawa?
Is
that
ok,
you
don't
need
to
speak
if
we
carry
the
atom
great
wonderful.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you
for
coming
in
you're,
welcome
to
state
for
the
rest
of
the
discussion
on
the
other
items.
Agenda
item
number
5,
which
is
updates
to
the
City
of
Ottawa
Heritage
Register.
This
is
following
up
from
the
Scott
Street
CDP
in
2014,
and
this
is
a
matter
of
staff
wanting
to
add
a
number
of
properties
to
the
registry.
We
don't
have
any
public
delegations
signed
up.
Can
we
carry
that
item?
Okay,
wonderful,
okay,
I'm
number,
six
application
alter
the
city
works,
building
at
seven
Bay,
View
Road.
C
We
do
have
public
delegations
for
that
item,
so
we
will
heard
and
item
number
seven
and
application
alter
the
transportation
building
at
ten
reader.
Street
we're
gonna
have
a
presentation
on
that
and
we
also
have
items.
So
we
will
hold
that
item
too
so
with
that,
we
will
proceed
then,
with
the
regular
agenda
having
taken
care
of
a
number
of
items,
beginning
with
and
agenda
item
number
two
application
to
alter
one
to
two
daily
Avenue.
C
E
Good
morning,
mr.
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
I'll
apologize
from
the
get-go
of
how
much
you're
going
to
hear
my
voice
today
and
that
we're
making
you
sit
in
here
on
this
beautiful
sunny
day.
So
the
chair
mentions
this
is
an
application
to
alter
1:22
daily
Avenue,
which
is
a
property
designated
on
their
part
5
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
it's
so
coded
in
the
Sandy
Hill
West
Heritage,
Conservation
District,
so
the
properties
located
on
the
south
side
of
Daly
Avenue,
it's
one
property
east
side,
west
of
King
Edward
Avenue.
E
So
this
is
the
property
here
there
is
a
new
building
that
has
been
constructed
at
the
corner
here
that
doesn't
show
on
this
map.
It's
a
four
story:
apartment
building
just
recently
completed.
It
shows
here
on
this
on
this
aerial
photo.
So
here's
the
building
in
question.
It
is
a
fairly
large
building
right
now.
The
original
portion
of
the
building,
as
you
will
see,
is
relatively
small.
It's
had
several
additions
over
time.
This
building
on
the
corner
is
the
new
building
that
I
was
mentioning.
E
It
did
go
through
a
process
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
to
allow
its
construction
on
a
what
was
a
parking
lot
and
a
small
1950s
building,
and
that
was
about
four
or
five
years
ago.
Just
some
photos
showing
the
streetscape
along
Dailey
Avenue.
It's
primarily
a
residential
street
across
the
street
from
the
property
is
st.
Albans
church
and
the
rectory
for
saint
albans
on
the
south
side
of
the
street.
This
is
the
porch
for
122
daily,
so
you
can
see.
E
Most
of
the
buildings
are
fairly
close
to
the
street
with
large
front
porches,
typical
of
the
19th
century
and
early
20th
century
residential
character
of
Sandy
Hill.
Excuse
me,
this
is
the
property
here.
So
it's
this
white
building
with
a
large
two-story
tower
at
the
front,
classically
inspired
front
porch.
It
was
constructed
in
in
1869,
circa
1869
I
should
say
so
it's
quite
an
old
building.
It
has
evolved
significantly
over
time
and,
as
you
can
see,
it's
quite
tight
to
the
neighboring
property
to
the
west.
E
This
is
looking
at
the
property
from
from
East,
so
looking
West
at
the
property.
This
addition
here
was
constructed
in
the
1940s
between
the
1930s
and
1940s.
The
original
building
was
a
one
and
a
half
story:
gable,
roof
house
sometime
in
the
late
19th
century,
the
mansard
roof
was
added
as
well
as
the
dormers
in
the
early
20th
century.
We
see
the
addition
of
this
two-story
tower
with
a
mansard
roof,
and
this
this
classically
inspired
front
porch.
So
it
has.
A
quiet,
has
had
many
changes
since
its
construction.
E
Just
a
couple
of
pictures
showing
you
some
more
details,
so
I'm
showing
you
this
picture
here,
because
I
really
referring
to
these
door
modes
later
with
their
decorative
large
boards
in
the
gable
ends
and
M
brackets
and
again
the
prominent
front,
porch
and
tower
at
the
front
of
the
building.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
property
is
designated
under
part
five
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
So
this
application
is
before
the
committee
today,
because
applications
to
alter
designated
buildings
require
City
Council
approval.
After
consultation
with
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
some
details
of
the
proposal.
E
It
includes
a
demolition
of
a
portion
of
the
building
construction
of
a
three-story
addition,
I
should
say
a
two
and
three-story
addition.
It
will
convert
the
building
into
an
eight
unit,
low-rise
apartment
building
and
the
other
planning
applications
that
are
required
are
site,
plan,
control
and
minor
variants.
Now,
though,
these
applications
have
been
submitted
to
date.
E
E
This
portion
here
is
the
two-story
portion
of
the
new
addition,
so
that
flat-roofed
portion
that
I
showed
you
in
said
that
it
was
constructed
in
the
1940s
that
portion
is
proposed
for
demolition,
as
well
as
a
good
portion
of
the
rear
of
the
existing
building,
so
the
three-story
section
will
be
on
top
of
the
historic
building
as
well
as
new
in
the
side
yard.
Also
part
of
the
proposal
is
that
is
the
demolition
of
a
garage
that
is
currently
in
place
in
the
rear
yard.
E
So
this
is
the
front
elevation.
As
I
said,
it's
two
stories
at
the
front
with
a
two-story
sort
of
tower
element
that
is
meant
to
mimic
the
two-story
tower
here.
The
addition
is
separated
by
a
curtain
wall
feature
to
attempt
to
create
two
significant
two
distinct
entities.
I
should
say
the
proposed
changes
for
the
historic
building
include
the
replacement
of
all
the
windows.
The
requiring
of
the
building
in
the
input
is
shown
as
red
brick
and
the
renderings,
but
I
don't
think
that
detail
has
been
completely
sorted
out.
E
E
This
is
the
east
elevation,
so
this
is
adjacent
to
the
new
four-story
building
at
the
corner,
fairly
simple
cloud
and
stucco
the
stone
cladding
that
is
proposed
for
the
front
of
the
building
wraps
around
one
one
Bay
of
the
of
the
side
elevation
and
there's
a
ledge
exterior
fire
escape
proposed
at
the
back
of
the
building
to
provide
an
additional
egress
to
allow
for
the
extra
units
here
is
a
good
place
to
see
the
historic
portion
of
the
building
gets
obscured.
So
the
addition
basically
removes
the
mansard
roof
along
the
east
elevation
of
the
property.
E
This
is
the
West
elevation,
so
here
we
are
seeing
the
retention
of
most
of
the
west
wall
of
the
building
we
clad
in
brick.
One
window
opening
is
proposed
to
be
closed
up
worked
up,
and
then
this
is
the
rear.
So
cloud
and
stucco
again,
that's
another
view
of
that
fire
escape
that
I
referred
to
these
renderings
are
obviously
for
illustration
purposes
only,
but
give
you
an
idea
of
the
direction
that
the
proponent
has
taken
in
this
application.
E
So
as
you've
seen
in
the
report.
The
recommendation
here
today
is
to
refuse
the
application
to
alter
122
daily
I'm,
now
just
going
to
run
through
these
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
Historic
Places
in
Canada
and
the
guidelines
for
the
Sandy
Hill
West
Heritage
Conservation
District
plan
to
explain
why
the
department
is
recommending
refusal
of
this
application.
E
So
I'll
start
with
the
Sandy
Hill
West
Heritage
Conservation
District,
the
district
was
designated
in
1994
for
its
cultural
heritage
value,
including
its
large
concentration
of
buildings.
The
building's
I
should
say
this
building
is
a
confederation
era
building
and
also
it
spread.
The
presidents
of
the
University
of
Ottawa,
so
the
first
set
of
applicable
guidelines,
are
the
restoration
guidelines,
so
restoration
must
be
based
on
accurate,
historical
documentation
and
restoration
of
individual
buildings
should
respect
the
evolution
that
the
building
has
undergone.
E
So
the
department
feels
of
the
proposed
restoration
of
the
brick
cladding
may
be
appropriate,
but
further
research
is
required
to
determine
exactly
whether
or
not
those
brick
underneath
the
stucco
fire
insurance
plans
do
indicate
that
the
building
was
brick
at
one
point
in
time,
but
we
don't
know
what
color
and
size
or
shape
and
the
use
of
the
same
material
on
the
main
building
on
the
tower
is
not
appropriate.
The
tower,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
was
a
load
of
addition
to
the
building
and
appears
to
have
always
been
clad
in
wood.
E
So
the
department
feels
that
the
two
sections
of
the
building
should
continue
to
have
two
different
types
of
cladding
to
respect
the
evolution
of
the
building
rehabilitation
and
adaptive
reuse.
So
here
we're
looking
at
respecting
architectural
layout
and
finishes
and
distinctive
features
of
good
and
good
examples
of
design
and
craftsmanship
should
be
retained.
E
Veneer
wood
trim,
strong
cornice
lines
and
carefully
proportion
window
and
door
placement
to
ensure
that
it
is
sympathetic
to
the
character
of
the
environment,
these
guidelines,
while
they
are
referred
to
as
intro,
though
to
include
additions
here,
we've
said
we
have
determined
that
the
proposed
proposal
requires
demolition
of
approximately
50%
of
the
original
building.
It
has
skills
its
historic
details
and
its
height
and
massing
dominate
the
historic
building.
E
The
purple
is
stone
and
stucco
finishes,
are
not
compatible
the
streets
characterized
by
red
brick
residential
buildings
and
the
fenestration
pattern
on
the
front
does
not
reflect
the
character
of
the
HCD,
which
is
characterized
by
vertically
oriented
punched
openings
and
then
the
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
Historic
Places
in
Canada,
which
have
been
adopted
by
council
a
standard
one
is
conserve
the
value
heritage,
value
of
an
historic
place.
The
department
does
not
believe
that
this
proposal
conserves
her
value
of
the
building
or
the
HCD
conserve
the
heritage
value,
including
any
new
additions.
E
So
this
edition
meets
the
criteria
that
an
addition,
the
distinguishable
from
the
original
building,
but
in
our
determination
that
is
not
physically
compatible
with
or
subordinate
to
the
historic
building
and
then
create
any
new
additions
or
constructions,
so
that
the
essential
form
and
integrity
of
this
historic
place
will
not
be
impaired.
If
we
want
to
remove
the
work
in
the
future
and
in
this
instance,
because
of
a
large
portion
of
the
building
being
demolished,
the
repair
and
restoration
of
the
building
would
be
very
difficult
if
the
addition
was
removed.
E
Visual
relationships
here
we're
looking
at
in
heritage
districts,
maintaining
the
rhythm
of
the
street.
Here
we
have
an
addition
that
does
conform
to
the
River
mystery,
but
it's
heightened
massing
overwhelmed
the
character
of
the
existing
historic
building,
the
exterior
form
so
selecting
a
location
that
ensures
that
any
value
is
maintained,
so
the
location
in
the
side
yard
is
appropriate.
E
However,
as
I
mentioned
just
to
reiterate
again,
the
height
of
the
addition
results
in
the
loss
of
the
mansard
roof
from
the
gable
dormers
on
the
east
side
of
the
building
and
then
during
the
clear
distinction
between
what
is
new
and
old.
It's
clearly
contemporary.
The
use
of
the
curtain
wall
to
separate
new
and
old
is
a
it's
an
appropriate
solution.
However,
it's
not
physically
and
visually
compatible
with
the
historic
resource
and
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
was
submitted
as
part
of
this
application.
E
The
official
plan
requires
a
cultural
heritage
in
vaccine
and
when
the
application
has
the
potential
to
negatively
impact
the
character
of
historic
place,
and
the
conclusion
of
that
document
is
that
the
proposed
building,
while
different
in
character
from
its
surrounding
environment,
can
subdue
fit
within
the
historic
varmint.
In
a
suitable
manner,
the
entire
document
is
appended
as
a
document
to
the
report.
As
you
can
see
from
our
assessment,
we
do
not
agree
with
the
findings
of
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
E
Council
flurry
has
provided
comments
on
the
application.
He
does
not
support
it.
Those
comments
are
included
in
the
report
actions
saying
he
also
does
not
support
the
application.
Harwich
auditor
was
notified
with
the
application.
This
presentation
was
prepared
before
the
committee
received
their
comments,
so
my
apologies
I
believe
the
committee
has
received
comments
that
suggest
that
they
agree
with
the
staff
recommendation
and
then
maybe
within
30
meters
of
the
property,
were
notified
and
offered
the
opportunity
to
comment
and
I
believe
a
couple
of
comments
were
received.
C
Thank
you
very
much.
Miss
Kahn's
I
was
very
hopeful,
so
we
have
two
public
speakers
registered
to
to
speak
to
us.
So
what
I
would
recommend
to
the
committee
members
we
now
have
three
is
that
we
hear
from
the
public
delegations
first
and
then
we
will
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
either
the
political
asians
or
have
staff.
So
if
that's
acceptable
to
the
committee
we'll
proceed
on
that
basis
and
our
first
speaker
is
David
jeans,
the
president
of
Heritage
Ottawa,.
