►
From YouTube: Planning Committee - April 24, 2018
Description
Planning Committee meeting – April 24, 2018 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
Okay,
good
morning,
everyone,
this
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
items
two
three,
four,
six,
eight
and
nine
on
today's
agenda
for
the
items
just
mentioned.
Only
those
who
make
all
submissions
today
or
written
submissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal.
A
In
addition,
the
applicant
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal,
if
counsel,
does
not
adopt
an
amendment
within
150
days
of
receipt
of
the
application
pros
owning
in
210
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment
and
the
comment
sheet
is
available
at
the
door.
Appoint
anyone
wishing
to
submit
written
comments
on
these
amendments.
A
A
We
have
Frank
Cairo
Frank
you're
here
and
Patrick
Harrington.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
either
Frank?
So
if
there
are
you
prepared
not
to
speak
if
we're
prepared
to
carry
it?
Yes,
Frank!
Okay,
thank
you
since
I'm
carrying.
Thank
you
I'm
number
three
is
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
four
373
Princeton
Avenue
and
this
is
in
a
five-point,
C,
seven
Melbourne.
This
is
in
the
councillor
leapers
kitchen,
sippy
wort,
and
he
just
and
Collier
here.
B
B
So
as
a
result
of
this
partnership,
we're
going
to
have
I
think
it's
thirty
to
thirty
six
units
of
affordable
housing
for
women
in
the
or
Jean
d'arc
Institute
building
the
remainder
of
their
property
is
going
to
be
developed
by
uniform,
with
the
rezoning
that
hopefully
will
pass
today,
and
my
thanks
go
to
the
developer.
While
this
is
a
partnership,
I
assume
that
there
is
some
contribution
being
made
by
the
developer,
it's
at
a
level
of
intensification
that
is
sensitive.
B
They
didn't
grasp.
This
is
a
reasonable
member
of
unit.
The
community
has
not
pushed
back,
so
it's
a
it's.
A
win,
win
win
for
the
community
for
uniform
and
for
cornerstone,
whose
fundraising
campaign
is
continuing,
ongoing
right
now
to
help
get
that
affordable
housing
built
so
I
do
hope.
Colleagues
will
support
this
thanks.
Sure
thank.
A
You
cows,
reliever,
is
this
item
carried
carry
thank
you
and
number
four.
Is
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
740
spring
land,
but
okay,
it's
being
held
by
a
councillor
Brockington
and
we
do
have
lloyd,
phillips
and
rod.
Leahy
are
here
as
well
for
questions
okay,
so
that
was
being
held.
The
next
item
is
the
application
to
alter
132
Lisgar
road,
a
property
located
in
Rockville
Park
Heritage,
Conservation,
District
designated
under
part
five
of
an
Theriot
Heritage
Act.
We
don't
have
any
one
to
speak
to
this.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
about
this
item?
Is
it
Kerry?
A
Thank
you.
Item
number.
Six
is
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
473,
Albert
Street
councillor,
Catherine
McKenna
is
here
it's
in
her
ward.
We
also
have
jeff
Nadeau
from
fo
ten.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for
Jeff
and
so
Jeff?
If,
if
we're
prepared
to
carry
this
item
Roger,
you
still
need
to
speak
to
it.
A
I'm
going
to
ask
the
chair
of
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
councillor
Tobin
aslam,
to
give
us
a
little
bit
of
an
analogy
to
prepare
us
for
our
contemplation
today.
Okay,
number
nine
is
the
City
of
Ottawa
zoning
bylaw
2008
250
omnibus
amendments,
q2
2018.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
on
these
is
item
carried?
Thank
you
and
then.
The
last
item
is
the
status
update,
Planning,
Committee
enquiries
and
motions
for
the
period
ending
9th
of
April
2018.
A
Okay,
so,
as
you
know,
at
the
last
don't
two
planning
committees
ago,
meandering
Brook
Drive
was
brought
forward
as
a
from
and
with
some
concern
address
by
councillor,
Dean's
and
so
Planning
Committee
asked
staff
the
developer
and
Kelsey
Dean's
to
go
away
and
have
a
conversation
about
what
could
be
done.
So,
as
you
know,
we
do
have
a
motion
that
Vice
Chair
tyranny
has,
but
before
he
introduces
that
I
thought
that
councillor
Dean's,
you
might
like
to
have
a
has
something
to
say.
Or
would
you
like
to
wait
till
either.
D
Thank
you.
Madam
chair
where's
planning
committee
had
us
meeting
on
April
10th
2018
deferred
the
consideration
of
the
site
plan,
approval
per
one-nine-five,
reentering
Brook
Drive,
whereas
the
motion
of
the
deferred
city
staff
were
directed
to
explore
any
and
all
options
in
finding
a
solution
to
the
traffic
and
transit
problems,
whereas
the
city
staff
have
considered
the
options
and
have
met
with
the
developer
to
determine
what
solutions
are
possible,
whereas
a
developer
has
agreed
to
the
options
below
therefore
be
resolved.
D
The
Planning
Committee
approved
that
delegated
authority
for
the
approval
of
the
safe
plan
be
returned
to
the
manager,
develop
developments,
review
self
and
such
approval
would
be
including
the
following
conditions.
One,
the
owner
shall
be
required
to
construct
a
bus
pad
on
the
south
side
of
Lester
hemming
and
during
book
together
with
the
median
at
this
intersection.
Estimated
cost
of
12,000
dollars
to
the
owner,
in
addition
to
the
other
securities
required
for
the
site
plan,
shall
provide
the
securities
through
a
letter
of
credit
to
the
amount
of
$33,000
three.
D
Should
the
construction
have
not
proceeded
by
this
time,
the
$33,000
security
shall
be
returned
to
the
owner,
5
that
the
total
contribution
to
contribution
of
the
owner
to
the
bus
pad
median
and
pedestrian
crossover
shall
be
capped.
At
the
lesser
of
45,000
and
50%
of
the
total
12,000
plus,
the
cost
of
the
best-trained
crossover.
A
E
E
So
I
just
even
find
that
dangerous,
where
you
feel
somebody
come
up
behind
you,
so
I
feel
with
the
installation
of
these
concrete
barriers
in
the
middle
could
in
fact
be
more
harmful
to
the
area
than
not
I'm.
Also
asking
or
just
whether
there's
a
ability
to
put
a
sign
for
the
hidden
entrance,
because
I
find
at
night
or
in
snowstorms
that
luster
meandering,
brook
as
we
come
on
to
luster,
is
very
hard
to
see
in
a
snowstorm
or
even
in
dark.
E
F
A
But
you
raised
some
good
points,
so
I'm
going
to
go
over
to
Colin,
Simpson
and
Carl,
maybe
to
speak
to
when
the
work
on
the
the
investigation
of
Lester
is
going
to
happen,
but
also
confirmation
that
a
hidden
intersection
could
be
added
as
signage
or
any
other
comments
you
have
of
what
mrs.
Pitt,
mrs.
Hague
said.
Yeah.
G
Thank
You
chairman,
so
we'll
review
the
signage
again
and
part
of
the
plan
includes
the
installation
of
pedestrian
warning
signs.
35
meters
on
the
approach
on
either
ends
of
the
intersection,
so
that
will
help
with
the
visibility
of
you
know.
The
awareness
of
potential
pedestrians
crossing
the
intersection
we'll
have
staff,
do
another
site
inspection
to
see
if
there's
any
overgrown
trees
that
could
be
in
the
way.
That's
limiting
the
sight
lines
that
could
be
cut
back
to
improve
the
sight
lines.
G
There's
already
an
existing
streetlight
at
this
intersection
and
we're
reviewing
the
illumination
of
the
lights
and
likely
an
upgrade
a
Cobra's
lens
or
a
cobra
lighting
will
likely
be
involved
in
the
upgrade.
Those
are
the
the
main
things
that
we're
looking
at
and
just
a
remind
committee
again
that
this
segment
of
Leicester
is
due
for
a
widening
within
the
next
seven
or
eight
years.
So
you
know
the
road
will
be
widened
to
four
lanes
so
that
we,
you
know
better
opportunities
to
make
those
those
movements
with
a
deacceleration
lane
to
make
the
right
movement.
A
H
I
came
back,
eaten.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
for
coming
down
this
morning.
I
appreciate
it
and
I'm,
not
sure.
If
you
were
here
at
our
last
meeting
you're
your
local
councillor
did
a
very
good
job
in
forming
this
committee
about
the
historical
challenges
at
this
intersection,
and
we
certainly
had
a
good
discussion.
I
wanted
to
get
your
feedback
on
what's
being
proposed.
Now
the
vice
chair
of
this
committee
read
out
some
modifications
that
are
being
proposed
to
that
intersection.
It's
not
a
light,
but
a
median,
a
potential
crosswalk,
a
bus
pad.
E
Yes,
what
were
obviously
I
was
not
here
at
the
last
meeting
I
apologize
for
that,
and
we
were
very
much
looking
forward
to
the
lights
being
installed
to
have
solved
all
of
these
issues.
So
we
seem
like
we've
gone
back
a
little
bit.
I
mean
something
is
better
than
nothing
to
reduce
the
speed
on
muster.
I
live
up,
the
block
and
I
can
still
hear
the
cars
racing
down
the
road,
so
anything
we
can
do
to
reduce
the
speed
would
be
great.
C
G
We
don't
expect
this
Center
median
to
have
a
safety
issue.
I
mean
there
will
be
hazard
markers
on
both
ends
of
the
median
and
there's
a
large
gourd
area
out
already
acting
as
a
painted
median.
So
you
know
what
we're
doing
here
is
just
reinforcing
the
fact
that
there
is
a
center
median
area
and
we're
building
in
some
pedestrian
refuge
for
as
a
safety
outlet
for
people
trying
to
you
know
cross
the
street
in
a
safe
manner
to
to
get
to
the
to
the
transit
stop.