D
You
chair
I'm
sure
you
appreciate
that
for
a
volunteer
organization
in
the
summer,
it's
sometimes
difficult
to
meet
deadlines
for
for
this
and
other
things,
but
we
do
require
that
our
review
of
these
reports
go
through
our
Advocacy
Committee,
which
has
submitted
to
you
in
writing
and
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
the
the
whole
thing.
But
basically
we
we
support
the
staff
recommendation
for
the
reasons
given
and
the
details
are
in
our
submission,
which
you
should
have
in
front
of
you.
So
you
have
a
lot
on
your
plate
today.
C
A
I'd
like
to
I'd
like
to
start
with
I
mean
this
is
our
cover
image,
but
it
actually
it
that
does
represent
some
of
the
you
know,
updates
or
improvements
to
the
project
as
a
result
of
comments
from
city
staff
and
from
from
Sandy
Hill
and
from
Heritage
Ottawa,
but
we
gotta
go
afford
here
so
I'd
like
to
show
you
a
few
more
context.
Images
again
cover
the
zoning
summer
site
plan.
A
Existing
conditions
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
streetscape
site
plan,
some
renderings
innovations
and
cover
the
changes
since
the
Heritage
submission,
and
that
talked
briefly
about
the
variances.
So
again,
this
this
site
is
in
the
West
district.
It
is
characterized
especially
to
the
north
by
very
dense
condominium
and
apartment
construction.
A
A
So
here
we
have
an
aerial
view
that
again
shows
both
the
years
of
immediate
context
and
some
of
the
adjacent
high-rise
construction.
The
the
new
development
to
the
right
is
shown
in
the
aerial
view,
as
well,
and
st.
Albans
church
to
the
northeast,
so
I
would
characterize
this.
Neighborhood
is
as
one
in
transition.
It
has
both
so
stable
existing
heritage
structures,
as
well
as
recent
contemporary
construction
that
all
speak
to
its
evolution.
A
This
site
permits
a
low-rise
apartment,
and
the
proposal
again
is
in
conformity
with
with
the
zoning
I
think
I
also
wanted
to.
You
know,
set
the
context
of
this
building.
Just
so,
we
don't
get
I
mean
I'll,
say
too
precious
about
about
this
particular
heritage.
Building
it's
1992
score
gave
it
35
out
of
100.
It
is
considered
one
of
the
lower
grade
buildings
more
than
cavity
of
buildings
that
might
contribute
to
a
district
while
not
having
a
particular
character
of
their
own,
so
they're
more.
A
So
again,
these
sub
Street
context
of
existing
conditions.
We
see
the
large
as
a
four
four-story,
with
the
walk
ups
to
the
west
and
a
Tass
existing
building.
I.
Think,
as
the
Heritage
report
from
city
staff
indicates,
this
building's
history
is
one
of
change.
Evolution,
renovation,
its
character
is
very
obscured
very
much
eclectic
in
what,
in
some
sense,
very
messed
up
and
the
interiors
you'll
see
any
following
pictures
is
very,
has
been
very
chopped
up
as
well.
So
here's
a
frontal
view
again.
A
Ok,
so
we
have
a
few
few
images
here
so
show
the
existing
stucco.
We
have
shipped
around
and
poked
at
elements
of
the
tower
and
the
main
building
it
does
appear
that
brick
was
removed
at
some
point
in
its
history.
So
very
very
little
of
that.
We
know
for
sure
that
the
brick
is
not
underneath
the
stucco
and
waiting
to
be
uncovered.
A
C
C
These
updated
renderings,
you
know
what
we
have
to
treat
everybody
fairly
and
there's
a
five
minute.
Rule
I'm
sure
you'll
get
questions
from
the
committee
which
will
allow
you
to
add
whatever
information
you
want
to
add
into
committee
and
reactions,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
stop
now,
because
your
time
is
up,
but
I
will
look
around
and
see
if
there
are
questions
from
the
committee
to
you
before
we
return
to
general
comments.
I
have
one
myself.
C
So
if,
if
nobody
else
has
one
I
will
start
in
the
beginning
of
your
presentation,
you
show
I
think
it
was
a
South
elevation,
which
was
very
very
different
from
that
which
was
in
the
report.
It
looked
like
the
front
entrance
had
been
changed
significantly.
Now.
That's
not
the
subject
of
the
report
before
us.
It
looks
like
substantial
changes
have
been
made
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
can
explain
why
it
is
that
the
report
before
the
committee
has
elevations
that
are
very
different
from
the
ones
that
you
put
forward.
C
A
The
elevation,
in
fact
the
one
that's
on
on
the
screen
behind
you
absolutely
screens
in
front
of
you-
is
the
one,
and
so
the
I
wouldn't
say
that
changes
are.
Are
that
substantial
that
the
massing
and
the
approach
to
the
design
is
very
much
the
same
as
in
the
report?
The
changes
are
basically
things
like
window
color
and
fenestration
proportions,
I'm
showing
the
coloration
of
the
brick.
A
But
the
actual
approach
to
this
development
is
substantially
the
same,
and
you
know
really
was,
as
with
any
development
which
is
you
know,
design
is
an
iterative
process,
we're
happy
to
listen
to
community
and
staff
concerns
and
make
improvements
where
we're
necessary.
But
the
the
changes
are
not
substantial,
they're
very
much
in
the
spirit
of
both
our
design
and
what
that's
just
that
supported
our
design
was
referring
to
and.
F
G
A
A
What
you
see
down
the
street
so
as
Leslie
had
referred,
the
the
design
approach
was
to
respect
the
street
with
them
of
of
masses
of
buildings.
So
we
have
the
heritage
building.
We
have
this
recessed
gap
or
gasket,
and
then
we
have
the
mass
of
the
the
contemporary
addition.
So
a
good
conservation
practice
would
dictate
that
additions
are
of
their
own
time.
They
have
their
own
expression.
And
what
come
to
your
question
about
this?
A
H
You
chair,
it's
just
to
go
back
to
some
of
the
detailing
again
and
as
our
chair
referenced
in
his
question
to
you,
I
think
you
know
there
the
the
there's
a
lot
of
importance
in
the
detailing
and
the
project
report
that
we
have
before
us
has
a
lot
more
stucco
in
the
finishing
than
what
appears
here
and
similarly,
the
top
of
the
third
story
addition
doesn't
appear
here
to
be
stucco
appears
to
be
perhaps
a
corrugated
metal.
No,
no.
H
A
And
you
know
some
of
the
comments
from
from
Sandy
Hill
we're
asking
for
more.
You
know,
quote
noble
materials,
so
the
the
we've
always
intended
to
have
a
restoration
approach
in
brick
on
the
existing
building
and
the
addition
is
has
always
been
a
combination
of
as
of
stone
elements
and
around
the
back,
some
stucco
as
well,
which
is
still
the
case
and.
H
Just
to
clarify,
because
the
I
understand
that
the
third
story,
the
setback,
is
not
the
addition,
that's
impacting
the
this
side
gable
window,
it's
the
it's!
The
curtain
wall
addition
separating
the
original
house
from
the
addition,
so
just
to
be
clear
that
you're
still
you're
not
retaining
that
in
in
in
this,
we.
A
Are
retaining
the
majority
of
the
if
you
like,
the
master
of
the
scalloped
mansard,
both
on
me
on
the
main
roof
and
the
tower
the
dormers
that
Leslie
referred
to
are
being
retained
and
especially
in
these
of
primary
or
dominant
streetscape?
That
one
is
retained,
so
we're
really
talking
about
the
loss
of
one
dormer
along
the
north
side,
but
but
again
this
design
decision
for
where
we
actually
connect
the
buildings
is
setback.
So
we
still
express
that
scalloped
mansard
roof.
So
again,
there's
there's
one
dormer
that
is
there's
obscured
and.
H
Lastly,
one
question:
if
you
could
provide
more
detail
around
your
the
plans
for
the
windows
in
the
original,
in
the
tower,
in
particular,
but
your
replacement
windows,
you
you
in
your
presentation,
you
talked
about
the
state,
the
deteriorated
state
of
the
original
wood
windows.
So
what
is
the
plan
there
with
more
information?
H
A
Existing
fenestration
in
the
heritage
building
is,
is
very
haphazard,
it's
being
just
sort
of
replaced
over
time,
some
some
new,
some
old,
some
in
very
poor
condition.
So
the
the
approach
is
one
of
replacement
with
with
wood
windows
that
I
would
say
are
sympathetic
to
heritage
detailing
in
the
in
the
district.
You
know
again,
I
can't
emphasize
enough.
A
The
the
owner
is
going
to
consider
a
length
to
invest
in
a
restoration
approach
for
the
existing
heritage
structure,
its
stone,
its
brick,
its
windows
and,
again,
mindful
of
this,
this
building
has
been
played
with
over
time
and
additions,
such
as
the
porch
added
over
time.
It's
I
think
this
is
very
consistent.
G
Thank
You
Tara
I
just
have
one
question.
You
mentioned
the
fact
that
the
third
story
addition
would
not
be.
You
wouldn't
be
able
to
see
it
from
street
level
I'm.
Looking
at
what
two
photos
here,
one
is
from
the
staff
presentation
of
the
Southwest,
Street,
View
and,
and
then
yours
and
from
what
I
can
see
it
is
noticeable
from
Street
View.
F
A
The
a
common
consideration
I
mean
you
can
think
of
arts
court
nearby
or
the
recent
medical
Arts
Building
a
common
strategies
that
we
take
very
substantial,
very
large
additions
and
they're
set
back
from
a
heritage
structure.
You
know
in
this
case
we
have
an
addition
at
the
rear,
there's
a
height
limit
of
thirteen
point.
Five
meters
that's
permitted
and
we're
around
ten
meters,
so
we're
almost
a
full
story
below
the
permitted
height
limit
in
this
area,
but
but
again
the
the
actual
mass.
A
The
idea
is
that
the
addition
does
not
compete
or
dominate
the
the
heritage
structure.
So
by
setting
back
the
mass
of
a
third
story,
almost
six
meters
from
the
face
of
the
heritage
building
and
even
the
front
face
is
set
back
from
that.
You
know
both
in
terms
of
your
you
know:
public
realm
walking
up
and
down
the
corridor.
The
presence
and
appearance
of
the
Hirsch
building
will
still
and
always
dominate.
F
A
You
go
if
some
of
Leslie's
certain
interviews
along
the
sidewalk,
you
will
not
see
the
addition
whatsoever.
In
fact
that
that
view
where
you
see
the
classical
porch
sticking
out
the
the
presence
of
this
addition
will
not
even
appear
in
that
kind
of
near
walking
condition
and
then
across
the
street.
You
know
yes
on
a
higher
level
setback
it.
It
will
have
some
presence,
but
not
you
know,
increasingly
we're
primarily
focusing
what
happens
in
at
the
street
and
grade
level
and
not
what
happens
on
an
upper
story.
C
E
Three
mr.
Joe
that's
sort
of
a
challenging
question
because,
as
you
know,
since
you've
been
through
the
process,
these
things
tend
to
go
through
various
iterations
and
we
had
a
long
dialogue
on
this
application
prior
to
its
submission
in
terms
of
what
might
be
appropriate.
What
might
not
starting
from
sort
of
a
massing
perspective.
I
think
that
the
idea
of
the
the
tower
element,
the
two-story
window,
is
actually
a
fairly
good
one
in
terms
of
mimicking.
The
rhythm
of
the
street
I
think
that
the
curtainwall
separation
is
something
that
we
recommended
that
they
incorporated.
E
However,
we
couldn't
get
much.
We
had
concerns
with
the
massing
and
the
loss
of
such
a
large
portion
of
the
mansard
roof
along
the
west
side
of
the
building
or
sorry
the
east
side
of
the
building
throughout
the
process,
and-
and
we
couldn't
get
to
a
point
which
is
unfortunately,
why
we're
in
a
position
of
recommending
refusal.
G
To
enhance
this
building
to
have
a
little
bit
more
economically,
viable
building,
I
think
that
the
kind
it
is
we
don't
really
want
to
see
the
thing
fold
down,
because
then
they
probably
lose
all
of
it,
and
there
is
a
mountain
building.
Next
to
it,
so
I
saw
what
the
architect
was
talking
about
is
moving
from
one
to
the
other
yeah
I
think
there
needs
to
be
more.
Is
there
some
way
that
we
can
give
them
some
assistance?
G
I
guess
it
is,
and
I
think
you've
already
been
doing
that
in
your
discussions,
what
you
just
said,
but
the
to
say
what
what
can
they
do
with
this
property
because
leaving
it
and
then,
though,
they
can't
do
this,
it's
kind
of
probably
going
to
end
up
having
that
building
broken
into
work.
Is
vacant
I'm,
not
sure
this
make
it
or
not,
but
if
it
is
it's
in
danger
of
having
things
happen
to
it,.
E
E
E
There
is
the
direction
that
we
have
given
is
look
at
trying
to
preserve
the
rhythm
of
the
street
in
terms
of
keeping
it
looking
like
two
separate
entities,
I
think
a
contemporary
addition
is
fine
to
this
building.
I.
Just
think
that
this
is
going
too
far
in
terms
of
removal
of
a
large
portion
of
the
historic
building,
so
I
think.
If
there
was
a
more
sensitive
linkage,
it
could
be
more
appropriate.
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,.
C
If
there
are
no
other
questions
to
staff,
I
might
just
provide
a
brief
comment.
I
plan
to
vote
in
favor
of
the
staff
recommendation,
I
think
for
the
reasons
outlined
in
the
report,
the
massing
the
relationship
issues
beside
that
the
rule
out
the
application
before
us
meets
the
standards.
If
the
Heritage
Conservation
District,
that
being
said,
I
would
encourage
the
applicant
to
come
back
with
a
revised
application
because
it
sounds.
C
Presentation
that
there
is
an
appetite,
perhaps
at
this
stage
now
to
be
responsive
to
the
comments
that
have
been
made,
both
by
the
Community
Association
and
by
other
stakeholders.
It's
too
bad
that
those
comments
and
those
changes
were
not
reflected
in
time
for
us
to
consider
them
to
see
whether
the
negotiation
application
could
proceed
so
that
something
useful
could
be
built
in
that
site
which
could
contribute
to
the
HCD
so
I'm.
Just
offering
that
as
a
comment
before
I
put
this
motion
to
revoke
any
other
comments.
Mr.
vice
chair,
I,.
D
C
C
C
Okay,
so
you've
seen
this
report.
This
is
a
recommendation
to
council
to
issue
a
notice
of
intention
to
designate
the
property
under
part
for
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
I.
Think
members
will
have
seen
the
report
and
seen
that
the
diagrams.
So
maybe
at
this
stage
we
can
hear
from
the
public
delegations
and
then,
if
you
have
questions
or
comments
to
staff
afterwards,
we'll
take
the
meant.
So
if
that's
agreeable,
we
have
two
public
delegations
registered.
The
first
is
andrew
king.
C
E
E
This
is
the
property,
so
the
the
building
itself
is
located
at
the
rear
of
the
property,
its
function
as
a
gas
station
for
many
years,
and
in
more
recent
times,
you
may
remember
it
as
a
used-car
lot.
Here's
an
aerial
view.
So
here's
the
little
building
currently
has
a
parking
lot.
It's
vacant
right
now.
E
This
is
a
historic
photo.
We
got
from
John
Newcombe,
who
is
the
owner
of
the
Esso
across
the
street
and
has
a
large
collection
of
historic
gas
station
things
and
found
this
photo
for
us.
So
this
is
a
historic
photo
from
1949
1950,
which
we
dated
based
on
the
name
of
the
company,
on
the
sign
and
and
when
they
occupied
this
site,
and
this
is
the
building.
Currently,
oh
and
now
my
slide
slipper
is
going
the
wrong
stop
okay,
so
this
is
the
site
currently.
E
So,
as
you
can
see
from
this,
based
on
the
historic
photo,
the
building
has
changed
very
little
since
its
construction
in
1934.
It
is
one
of
the
earliest
gas
stations
in
the
city
that
is
still
remaining
construction
of
1934
for
the
Benz
alene
that
oil
company,
the
represents
the
emergence
of
gas
stations
and
service
centers
in
North
America.
As
the
growth
of
the
private
automobile
happened
through
the
20
20th
century,
it's
a
one
and
a
half
story,
building
comprised
of
three
main
sections.
E
So
it's
got
the
office
portion,
which
is
here
with
this
steeply
pitched
gable
roof.
This
is
a
section
that
you
would
have
entered
through,
and
then
this
is
the
service
section
here.
You
can
see
that
it's
designed
in
sort
of
a
residential
character
which
was
typical
of
gas
stations
at
the
time
which
were
often
designed
to
fit
into
their
context.
E
This
is
just
looking
at
it
from
the
west,
so
looking
east
towards
Island
Park,
and
then
this
is
looking
at
it
from
the
west
from
Island
Park,
and
this
shows
some
of
the
architectural
details.
So
you
can
see
it
has
a
standing,
seam
metal
roof.
This
very
interesting
round
had
a
door
with
a
round
window
engaged
columns
here
at
the
corners
of
the
service
centre
portion
and
and
it's
clad
in
stucco.
E
The
city's
official
plan
says
that
the
city
will
designate
individual
building
structures,
sites
of
cultural
heritage
landscapes
under
part,
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
and
the
Ontario
section
29
of
the
Ontario
Jack
gives
me
miss
Patty's
the
ability
to
designate
properties
of
cultural
heritage
value,
so
the
criteria
for
designation
is
that
a
property
must
need
at
least
one
of
the
criteria
listed
in
Ontario
regulation.
Oh
906
staff
have
determined
that
this
building
needs
all
three
of
those
criteria
and
I'm
now
just
going
to
run
through
why?
E
So
the
criteria
are
design
and
physical
value
as
of
historical
value
and
contextual
value,
so
design
value
the
as
I
mentioned.
The
property
is
a
good
example
of
a
pre
Second
World
War
service
station,
designed
to
evoke
other
building
types
such
as
castles
or
residential
buildings,
and
this
instance.
The
building
is
designed
to
evoke
sort
of
an
English
cottage
feel
which
is
very
contextual
to
Island
Park.
We
see
many
Tudor,
Revival
and
English
cottage
style
buildings.
E
It
has
metal
roof.
Rectangular
windows
with
overhanging
shed
roofs,
stucco
cladding,
suggests
the
influence
of
cottage
architecture,
historic
associative
value,
as
I
said,
its
associated
with
the
rise
in
private
automobile
ownership
in
the
1930s,
the
in
Ottawa
in
1925,
there
were
25
gas
stations
and
by
1935
there
were
150,
and
so
this
building
was
built
in
1934.
So
it's
really
representative
of
that
trend
of
the
growth
of
the
automobile
small
scale,
residential
service
stations
of
similar
design.
So
there
are,
there
are
two
others
in
the
city
that
are
still
in
existence.
E
One
is
on
Bronson,
just
south
of
the
Queensway
and
the
other
is
at
main
and
Hawthorn,
and
it's
a
little
home
rental
shop
now.
But
this
one
is
of
a
slightly
different
style.
The
contextual
value
it's
located
along
Richmond
Road,
which
is
interesting
as
Richmond
Road,
was
always
was
the
highway
in
and
out
of
Ottawa
and
the
link
to
the
West
to
the
West
End
and
at
this
corner.
At
one
point
in
time
there
were
four
gas
stations,
so
it
was
a
fairly
typical
place
to
have
service,
sensors
and
gas
stations.
E
So
the
conclusion
is
that
the
department
recommends
the
issuance
of
a
notice
of
intention
to
designate
under
part
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
According
to
the
statement
of
heritage
character,
which
has
attached
those
document
six
and
just
very
quickly
because
the
through
this
process
we
sort
of
thought
about
what
this
building
could
be
used
for
if
it's
designated
and
planning
our
heritage
planning
assistant
did
some
research
for
me
this
summer
and
came
up
with
some
great
examples.
So
I'm,
just
gonna
with
the
chairs
indulgence,
show
you
two
or
three
quick
examples.
E
So
this
is
a
fairly
recent
one.
It's
the
joy
oil
gas
station,
which
has
been
is
in
Toronto.
It's
been
recently
relocated
to
lakeshore,
Boulevard
and
restored
by
Ira
architects.
Some
of
these
American
examples
are
really
interesting.
So
this
is
a
the
top.
One
is
a
Texaco
which
is
now
an
info
center
in
Kentucky,
it's
very
tiny
and
below
one
sort
of
more
typical.
E
This
one
pure
oil
gas
station,
which
is
now
garden
center
restaurant
in
California
on
the
top
and
a
Starbucks.
Of
course,
Starbucks
is
everywhere
in
in
LA
in
a
former
gas
station.
So,
just
to
show
that,
even
though
these
buildings
are
small
there,
they
have
been
adapted
and
in
fact
the
National
Park
Service
out
of
the
US
has
a
whole
preservation
brief
on
the
preservation
and
reuse
of
historic
gas
stations.
So
it's
it's
a
bit
of
a
trend
anyway,
I
just
thought
that
might
be
interesting
for
the
benefit
of
the
committee
and
now
I'm
done.
C
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
I'm
columns
for
that
presentation.
So
again,
if
the
community
agrees
we'll
hear
from
the
public
delegations
and
then
we'll
come
back
for
questions
and
comments
from
committee
members,
so
mr.
king
now
for
real
I
would
invite
you
to
the
microphone
and
you
have
five
minutes
to
speak
and
welcome
to
the
committee
good.
B
Morning,
thank
you,
Wow
very
good
report.
I
pretty
much
have
a
slideshow,
but
somebody
in
the
technical
depart
is
working
on
it.
So,
in
the
meantime,
I
want
to
thank
everyone
for
listening
to
this
proposal.
To
preserve
this
unique
piece
of
neighborhood
architecture
sentiment
aside,
I've
lived
in
the
area
for
20
years
and
a
big
part
of
the
appeal
of
that
neighborhood
for
myself
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
other
people
is
the
historic
aesthetic
of
the
neighborhood,
and
this
property
significantly
contributes
to
that
aesthetic
of
the
neighborhood.
B
B
B
Anyway,
slideshow
aside,
I
just
like
to
talk
about
the
neighborhood,
and
this
building
in
particular,
as
the
report
showed,
it
has
a
significant
cultural
and
aesthetic
value
to
the
neighborhood
I
think
it's
important
that
as
a
city,
we
preserve
this
aesthetic
of
the
neighborhood.
All
too
often
these
things
are
fading
away
to
make
room
for
a
new
development
which
may
not
reflect
the
style
of
the
neighborhood.
This
building,
in
particular,
is
in
really
good
shape.
B
Now
and
I
would
hate
to
see
such
a
symbol
of
city's
history,
be
torn
down
and
have
a
condo
or
something
similar
be
put
up
in
its
place.
Now
I'm,
not
saying
that
we
should
demolish
it
or
not,
saying
we
should
save
it,
as
is
maybe
retrofitted
and
incorporated
into
a
new
development
or
a
new
structure,
or
perhaps
move
it.
As
we
heard,
there
are
examples
of
it
being
converted
into
a
restaurant
and
with
it
in
such
good
shape.
B
C
I
My
question
is
partly
for
mr.
king
and
for
maybe
Leslie
first
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
you
I.
Think
mr.
king
was
your
article
that
got
the
ball
rolling
on
this,
so
I
want
to
thank
you
and
I.
Certainly
from
my
perspective,
I
would
certainly
support
the
designation
of
this
property
Mike
because
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
question
about
the
value
of
it
and
its
importance
in
the
community
and
I
also
don't
think,
there's
any
doubt
that
it
could
be
reused.
I
I
Maybe
we
should
be
saying
to
our
councillors
and
the
city
that
they
should
be
considering
ways
of
assisting,
because
it
seems
clear
to
me
that
if
we
designate
this,
somebody
and
I
think
it's
probably
the
current
property
owner
is
going
to
take
a
fairly
substantial
loss
in
it.
So
do
you
think
that
that
maybe
is
a
role
that
the
wider
city
should
be
playing
in
in
this
case?
Thank
you.
That's.
B
A
great
comment,
I
think
it's
up
to
a
cooperative
approach
between
the
city
and
the
developer,
to
come
to
an
agreement
to
help
fund
the
preservation
it
shouldn't
be
one
or
the
other.
It
could
also
be
part
of
the
citizens
approach
of
the
neighborhood
if
they
want
to
start
a
crowdfunding
campaign.
I
know
it's
not
going
to
make
enough
money
to
help
preserve
it,
but
every
bit
helps
so
if
we
can
have
a
cooperative
effort
to
preserve
it
through
the
city
through
the
developer
and
through
the
citizens.
Maybe
something
could
happen.
E
Through
mr.
chair
just
you
know
to
comment
on
the
tax
incentive
thing.
The
city
does
have
ahead
grant
program
which
provides
up
to
five
thousand
dollars
for
property
owners
of
designated
heritage
buildings.
We
do
not
currently
have
a
tax
incentive
program.
It
is
something
that
we
could
we
could
look
into
if
it
was
something
that
the
committee
was
interested
in
as
members.
No
it
says
it
is.
It
is
allowed
through
the
provincial
legislation
that
being
said,
research
that
we've
done
on
it
has.
E
It
has
shown
that
the
tax
incentives
for
small
properties
like
this
maybe
aren't
as
great
as
everybody
thinks
they
are,
and
that
the
Heritage
grant
program
actually
in
some
cases,
provides
more
funds
than
the
tax
incentive
program.
Would
so
it's
something
that
could
be
looked
into,
but
it's
it's
not
it's,
maybe
not
the
the
ultimate
solution.
J
Thanks
mr.
chair
mr.
king,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
work
that
you've
done
over
the
I
think
the
past
year
and
a
half
at
least
researching
and
licking
this
really
important
building.
In
my
opinion,
I
have
had
a
chance
to
take
a
look
at
your
presentation
which,
unfortunately
wasn't
able
to
get
pulled
up
today,
but
I'm
wondering.
Can
you
tell
us
about
sampling
oil
products
and
some
of
the
interesting
ownership
behind
that
sure.
B
Thanks
councillor,
Champlain
Oil,
fitting
that
were
sitting
in
the
Champlain
room
of
all
places
was
a
company
that
was
started
by
Pierre,
Trudeau's
father
in
a
time
when
the
automobile
was
coming
on
to
the
scene
in
Canada,
and
he
saw
an
investment
into
setting
up
gas
stations,
so
Champlain
oil,
which
this
station
was,
was
owned
by
mr.
Trudeau
up
until
the
60s
and
it
contributed
to
the
whole
automobile
scene
in
Canada.
That's
the
connection
with
Champlain
oil
I.
J
Just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand,
you
know
there
are
the
the
criteria
by
which
we
designate
something
as
heritage,
and
you
know
it
relates
to
its
design,
its
contacts,
the
architectural
features
etc.
But
I
do
want
to
understand
you.
You
feel
that
it
goes
beyond
just
you
know,
sort
of
a
foot
paint
the
numbers.
Yes,
it
meets
this
criteria,
this
criteria,
this
criteria,
Westbury,
is
changing.