C
A
Jenny,
do
you
want
to
come
forward?
You
don't
have
to.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
Danny's,
representing
veil
crafts,
sure
anyone
I,
don't
see
any
questions
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
cooperation
over
the
past
month
and
your
willingness
to
support
this
motion
and
the
finances
associated
with
it.
Thank
you
very
much
councillor
Dean's
that
anyone
else
before
we
give
wrap
up
to
councillor
Dean's
go
ahead.
Please
Thanks.
C
Chair
harder
and
I
just
wanted
to
take
this
opportunity
to
thank
my
colleagues,
councillor
bleh
and
councillor
eglee,
who
were
very
helpful.
The
chair
of
transit
and
transportation
in
coming
to
a
resolution
and
I
also
wanted
to
thank
the
representatives
from
Vale
Kraft
for
their
cooperation
and
city
staff
for
their
work
on
this
file
and
the
planning
committee
I
know
you
don't
always
aren't
always
C's
with
site
plan,
but
this
is
an
important
issue
for
this
community
and
I.
Thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
come
to
a
resolution
so
effectively.
C
There
were
two
issues
that
we
raised
the
last
time.
One
was
access
to
reasonable
access
for
an
entire
community
to
public
transit
and
the
other
one
was
concern
about
the
access
and
egress.
So
what
we
have
come
forward
with
really
I
think
addresses
fairly
well.
The
issue
of
access
to
public,
transit
and
I
think
that's
a
really
important
consideration,
because
the
speeds
so
high
on
Lester
Road.
C
We
can't
put
a
pxo
in
because
it
speeds
80,
but
the
city
staff
have
said
that
they
do
think
that
there
is
potential
because
of
that
Center
concrete
median
of
the
speed.
Actually
reducing,
in
which
case
we
could
then
install
a
pxo,
and
so
what
we've
done
is
taken
as
security
they'll
craft
have
agreed
to
pay
for
50%
of
a
pxo,
so
I'm
hopeful
that
we'll
end
up
with
a
crosswalk
there
good
a
copy,
EXO
and
and
access
to
transit,
because
the
traffic
control
signal
wasn't
warranted
at
that
intersection.
C
There's
really
no
way
to
compel
Vale
crop
to
pay
for
that,
so
where
this
is
I
think
all
we
could
reasonably
get
but
I
think
it's
much
better
than
it
was
the
last
time
we
were
here
so
I
did
really
want
to
genuinely
thank
everyone
for
participating.
I.
Think
we've
served
this
community
much
better.
So
thank
you
and.
A
A
A
H
Madam
sure
I
do
thank
personal
committee
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
and
then
provide
some
history
and
context
to
this
item
and
help
the
committee
understand
what
are
some
of
the
issues
in
the
neighborhood.
That
may
not
be
germane
specifically
to
the
motion
before
us,
but
certainly
our
secondary
issues
that
need
to
be
addressed.
So
the
property
is
in
the
Moonies
bay.
Neighborhood
have
real
reward.
What's
interesting
about
this
particular
neighborhood.
Is
it's
seeing
four
different
development
files?
At
the
same
time,
council
dealt
with
canoe
bay.
H
H
The
number
of
units
within
the
complex
and
that
question
is
not
being
put
towards
the
committee
today,
there's
they're
not
seeking
a
zoning
amendment
for
the
expansion,
because
the
land
has
already
zoned
for
that
purpose.
What's
before
us
today
is
is
because
the
new
buildings
automatically
trigger
a
requirement
for
parking.
H
The
third
part-
that's
before
us,
madam
chair,
is,
is
to
provide
parking
on
the
inner
circle
Lane
ways
of
the
existing
building,
so
the
four
buildings
that
exist
now
have
semi
circle,
driveways
and
they're,
going
to
use
some
of
the
green
space
on
that
property
to
to
take
out
to
provide
more
visitor
parking.
We've
successfully
got
the
number
down
it
used
to
be
40,
it's
now
down
to
26
and
there's
still
some
wiggle
room
when
we
get
to
the
site
plan,
but
why
I
held
this?
H
Madam
chairs
I
do
wanted
to
just
address
and
get
on
the
record
some
of
the
issues
that
I've
heard
that
some
of
the
both
tenants
and
nearby
neighbors
have
raised
with
me.
The
intent
of
the
Norbury
residents
to
expand
on
the
site
has
existed
for
many
many
years.
This
has
been
in
the
public
domain
under
my
tenure
for
a
number
of
years
as
well.
H
There
have
been
two
well
attended
public
meetings,
and
certainly
people
have
been
engaged
and
again,
not
necessarily
germane
to
what's
before
us,
but
I
just
have
some
liberties
to
raise
this
to
get
it
on
the
record,
because
these
buildings
have
had
a
50
plus
year
history
in
the
community.
Certainly
tenants.
Existing
tenants
have
raised
issues
with
me
about
some
of
the
repair
and
state
of
the
buildings
which
I've
raised
with
the
owners.
There's
a
parking
garage
now
that
is
attached
to
the
largest
building,
that's
going
to
come
down
in
the
expansion
process
and
be
rebuilt.
H
There's
a
lot
of
concerns
that
some
of
the
tenants
or
either
older
mobility
challenges
who
are
going
to
be
served
in
the
interim
again.
That
will
be
worked
out
through
the
site
plan
and
post
approval
and,
of
course,
OC
Transpo,
as
as
this
facility
expands
and
hundreds
of
more
residents
come
buses
which
are
challenged
to
serve
the
community
at
peak
times
already
will
be
further
exchanged.
So
when
this
comes
to
council
I'm
going
to
ask
some
questions
to
OC
Transpo
and
get
their
answers
on
the
record.
But
madam
chair
I
mean
the
issue.
H
But
if
their
expansion
plans
proceed
and
they
can
use
parking
spots
that
are
surplus
already,
that
for
me,
from
a
planning
perspective,
is
the
best
way
to
go
so
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
some
of
those
issues
get
those
on
the
record
again
the
issue
of
whether
they
expand
or
not
is
not
before
the
committee.
Rather
the
question
about
whether
we
approve
their
parking,
variances
and
I
just
wanted
to
provide
those
comments.
Okay,.
A
Thank
you
councillor
and
I.
Just
would
ask
our
committee
M
coordinator
what
your
that's.
It
miss
Stephanie,
that
if
you
would
please
advise
OC
Transpo
that
councillor
brockington
is
going
to
be
asking
some
questions
so
that
mr.
man
Kony
will
need
somebody
probably
a
pad
Scrimgeour,
something
like
there.
Okay,
just
so,
you
know
we
have
the
right
people
at
the
table,
since
we
have
advance
notice.
A
F
Thank
you,
Matt
I'm
sure.
Yes,
so
this
item
first
came
to
build
heritage
subcommittee
at
its
February
8
meeting.
As
colleagues
may
know,
this
is
a
building
in
the
world
Laurier
Heritage
Conservation
District
and
is
a
category
3
building
which,
in
that
HCD
is
a
contributing
building.
It
initially
had
a
score
of
44,
but
in
doing
research
on
this
property
members
of
the
community
established
that
it
was
the
home
of
Lester
Pearson
during
the
period
of
time
that
he
was
minister
of
External
Affairs.
F
So,
as
a
result
of
that,
the
score
the
heritage
staff
acknowledged
the
the
score
for
the
building
would
have
gone
up
from
44
to
49
still
as
a
category
3
building
still
a
contributing
building,
but
in
this
case
staff
were
recommending
demolition
because
of
the
state
of
the
building
and
approval
of
an
application
for
new
construction.
For
those
who
don't
know
the
building,
it's
mid-century
two-story
apartment
building,
and
so
when
this
came
at
February
8th,
there
was
considerable
discussion
and
public
delegations
at
the
meeting.
F
I
would
say
that
there
was
a
general
concern
at
the
committee
in
February
that
there
had
not
been
an
independent
assessment
of
the
structure
of
the
building,
some
concerns
about,
given
the
fact
that
the
Ugandan
government
had
owned
the
building
since
1985.
You
know
was
this
a
case
of
a
property
owner
not
taking
precautionary
steps
to
ensure
the
proper
repair
and
state
of
the
building.
Those
were
some
of
the
issues
that
came
up
in
February.
F
The
engineering
study,
independent
engineering
study
concluded
that,
in
this
case,
John
Koch
and
associates
concluded
that
they
felt
that
demolition
was
justified,
given
the
state
of
the
building,
but
also
acknowledged
that
there
was
a
way
to
preserve
it
with
sufficient
investment
in
the
property
and
the
issue
is
the
foundation
slab
had
degraded.
There
were
cracks
in
it
over
time
and
I'm
sure
you'll
hear
from
members
of
public.
If
use
on
that.
So
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
committee
was
faced
with
this
independent
engineering
study
and
voted
once
again
on
this.
F
The
committee
was
split.
It
voted
5-2
in
favor
of
rejecting
the
application
for
demolition
and
I.
Think
it's
fair
to
say
that
for
the
majority
of
members,
the
concern
was
really
about
rewarding
what
they
felt
was
a
case
of
a
property
owner
not
taking
sufficient
care
of
her
property
and
rewarding
demolition
by
neglect
and
to
to
members,
including
myself,
voted
in
favor
of
the
staff
recommendation
most
not
because
we
disagreed
with
the
concerns
around
the
message
that
these
sorts
of
demolition
send.
F
But
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
motion
that
we
staff
to
look
at
in
February
was
followed.
The
revised
application
did
reflect
a
couple
of
the
changes
that
had
been
requested
in
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement,
so
there
were
two
two
or
three
small
changes
made
between
the
February
and
the
a
pro
version
and
since
on
its
face,
the
motion
had
been
respected.
F
A
That's
good.