You
said
what
what
does
the
preservation
of
this
station
mean
for
Westborough
writ
large?
What
is
the
bigger
picture
here
in
preserving
this
piece
of
heritage,
property.
B
Well
I
think
I
mentioned
earlier
about
the
aesthetic
of
the
neighborhood
is
one
of
the
main
reasons
people
are
drawn
to
that
area.
It's
got
a
nice
feel
to
it's,
got
a
small-town
feel
and
I
think
that's
given
rise
to
the
popularity
of
the
area,
but
we're
slowly
using
that
through
the
demolition
of
heritage,
buildings
will
no
longer
maintain
that
aesthetic,
and
this
place
in
particular,
is
at
a
very
prominent
location
in
the
neighborhood.
B
D
Thank
You
chair,
you
have
a
brief
written
letter
of
support
from
heritage
Ottawa
for
this
designation
as
an
intact
a
completely
intact
example,
and
it
really
is
completely
intact,
except
possibly,
the
roof
has
changed
over
the
years,
but
of
a
cottage
style
service
station,
at
the
dawn
of
the
expansion
of
private
automobile
use
and
her
dejar
de
huaah
really
commends
andrew
king
for
his
research
work
on
this
and
and
his
presentation,
I
have
a
personal
point
or
points
to
add.
I
live
not
far
from
this
area.
D
I
go
past
this
building
several
times
every
week
and
I
and
Professor
Bruce
Eliot,
who
is
also
a
member
of
heritage
Ottawa,
and
the
historian
of
the
whole
former
city
of
Nepean,
including
this
area,
feel
that
this
is
quite
important.
In
addition
to
representing
the
automobile,
it
represents
something
more
important
to
Ottawa
than
that,
and
that
is
Ottawa's
Parkway
Network.
It
is
on
Island
Park
Drive
at
the
corner.
It
is
part
of
the
streetscape
of
Island
Park
Drive.
D
There
was
originally
a
traffic
circle
there
and
that
has
to
be
considered
as
well
as
it's
being
part
of
the
streetscape
of
Richmond
Road.
Even
though
it's
the
one
end
of
the
building
that
faces,
Island
Park,
Drive,
Island,
Park
Drive,
was
laid
out
in
the
in
1920s,
so
this
building
went
up
relatively
early
in
the
in
the
construction
of
buildings
along
the
new
Parkway
to
the
to
the
Ottawa
River,
the.
In
fact.
At
one
point,
there
were
four
gas
stations
I
believe
on
on
four
corners
of
of
of
this
roundabout.
D
The
and,
although
that's
Adam,
Park
Drive,
is
obviously
part
of
the
federal
realm.
It's
still
very
much
a
significant
part
of
Ottawa's
Parkway
network
and
another
factor
which
I
wish
to
draw
to
your
attention.
Looking
at
this
picture
in
front
of
you,
there's
a
nine-story
building,
just
in
the
background
there,
which
is
the
new
building
that
has
gone
up
as
part
of
the
sisters
of
the
visitation
monastery,
which
is
another
heritage.
D
On
both
sides
of
the
road
at
that
point-
and
it
really
makes
sense
that
from
the
Island
Park
Drive
environment,
there
should
be
a
transition
upwards
to
that
already
planned
an
established
gateway
to
West
Grove
Village
and
that
that
gateway
should
not
be
relocated
to
right
on
the
edge
of
Island
Park
Drive
I
I
understand.
There
are
some
issues
in
adaptive.
D
Reuse
of
this
building
I
did
attend
previously
community
meeting
organized
with
developers
I've
seen
a
couple
of
development
proposals
for
this
site,
appreciate
that
it's
a
difficult
site
to
work
with,
but
you're,
not
looking
at
that
today,
you're
looking
at
the
Heritage
value
of
this
building
and
I
think
that
has
been
well
established
by
the
staff
report
and
Andrew
King's
research
and
the
extra
point
about
the
parkway
network
that
I
have
made.
Thank
you
thank.
C
B
You
mr.
chair
Thank,
You
committee
members,
certainly
this
building
has
architecture,
culture
and
context.
It's
really
important
to
focus
in
on
the
second
half,
which
is
value,
so
you
think
about
the
culture
of
this
building,
which
is
as
a
gas
station
and
an
automotive
use.
There
is
a
whole
host
of
planning
work
done
by
the
City
of
Ottawa.
That
roundly
rejects
the
value
of
those
automotive
oriented
uses
from
the
traditional
Main
Street
guidelines
to
the
CDP.
For
this
very
area,
the
architecture
itself
is
indeed
the
question
of
value
is
a
whole
other
matter
in
itself.
B
Are
there
specific
elements
of
the
building
that
are
carried
across
other
examples?
Certainly
does
it
constitute
a
style
in
and
of
itself
is
a
completely
different
question.
The
context
itself
would
the
building
situated
at
the
back
of
the
lot
seems
to
be
a
general
land
use
approach
that
the
city
is
actively
everyone
to
move
away
from.
Mr.
B
king
spoke
about
cooperation,
and
the
gentleman
from
heritage
spoke
about
some
consultation
meetings,
so
these
were
these
were
meetings
that
we
organized
as
a
property
owner
to
attempt
to
work
more
closely
with
the
community
to
identify
potential
future
uses
for
the
site.
There
was
a
substantial
majority
and
the
feedback
from
the
community
that
focused
on
improving
this
site's
contribution
to
the
street.
As
a
traditional
Main
Street,
there
was
precisely
one
person
who
brought
up
the
heritage
value
of
the
building
itself
and
mr.
King
who's
clearly
devoted
some
time
to
doing
this.
B
One
thing
that
is
100
percent
certain
this
building
is
slightly
over
900
square
feet
of
interior
square
footage.
There's
substantial
contamination
in
the
parking
lot
itself.
There
is
also
it
looks
likely
that
there's
contamination
within
the
footprint
of
the
building
as
well,
and
certainly
an
adaptive,
reuse
strategy
of
this
building,
the
$5,000
of
available
grant
money,
will
not
result
in
anything
approaching
an
economically
viable
reuse
strategy
for
this
building.
C
D
D
B
Have
conducted
study
on
that
matter,
there
is
not
a
redevelopment
scheme
to
the
building
that
expands
it
in
the
rear,
that
is,
that
is
economically
viable
to
rehabilitate
the
site.
Environmentally
relocation
of
the
building
itself.
The
site
is
under
10,000
square
feet.
There's
municipal
services
below
grade
that
run
on
the
western
boundary
of
the
site,
which
preclude
further
assembly
relocation
of
the
building
within
the
context
of
the
site.
B
Size
is
not
practical,
so
we
have
yet
to
identify
a
redevelopment
strategy
to
it
that
comes
even
close
to
being
practical
or
workable
for
us,
and
certainly
we
feel
a
designation
for
the
site
is
not
going
to
help
us
get
any
closer
to
that
in
the
first
place.
I'd
also
add
that
our
primary
you
know,
we've
been
characterized
several
times
as
a
toronto-based
developer,
I'm
from
the
Ottawa
Valley,
the
principals
of
the
firm
were
based
out
of
Ottawa.
B
We
are
primarily
focused
on
the
retail
component
of
mixed-use
development
and
we,
you
would
fit
perfectly
fine
with
our
business
objectives
to
put
a
retail
use
on
the
site.
The
fundamental
reality
is
that,
with
a
900
square,
foot,
building
every
single
cost
component
to
doing
this
is
is
a
huge
number
per
square
foot.
So
if
the
Heritage
Committee
wants
to
rent
office
space
for
five
hundred
dollars
a
foot
a
year,
we
might
be
able
to
talk,
but
we
have
no
other
alternative
to
moving
forward
with
it.
B
We
consulted
with
the
community
above
and
beyond,
what's
required
from
a
statutory
standpoint,
because
we're
interested
in
working
with
the
community
and
what
the
community
wants.
However,
when
mean
with
them,
they
did
not
say:
please
preserve
the
building.
The
neighborhood's
do
not
say.
Please
keep
the
building
at
the
back
of
the
lot
they
said.
Do
not
do
not.
They
did
not
ask
us
to
put
a
restaurant
next
to
single-family
residential
homes.
B
C
E
E
If
the
building
were
designated,
there
would
be
a
process
through
which
the
FDA
owner
could
apply
to
move
the
building.
We
specifically
in
the
statement
of
heritage
cultural
heritage,
value
which
is
attached
to
the
report
and
which
is
what
we
use
to
assess
these
types
of
applications
did
not
include
its
location
on
the
lot,
recognizing
that
it
is
in
a
difficult
spot
on
a
lot
to
to
redevelop
that
site.
E
That
being
said,
we
did
includes
location
along
Richmond
Road
because,
as
I
mentioned,
that's
part
of
its
contextual
value,
so
that
would
be
part
of
the
criteria
for
assessing
whether
or
not
the
problem
the
building
could
be
moved.
So
City
Council
approved
will
be
required
to
move
the
building.
What
it
does
happen,
I.
C
J
Thank
you.
May
I
counselor,
miss
Baum,
asked
me
a
question
with
respect
to
the
interior,
but
with
respect
to
adaptive,
reuse,
what
would
you
see?
I'm
sorry,
first
I
just
want
to
thank
you
very
much
for
the
leadership
that
you've
demonstrated
on
this
file.
Leslie,
it's
been
a
it's
been
some
excellent
work
with
respect
to
the
adaptive
reuse,
though,
I
mean
what
could
you
mean
vision?
You
showed
us
a
couple
of
examples:
could
somebody
build
by
expanding
off
elsewhere
and
a
property?
Can
they
build?
E
As
has
been
mentioned,
it's
a
very
small
building,
so
I
do
think.
There's
probably
opportunity
here
for
the
building
to
be
expanded.
That
being
said,
any
any
application
of
that
type
is
assessed
based
on
its
own
merits
and
the
design.
The
heritage
section
goal
is
to
see
buildings
adapted
and
reused
in
a
way
that
conserves
their
heritage
value.
E
So
whatever
the
use
is
as
long
as
it
conserves
the
Heritage
value,
we
don't
really
mind
so
you
know
I
mean
I,
think
it
would
be
difficult
to
add
to
this
building
in
its
current
location
on
the
site,
so
I
think,
if
it's
going
to
be
added
to
it,
would
likely
have
to
be
moved
to
the
front
of
the
site.
Perhaps
the.
J
E
Yes,
that's
correct,
I
mean,
as
was
mentioned,
it's
kind
of
a
bit
of
a
conflict
in
terms
of
you
know:
preserving
a
gas
station
for
its
association
with
the
private
automobile.
When
now
planners
are
all
you
know,
no
cars,
everybody
ride
their
bicycle
or
take
transit,
so
it
is
a
bit
of
a
catch-22.
But
that
being
said,
the
the
goal
of
the
program
at
the
City
of
Ottawa
is
to
preserve
a
piece
of
all
of
our
history.
E
C
So
any
other
general
comments
on
this
application.
No
I
might
just
make
a
brief
comment
before
I
put
this
to
the
committee,
which
is
I
plan
on
voting
in
favor
of
the
staff
recommendation,
and
the
reason
is
that
and
we've
had
this
discussion
before
and
it's
a
difficult
one
that
the
mandate
of
this
committee
is
to
evaluate
when
we're
looking
at
designation,
the
criteria
stated
under
Ontario
regulation,
all
906,
which
I've
become
I've
coming
over
a
row
within
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
and
it
doesn't
really
a
discussion
of
context
which.
C
I
personally
am
sympathetic
to
the
issues
that
the
need
to
consider
adaptive,
reuse
and
I
would
certainly
encourage
the
applicant.
Should
this
property
become
designated
by
a
vote
of
council
to
not
be
shy
about
bringing
forward
an
application
which
could
be
considered,
which
would
offer
a
way
forward
in
terms
of
how
this
property
could
bring
a
beneficial
use
to
the
community.
I
think
the
fact
that
this
EDP
envisions
a
four-story
building
means
there
was
a
certain
amount
of
intensification
and
density
envisioned
for
this
site.
C
I
think,
as
Miss
Collins
has
pointed
out,
the
need
to
respect
traditional
mainstream
principles
of
allowing
people
to
walk
and
cycle
along
Wellington
and
Richmond.
Road
is
also
important,
so
again,
I,
don't
or
anyone
else
to
think
that
a
vote
for
designation
rules
out
the
possibility
that
the
committee
could
consider
some
adjustments
to
the
designated
site
in
the
context
of
a
development
application.
So
I
just
offer
that
as
a
reasoning
for
my
vote,
which
I'm
about
to
cast
any
other
comments.
Mr.
vice
chair,
I.
D
In
favor
the
designation,
this
is
a
small
building
that
harkens
back
to
the
heroic
and
romantic
age
of
the
automobile.
So
from
that
perspective,
I
guess
at
that
point
we
were
more
than
ieave
than
we
are
today
about
the
impact
of
that
form
of
transportation.
Nevertheless,
I
think
that
the
opportunity
has
been
lost
in
the
last
year's,
so
to
come
up
with
a
development
proposal
for
the
site
that
would
achieve
the
purposes
of
the
community
design
plan
was
secondary
plan.
J
To
respond
to
a
couple
of
things,
the
the
residents
of
we're
not
necessarily
specifically
asked.
Are
you
interested
in
heritage
designation
for
this
building?
I
was
at
both
consultations
that
Maine
and
Maine
held
and
I
do
want
to
congratulate
them
on
having
a
rich
consultation
process
at
the
first
consultation
that
they
held.
We
had
the
the
forum
bricks
and
we
were
asked
to
design
a
building.
That
would
be.
You
know
upwards
of
four
stories
tall
with
a
certain
density,
and
that
was
the
the
point
of
that
consultation.
J
The
second
would
have
been
held-
I
guess
probably
just
about
a
year
ago,
or
is
it
a
couple
years
and
I
was
one
of
four
people
at
that
consultation?
It
was
the
dog
days
of
summer.
There
was
very
little
advertising
for
that
meeting
left
so
I
I,
don't
want
the
consultation
process
or
the
assertion
of
a
rich
consultation
process
to
lead
any
of
the
members
of
the
community
to
believe
that
the
residents
are
not
supportive.
J
E
Three
in
mr.
chair,
the
way
that
designation
is
done
is
that
this
committee
and
then
Council
would
issue
a
notice
of
intention
to
designate
that
goes
to
the
owner.
It's
published
in
the
newspaper
there's
a
30-day
appeal
period.
If
no
appeals
are
received,
a
bylaw
goes
directly
to
Council.
It
doesn't
come
back
to
this
committee,
so
you
are,
in
effect,
voting
to
designate
the
building
today.
It's
just
the
language
of
the
Heritage
Act
is
about
issuing
the
notice
of
intention,
but.
E
There
are
objections,
a
conservation,
Review,
Board
hearing
would
be
convened
and
the
conservation
new
board
would
review
the
objection
that
would
be
hearing
similar
to
and
OMB
hearing,
but
the
conservation,
Review
Board
does
not
make
a
binding
decision.
They
make
a
recommendation
back
to
City
Council.
They
regarding
the
proposed
designation
as
to
whether
or
not
it's
appropriate
so.
C
C
This
item
number
six,
which
is
seven
Bayview,
so
the
application
before
us
is
to
alter
the
city
Brookes,
building
that
seven
Bay
View
Road,
which
has
a
property
protected
under
part,
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage,
Act
and
I'm
sure
miss
Collins
has
a
presentation
for
us,
which
would
be
great
because
it
was
helpful
to
set
the
stage
so
Miss
Collins
over
to
you
to
set
the
scene.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
You
mr.
chair
and
as
councillor
Wilkinson
was
just
asking
about
the
the
process
for
designation.
This
property
is
actually
I
guess
through
that
process
not
actually
designated
yet,
but
a
notice
of
intention
has
been
issued.
The
designating
bylaw
has
not
been
passed,
but
a
notice
of
intention
to
designate
does
protect
the
property.
E
This
is
the
front
facade
of
the
property.
To
show
you
a
few
photos
to
remind
you.
It's
a
one
and
two-story
building
that
was
constructed
in
the
late
nineteen
overside
of
the
early
1940s
for
use
as
a
city
workshops.
Building
it
was
used
for
that
function
up
until
the
early
2000s,
and
it
was
part
of
a
larger
complex
of
buildings,
has
a
flat
roof.
It's
influenced
by
the
modern
style,
constructed
of
a
reinforced,
concrete
grid
and
filled
with
brick,
pounds
and
large
windows,
so
you
showing
the
whole
building.
E
E
The
structural
frame
of
the
building
is
expressed
on
the
exterior
of
the
building
and
that
will
come
into
play
as
I
start
to
describe
the
alterations
that
are
proposed
for
the
building.
These
large
doors
will
be
discussed
again
later,
so
these
are
on
one
of
the
facades
of
the
building.
They
are
in
quite
poor
condition.
There
were
doors
tongue
and
groove.
The
bottom
in
particular,
is
quite
rotted
as
it
was.
E
It's
been
affected
by
the
weather
for
the
last
70
years
or
so,
but
they
were
identified
as
a
heritage
attribute
in
the
designation
and
again,
the
windows
will
I'm
sure
come
up
for
discussions.
So
here's
just
a
few
pictures
of
the
windows
in
the
building
large
steel
framed
windows
with
many
panes
and
an
inset
hopper
window.
E
So,
as
I
said,
the
property
is
in
designated
under
the
interior
to
Jack,
but
it
is
protected
because
a
notice
of
intention
has
been
issued
by
City
Council
and
an
application
is
required
to
to
alter
the
building.
So,
as
you
are
aware,
the
building
is
being
proposed
or
has
been
approved
for
adaptive,
reuse
for
the
Innovation
Center
at
Bayview
Yards,
which
will
be
a
business
incubator
project
and
it's
set
to
open
next
year.
E
So
this
application
is
before
the
committee,
because
the
adaptive
reuse
from
an
industrial
use
to
office
type
use
does
require
some
alterations
to
the
building.
In
addition,
the
building,
as
I
said,
has
been
industrial
use
for
many
years
and
has
been
vacant
for
a
number
of
years
and
is
in
relatively
poor
condition
and
requires
some
significant
upgrading
to
make
it
habitable
for
the
new
use.
So
I've
broken
the
the
section
of
the
application
into
two
parts.
E
The
first
is
the
conservation
and
replacement
of
exterior
building
elements,
so
that
refers
to
the
Wu
windows,
doors
masonry
and
the
chimney
and
then
exterior
alterations
and
additions.
So
there
are
two
additions
proposed,
a
new
main
entrance,
which
is
where
I'll
talk
about
that
that
structural
grid
and
then
solar
panels
on
the
roof.
So
I'll
go
quickly
through
the
elevations.
E
Here
you
see
the
the
solar
panels
that
are
proposed
on
both
East
and
West
roof
flat
roofs
of
the
two-story
section,
and
then
there
is
a
proposed
concourse
or
so
I
proposed
link
across
the
top
of
the
building
to
link
again
the
east
and
west
sections.
One
of
the
things
about
this
building
is
that,
because
of
its
former
use
as
an
industrial
building,
it
has
very
strange
soil
levels
because
of
all
the
loading
days
and
docks
and
that
sort
of
thing.
So
it's
been
a
challenge
to
work
out
the
interior
layout
to
meet
accessibility
requirements.
E
E
So
here
are
the
elevations,
so
the
main
changes
you'll
see
so
here
this
is
the
front
elevation
of
the
building
I'm.
Sorry,
it's
so
small.
This
section
here
that
I'm
highlighting
is
the
proposed
addition
on
the
roof
of
the
building.
So
it
is
a
one-story
addition
that
will
be
slightly
lower.
Then
the
existing
roof
line
of
the
of
the
two-story
wings
of
the
building
it
will
be
set
back
from
the
front
facade
so
that
the
one-story
portion
continues
to
read
as
the
dominant
feature
in
the
streetscape,
with
its
City
of
Ottawa
workshops,
sine
slope.
E
Skylight
is
proposed
for
the
top
here,
as
well
as
an
element-
that's
not
shown
in
these
elevations,
but
you
will
see
it
in
the
renderings.
A
sort
of
Lantern
chimneys
take
the
element,
so
this
addition
is
proposed
for
the
top.
This
sorry,
the
on
top
of
the
first,
the
one-story
section,
the
windows
in
this
section
of
the
building
the
one-story
laying
out
proposed
for
restoration
and
the
in
the
interior.
There
will
be
a
new
interior
storm
window
and
to
increase
energy
efficiency.
E
The
windows
throughout
the
rest
of
the
building
are
proposed
for
placement,
with
new
thermally,
broken
aluminum
windows
with
simulated,
divided
lights.
I
will
now
go
to
so
this
elevation
here
at
the
top
shows
that
concourse
link
at
the
back
upgrade,
which
I
was
telling
you
about
that,
will
help
link
this
build
at
this
wing
and
the
swing
together.
It
will
also
include
a
couple
of
openings
at
the
back
of
the
existing
rear
facade
of
the
building.
E
Here
you
can
also
see
on
this
elevation
the
replacement
of
some
of
garage
doors
with
glass,
so
the
windows
remain
the
same,
but
the
proposed
replacement
is
glass
to
mimic
a
similar
pattern
to
the
panel
doors
that
were
in
place
here
before
so
whose
perspective
rendering
this
I
didn't.
Show
you
this
it's
easier
to
show
you
here.
This
is
the
proposed
new
entrance.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
building
you'll
see
these
concrete
bends,
the
building
it
has
a
structural,
concrete
frame
and
it
and
each
panel
is
filled
in
with
brick.
E
The
proposal
here
is
to
open
up
two
of
the
panels.
Moving
the
grid
in
place
and
creating
a
new,
more
prominent
front
entrance
for
the
building
I
should
have
showed
you
on
the
first
picture.
The
current
front
entrance
of
the
building
is
just
a
tiny,
little
regular,
one-person
door
kind
of
hidden
away.
So
this
was
about
a
new,
more
prominent
main
entrance
for
the
proposed
Innovation
Center
and,
as
I
mentioned
this,
this
is
the
sort
of
homage
to
the
chimney
that
was
in
place
on
this
building.
E
This
is
a
real
perspective,
so
this
shows
that
proposed
concourse
link
at
the
back,
as
well
as
the
proposed
glass
inserts,
where
the
garage
doors
were
and
I
actually
I'm,
just
going
to
flip
back
to
one
elevation,
because
I
mentioned
that
series
of
four
garage
doors,
the
green
ones
that
I
showed
you
these
ones
here
and,
as
I
said,
they're
in
quite
poor
condition,
and
so
through
the
process
of
RFP.
For
this
project,
we
looked
very
closely
at
these
doors
and
what
could
be
done
with
them?
E
It
was
determined
that,
in
order
to
keep
them
as
functioning
doors,
that
would
basically
have
to
be
completely
replicated.
So
the
proponent
has
instead
proposed
to
retain
the
doors
conserve
them
and
hang
them
inside
so
in
their
exact
spot,
but
inside
in
an
open
position
and
then
in
fill
the
area
with
glass
in
a
way
that
will
reflect
the
the
character
of
the
former
doors
so
that
that's
the
proposed
solution
to
the
issue
of
the
condition
of
those
doors
rather
than
throwing
them
away
completely
and
having
new
doors
built.
E
E
The
applicant
is
still
working
through
some
of
the
issues
in
terms
of
exact
mortar
mixes
and
things
for
the
masonry,
restoration
and
we're
asking
for
that
stuff
to
be
delegated
to
staff.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
building
does
have
a
statement
of
cultural
heritage
value.
It's
a
good
example
of
an
industrial
building
constructed
as
part
of
the
city,
a
city
complex
in
1941,
designed
by
the
city
of
ottawa,
design
engine
at
the
time,
concrete
and
steel
frame
with
brick
veneer
and
the
influence
of
the
modern
style.
E
So
it
has
a
flat
roof
with
unadorned
facades
and
steel
windows.
So,
as
we
do
for
any
building
designated
under
way
onto
the
Heritage
Act,
we
review
the
standards
and
guidelines
as
they
apply
to
the
project
standard
one.
Here
we
have
determined
that
the
proposed
adaptive
views
conserves
the
Heritage
value
of
the
building
standard.
Three
is
conservative
value
by
adopting
an
approach
of
minimal
intervention.
The
proposed
adaptive
use
of
this
building
has
been
informed
by
detailed
assessment.
Inspection
of
the
building.
E
E
They
echo
the
pattern
of
the
structural
grid,
subordinate
to
and
distinguishable
from
the
historic
building
and
then
in
terms
of
guidelines,
exterior
form
so
selecting
a
new
location
for
an
addition,
as
I
mentioned,
these
are
sensitively
sited
to
allow
the
start
building
to
read
as
the
as
the
dominant
presence
the
windows.
So
the
guidelines
for
windows
recommend
that
windows
should
be
repaired
rather
than
replaced,
and
if
they
are
replaced
they
should
be
replacing
kind
and
then
the
second
guideline
on
Windows
is
if
in-kind
replacement
is
not
technically
or
economically
feasible.
E
Alternate
compatible
options
may
be
considered.
So,
as
you
made
the
report,
we
have
assessed
that
the
replacement
of
all
of
these
windows.
Well,
not
sorry.
The
large
majority
of
the
windows
and
doors
in
this
building
will
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
character
of
the
building.
But
that
being
said,
the
proposed
replacement
windows
are
compatible
while
not
exactly
in
kind.
E
The
guideline
for
entrances
is
designed
a
new
entrance
required
by
a
new
use
of
sorry
for
the
typo
in
a
manner
that
is
compatible
with
the
building
style
era
and
character,
and,
as
I
mentioned,
the
proposed
new
entrance
at
the
front
of
the
building
does
is
compatible
with
the
with
the
building
in
terms
of
retaining
that
structural
grid,
while
still
providing
a
new,
more
prominent
public
entrance
to
a
building.
That
will
now
have
a
public
function
which
never
did
before
a
cultural
heritage.
E
Impact
statement
was
submitted
as
part
of
the
RFP
at
the
request
of
this
committee.
Actually
so
last
October,
when
the
when
there
was
a
presentation
on
this,
there
was
a
motion
of
the
committee
that
each
proposal
include
a
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
So
this
is
the
conclusion
of
that
cultural
heritage,
impact
statement
and
staff
agree
with
the
findings
of
the
choose,
so
that
overall,
the
project
will
have
a
positive
impact.
E
The
council
leaper
has
provided
comments
and
he's
here
today,
obviously
so
can
provide
his
own
comments.
I
guess,
instead
of
me
that
they
are
included
in
the
report
with
some
concerns
about
the
proposed
windows,
heritage,
Ottawa
has
provided
comments
and
I
think
provided
amended
comments
since
then,
since
the
ones
that
are
including
the
report
and
again
not
not
wrapping
anybody's
knuckles,
because
it
is
summer
but
Hindenburg,
Community
Association
provided
comments
just
this
morning.