Thank
you
very
much,
I
think
that
was
important
that
you
had
that
opportunity,
and
so
we
have
a
lot
of
people
in
front
of
us
and
live
by
on
the
heritage
side
by
court,
curry,
who's,
the
manager
of
right
away
heritage
and
urban
design
services
and
then
Doug
James,
whose
manager
on
the
planning
side.
So
if
you
could
introduce
the
people
up
here,
I
think
that
would
be
helpful
for
people
in
the
in
the
audience
and
certainly
in
case
anyone
around
the
table
doesn't
know
that
they
are
and
for
the
delegations.
Thank.
I
A
A
A
J
Good
morning,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
this
morning.
My
name
is
Chad
Rollins
I'm,
president
of
the
Community
Association
Action
Sandy
Hill
I,
do
have
some
slides,
I'm,
hoping
you're
able
to
see
them
I'm
just
here
to
respond
further
to
our
written
submission,
which
I
hope
you
all
received
and
we're
asking
today
that
you
please
refuse
the
application
to
demolish
the
building
and
the
rezoning
of
the
site
before
you
here.
J
You'll
see
a
photo:
that's
actually
Lester
B
Pearson
and
his
wife
Marian,
taken
in
1957
in
the
living
room
of
their
home
at
231,
Coburg
Street.
This
was
their
residence
in
the
late
1950s.
The
Golden
Age
of
Canadian
foreign
policy
often
referred
to
as
Pearson
diploma
Pearson
and
diplomacy.
This
period
included
the
founding
of
the
UN
and
NATO
Presidency
of
the
UN
General
Assembly
in
1952,
and
the
leading
of
the
UN
intervention
in
the
Suez
Crisis.
The
timeline
here
is
important.
J
Pearson
and
his
wife
bought
this
house
in
night
into
a
sari
into
1954
in
1956,
the
Suez
Crisis
erupted
in
Pearson
led
the
UN
intervention
creating
peacekeeping.
This
earned
him
the
Nobel
Prize
in
1957
and
influenced
strongly
his
view
that
Canada
needed
its
own
new
flag.
In
1958,
he
became
leader
of
the
Opposition
and
moved
from
this
house
to
Stornoway
when
he
became
prime
minister
in
1963.
He
pushed
for
a
new
Canadian
flag,
which
was
eventually
adopted
in
1965.
J
J
J
There's
some
fine
examples
shown
here,
including
the
Australian
High
Commissioners
residence,
the
Angolan
and
Croatian
embassies
and,
in
the
background,
static,
ona
Hall,
which
was
home
to
Sir
John
a
McDonald
at
one
time
and
is
now
the
High
Commission
of
Brunei.
Sadly,
though,
the
Ugandan
High,
Commission
and
other
examples
are
now
arising
where
our
heritage,
our
resources,
are
at
risk
due
to
the
neglect
of
foreign
governments,
we're
very
concerned
that
allowing
this
demolition
will
set
a
precedent
for
other
situations
with
foreign
missions.
J
This
is
a
clear
situation
of
demolition
by
neglect.
The
independent
expert
hired
by
the
city
stated
in
their
report
and
I
quote
that
the
building
stood
vacant
for
four
years
and
unheated
through
at
least
two
winters,
and
that
this
worsened
the
situation.
Even
the
proponents
own
experts
state
in
their
planning
rationale
that
the
building's
condition
is
due
in
part
to
deferred
or
inadequate
maintenance
over
the
past
few
decades.
Indeed,
the
Ugandan
High
Commission
has
owned
the
building
for
more
than
30
years.
J
Just
yesterday,
we
found
a
2015
annual
report
prepared
by
the
Auditor
General
of
Uganda,
which
states
on
pages
438
through
441
that
since
2012,
various
consultants
have
undertaken,
reviews
and
inspections
of
this
property
in
2013,
a
consultant
recommended
remedial
work
when
they're
taken
within
one
year
and
warned
that
there
would
be
consequences.
If
that
was
not
done,
the
government
of
Uganda
budgeted
roughly
1
million
dollars.
Us
for
that
work,
but
the
AG
found
in
on
inspection
in
2015
that
the
work
had
not
yet
been
concluded
a
completed,
and
they
concluded
that
and
I
quote.
J
The
delay
in
renovations
has
caused
further
deterioration,
as
earlier
predicted
by
the
consultants
after
two
years
without
renovations,
the
property
is
now
recommended
for
demolition.
I,
don't
think
you
can
get
clearer
evidence
of
demolition
by
neglect
than
not
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
as
councillor
Nussbaum
mentioned,
had
passed
a
motion
in
February
asking
that,
at
least
in
part,
the
applicant
be
encouraged
to
prepare
a
revised
application
that
retains
or
incorporates
a
significant
portion
of
the
existing
building.
Sadly,
this
was
not
done.
J
We
know
that
the
huge
ganden
AG's
report
says
that
a
million
dollars
was
budgeted
previously
for
this
work
and
that
has
not
been
spent.
Rather,
they
spent
three
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars.
According
to
the
AG
report
on
consultants
to
plan
for
the
demolition
and
replacement
of
the
building,
when
that
been
money
have
been
better
spent
on
preserving
this
piece
of
Canadian
Heritage.
So
just
in
conclusion,
this
is
a
building
of
significant
cultural
heritage
value.
J
It
is
a
contributing
building
and
in
HCD
it
is
contributing
contributory
to
the
Prime
Minister's
Roe
initiative
and
it's
clearly
a
victim
of
demolition
by
neglect.
And
yet,
despite
all
that,
the
experts
say
it's
still
possible
to
retain
it.
So
perhaps
someone
other
than
the
Ugandan
would
be
willing
to
do
that.
We
would
encourage
you,
therefore,
to
that
pulled
the
built
heritage,
subcommittees
recommendation
and
refused
the
application
for
demolition,
and
we
would
also
encourage
you
to
refuse
the
application
to
rezone
the
property
to
commercial,
as
this
sets
a
precedent.
That's
uncommon,
unappealing
for
the
neighborhood.
J
J
A
Up,
we
have
Francoise
Bray
Francoise,
welcome.
K
Prime
ministers,
our
role
is
a
citizen's
initiative
to
preserve
the
prime
ministerial
legacy
in
the
Sandy
Hill.
We
oppose
the
demolition
of
231,
curb
Street
and
we're
concerned
by
the
design
plans
that
have
been
advanced
to
replace
this
important
building.
231
Coburg
Street
is
part
of
unique
cultural
landscape
in
Sandy
Hill
that
exists
nowhere
else
in
this
country.
K
Indeed,
over
the
past
150
years,
the
neighborhood
has
housed
an
extraordinary
number
of
nationally
important
people,
including
seven
fathers
of
Confederation
and
ten
Prime
Minister's,
many
of
their
homes
and
houses
of
worship
remained
standing,
making
Sandy
Hill
one
of
the
most
important
heritage
neighborhoods
in
the
country.
This
heritage
includes
celesta
V
Pearson's
former
residents
at
2:31
Kohlberg.
The
period
in
which
Pearson
lived
at
231
Coburg
represents
the
pinnacle
of
Canada's
Golden
Age
of
diplomacy.
K
As
child
Rollins
noted,
it
was
were
living
at
2:31,
core
Berg,
that
Pearson
led
the
United
Nations
intervention
in
the
Suez
Crisis,
which
led
to
his
award
of
the
Nobel
Peace
Prize
in
recent
decades.
The
demolition
of
some
of
Sandy
Hills,
nationally
significant
built
heritage
and
the
corresponding
denigration
of
their
surrounding
public
realm
space
has
become
more
acute.
This
has
resulted
in
a
loss
of
awareness
regarding
the
historical
importance
of
the
neighborhood,
leaving
it
vulnerable
to
decay.
K
Prime
Minister's
role
grew
out
of
a
desire
to
hold
to
this
downward
cycle
and
to
preserve
and
protect
Sandy
Hill
for
future
generations
and
to
celebrate
the
nation
building
efforts
of
our
prime
ministers.
The
proposed
demolition
of
231
Coburg
Street
runs
counter
to
these
efforts.
It
would
destroy
one
of
the
key
buildings
were
seeking
to
protect.
It
would
undermine
the
contextual
integrity
of
the
cultural
landscape
and
it
would
deprive
Canadians
from
across
the
country
of
the
chance
to
connect
with
their
national
identity.
K
A
L
K
In
generally,
it's
been
quite
positive
and
they
have
been
consultations
undertaken
by
some
of
those
missions
with
the
Community
Association
in
advance
of
any
work
done
under
properties
having
and
in
general.
It's
been
believed
that
foreign
delegations
represent
a
good
use
of
that
heritage
property
because
they
often
have
the
resources
to
maintain
those
properties
were
seeing
now.
Unfortunately,
one
example
here
and
perhaps
a
second
example
on
Blackburn
Avenue
for
foreign
delegations,
no
longer
maintaining
these
properties
and
were
of
course
very
concerned
by
that
and.
K
H
You,
sir,
for
your
presentation,
both
you
and
the
previous
gentlemen
have
made
some
strong
cases
cases
for
this
committee
to
to
consider
this
morning.
I
was
in
Stockholm
Sweden
three
years
ago
at
the
Nobel
Museum
and
I
learned
more
about
Lester
B
Pearson
there
than
any
other
building
or
place
in
Canada,
certainly
learned
through
history
about
the
former
prime
minister.
But
the
museum
had
a
very
good
display
on
his
contributions.
Can
you
just
elaborate
for
me
what
is
in
the
public
good
to
retain
this
building,
a
building
that
the
public
aren't
going
into?
H
They
don't
get
that
same
sense
of
the
picture
that
was
shown
from
the
previous
speaker.
It's
basically
a
building
on
a
tour
where
you
can
elaborate
what
happened
in
this
building?
Why
that
building
is
significant?
Could
the
same
value
not
be
derived
with
a
brand
new
building
built
by
the
High
Commission,
with
some
sort
of
monument
or
plaque
erected
on
site?
That
gives
a
description
of
what
happened
on
the
site
through
the
past
decades.
K
K
A
I
The
zoning
is
not
a
heritage
matter
from
our
point
of
view.
At
this
point,
we're
primarily
concerned
with
the
observations
and
recommendations
of
the
building
condition
report
you've
already
been
told
by
action.
Sandy
Hill
that
the
report,
in
fact
on
page
1,
does
identify
that
the
the
building
that
were
to
stabilize
the
building
is
structurally
feasible.
Obviously,
at
some
cost
we're
not
experts
on
on
the
cost
or
the
or
the
method
of
that
would
have
to
be
used
to
save
the
building.
I
But
whether
the
current
condition
of
this
building
is
the
result
of
demolition
by
neglect,
as
has
been
suggested
or
whether
it's
a
problem
with
flawed
construction
from
the
beginning,
those
deficiencies
should
have
been
identified
in
attended.
Two
years
ago,
we
heard
yesterday
afternoon
about
the
Uganda
Auditor
General's
report,
which
mr.
I
We
do
request
that
the
government
of
Uganda
demonstrate
its
respect
for
Canada's
heritage.
This
is
a
building
that,
as
you
have
heard,
is
of
significant
importance
to
the
community
and
I'm,
not
going
to
repeat
those
arguments
which
have
been
presented,
so
we
are
again
suggesting
that
the
planning
committee
should
respect
the
recommendation
from
built
heritage
subcommittee
and
reviews
the
application.
Thank
you
very
much
great.
H
I
Well,
that's
a
that's
a
technical
score
and
we
don't
pretend
to
be
sufficiently
expert
to
determine
what
the
score
the
building
should
be.
We
that
the
case
was
made
before
built
heritage
subcommittee
and
has
been
made
here
by
the
community
that
this
is
a
building
whose
heritage
is
significant
not
only
to
the
local
community,
but
the
wider
community
you've
heard
from
mr.
Rollins
that
it
has
significant
set
and
and
mr.
Vega,
that
it
has
significance
canada-wide.
I
There
are
reasons
why
the
score
is
not
higher.
One
reason
is
that
it
stated
that
you
know
mr.
Pearson,
as
as
minister
of
External
Affairs
didn't
entertain
or
do
work
specifically
related
to
his
achievements
in
the
international
of
arena
in
this
building,
and
that's
that's
certainly
a
matter
of
debate.
In
many
cases
where
a
person
live
is
considered
to
be
a
sufficient
reason
for
designating
the
building.
I
H
I
The
first
first
of
all,
the
the
interior
of
heritage
buildings
is
usually
not
designated
so
that,
in
fact,
not
normally
permission
to
alter
the
interior
even
to
completely
gut.
It
would
not
be
a
matter
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
of
certain
for
this
particular
building,
but
the
show
is
covered
by
the
part
5
designation
under
the
Ontario,
Heritage
Act
and
so
from
heritage.
Point
of
view.
That's
the
part
which
could
be
protected.
B
I
D
M
You
I'm
Chris
balcony
from
John
Cook,
&,
Associates
structural
engineers
in
town.
We
were
retained
to
review
the
existing
reports
and
to
provide
a
visual
inspection
of
the
structure
at
231
covert
Street.
The
documents
provided
for
review
included
the
building
investigation
reports
from
both
2013
and
2017
geotechnical
reports
from
both
these
times
and
the
2017
proposed
redevelopment
plan
from
10:00
to
4:00
architects.
M
Also,
the
colts
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
prepared
in
2017
by
Robertson
modern
architects
I'd
like
to
take
this
opportunity
to
highlight
the
construction
of
the
building
and
the
considerate,
so
the
considerable
effort
that
would
be
required
to
retain
all
a
part
of
it.
The
building
is
a
two-story
compass
and
masonry
and
wood
frame
structure
on
concrete
foundations.
The
foundations
are
cast-in-place
concrete
at
the
perimeter
of
the
building
with
non
load-bearing,
concrete
block
masonry
walls
at
the
interior.
The
masonry
is
unlikely
to
be
yes,
sir.
M
They
masonries
unlikely,
be
enforced
and
the
concrete
may
contain
reinforcing
but
is
very
likely
minimal.
The
perimeter
concrete
foundations
appeared
to
be
settling
somewhat
uniformly
suggested
by
the
pattern
of
cracker.
The
northwest
corner
of
the
foundation
wall
has
been
previously
repaired.
This
intervention
included
replacing
of
the
concrete,
with
reinforced,
concrete
block
and
removal
of
a
large
tree
within
close
proximity
of
the
foundation
wall
based
on
of
a
based
on
observation.
M
The
repair
was
unsuccessful
and
there
appears
to
be
continued
to
settlement
since
the
repair
was
noted
to
have
separation
at
the
interface
between
the
concrete
and
the
concrete
block
in
the
basement.
The
interior
masonry
block
walls
show
signs
of
major
settlement
with
large
cracking
through
the
joints
and
through
the
units
themselves,
and
there
is
evidence
that
the
several
past
repair
campaigns
have
been
undertaken
and
in
all
cases
the
repairs
have
failed
and
cracked.
This
is
another
sign
of
continued
settlement.
M
The
saliva
on
grade
in
the
basement
also
shines
show
signs
of
the
settlement
with
large
cracking,
probably
primarily
along
the
perimeter.
The
perimeter
of
the
building
is
expected
to
be
the
area
of
most
concern
with
respect
to
settlement
due
to
the
significant
weight
of
the
building
materials
which
I
especially
heavy,
compared
to
the
wood-framed
houses
of
the
neighborhood.
The
exterior
masonry
appears
to
be
multi
white,
composite
brick
and
concrete
block.
The
exterior
brick
veneer
is
connected
to
a
load-bearing
concrete
block
back
up
with
brick
header
ties
at
about
every
7th
course.
M
This
construction
is
not
uncommon
for
this
area,
but
has
ins
parent
issues,
the
differences
in
material
properties
between
the
brick
and
the
concrete
block
leads
to
differential
reactions
from
thermal
expansion
and
contraction,
and
this
very
often
leads
to
snapping
of
the
brick
ties
which
offer
the
lateral
connection
of
the
veneer
to
the
structural
backup
wall
as
mortise
connection
occurs,
the
veneer
becomes
laterally
unstable
to
retain
the
book
veneer.
This
must
be
further
investigated
with
with
destructive
testing
and
addressed.
If
found
to
be
an
issue.
M
The
brick
also
exhibits
significant
cracking
most,
notably
at
the
corners
again.
Several
repair
campaigns
were
undertaken
and
again
continued
settlement
has
led
to
the
failure
of
past
repairs.
We've
continued
opening
up
the
cracks
moisture
is
more
likely
to
penetrate
the
core
of
the
wall
and
affect
the
lateral
connection
of
the
two
masonry
materials.
This
is
again
something
that
must
be
further
assessed
with
destructive
investigation.
M
The
ground
and
second
floors
are
significantly
sloped
due
to
the
settling
walls.
The
sloping
is
substantial
and
is
very
obvious,
while
walking
through
the
building
we
reviewed.
The
condition
of
the
joist
is
generally
good,
though
some
environmental
damage
may
be
expected.
The
slope
of
the
floor
is
too
extensive
for
lifting
to
be
considered
and
is
likely
that
the
most
efficient
solution
involves
a
series
of
shimming
and
leveling
toppings.
This
would
require
structural
assessment
of
the
capacity
of
the
joists
for
their
ability
to
support
this
additional
weight.
M
It
is
expected
that
the
assessment
will
lead
to
localized
joist
reinforcements
in
order
to
retain
a
substantial
portion
of
the
existing
building.
The
majority
of
the
work
will
be
required
at
the
foundation
level
and
based
on
past
geotechnical
reports.
This
is
best
carried
out
with
the
use
of
piles.
In
order
to
implement
this,
the
footings
and
foundation
will
require
considerable
intervention.
Even
if
found
to
be
reinforced,
the
existing
foundation
will
be
unable
to
withstand
redistribute
loading
without
reinforcing
the
most
efficient
solution
is
likely
full
replacement.
M
This
means
full
support
of
the
ground
floor,
joists
and
the
interior
and
exterior
walls
on
this
site.
The
temporary
support
will
prove
to
be
complicated
and
thus
costly,
rather
due
to
the
proximity
of
the
sidewalk
and
the
neighboring
house,
structurally
speaking,
there's
no
explicit
line
defining
whether
a
structure
can
or
can't
be
saved
soon
lay
hook.
M
Heroic
measures
can
be
taken,
but
this
must
be
weighed
with
his
cultural
value,
which
is
obviously
being
very
well
discussed
today,
based
on
the
significant
effort
required
to
stabilize
the
structure,
we
concur
with
past
reports,
including
the
cultural
heritage
impact
statement
which
support
demolition.
Thank
you.
L
L
M
M
A
A
O
O
The
building
building
history
is
being
talked
about.
Mr.
genes
are
liking
this
to
a
fish
out
of
water.
We
would
totally
agree
with
that.
It's
important
to
note
that
this
building
itself
demolished
an
earlier
building
the
original
Victorian
building
that
stood
on
a
site.
So
you
know
this
Vegas
speaks
to
the
processor
cycle
of
neighbourhood
renewal
over
time
it
isn't
a
if
you
like
an
American
federal
style
that
is
quite
out
of
keeping
with
the
prevailing
character
of
the
district.
O
I
also
want
to
emphasize
that
you
know
we
in
the
city,
and
indeed
anyone
analyzing
or
assessing
Heritage
character,
will
operating
within
a
framework,
so
heritage
character
can
may
be
defined
under
the
actual
architectural
style
itself,
so
famous
architects,
actual
construction
quality
and,
of
course,
this
connotation
of
connection
with
famous
persons
I
also
want
to
emphasize
too
that
Pearson
didn't
live
in
the
whole
building.