I
think
that
you've
received
again
with
some
concerns
about
the
windows.
E
So
in
conclusion,
the
department
recommends
approval
of
the
application
for
the
following
reasons:
it
is
a
balanced
approach
to
conservation,
so
it
represents
a
partial
restoration,
partial
replacement
of
the
windows
and
doors.
It
will
have
a
positive
impact
on
the
building
and
the
proposed
additions
are
appropriate
and
compatible
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
heritage
related
questions.
I
know
that
the
project
team
is
here.
If
there's
any
Innovation,
Center
sort
of
related
questions.
C
Thank
you
very
much.
That
was
a
useful
presentation,
so
what
I
proposed
to
do
is
follow
the
same
pattern
and
we'll
hear
from
the
public
delegations
and
then
we'll
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
of
staff
and
I
will
at
that
time
also
invite
the
applicant
up,
because
I
suspect
there
might
be
some
specific
questions
that
the
applicant
will
be
best
placed
to
answer.
So
first
on
the
list
is
none
other
than
David
jeans.
D
Yes,
given
the
close
involvement
of
heritage
Ottawa
with
this
committee,
you
will
have
to
get
used
to
seeing
and
hearing
me
from
time
to
time
so.
Heritage
Ottawa
is
very
supportive
of
this
adaptive.
Reuse.
We've
waited
a
long
time
for
something
viable
for
this
important
building,
and
it's
it's
encouraging
to
see
that
there's
a
conservation
plan,
but
a
new
vitality
for
this
building.
The
front
entrance
is
a
change
that
we
that
we
can
live
with
the
the
the
second-story
additions
and
the
and
the
link
at
the
back
is
fine.
D
You're,
not
surprised
that
our
main
concern
is
still
with
the
replacement
of
those
windows
where
the
original
window
structure,
with
the
with
the
Malians
is
being
lost.
We
don't
consider
that
a
sheet
of
glass
with
a
with
a
fake
mullion
across
it
is
an
adequate
replacement
for
the
Heritage
window,
and
we
would
like
to
see
a
better,
a
better
approach
for
that,
because
we
think
that
that
that
kind
of
window
replacement
is
not
in
character
with
the
building
and
the
the
cultural
heritage
Impact
Statement
took
that
took
this
position.
D
We
would
were
also
concerned
about
the
disappearance
of
the
historic
garage
doors
from
the
outside
view.
Certainly
preserving
them
as
important
they're.
Open
position
from
the
inside
is
is
nice,
but
it
really
would
be
better
if
at
least
one
of
those
doors
could
still
be
visible
and
unreadable
from
the
outside
of
the
building
and
I
think
that
if
that
could
be
done
in
some
way
it
would
it
would
improve
the
the
preservation
of
the
of
the
heritage
values
of
this
building
and
I.
Think
that's
it.
C
G
Morning,
it
is
still
money.
Yes,
thank
you
for
yeah
for
hearing
me
I'm.
Basically
a
you
received
my
presentation
this
morning,
so
I
won't
go
over
it
in
detail.
We're
very
pleased
to
see
the
the
plans
for
the
adaptive
reuse
movement
been
made
in
a
long
time
and
for
the
most
changes
are
appropriate
and
in
keeping
with
the
heritage
designation,
that's
in
process.
G
There
are
some
concerns,
I
wonder
if
you
could
show
the
very
first
slide
that
you
showed
of
the
building
yeah,
that's
the
one
that
is
the
crush
world
which
is
protecting
the
transformer
in
front
of
the
building.
It's
not
clear.
What's
going
to
happen
with
that,
because
it's
mentioned
in
the
cultural
heritage.
G
Emotions
which
are
look
very
lovely
and
all
the
improvements
that
are
going
to
be
made
to
that
front.
Facade
of
the
building
will
be
I
think
greatly
impaired.
If
that
crash
wall
and
transformer
cannot
be
mended.
I
also
have
a
comment
on
garage
doors
similar
to
heritage.
Otherwise,
in
that,
it's
understandable
that
they
can't
all
be
preserved
in
situ,
but
if
at
least
one
of
them
could
be
preserved
in
such
I
think
it
would.
G
C
C
C
J
Implications
cost
overruns
that
would
be
associated
with
changing
the
way
we
we've
looked
at
the
design-build
so
far,
we're
probably
looking
at
somewhere
near
two
to
three
million
dollars.
We're
also
looking
at
a
timeline
implication.
Would
we
have
to
go
back
and
renegotiate
our
contract
with
the
design
builders?
J
G
Good
morning,
mr.
chair
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Nancy
Milosh
I'm,
a
member
on
the
board
as
well
with
Ian
Frazer,
the
board
of
the
Innovation
Center
and
I'm.
Also
an
urban
planner
and
I.
You
know,
I
may
leave
I
think
I'll
leave
the
detailed
design
questions
to
to
our
team,
very
Hoban
and
and
group,
but
I
just
want
to
say,
I
think
as
to
underscore
Ian's
comments
that
I
think,
as
you
can
see
from
the
renderings.
G
This
is
a
spectacular
adaptive,
reuse,
I,
believe
of
the
old
city
works
yards,
and
we
have
been
working
very
hard
with
the
whole
design-build
team
to
deliver
a
building
that
we
believe
is
architectural
sensitive
to
the
heritage
and
I.
Think
what
we're
hearing
this
morning
is
is
really
there.
There's
general
agreement
with
the
exception
of
the
the
window
treatment
as
well
as
the
the
garage
doors
and
I
think
were
you
know
we're
down
to
an
issue
where,
in
our
opinion,
we
think
we
think
it's
the
treatment
is
very
suitable
and
actually
quite
exciting.
G
I
think
that
the
fact
that
the
garage
doors
are
are
still
being
preserved
and
maintained
in
place
on
the
inside
will
be
a
really
exciting
design
feature
and,
as
you've
heard
from
Miss
Collins,
you
know
for
the
most
part
the
windows
are
being
maintained
and
where
they
are
being
replaced,
every
intention
has
been
made
to
to
to
maintain
them
with
the
same
looking
character,
as
has
been
there.
So,
in
my
opinion,
as
an
urban
planner
I
think
it's
a
very
sensitive
use
of
this
building.
Thank
you.
C
She
just
said
you
finished
besson.
For
the
most
part,
the
windows
are
being
maintained.
Maybe
I
misunderstood
in
the
original
presentation,
but
I
had
understood
from
the
staff
report
that
only
the
windows
in
the
central
portion
of
the
building
are
being
maintained
and
the
windows
on
both
the
east
and
west
I.
Guess
at
that
stage
or
north
and
south
I'm,
not
sure
sides
are
being
replaced.
So
when
we
say
most
of
them,
windows
were
being
maintained,
have
I
misunderstood
the
staff
report.
C
C
G
E
I'll
just
answer
very
quickly
and
then
I'll
pass
it
to
sandy,
but
I
I
think
your
interpretation
is
correct.
Mr.
chair
I
think
most
of
the
windows
will
be
replaced
in
the
building,
so
the
windows
in
the
central
blocks
of
the
one-story
section
to
be
retained
and
restored,
and
then
a
new
storm
window
added
on
the
interior
and
unless
I'm
wrong
the
remained
oh.
If
the
windows
would
be
replaced
so.
C
K
What
less
needs
did
say
the
the
center
portion
is,
the
center
link
between
the
two
wings
is
intended
to
be
preserved.
The
remaining
windows
are
Blazers,
but
four
or
five
of
them,
plus
the
overhead
door
that
exists
on
that
elevation
and
the
two
bays
to
the
extreme
east
are
the
ones
that
are
intended
to
be
renovated.
As
the
new
main
entrance.
D
Decided
just
to
make
it
really
clear
to
the
committee:
could
we
bring
up
the
elevation
of
the
front
elevation
so
that
you
could
show
us
of
which
of
the
existing
windows
are
going
to
be
restored
and
taking
it
that
on
the
north
side,
we
have
the
additional
concourse?
That's
a
new
addition,
so
that
the
windows
that
exist
there
now
are
not
really
facing
the
next
door.
So
they
destroy
us,
which
ones
just
highlight,
which
ones
are
the
ones
that
will
be
restored.
D
K
Top
elevation
is
the
South
elevation
and
and
see
there's
three
windows
to
the
extreme
left
and
three
windows
to
the
extreme
right.
The
windows
in
between
at
the
lower
elevation
are
to
be
restored.
There's
a
large
1/4
go
from
left
to
right.
There's,
there's
a
three-panel
steel
sash.
Then
the
next
opening
is
an
overhead
door
that
will
be
preserved
in
place.
Then
these
are
two
smaller
steel
sash.
The
door
is
the
existing
door
main
entrance
with
a
the
light.
Above
it
was
added
at
a
later
date.
K
Just
we've
been
kind
of
scrambling
on
this
with
Auto
hydro,
we've
just
made
our
design
deposit
and
we've
had
information
that
the
new
type
of
transformer
will
delete
the
need
for
the
bras
wall.
It's
an
internally
fused
type
transformer,
so
indications
are
that
we
will
be
able
to
delete
the
blast
wall.
H
Coming
back
to
the
windows,
so
the
six
that
we've
identified.
Thank
you
very
much
that
will
be
restored
with
the
interior
additional
window
for
energy
purposes,
but
the
facades
of
the
front
elevation
that
shows
the
two
wings
we're
really
the
windows
are
by
far
more
significant
and
make
up
a
considerable
portion
of
both
of
those
facades.
I
think
when
we
think
about
a
heritage
building,
and
we
talk
about
the
importance
of
windows
in
the
statement
of
significance.
I
think
this
is
a
case
where
really
they
are
making
up
a
significant
portion
of
those
those
walls.
H
K
K
Many
of
these
openings
have
been
adapted
to
accommodate
different
type
overhead
doors
and
your
windows,
and
we
saw
by
extrapolation,
feel
that
we're
doing
the
same
kind
of
adaptive,
reuse
of
the
building
and
and
honoring
the
grid
and
forms
that
are
there
we're
working
very
closely
with
Commonwealth
Resource
Management
to
come
up
with
appropriate
gridding
on
it.
We're
obligated
to
meet
a
LEED
Gold
standard,
which
is
a
high
level
of
energy
performance.
We're
very
close
to
getting
a
platinum
into
the
Platinum
level,
which
would
be
is
basically
a
huge
with
a
building
like
this.
K
K
The
was
miss
Hogg
mentioned
the
windows
that
were
being
replaced
in
the
Laura
Secord.
We
are
in
fact
working
with
the
manufacturer
of
that
system
and
we
were
working
with
the
building
envelope
consultant,
who
is
reviewing
the
installation
of
those
the
thing
that
were
challenged
with
is
because
of
the
amount
of
windows
and
exterior
with
this
building
and
to
meet
the
LEED
standards.
K
We
have
to
have
a
fairly
high
performance
of
a
window,
and
every
time
you
introduce
a
through
the
true
divided
light
muntin,
you
lose
performance,
you're,
adding
more
mass
to
it
to
the
frame.
So
the
alternative
is
you
use
the
word
fake.
We
would
like
to
use
the
word
simulated
divided
light,
which
is
pretty
convincing
from
you
know
the
street
and
up
close,
it's
not
a
true,
divided
light,
but
again
it
offers
a
very
it
offers
less
in
terms
of
loss
of
performance.
K
So
we're
looking
at
all
those
variables
and
again
we
are,
you,
know,
we're
working
with
buck
a
lot
and
we're
working
with
Commonwealth
to
come
up
with
a
solution
that
we
feel
is
in
the
spirit
in
the
aesthetic
of
the
building
and
under
the
terms
of
our
peace
mission.
We,
you
know
our
obligation
is
to
the
south
central
inc
to
restore
it
and
then
the
wings
to
do
as,
as
that,
the
very
best
we
can
within
the
budget
we
have
and
to
performance
standards
that
are
set
out
in
the
submission
thanks.
I
Thank
you,
I
think
we're
gonna
be
spending
a
lot
of
time
on
windows,
but
I
have
a
real
concern
about
the.
It
seems
to
me
that
that
you
don't
like
the
term
fake,
but
they
are
fake,
they're
trying
to
throw
people
under
thinking
something's
there
that
isn't
there
but
I
understand
your
your
intention
and
I
do
want
to
say.
I
think
this
is
a
wonderful
project.
I
think
you
guys
have
done
a
really
great
job
and
I
understand
the
challenges
that
you
face.
I
K
The
divided
lights
are
I
mean
it's
you're,
never
gonna
make
everybody
happy
it's
it's
a
solution
that
meets
the
requirements
of
this
project
and
again
I
go
back
to
the
adaptive
ability
of
this
framework
to
accept
new
interventions,
and
it
is
being
changed
from
a
garage
sort
of
shop
use
to
rave,
fully
occupied
office
use.
It
would
be
I'm
hoping
that
it
will
become
a
signature
in
the
community.
C
Also
related
to
windows,
I
noted
in
the
staff
report
that
the
proposed
replacement
windows
would
change
the
grid
pattern
from
a
five
by
five
to
a
three
by
three
pattern
in
each
of
the
windows
and
I'm.
Just
wondering
if
you
can
explain
it
a
little
bit
the
rationale
behind
changing
the
path
I
mean
we
understand
that
they're
simulated
modern
bars.
But
if
you
can
explain
a
little
bit
the
rationale
of
moving
away
from
that
five
by
five
powder
to
something
different.
K
The
current
drawing
showed
a
3x3
I
believe
we
can
look
at
different
variations
again,
like
I
said
we're
still
studying
the
opportunities
we
have
to
to
get
closer
to
what
was
or
is,
as
far
as
adapting
the
frames
that
are
there.
They
have
lead
paint
on
them.
They
have
asbestos
in
the
putty
and
they're
extremely
expensive
to
to
restore
and
putting
sheets
of
glass
behind
would
be
a
big
challenge
based
on
the
construction.
C
I'm,
just
that
I
understand,
because
I
presume
all
of
the
new
windows
would
be
ordered
in
a
custom
fashion.
Given
that
they're
simulated,
why
would
an
additional
amount
of
simulated
aluminum
mountain
bars
affect
the
integrity
of
the
window?
I
assume
that
they
don't
go
through
the
whole
width
of
the
window,
but
are
merely
topical
their
surface
so
that
they
are
applied.
K
D
To
the
Bell
feathers
have
a
pretty
intense
cross-examination
on
the
window,
proposals
and
I
guess
you're
getting
it.
I
have
a
couple
of
questions,
but
just
before
I
put
those
questions,
I
must
say
I'm
overwhelmed
by
the
innovation
of
the
project.
This
is
a
fantastic
project
for
the
for
the
city
trigger
to
the
you
know,
the
Bayview
station
and
the
development.
D
So
what's
up
question,
we
shouldn't
really
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
this
is
an
exemplar
project
that
is
going
to
trigger
the
economic
development
of
the
baby
or
station
in
a
way
which
will
make
us
all
proud,
so
that
would
pitch
I
apologize
for
doing
an
opinion
on
that
during
the
question
period.
Having
said
that
here,
my
questions
to
Sandy
and
that
is,
did
you
actually
look
at
alternatives
to
the
thermal
units
with
the
simulated
lights
and
evaluate
them
in
terms
of
Phillip
performance
cost?
D
And
so
that's
the
question:
did
you
look
at
alternatives
and
members
report
on
that,
so
that
this
debate
this
morning
about
lights,
isn't
in
isolation
because
there's
been
to
my
recollection
at
least
about
30-40
years
of
of
conferences
and
technical
papers
and
discussions
on
this
very
question
and
I
agree
with
Sandy
Smallwood
that
sandy
that
the
City
of
Ottawa
was
a
citywide
web
project
and
the
city
we
needs
to
set
the
example
for
the
rest
of
the
developments
in
the
city.
And
if
we
proceed
with
adopting
the
simulated.
K
Respecting
the
desire
to
have
something
that
is
convincing,
I
mean
whether
it's
a
true
divided
light
or
a
simulated,
divided
light
or
a
fake,
divided
light.
It's
going
to
be
very
difficult
to
tell
the
difference
because
of
those
the
scaling
with
the
window.
Manufacturers
are
very
sensitive
to
this
as
well.
Otherwise
there
wouldn't
be
any
market
for
it
again.
I
go
back
to
performance,
we
did
look
at.
There
was
four
alternatives
offered
in
the
RFP,
the
main
American
manufacturers.
One
was
a
true
steel
sash,
with
some
very
minor
attempts
to
have
thermal
brakes
in
it.
K
In
the
vein
of
what
we're
proposing
with
aluminum
frames,
they
actually
did
have
some
stated
performance
criteria
where
several
of
the
manufacturers
did
not
so
we
have
and
the
performance
is
not
good
support.
You
know
us
attaining
legal.
So
again
we
go
back
to
compromise.
There's
we're
gaining
something
in
terms
of
operations
and
efficiency.
K
We
may
be
losing
something
in
terms
of
a
true
aesthetic
but
again,
I
think
that
the
efforts
that
are
being
directed
at
being
sympathetic
to
the
window,
openings
by
our
team
Commonwealth's
and
buckle
on
the
we're
gonna
end
up
with
a
really
good
product.
That's
you
know,
gonna
reflect
the
uniqueness
of
the
Innovation
Center.
C
J
It's
okay,
mr.
cha
just
wanted
to
offer
just
a
few
comments
from
an
economic
development
departments
perspective
and
I,
appreciate
and
I,
really
am
pleased
to
hear
that
most
of
the,
if
not
all,
of
the
committee
members
are
excited
about
the
development
that
is
slated
to
take
place
at
this
facility.
Just
consider
as
you're.
Considering
this
application
also
consider
a
couple
of
things.
J
Any
delay
to
this
project
is
likely
going
to
jeopardize
this
project
actually
taking
place
at
this
site
in,
for
a
few
reasons,
one
being
the
tight
timelines
that
the
province
has
imposed
upon
us.
The
tight
timelines
that
the
federal
government
is
going
to
be
imposing
upon
us
with
one
of
the
funding
application
that
is
going
to
be
in
front
of
them.
J
C
I
Okay,
so
if
you
look
at
that,
what
you're
seeing
and
I
appreciate
most
people
are
their
eyes
are
glazing
over
and
they're
saying.
Why
are
you
going
down
this
road?
That
happens
is
when
you
go
by
and
you
look
at
this,
you
see
a
reflection
of
the
tree
and
the
window.
The
focus
a
true
divided
night
you'd
see
a
reflection.
I
But
if
you
go
by
a
building
which
has
old,
true
divided
night
windows
on
it,
you'll
see
the
difference,
it's
a
much
richer
character.
However,
having
said
that,
I
don't
think
we
want
a
stylist
project.
There
are
timelines
and
I
think
we
want
to
get
on
with
it.
Can
we
not
approve
this
and
ask
that
you
come
back
and
we
try
to
work.
You
work
with
staff
so
that
we
try
to
get
some
resolution,
but
I
don't
think
anybody
wants
to
see
the
project
stalled
or
delayed.
C
C
So
member
Smallwood
has
put
an
idea
to
the
committee
about
whether
there's
interest
on
the
committee's
part
in
approving
the
application
subject
to
some
further
modification
of
the
windows
or
a
consultation.
It
could
be
in
the
form
of
staff
direction
that
staff
be
directed
to
to
work
on,
in
particular,
the
window
aspect,
I
think
I'm,
hearing
largely
approval
of
the
other
elements
of
the
application
to
alternate
the
building.
C
G
Would
like
to
have
them
come
back
here,
I,
don't
want
to
delay
this
project
I
think
we
could
ask
staff
to
talk
with
them
and
see
if
it
could
happen,
but
leave
it
up
to
their
discretion
of
what
actually
happens
if
stays
the
way
it
is
because
they
can't
make
it
work,
then
it
stays
where
it
is.
They
can
make
some
more
windows
door.
One
thing
I
would
like
those
big
difference
in
the
morning
was
some
of
those
windows
opened
and
the
new
ones
don't
I
like
windows
that
open,
but
they
get
snow.
G
Sometimes
you
need
them,
but
I
think
if
they
just
neither
with
them
to
see
if
they
can
do
some
more
on
that
and
a
small
way
to
say
no
expertise
done
a
lot
of
these,
he
might
be
able
to
assist
them
and
just
talking
to
them
about
it
and
I.
Think
that
would
be
a
should
be
appropriate
in
this
case,
because
he
will
not
be
having
a
decision-making
role
left
on
that
bed.
C
Okay,
thank
you.
For
that
comment,
I
mean
the
question
is
well
that,
given
that
our
you
know,
some
of
the
budget
of
this
project
is
has
come
from
the
corporation
of
the
City
of
Ottawa,
that
there
might
be
a
useful
opportunity
for
staff
to
articulate,
in
fact,
if
there
were
to
be
improvements
in
the
window
and
those
would
have
financial
consequences
and
I
recognize
that
there's
some
awkwardness
in
asking
the
staff
of
the
corporation,
who
is
also
a
major
proponent
of
it
and
and
I'll,
leave
you
to
manage
the
values
and
ethics
of
that.
C
But
I
do
think
it
might
be
useful.
Then,
given
that
there
is
this
dual
role
for
staff
to
articulate
the
window
and
if
those
would
have
financial
consequences,
what
those
could
be
and
then
presumably
council
could
make
a
decision
as
to
whether
should
there
be
an
additional
financial
cost
to
doing
things.
I
think
what
you're
hearing
from
members
is
the
right
way,
instead
of
a
compromised
way,
is
really
a
discussion
that
could
be
had
in
the
context
of
council
approval
as
well.
I
recognize
that
we
do
not
have
the
jurisdiction
here
to
authorize
additional
expenditures.
H
You
just
to
add
to
to
our
chairs
comments.
It
would
also
I
would
like
to
say
that,
in
terms
of
cost
considerations
that
perhaps
the
revision
to
the
window,
application
really
just
deal
with
the
more
public
front
elevation
of
the
building,
as
opposed
to
all,
because
obviously
there
is
a
lot
of
glazing
that
we're
talking
about
with
this
particular
project.
So
as
again,
a
further
perhaps
compromise
that
that
that
you
could
consider
as
well
but
I
think,
in
my
opinion,
the
issue
of
precedents
setting
for
the
city
and
and
the
city
being
the
gold
standard.
H
As
you
said,
Barry
in
this
particular
project,
we
are
also
talking
about
a
project
that
is
searching
for
a
gold,
possibly
even
a
platinum,
LEED,
standard
and
I
think
that
makes
it
gives
this
project
a
special
consideration,
as
opposed
to
other
projects
that
from
developers
that
could
come
before
this
committee
looking
to
do
simulation
or
fake
treatments.
I
think
this
is
really
an
exception.
In
that
sense,
so
I
would
support
my
colleagues
sandy
on
the
committee
to
support
this
because
I
think
it's
a
fabulous
project,
it's
in
many
anyways.
So
those
are
my
comments.
J
J
Yet
in
this
instance,
the
alternate
treatment
is
acceptable.
I'll
defer
to
that
opinion
and
and
likely
to
be
guided
when
I
go
to
vote
at
Planning
Committee
by
the
wisdom
of
this
committee,
which
also
contains
significant
expertise.
So
I'm
not
going
to
urge
you
to
to
vote
against
this
proposal.
I
am
very
pleased,
though,
to
be
hearing
from
the
committee
the
strong
message
to
staff
to
to
work
as
hard
as
they
can
to
sharpen
their
pencils
in
order
to
try
to
achieve
a
window
treatment
that
is
more
acceptable
to
the
community
and
I'm
hopeful.
J
C
C
Okay,
we're
turning
now
to
our
final
item,
which
is
item
seven
on
our
agenda,
which
is
the
application
also
the
transportation
building
at
ten
Lido
street,
a
property
designated
under
part
four
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
And
we
will
call
on
those
columns
for
the
last
time
to
give
us
a
brief
overview
and
presentation
of
the
application.
E
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I'll
make
this
quick
I
would
like
to
preface
it
by
saying
this
is
my
record
number
of
presentations
that
have
built
our
security
since
I
started
working
here.
So
this
is
an
application
belt
of
the
Transportation
Building
at
Tim
Vito
Street.
The
building
is
part
of
the
Vito
Center
and
is
being
incorporated
into
the
new
LRT
station
at
the
corner
of
on
Rideau
Street.
E
So
here's
the
location,
so
the
property
is
right
at
the
corner.
You'll
recognize
that
when
I
show
you
the
pictures,
but
it's
at
the
corner
of
Colonel
buy
and
burrito
here's
a
picture
of
it.
The
property
was
designated
in
1980
for
its
cultural
heritage
value
and
then
in
the
early
1980s
it
was
incorporated
into
the
Rideau
Center
as
part
of
its
as
part
of
the
building
or
part
of
the
mall.
Sorry,
the
application
before
the
community
is
a
fairly
small
project.
E
There
was
an
application
two
years
ago,
approved
by
council
to
construct
a
new
canopy
along
Vito
Street,
wrapping
around
the
corner
here
to
incorporate
the
new
entrance
to
the
LRT,
so
that
was
approved
by
council
in
2013.
That
application
also
included
some
new
light.
The
building,
as
well
as
restoration
of
the
terracotta,
so
I'll
just
show
you
the
area
of
work
for
the
application
today.
So
this
is
the
kernel
by
facade.
E
So
the
area
that
we're
discussing
is
these
piers
all
the
way
along
this
facade,
which
are
currently
plowed
in
terracotta
with
a
granite
base,
as
well
as
these
piers
along
Lido
street,
which
mostly
clad
in
terracotta
this
one.
Here
the
terracotta
has
been
removed
prior
to
this
application
being
submitted
through
the
construction
work
it
was
removed.
E
The
proposed
canopy
you'll,
see
in
the
elevations,
is
going
to
come
along
here
and
wrap
around
the
corner
this
these
pillows
along
here,
so
there's
six
that
are
open
on
all
four
sides.
These
were
open
in
the
1980s
when
the
building
was
incorporated
into
the
Rideau
Center,
and
this
the
setback
entrance
as
I'm
sure
everybody
has
gone
through
was
was
introduced.
So
three
of
the
four
sides
of
these
piers
currently
have
Indiana
limestone
on
them.
The
front
facing
side
has
the
historic,
terracotta
we're
getting
very
technical
here,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
really
describe
it.
E
So,
as
I
said,
it
was
Desmond
in
1980
building
is
constructed
of
terracotta
and
matching
yellow
brick
on
a
polished,
granite
base
has
a
gothic
theme
and
a
decorative
symmetrical
facade
buildings
designated
the
project
description.
So
the
proposal
just
based
on
all
those
photos,
I
just
showed
you-
is
to
replace
all
of
the
existing
terracotta
panels
on
the
ground
floor
with
Indiana
limestone,
and
the
second
portion
of
the
application
is
to
change
the
material
of
the
canopy
that
was
previously
approved
by
council
from
glass
to
porcelain
and
I'll.
Explain
the
reasons
for
that.