This
was
a
semi.
O
He
lived
in
one
half
of
it,
so
the
the
actual
score
of
44
out
of
100,
which
even
if
one
gave
full
marks
ten
out
of
ten
for
Pearson's
connection,
would
move
it
to
about
49
out
of
100.
So
it's
important
to
write,
you
know
understand
that
within
heritage
scoring
framework
we're
still
dealing
with
an
extremely
marginal
building.
This
is
not
a
high
grade
heritage
asset
I
want
also
emphasized
to
the
buildings
condition.
So
you
know
both
in
terms
of
what
the
reports
we
read
in
our
physical
reviews
on
site.
This
building
is
literally
self-destructing.
O
O
I
will
also
emphasize
the
environmental
considerations
of
mold
asbestos
throughout
lead,
and-
and
you
know,
one
of
the
things
that
we
found
most
I
would
say
egregious
the
build
Harwich
committee
was
this
characterization
of
demolition
by
neglect.
You
know
we
are
aware
of
the
city
initiative,
the
mayor's
Task
Force,
on
demolition
by
neglect,
but
there
is
abundant
and
clear
evidence.
A
repeated
good
faith.
Attempts
at
repair
by
this
occupant
over
many
years.
We
also
would
like
to
note
that
action,
Sandy
Hill
themselves
on
their
first
walkthrough,
was
prepared
to
consider
demolition.
O
Ana
is
contained
in
a
letter
to
mayor
Watson
and
mister
nussbaum
as
chair
of
the
built
heritage
committee
and
so
action
Sandy
Hill
themselves
recognized
the
absolute
dire
state
of
this
building
regarding
Prime
Minister's
row,
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
all
the
great
research
and
effort
of
prime
zero.
This
is
a
word
the
initiative
and
nothing
that
we
are
doing
precludes
any
of
that
history.
Continuing
to
be
told.
As
people
have
pointed
out,
there
is
no
physical
entry
to
these
buildings
of
Prime
Minister's
Road.
O
It's
something
that's
from
the
exterior
and
and
nothing
redoing
precludes
that
continued
story
being
told
the
owner
is
prepared
to
to
have
a
plaque
indicating
Pearson's
involvement
on
the
site
for
Fears,
and
we
would
also
note
that
the
actual
formal
Lesley
Pearson
house
is
just
around
the
corner
at
243
Augusta.
So
Pearson
in
terms
of
this
district
is
already
he
already
has
a
presence.
O
He
already
will
be
commemorated
and
can
be
in
with
the
additional
applaud.
So
you
know
when
we
made
our
assessment
with
these
repeated
studies
and
peer
review
that
all
confirm
the
same
finding
it's
it's
a
sort
of
holistic
view
that,
in
view
of
the
poor
heritage
character
in
view
of
the
dire
structural
condition,
in
view
of
all
these
other
issues
that
imbalance,
the
best
decision
is
for
demolition
and
I
want
to
stress
that
this
is
not
an
easy
one
for
us.
You
know
what
conservation
architects
are.
O
Typical
stance
would
be
one
of
our
preservation,
but
this
is
certainly
what
I
would
call
extenuating
circumstances
and
we
know
with
respect
to
what
is
technically
possible.
It's
easy
for
people
to
say
one
should
do
this,
or
one
should
do
that.
But
the
question
is,
you
know:
should
one
do
this
for
a
marginal
building?
And
you
know
at
a
certain
point,
common
sense
and
reasonableness
must
govern
our
discussion
of
discussions.
So
we
were
coming
up,
there's
a
sense
of
practicality
that
what
may
have
happened
may
have
happened.
O
The
again
and
high
commission
invest
efforts
made
that
made
their
attempts
to
repair
or
stabilize
the
building
over
time,
and-
and
you
know
they
just
simply
aren't
working,
and
at
this
point
we
have
to
take
take
new
measures
and
I
would
also
point
out
that
the
amount
of
money
that
mr.
Owens
talked
about
from
the
Auditor
General
was
specifically
allocated
to
two
things.
One
was
tree
removal
and
one
was
a
repair
of
a
mechanical
electrical
subsystems.
O
It
wasn't
about
actual
stabilizing
the
stabilization
of
building
that
same
other
general
report
in
the
next
paragraph
actually
talks
about
the
new
building
being
the
plan,
so
there
has
never
been
any
intention
on
Uganda's
part.
Two.
You
know
in
this
regional
report
to
to
consider
that
the
interim
monies
were
so
in
place
of
the
building
replacement.
So,
overall,
as
a
committee,
we
would
like
to
summarize
by
saying
that
the
characterization
of
this
property
is
demolition
by
neglect.
This
is
neither
fair
nor
accurate,
and
you
know
a
certain
point.
O
A
O
Suppose
so
they
would
do
a
series
of
three
engineers
who
had
made
analyses
of
the
building
and
let
my
geotechnical
and
structural
issues
and
our
role
is
as
is
required
whenever
one
is
intervening
in
a
designated
property
or
Conservation.
District
is
to
is
to
provide
a
cultural
heritage
impact
statement.
So
so
we
reviewed
those
those
previous
structural
studies
and
assess
the
building
character
and
its
of
provenance
and
history
and
and
made
our
deliberations
on
our
basis
and.
O
O
O
O
Know
that
there
is-
or
there
was-
and
there
is
a
suspicion
that
some
of
the
subsidence
in
the
soils
around
the
building
and
under
the
building
might
be
connected
to
a
depletion
of
moisture
in
the
in
the
soils
as
a
result
of
trees,
and
so
that
some
of
that
interim
money
was
intended
to
remove
trees,
and
it
also
talks
about
you
know
system.
So
not
it
was
not
intended
to
go
into
any
sort
of
heroic
missionary
stabilization
process.
O
A
F
So
we
had
a
consultant
report
in
2013
we
had
money
released
1.1
million
dollars.
Surely
the
Ugandan
government
didn't
intend
1.1
million
u.s.
dollars
to
be
spent
on
holding
the
building
up
until
they
could
demolish
it?
I
can't
imagine
that
that's
what
public
funds
would
be
used
for
so
surely
the
1.1
u.s.
million
that
was
released
was
intended
to
help
stabilize
the
building
in
order
to
maintain
the
building
I.
O
Did
this
information
from
the
other
generals
report?
It
was
only
brought
to
my
attention
last
night
as
well,
so
I'm
reviewing
it,
but
from
conversations
with
them.
Madam
ambassador
I
understand.
First
of
all,
it's
not
1.1
million
u.s.,
it's
1
million
Canadian.
So
even
though
the
document
says
us
the
amount
when
it's
actually
from
Ugandan
shillings
is
about
a
million
dollars,
Canadian
and,
and
that
amount
is,
is
intended
to
address
the
items
below.
So
it
relates
to
tree
work
and
other
subsystems.
O
So
you
know
I,
guess
I'm,
trying
I'm
trying
to
convey
that
you
know
for
better
for
worse
through
a
whole
series
of
studies,
investigations,
consultants
retained
by
Uganda.
They
they
both
assessed
the
the
underlying
conditions,
the
serious
degradation
of
the
building
and-
and
you
know
quite
recently-
may
have
said
any
money
thrown
at
the
building.
Is
it
losing
cause
right
now.
F
Bylaw
stock
would
have
a
very
difficult
case
of
knowing
whether
a
property
was
that
deteriorating
or
not?
But
are
you
concerned
that
the
message
that
counsel
would
send
if
it
agreed
with
the
staff
recommendation
is
as
a
longtime
owner
you
don't
actually
have
to
keep
your
heritage
property
in
a
state
of
good
repair,
because
if
it
gets
to
a
stage
where
it
has
to
be
a
demolished,
counsel
is
going
to.
Let
you
do
it.
O
Well,
I
mean
that
one
opens
was
conservation
practices
every
case
is
unique.
Okay,
so
I
don't
think
one
should
take
whatever
happens
at
2:31
cobra
to
apply
to
a
general
understanding
of
other
other
properties.
In
this
particular
case,
you
know
both
the
engineering
consultants,
city
staff
ourself
have
made
the
assessment
on
this
particular
property,
and-
and
you
know,
the
the
conditions
have,
in
effect
informed
our
regrettable
decision
that
imbalance
of
all
the
factors
that
demolition
is
the
best
way
forward.
O
I,
don't
think
we're
sending
any
any
message
otherwise
and
and
I
at
the
point
about
about
whether
Uganda
intended
to
or
did
a
repair
over
the
years,
there's
abundant
and
clear
evidence
that
they
did
expend
money
time
effort
attempting
to
repair
foundations.
All
you
know
throughout
the
building
the
plaster
work.
It's
it's
all.
It's
all
there
in
info
view,
so
you
know
that
the
track
record
is
demonstrated
and
at
a
certain
point
maybe
some
of
the
consulting
people
would
advise
enough.
Is
enough.
L
Yes,
America's,
don't
could
you
maybe
speak
to
so
the
property
was
owned
for
33
years
in
the
last
years,
or
so
the
the
property
was
vacated.
Can
you
speak
to
that,
because
my
understanding
is
that
it
wasn't
the
case
where
there's
an
engineering
report
saying
hey
or
even
the
city's
building
code
team
saying
you
have
to
vacate
this
property
will
collapse
on
you
or
something
urgent.
It
was
a
choice
that
the
High
Commission
make.
Maybe
you
could
briefly
speak
to
that
issue.
I.
O
Mean
first
of
all,
leave
there's.
No
any
any
property
owner
can
unilaterally
make
a
decision
to
vacate
a
building
if
they
feel
unsafe.
So
if
the,
if
your
walls
are
cracking
around
you
and
you
can't
repair
them
and
it
continues
to
deteriorate,
you
know
there's
that
basic
health
and
safety
concern
that
would
inform
your
decisions
on
your
own
and
your
staffs
behalf.
O
So
I
I
think
the
when
one
analyzes,
the
the
general
gist
of
the
various
studies
that
started
even
before
2014,
they
all
are
alerting
their
owners
to
this
ongoing
deterioration,
for
which
repairs
have
not
been
successful.
They
predict
that
this
condition
will
continue
and
it
does,
and
it
has-
and
it
still
is
today,
so
the
you
know
for
the
again
accumulation
effects
you
can
have
made
the
decision
to
vacate
which
again
I
can't
account
second-guessed
on
that
and.
L
Then
do
you
feel
that
further
to
the
the
High
Commission
leaving
that
property
at
some
point,
a
decision
was
made
to
remove
the
heating
components,
I
believe
the
the
source
of
heating
was
through
water
and
the
that
was
capped
at
some
point
in
time
which
you
know?
Could
you
maybe
speak
to
that?
As
you
know,
someone
that
tries
to
protect
heritage
when
we
be
in
a
different
position
today,
if
the
property
was
properly
heated
during
the
during
those
years.
O
My
understanding
personally
is
that
the
heat
was
not
turned
off.
It
was
lowered
which
anyone
would
do
even
when
someone
goes
on
vacation.
You
can
turn
your
heat
down
your
building,
but
as
a
result
of
that
lowered
heat
within
the
building,
my
understanding
is:
there
was
a
radiator
that
burst
in
one
area
the
building
and
is
contributed
to
the
some
of
the
plaster
deterioration
that
that
we
see,
but
to
your
question,
would
the
results
be
the
same?
No,
the
the
issues
that
we
see
are
not
related
to
heat.
L
L
O
So
the
you
know,
each
each
location
is
is
different,
so
what
might
be
present
in
one
area?
Sandy
Hill
could
be
completely
different
in
another.
You
know
that
places
where
there
is
a
lot
of
sand,
as
the
name
suggests,
another
places
where
clay
and
other
materials
are
present.
So
you
know
that
that's
one
point
that
what
whatever
may
happen
on
another
part
of
Sandy
Hill
doesn't
necessary,
govern
what
happens
on
our
site
and
and
the
the
other
primary
point
here
is.
O
Is
building
owners
have
a
choice:
it's
their
own
volition,
whether
they
choose
to
invest
in
their
properties,
and
you
know
for
for
one
owner
their
determinant
germination
might
be
that
I
have
a
high-grade,
beautiful,
1924,
Victorian
and
and
I
want
to
invest
in
it.
Perhaps
more
than
the
building
value
and
another
building
owner
may
say:
no,
it's
it's!
It's
not
worth
undertaking
these
heroic
measures
and
significant
sums
of
money
to
to
salvage.
O
N
N
Is
your
49
something
that
that
you're
aware
of
that
staff
support
as
well
and
and
the
other
was
our
three
experts
brought
in
to
review
this
I?
Should
the
score
she
basically
well
I'm
going
to
ask
you?
Should
this
course
she
be
redone
is
something
coming
out
here
in
the
last
week
that
somehow
changes
the
score
around
that
it
should
go
up
so
much
and.
O
No
I,
don't
think
so.
On
the
the
so-called
Heritage
inventory
that
the
city
has
all
of
these
buildings
are
scored
under
under
the
various
categories
and
and
and
again
I
want
to
emphasize.
You
know
we're
not
operating
in
a
vacuum.
Here
we
actually
have
a
framework
for
determining
whether
building
is,
is
a
high
grade,
building
or
a
medium
or
a
low
grade,
and
using
the
the
mechanisms
that
are
within
the
city
heritage
registry.
This
this
one
is,
is
a
very
borderline.
O
O
F
I
just
had
to
be
helpful,
counselor
QP,
to
explain
the
law.
The
willboard
lawyer,
hedge
Conservation
District,
is
a
bit
unique
from
some
of
the
other
ones.
A
category
3
building,
which
is
a
score
between
40
and
55,
is
considered
a
contributing
building.
So,
unlike
the
case
of
rock
lift
that
we
dealt
with
a
couple
years
ago
or
last
year,
50
was
an
important
threshold.
In
this
case,
50
isn't
an
important
threshold,
so
50
40
to
55
is
a
category
3.
F
N
F
J
F
Not
a
category
4
or
5,
it's
a
category
3,
it's
a
contributing
building
which
is
different
from
a
non
contributing
building,
but
I'm
trying
to
be
even-handed.
Here.
It's
a
contributing
building
but
a
score
can
go
all
the
way
up
to
100.
So
yes,
in
terms
of
the
contributing
buildings,
it's
at
the
lower
band
of
that
okay,
the.
N
Other
thing
that's
come
up
over
and
over
today
and
I
know,
the
council
for
the
area
has
been
promoting
that
or
circulating
information
about
the
demolition
by
neglect,
but
you
seem
to
take
a
different
position
on
that
and
don't
believe
that
that's
the
case
here
is
that
correct,
correct.
Okay,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Manager,
Thank,.
A
A
No,
he
doesn't
want
nope.
We
have.
No,
you
don't
want
to
come
up.
Mr.
Mullaly,
you
figure,
it's
covered.
Okay!
Thank
you!
Okay!
So
we're
back
here,
questions
of
staff
for
sure
we
have
enough
of
them
up
here.
We
have
sure
they
can
cover
everything
and
if
they
don't
de
Nick
and
come
back
up
okay,
counselor
here,
please
did
you
want
to
go
first.
Thank.
N
N
And
they,
basically
all
came
up
with
the
same
finding
that
the
the
building
wasn't
worth
saving.
Is
that
correct
or
the
cost
would
be
too
high
to
save
whatever
way
you
want
to
state
that
and.
E
It
was
a
little
subtler
than
that
counselor,
but
indeed
they
all
agreed
that
that
the
the
damage
to
the
building
was
caused
as
a
result
of
differential
settling
due
to
desiccation
of
soils
and
also
that,
in
the
report
also
pointed
out
that
the
building
and
as
mr.
rocky
pointed
out
today
too
is
the
building-
is
extremely
heavy
because
of
its
construction
method,
and
so
that
also
contributed
to
to
the
cracking
on
unstable
soil.
So
the
conclusions
were
the
same.
N
My
experience
of
eight
years
now
on
play
and
whenever
there's
a
heritage
property
that
has
even
a
little
germ
of
worth
protecting
you
folks
are
very,
very
big
on
defending
that
property.
So,
when
I
saw
your
recommendation
in
this
report,
I
figured
okay.
This
is
like
you've
looked
at
this
and
you're,
not
seeing
how
we
could.
How
would
this
could
be
saved?
Does
that
correct.
E
We
did
I
first
met
with
the
with
the
staff
from
the
abandoned
high
commission,
starting
in
2014,
I,
think
and
had
a
tour
etc,
and
then
there
was
because,
as
as
you
say,
counselor-
and
there
is
always-
you
know-
it's-
it's
not
a
decision
we
take
lightly.
So
this
was
a
long
process
of
study
of
many
of
the
engineering
reports
on
discussions
internally
with
senior
management,
so
it
I
know
over
the
course
of
that
we
came
with
our
recommendation.
So,
madam
chair,
the
counselor
is
correct.
E
N
You,
the
last
question,
is-
and
this
may
have
to
go
to
mr.
Willis,
but
what
I'm,
looking
at
what
we
heard
from
a
lot
of
people
today
is
about
and
from
the
ward
councillor
he's
been
circulating
information
on
the
demolition
by
neglect
piece,
I'm,
trying
to
figure
out
how
that
weighs
into
this
decision.
What
is
the
process
for
dealing
with
that?
N
Or
do
we
need
a
process
to
address
that,
because
you
know
I
think
we
all
agree
that
the
work
of
our
heritage
people
is
important
work
if
we
are
going
to
preserve
our
older
buildings
and
items
up,
we
want
to
protect
so
I
believe
we
have
to
have
some
sort
of
a
process
to
deal
with
that,
not
when
it
gets
to
this
point
when
it's
too
late,
but
early
on,
is
there
going
to
be
some
sort
of
an
inspection
of
these
heritage
properties
to
prevent
that?
Okay,
so
go
ahead
done
so.
A
N
This
is
an
example:
I
know
what
you're
talking
about
with
what
the
mayor
did
and
I
fully
support
what
he
did
to
try
to
get
out
there
and
stopped
us,
but
clearly
here's
what
is
in
Canada
has
fallen
into
a
bad
state
of
disrepair.
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
we
have
to
do
something
different
or
if
we
are
looking
at
something
so.
I
Councillor,
certainly
as
charges
palm
advise
and
you
advised,
the
mayor
did
strike
the
task
force
two
years
ago.
We
are
now
working
very
closely
with
our
colleagues
in
Building
Code
services
and
bylaw
services.
We've
identified
buildings
that
we
have
on
a
quote
unquote
watch
list
which
we
do
regular
inspections
on,
and
we
have
been
laying
orders
where
we
believe
that
their
heritage
attributes
are
not
being
respected
and
we've
been
undertaking
prosecutions.
So.
A
N
You
very
much
madam
chair,
and
just
coming
back
to
what
conceivably
was
asking
about
your
preferences,
obviously
as
heritage
Department,
is
to
protect
as
many
buildings
or
as
many
properties
that
you
can
under
the
Heritage
Act
in
terms
of
the
opinion
that
the
staffs
put
in
the
support
about
a
possible
dem
elation
of
this
property,
a
recommendation
to
demolish
the
property.
What
led
you
to
that
final
decision
was
at
the
foundation
itself,
because
it's
a
block
foundation
was
it
just
the
entire
deterioration
of
the
building
or
was
there
other
factors
that
played
into
your
decision?.
E
Value
of
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
in
combination
led
us
to
to
reluctantly
agree
that
this
would
be
an
instance
where
we
would
not
that
we
could
support.