E
So
here's
the
site
plan
you
can
see
these
little
boxes
here
are
the
piers
that
we
are
discussing.
So
these
say
or
five
sorry,
six,
including
this
one,
the
ones
that
currently
have
limestone
on
them
on
three
of
the
four
sides,
and
then
these
ones
along
here
are
all
intact
with
terracotta
and
two
of
these
three
currently
have
terracotta.
This
is
the
one
that
has
had
its
terracotta
removed
again,
just
an
elevation
showing
you
so
here's
the
canopy
that's
being
introduced
along
Rideau
and
coronal
by
and
then
just
a
close-up.
E
So
the
reason
for
the
exchange
of
material
from
glass
to
porcelain
was
for
durability
reasons.
There
was
some
further
consideration
given
to
the
fact
that
it
is
not
that
high
off
the
ground
could
be
subject
to
vandalism.
That
sort
of
thing
and
porcelain
was
a
more
durable
material.
That's
that
had
the
same
same
effect
as
the
glass
again
to
show
you
these
elevations,
and
so
the
applicant
is
now
proposing
to
replace
all
of
the
existing
terracotta
on
the
ground
floor
on
all
of
the
piers,
both
on
Middle,
Street
and
Colonel
by
within
Indiana
limestone.
E
This
image
just
shows
you
the
difference
in
the
material.
So
this
is
the
proposed
limestone
and
then
this
is
the
existing
terracotta.
It's
somewhat
difficult
to
see
in
this
room,
so
the
application
is
before
the
committee,
because
staff
doesn't
have
the
delegated
authority
to
approve
the
removal
of
heritage
attributes
of
a
building
and
because
the
Terracotta
is
considered
a
heritage
attribute.
We
had
to
bring
this
forward
for
the
decision
of
the
committee.
E
The
proponent
has
an
engineer's
report
prepared
that
identified
four
options.
One
was
removed
the
Terracotta
and
replace
it
with
new
terracotta
and
limestone
two
was
removed,
the
Terracotta
and
replace
entirely
with
limestone,
which
is
what
has
been
proposed
by
the
applicant,
repairing
the
Terracotta
in
situ
and
then
selectively
replacement
of
terracotta
in
it
with
limestone.
E
So,
as
you
will
see
from
the
staff
recommendation,
we
are
recommending
something
quite
close
to
option
four,
which
is
a
partial
replacement
in
our
partial
restoration
or
or
replacement
in
kind
based
on
whatever
is
appropriate,
so
approve
the
replacement
of
the
terracotta
panels,
with
Indiana
limestone
with
the
appropriate
vertical
tooling
on
the
street,
facing
forestry
facing
elevations
and
that's
for
the
six
exposed
ground
floor
players
appears
at
chrono
binary
tow.
So
that's
the
ones
that
are
already
altered
for
the
entrance.
E
E
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
these
in
too
much
detail
again
because
we've
talked
about
them
a
lot
today,
but
staff
have
determined
that
this
looking
for
a
balanced
approach,
so
we
have
appears
have
already
been
altered
at
the
corner.
We
may
have
deemed
it
appropriate
to
to
replace
the
existing
deteriorated
terracotta
with
the
proposed
limestone
and
then
in
the
areas
where
the
building
has
not
been
so
significantly
altered.
The
the
value
should
be
retained
by
either
replacement
in
kind
or
restoration.
E
There
are
guidelines
around
masonry
they're
here,
I
again
won't
go
through
them.
The
principles
are
the
same
as
they
are
for
pretty
much
anything
replacing
and
kind
if
it's
a
lovable
retaining
sound
and
reparable
masonry
that
contributes
to
the
heritage.
Value
of
this
dark
place
and
only
replacing
the
parts
that
are
extensively
deteriorated.
E
Counselors
aware
of
the
application
Harwich
ottawa
was
notified
of
the
application
and
I
see
that
you've
received
comments
from
them.
Neighborhood
neighbors
within
30
meters
were
notified,
I,
don't
believe
any
comments
were
received
and
the
Lowertown
community
association
was
notified
of
the
application.
C
D
Thank
You
chair
so
basically
heard
each
other
or
supports
the
staff
recommendation
recognizing
that
the
columns
at
the
entrance
and
that
the
I
guess
the
far
east
end
of
the
building
are
too
far
gone
to
be
economically
viable
to
reinstate
as
the
original
terracotta
and
in
fact
those
entrance
columns
have
been
that
way
for
more
than
35
years.
So
we're
not
talking
about
recent
changes.
We
do,
however,
feel
strongly
that
the
columns
that
are
in
good
condition
should
be.
D
It's
also
groundbreaking
in
its
in
its
use
of
skyscraper
Gothic
architecture
in
Ottawa
and
the
cladding
with
with
terracotta
and
the
treatment
all
the
way
up.
The
building
so
I
give
a
number
of
walking
tours,
and
this
building
actually
features
on
four
different
walking
tours
that
I
give
for
heritage
Ottawa,
so
I'm
quite
quite
close
to
it,
but
we
do
support
the
staff
recommendation.
Thank
you.
D
C
J
J
Failed
is
failing
or
will
fail
in
the
near
future,
and
unless
we
address
the
root
causes
of
that
failure,
it
has
a
problem
that
is
going
to
continue
because
of
the
continued
failure
of
the
terracotta.
Essentially,
this
steel
structure,
behind
it
terracotta,
is
a
very
soft
material
and
in
this
climate
it
cracks
over
time
and
the
glaze
rubs
off
over
time,
which
allows
water
to
penetrate
to
the
steel
structure
in
behind
the
steel,
the
corrodes,
the
steel,
which
then
puts
outwards
pressure
on
the
Terracotta.
J
J
I
F
Thanks
so
yeah
I'm
Nick
from
and
I'm
representing,
John
cooking
associates,
and
so
we
prepared
that
report
with
the
four
options
so,
as
was
recommended
by
the
staff
or
was
a
option
for
which
was
kind
of
a
hybrid
replacement
of
limestone
and
some
of
my
pay
of
Terra
Cotta.
So
we
do
support
that
as
one
viable
option
and
you
can
take
any
questions
if
there
are
any
from
the
committee,
but
otherwise
we're
okay
with
the
staff
option
recommended
option.
Maybe.
K
F
I
believe
I'm,
not
the
one
who
wrote
the
report
for
our
office,
but
I
believe
based
on
a
report,
appears
that
they're
recommending
remain.
It
says
that
these
wings
are
in
the
lower
traffic
exposure
locations
few
in
number,
so
the
demand
for
ongoing
maintenance
would
be
reduced
on
those
PS
I
believe
the
peers
that
were
recommending
for
replacement,
which
it
is
five
or
six
there
at
the
corner
or
in
the
worst
condition.
So
replacing
those
with
limestone
is
definitely
the
best
option
as
far
as
the
exact
condition
of
the
other
peers.
I
I
guessing
what
happened
here
is
when
they
recessed
the
entrance
that
then
led
to
increased
exposure
for
those
Terra
Cotta
peers,
which
is
why
those
ones
every
ones
we're
dealing
with
today
and
that's
kind
of
an
unintended
consequence
of
that
decision
to
to
recess
the
entrance.
Can
you
give
us
an
idea
of
that?
Certainly,
tear
apart
is
more
expensive
than
Indiana
limestone.
I
F
So,
with
Terra
Cotta,
when
it's
exposed
to
the
weather,
it
relies
on
the
thin
glaze
to
resist
weathering
once
the
glaze
is
broken,
say
if
a
chip
in
the
Terra
Cotta
than
the
soft
material
behind
glaze
will
deteriorate
more
quickly.
So
since
it's
a
high
traffic
area,
it's
likely
that
it
could
be
exposed
to
chips,
or
you
know,
weathering
your
damage
from
pedestrians.
That
would
cause
the
glaze
to
fail,
and
then
it
would
result
in
premature
failure
of
the
terracotta
itself.
Limestone
is
is
a
solid
material.
C
Yes,
thank
you,
yeah.
That
was
pointed
out
in
the
report.
Thank
you.
You
can
return
to
your
to
your
seat.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
so
questions
or
comments
of
staff,
I'm,
I'm
happy
to
start
so.
I
guess
regard
to
the
consultants
assertion
that
the
cost
of
replacing
the
materials
with
cotta
is
ten
times
the
amount
of
limestone
you
have
any
sense.
Would
you
be
able
to
support
that
assertion?
Are
we
talking
about
really
a
budget
that
would
have
to
be
ten
times
what
what
this
applicant
has
budgeted
for?
E
Know
I
can't
I
can't
confirm
or
deny
I've
had
that
assertion,
because
it's
not
information
that
was
provided
to
me
other
than
the
same
answer
that
was
provided
to
the
committee.
I
would
acknowledge
that
it
likely
is
more
expensive
to
do
terracotta
but
I,
don't
know
what
order
of
magnitude
that
would
be
and
I
haven't
seen
any
figures.
E
C
If
we
look
at
the
existing
terracotta
peers,
are
they
severely
degraded
so
will
there
be
an
expectation
that
terracotta
last
five
ten
fifteen
years
and
then
it
needs
to
be
repaired,
whereas
limestone
has
a
hundred
year
lifespan?
How
would
you
advise
the
committee
to
consider
the
issues
of
repair
and
lifespan
of
those
two
materials.
E
Just
from
my
own
visual
inspection
at
the
risk
of
looking
like
a
strange
person
at
the
corner
of
Reno
Street
eyes
at
lunch
hour,
one
day,
it's
clearly
in
worse
condition
there
at
the
corner,
where
those
pills
have
already
been
altered.
The
pills
on
Colonel
buy,
don't
appear
to
be
in
as
poor
condition
as.
C
Right
last
question:
so
if
you
were
to
page
12
of
your
presentation-
and
we
see
the
one
two
three
four
five-
six
to
seven
peers
as
you
go
from
south
to
north,
which
are
encased
in
glass
right
now
with
the
applicant
men
only
have
to
repair
replace
that
last
frontage
of
the
pews
with
the
other
three
sides
of
those
piers.
Given
that
they
look
to
be.
C
E
Back
should
be
easier
to
show
you
on
a
photograph,
because
you
can
see
the
existing
piers,
so
you
can
see
here.
The
windows
come
quite
close
out,
so
there
aren't
really
four
sides
that
would
be
exposed.
So
the
primary
you
know
there's
a
bit
of
a
return
here
on
on
either
side
of
the
of
the
pier,
but
it's
primarily
the
front
portion
that
faces
the
street
and.
E
Think
that's
something
if
the
committee
approves
the
staff
recommendation
that
the
applicant
would
have
to
explore
more
in
more
detail,
because
it
is
something
that
we
that's
why
we
recommended
repair
or
replacement.
There
is
some
evidence
that
repair
of
terra
cotta
is
not
always
successful,
depending
on
what
condition
it's
in
so
I
think
further
assessment
on
the
on
the
quality
or
the
condition
of
that
terra
cotta
would
be
required
and
then
the
replacement
at
the
corner
would
then
the
introduction
of
the
canopy
and
all
that
so
I.
E
As
I
mentioned,
the
presentation,
the
ones
the
ones
at
the
corner
have
already
been
altered.
They
only
have
one
face
of
Terra
Cotta
at
this
point,
so
I
mean.
Obviously
the
removal
of
any
hair
judgment
has
somewhat
of
a
negative
impact
on
the
character
of
the
building.
As
I
mentioned,
what
the
windows
on
Bayview,
but
here
are
where
you
use
a
new
material
that
is
compatible
in
terms
of
character
and
color.
E
H
H
H
This
is
a
very
important
feature
and
element
of
the
building,
so
just
to
remind
ourselves
of
that
fact
and
I
will
be
supporting
that
part
of
a
staff
recommendation
in
terms
of
the
canopy
glass
versus
the
porcelain.
I
guess
I
need
an
explanation
as
to
how
what
what
this
porcelain
product
looks
like
and
how
it
can
be
comparable
to
glass
just
because
I'm,
not
that
I
meant
against
it,
but
just
say
I
need
more
information.
Thank
you.
E
The
architect
may
be
able
to
speak
a
little
bit
better
to
this,
but
I'll
try.
The
canopy
design
is
remaining
the
same.
The
proposed
canopy
was
to
be
translucent
and
sort
of
been
lit
and
kind
of
glow,
and
that
sort
of
thing-
yes,
probably,
and
so
you
know
there
will
be
a
difference
there
and
I
I
think
there's
still
intention
to
have
it
be
lit
and
all
of
that
sort
of
thing,
but
I
mean
if
the
chair
will
indulge
the
architect
may
be
able
to
better
answer
that
question.
If
they're
still
here.
J
J
Where,
instead
of
lighting
it
from
within
their
lighting
it
from
below,
so
we
feel,
like
the
reflection
of
that
light,
will
give
it
that
same
glowing
element.
In
addition
to
that,
the
white
portion
is
also
the
material
that
the
RTG,
the
builders
of
the
LRT
have
chosen
to
to
use
on
the
walls
of
their
of
their
station.
So
we
think
that
that
actually
is
well
I
mean
that's
a
good
connection
between
the
canopy
and
the
LRT.
Obviously,.
C
C
G
I
was
heavily
involved
with
the
penny,
a
statement
we
obtained
that
and
things.
So
there
are
a
few,
not
a
lot
a
lot
of
the
older
buildings
and
the
rural
areas
were
destroyed
in
the
fires
in
the
1870s
and
so
the
opportunity.
It's
also
the
weekend
of
the
Cup
fair,
but
you
could
come
for
a
while
if
you
want
to
go
on
the
court
for
anything
a
half
way
there.