They
proposed
a
demolition
of
the
property,
a
property
designated
under
the
Ontario,
Heritage
Act
and
also
in
terms
of
associations
with
with
with
Lester
Pearson.
What
done
in
the
general
principle-
and
this
comes
up,
you
know,
because
everybody
knew
everybody
lives
somewhere.
So
what
do
we
look
at
in
terms
of
the
what
a
person's
contribution
to
a
place?
E
And
our
conclusion
was
that
the
property
was
not
explicitly
or
meaningfully
identified
with
the
work
of
Lester
Pearson
at
his
when
he
lived
there,
he
he
was
doing
magnificent
work.
We
all
know
that
at
the
time.
But
you
know
a
lot
of
the
work
with
the
creation
of
a
peacekeeping
force
was
at
the
UN
in
East
Bloc,
where
foreign
affairs
was
located
at
the
time,
and
so
we
balanced
all
of
that
and
that's
how
we
reached
a
conclusion.
Counselor
thank.
A
I'm
going
to
tell
you
that
our
very
own
and
our
very
own
Carlton
Lodge
about
six
years
ago
and
Janet
passed
away,
who
was
his
executive
assistant
back
when
he
was
working
on
the
United
Nations
in
California
and
she
was
106
and
bright
as
certainly
probably
brighter
than
I
am
today
she
was
sharp
as
a
cookie,
so
I,
remember
it
well,
it's
funny
to
have
the
conversation
now
counselor
flurrying.
Anybody
else
have
questions.
L
So
I
just
want
to
go
back
to
the
birth
heritage
motion
that
was
passed
and
then
the
work
that
was
conducted
may
be
more
specific
to
court
or
someone
from
the
team
did
the
do.
The
city
hire
consultant
to
look
at
retentions
of
portions
of
the
building
or
the
building
itself,
because
in
a
report
it
alludes
to.
You
know
things
that
could
be
saved
a
cost
to
that.
But
there
wasn't
you.
I
Counselor,
we
did
retain
John
Cook
and
associates,
and
we
did
how
to
do
a
thorough
assessment
of
the
previous
two
engineering
reports.
As
we
mentioned,
they
came
to
the
same
conclusion,
but
they
did
provide
a
breakdown
of
the
building
and
all
of
the
specific
components
in
the
building
and
the
cost
for
salvaging
or
restoring
those
parts.
The
direction
from
committee
was
to
look
at
incorporating
parts
of
the
existing
building
into
the
new
design
of
a
new
building
or
tweaking
the
design
of
the
proposed
building
to
become
better
in
alignment
with
the
cultural
heritage
impact
study.
I
We
did
first
look
at
whether
we
could
retain
portions
of
the
existing
building
into
the
new
building.
We've
determined,
the
quality
of
bricks
is
very
poor.
There
is
no
architectural
piece
of
porch
or
turret
or
an
element
that
we
could
that
we
could
salvage
and
meld
with
the
new
building.
So
in
this
case,
we
without
looking
rather
clumsy.
So
in
this
case,
we
put
our
efforts
on
the
second
component
of
the
motion,
which
was
to
bring
the
new
building
into
alignment
which
is,
and
we've
made
some
alterations
to
that
design.
Okay,.
L
Can
you
speak
to
our
cities
after
them
I'm
concerned
and
we're
seeing
series
of
properties
that
are
our
heritage,
designation
or
in
heritage
districts
that
are
vacant
and
of
those
there
seems
to
be
ongoing
tactics
by
property
owners
to
to
not
heat
the
building
or
to
leave
the
building
vacant
to
not
maintain
them?
So
what
are
the
efforts
of
the
department
and
ensuring
that
the
space
is
livable
and
that
it
retains
its
characteristics
so.
A
A
Okay!
So
just
let
me
get
organized
here
a
bit
okay,
so
counselor
Brockington,
Kells
really
/.
Did
you
want
to
I'm
going
to
put
you
down
because
you
know
you're
going
to
want
to
yeah
cheering
this
bond
you're.
Another
me
counselor
coach,
a
your
good
and
no
counselor
flurry
is
going
to
wrap
up.
That's
why
I'm
putting
councillor
Nussbaum
in
front
of
calico
mr.
Fleury?
Okay!
So
that's
how
we
close
up
brockington
leaper,
miss
bumming
flurry.
Thank.
H
You,
madam
chair,
first,
a
a
procedural
question.
We
have
a
motion
before
us
coming
from
the
subcommittee.
That's
asking
us
to
refuse
the
application.
We
could
deal
with
that
first
and
mr.
mark
I'm
going
to
look
to
you
just
to
get
some
comment.
If
the
committee
rejects
the
motion
before
us
to
refuse
the
application,
would
it
then
be
immediately
in
order
to
move
a
motion
to
approve
the
application.
N
Madam
chair,
it
was
my
understanding
that
there
would
be
a
motion
coming
forward
to
substitute
the
staff
recommendation
for
the
build
heritage
subcommittee.
Recommendation
motions
are
put
as
in
a
logical
sequence
as
determined
by
the
chair,
but
the
standard
rule
is
to
put
them
in
reverse
order
to
which
they're
moved.
So
the
amending
motion
that
I
understand
it's
coming
forward
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation
would
typically
be
voted
upon
first
and
if
that
lost,
then
the
refusal
will
be
voted
upon.
Okay,.
H
H
H
Certainly,
this
building
has
suffered
from
a
series
of
unfortunate
events
that
have
led
to
I
think
a
very
serious
state
of
the
building
and
I
do
believe.
There
is
an
argument
to
be
made
to
approve
the
application
to
demolish
it.
There's
no
question
that
there
is
some
historic
events
that
have
occurred
within
this
building
and
I
do
believe
that
if
this
building
is
demolished,
there
should
be
commemoration
or
a
plaque
erected
here
to
inform
people
who
pass
by
that.
H
Not
only
is
this
the
site
of
a
high
commission,
but
that
there
was
some
significant
or
historic
events
that
occurred
here
on
the
site
and
provide
sort
of
a
detailed
plaque
and
I
think
I
heard
today
from
one
of
the
representatives
of
the
High
Commission
that
they
are
prepared
to
do
that.
So
I
really
appreciate
that.
H
Madam
chair,
a
quick
scan
on
wiki
and
I'm,
not
purporting
that
everything
I
read
on
wiki
is
true,
less
pages
and
pages
of
commemorations
for
one
of
Canada's
greatest
prime
ministers,
not
just
in
Ottawa
but
across
Canada,
including
his
birthplace,
which
no
longer
exists
according
to
wiki,
it's
as
a
plaque.
At
the
north
end
of
the
North
American
Life
Building
in
North
York
placed
by
the
Willard
o
federal
Liberal
Party
Association
commemorates
the
location
where
the
man's
in
which
Pearson
was
born
previously
stood
so
that
building
at
some
point
came
down.
H
A
new
building
was
erected.
There's
a
plaque
there
to
commemorate
his
birthplace,
in
addition
to
his
Peace
Prize,
there's,
certainly
a
number
of
awards
and
medals
in
Pearson's
honor,
which
certainly
allow
us
to
remember
his
significant
contributions,
including
Canada's
busiest
airport
and
the
Global
Affairs.
Our
Foreign
Affairs
building
here
in
Ottawa,
which
his
name
is
associated
with
so
I
mean
I,
did
not
take
this
file
lightly.
I,
certainly
read
the
information
and
listened
to
our
speakers
and
I
thought.
H
The
speaker's
today
today
made
a
strong
case
why
at
least
the
historical
events
that
occurred
here
should
be
recognized.
I'm
not
convinced
that
that
requires
us
to
refuse
the
application
to
demolish
the
building,
so
madam
chair
I
will
be
voting
in
favor
today
of
approving
the
application.
Thank
you
thank.
B
Thanks
Jeff
I
was
coming
into
this
meeting
today,
prepared
to
support
the
high
Commission's
efforts
to
have
this
building
demolished,
but
I
was
listening
to
the
apathy
presentation
that
was
made
by
the
the
residents
of
the
community
and
I.
Think
in
this
instance
that
geography,
geography
matters,
the
the
physical
as
a
reminder
of
our
past
is
important
and
I
think
we
sometimes
forget
the
connection
that
physical
things
have
to
remind
us
of
our
past.
B
I
want
to
go
too
far
down
this
path,
but
if
you
go
to
Memphis
Tennessee
to
visit
Graceland
right,
Elvis
Presley,
there
are
actually
two
other
buildings
in
Memphis.
One
way,
Elvis
spent
some
formative
years
as
a
teenager,
the
other
the
really
crappy
ranch
home
we
bought
before
he
bought
Graceland
and
people
go
there.
It
met.
He
may
only
have
lived
in
that
house
on
the
ranch
home
in
the
suburbs
for
a
year,
but
people
go
there.
B
My
my
person
is
obviously
a
significantly
more
substantial
person
with
a
significantly
more
important
contribution
to
the
world
and
having
that
house,
even
though
there's
another
one
around
the
corner
matters,
and
then
the
collection
of
all
those
prime
minister's
homes
lead
to
a
very
special
district
I'm,
not
willing
to
vote
in
favor
of
that
demolition.
Today,
just
I
think
the
geography
and
the
physical
building
matter
too
much.
Once
it's
gone,
it's
gone,
there's
a
there's,
a
temptation
to
take
a
look
at
this
in
a
George
Washington
slept
here
context.
B
F
So
I
will
continue
to
support
the
staff
recommendation,
mostly
on
the
basis,
as
I
said,
that
that
the
original
motion
had
been
respected.
That
said,
I
think
councillor
hubely
raised
a
very
important
point
and
I
should
mention
that
I've
been
struggling
since
this
application
came
forward
to
think
about
what
the
mechanism
should
be
for
the
city
to
ensure
that,
like,
in
this
case,
a
building
owner
of
a
heritage
property,
that's
owned.
F
It
for
33
years
is
engaged
in
the
type
of
much
more
affordable
and
efficient
out,
keep
to
obviate
the
need
for
demolition
and
the
only
limitation
to
the
mayor's
task
force.
On
heritage
matters
is
I,
think
all
of
the
work
up
until
this
stage
has
been
focused
on
vacant
properties,
and
the
issue
is
and
I
think.
This
is
a
great
example
of
an
owner
of
the
heritage
property
that
is
not.
F
They
can
can
still
choose
to
not
invest
and
lead
that
property
into
a
state
where
decades
later
demolition
seems
to
be
the
only
reasonable
option
which
you
know
again.
I
understand
that
in
this
case,
but
the
point
is:
why
did
it
get
there
and
what
steps
does
the
city
need
to
take
to
try
and
either
incentivize
building
owners
to
invest
in
their
heritage?
Property.
I.
F
We
would
have
wished
that
the
owner
had
had
made
the
investments
to
make
this
unnecessary,
but
I
do
want
to
pick
up
on
that
point
and
I
want
to
reassure
members
here
that
I
am
thinking
deeply
about
that
and
and
and
hope
to
come
forward
in
the
coming
months
and
through
the
work
of
the
mayor's
Task
Force
on
some
concrete
ideas
to
try
and
make
sure
that
we're
not
dealing
with
cases
like
this
in
the
future.
Thank
you
thank.
L
Marron
mcas-alt,
so
I
wanted
to
adjust
a
couple
of
elements
and,
as
you
know,
I
wish
I
would
have
had
fulsome
time
to
review
the
AG
report
from
from
the
ugandan,
but
in
the
limited
time
I
just
want
to
reclassify
one
of
the
sections
of
the
report
that
mr.
Martin
are
brought
forward
a
few
minutes
ago
and
that's
on
page
439,
I
shared
it
with
committee.
Earlier
it
reads
the
following:
the
delay
in
renovations
caused
further
deterioration,
as
earlier
predicted
by
the
consultants
after
two
years
without
renovations.
The
property
has
now
been
recommended
for
demolition.
L
That,
in
my
mind,
highlights
exactly
the
problem
in
in
this
context,
and
it's
really
that
there
was
identified
deterioration
of
the
property
that'd
be
the
foundation
that
it
be
the
systems
that
would
be
the
trees
that
were
impacting
the
soil
near
the
property,
and
nothing
was
done
so
much
so
that
the
property
was
vacated
and
nothing
was
done.
So
we
find
ourselves
years
later.
Where
were
they
out?
Were
the
applicant
really
had
not
done
what
was
needed
to
protect
the
integrity
of
the
property?
L
Further
to
that
you
we've
come
to
the
table.
Often
at
this
committee
relating
to
reports
for
there
to
be
infill,
1
infill
to
some
of
the
Heritage
inventory
report
and
in
some
of
the
extension
to
the
Heritage
Conservation
districts
in
the
area
that
will
be
coming
in
the
next
few
weeks.
This
is
in
a
heritage,
conservation,
district
and,
in
my
mind,
the
districts.
L
Come
is
part
of
multiple
buildings
that
have
different
heightened
levels
of
interest
of
value,
but
they
all
are
form
the
fabric
of
the
district
itself,
compounding
that
there's
the
idea
that
we're
a
capital
city
that
in
a
residential
community
we
have
more
than
40
missions,
of
which
we
have
tremendous
examples
of
strong
collaborations
with
the
community.
In
this
context,
it's
really
the
built
form
that
that
was
abandoned,
but
you
know
I
want
community
to
start
thinking
about.
We
might
have
whatever
the
decision
might
be.
Today.
L
We
might
have
other
situations
of
other
missions
that
receive
this
as
a
message
you
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that
would
be
the
type
of
message
that
we
want
to
send.
It's
a
mature
neighborhood
as
a
heritage,
conservation
districts,
it's
a
proximity
to
Parliament
Hill
and
the
federal
precinct
is
important.
L
Now
you
know,
we
know
that
coffees
meetings
and
so
on
would
have
happened
in
that
location.
We
know
the
importance
of
our
country
in
terms
of
showcasing
a
piece
across
the
world
and
obviously
I
don't
have
to
rhyme
off
all
of
the
accomplishment
of
mr.
Pearson,
but
certainly
a
Prime
Minister
Pearson,
but
certainly
that,
in
my
mind,
is
factored
in.
I
will
further
disagree
with
mr.
Martin
that
the
amount
of
money
that
was
given
to
the
mission
here
was
simply
for
systems
in
trees.
L
So
committee
you're
left
with
a
series
of
options
to
consider
and
I'll
leave
you
with
a
few
which
are
we
had
a
staff
report
that
I
know
we
have
a
motion
to
bring
back
to
the
floor,
but
we
have
the
work
of
our
experts
and
and
residents
on
the
built
heritage
committee
and
obviously
it
is
this
committees
purview
to
to
analyze
that
work
and
see
its
pertinence
or
its
value.
But
in
that
context
you
know
a
lot
of
elements
were
brought
up
by
member
Vera,
Podolski
and
Sandy
Smallwood.
L
That
really,
you
know,
highlighted
that
many
of
the
properties
in
Sandy
Hill
have
lived
through
the
similar
challenges
of
the
soil
conditions
and
that
a
lot
of
the
neglect
that
in
the
issues
of
restoration,
so
on
that
you
would
see
here,
could
happen
in
any
of
the
properties
within
sandy
hills.
So
the
committee
really
reviewed
it
and
them
you
know
not
only
PMR,
not
only
demolition
by
neglect,
but
today
you're,
informing
I'm.
Sorry,
it's
last
minute.
I
was
only
informed
later
in
the
afternoon
and
led
the
reports
in
the
early
morning.
L
But
the
AG
report,
in
my
mind,
is
interesting
where
there
was
a
sum
of
money
that
was
put
in
place
for
restoration,
it
never
went
to
it
and
today
you're,
faced
with
you,
know
the
impacts
of
not
restoring
that
property
at
its
right
time.
So
you
know,
I
would
ask
for
you
to
to
hold
the
position
of
built
heritage
committee
to
work
with
the
Ugandan
High
Commission
to
find
an
approach
that
is
suitable
and
if
the
approach
financially
does
not
work
in
terms
of
protecting
the
property,
then
let's
work
with
them
on
finding
other
solutions.
L
A
D
Should
be
here
right
now
and
again,
madam
chair
we've
asked
some
counsel.
We
brought
the
motion,
be
split,
so
there's
two
sections
that
the
planning
committee
one
received,
the
revised
cultural
heritage
impact
statement,
document
15
dated
November
22nd
2017,
prepared
by
Robert,
Merton
architects
and
number
two
approved.
The
original
report.
Recommendations
has
submitted
by
staff
on
April
5th
2018
to
approve
the
application
for
demolition
of
the
applicant
application
for
the
new
construction
of
231,
core
Brook
Street.
D
A
Received
in
part
two
to
approve
the
original
report,
recommendations
are
submitted
by
staff
on
April
the
5th
to
approve
the
application
for
demolition
in
the
application
for
new
construction
at
231,
Cobra
Street,
Aggies
and
nays
have
been
called
comfortably
because
of
Rakatan.
Yes,
Kennish
rally,
yes
Kosaku
chain,
counselor,
Hugh,
Blaine,
councillor
Reaper
count
vice
chair
of
heritage.
In
this
phone
I
mean
charity,
respond,
yes,
counselor
pattering,
yes,.
D
O
A
A
F
Just
a
quick
comment
on
that:
one:
oh
yeah!
No,
it's
just
important
because
it's
there
is
an
important
point
of
clarification,
because
Chad
Rawlins
made
an
observation
about
the
zoning
and
I
think
it
is
important
to
state
that
many
residential
zoning
is
permit
what
what
is
called
in
a
zoning
bylaw,
a
diplomatic
mission,
which
is
probably
a
word
that
ought
to
be
changed
because
to
the
normal
year.
That
suggests
an
office,
but
it's
not
it's
essentially
an
official
residence.
F
So
it
is
in
this
case
a
zoning
amendment
is
required,
but
I
can
understand
why
people
reading
the
existing
boat
zoning
and
seeing
the
words
diplomatic
mission
might
be,
might
assume
that
that
would
allow
for
the
type
of
embassy
or
consulate
use
which
is
being
proposed
here.
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
that's.
A
A
great
point
and
and
I
will
just
add
to
that,
but
before
the
meeting
I
was
speaking
with
our
general
manager,
Steve
Willis
and,
as
you
know,
in
the
next
term
of
council,
the
official
plan
at
all
the
big
plans
are
coming
forward,
but
the
official
plan
being
one
of
them
and
we
had
a
discussion
about
going
to
have
to
get
some
real
attention
to
Heritage
mr.
Lewis.
If
you
want
to
just
speak
to
it
and
then
we'll
vote
on
on
the
item.
Madam.
H
N
A
A
D
Great
and
I
got
a
phone
in
front
of
me,
madam
chair,
whereas
the
approximate
18
months
that's
been
required
for
the
studies
and
the
process
leading
to
the
official
plan
amendment,
whereas
advancing
this
item
will
assist
in
the
efficient
development
of
the
land,
be
it
resolved.
That
planning
committee
approve
that
this
matter
proceed
to
Council
on
April,
25th,
2018
and.
A
Just
say
other
number
to
the
Borah
so
keen
and
and
just
to
embellish
that
a
little
bit
mr.
Hoyer,
who
was
very
involved
in
that
file.
It
took
a
lot
of
time
to
get
us
to
this
point
and
because
no
one
came
out
today
and-
and
you
know,
we
just
get
going
on
it
all
right.
So
his
carry
fate
and
just
one
other
thing
for
all
of
you.
The
next
meeting
on
May,
the
8th,
its
starting
at
ten,
am
not
9:30.