Thread by @adamadonaldson

This month's Heritage #Guelph meeting starts soon. This is what we're talking about today: guelphpolitico.ca/2023/03/31/mee…

Chair Epp calls the meeting to order.

First up is 785 York Rd: Ontario Reformatory Powerhouse and Chimney Cultural Heritage Resource Impact Assessment and a presentation from Miranda Bunton and David Addington at Infrastructure Ontario.

Infrastructure Ontario has prepared a report for about environmental remediation efforts that have to happen on this part of the site, and the best, cheapest and most direct way to ensure that all the contamination is cleaned up is to demolish the building and the chimney.

Background deets:

Remediation efforts have been underway for a while:

Button says that they had hoped that the contamination was limited, but its continued to seep through the ground. Soil will need to excavated down to the bedrock or 4 metres.

What and where that's going to look like:

Pros and cons:

Button says that they didn't just jump to demolition, it was the last of a lot of options looked at:

So that's how we arrived at the preferred option:

Questions for the Infrastructure Ontario duo? Member Tilley asks why it seems like nothing was done between 2010-19. Bunton says there was stuff done at other points on the site, contamination not limited to power house area.

Tilley asks about the costs of preserving vs demo. Addington says the amount is in the hundreds of thousands, "approaching a million" for remediation and protection. This option costs about a third of that.

Tilley asks about demolition as a last resort. Addington agrees that it should be a last resort, but health & safety and environment purposes are considerations, and that especially applies here.

Cllr Downer asks about the purpose of the presentation, can motions or recommendations be made? Epp says she asked this and while the City has not legislative power, the committee can still pass a motion.

Downer asks if there was a conversation plan around this part. Brunton says there was, it was completed in 2019 and was approved by the minister.

Downer asks if that was shared with HG. Brunton says part of the work with this is community engagement. This is not a demo request.

Downer asks if IO's mind is made up and a demo is coming, or if there's still room for feedback? Brunton says IO's has identified their ideal approach, but they want to hear the committee's feedback on any mitigation measures, and goes to final decision.

Downer asks if this will go to the full council in anyway. Brunton says the demo permit will go through regular channels. Heritage Planner Jack Mallon notes that council receives the minutes of HG in info report.

Tilley asks if committee can get the HIA if its been completed. Brunton says the HIA has not been completed yet, and that this part of the process.

Member Cameletti asks the longevity of upgrades to the structure if saved. Addington says he's not sure, there might be further capital repairs down the road, and the costs he provided are ballpark, and inflation is always a factor.

No further questions. Epp thanks the IO duo for the presentation.

Next: Consultation for the Guelph Private Tree Bylaw Review Timea Filer, Urban Forestry Field Technician, will present, and the consultant Margot Ursic is also on the line.

High level facts: 23% canopy cover in Guelph, more than half of that is on private land. 70% are 15 cm in diameter or less, and 90% are 30 cm or less. Guelph's tree pop. is on the young side.

Much of this information was covered at least week's Ward 5 town hall, and is based on a presentation you can find on the Have Your Say page. Find applicable links here: guelphpolitico.ca/2023/04/06/rec…

Relevant:

There are also some caveats when it comes to the one Heritage Conservation District that currently exists in the City:

Some of those allowances are a bit bigger than what's in the current private tree bylaw.

Questions from the committee?

Tilley asks about how the current bylaw works if the property is heritage but not the trees. Ursic says the rules in the HCD apply to lots <0.2 ha, so it doesn't apply to most properties in the HCD.

Downer notes that in the CHB district, most of the heritage trees are in backyards, but only front and side yard trees are protected. Would like to see protections on all properties under 1/2 acre for trees of a certain size.

Member Abou-Jaoude asks about regulating larger lot sizes. Ursic says the intent was to protect the larger lots since they're more target for new development/clear cutting.

Moving on to 49 Norfolk Street: Staff Report on Intention to Designate. This was deferred from last month. Staff are asked if they've finally been able to get in touch with the owner and apparently there are still issues here.

Heritage planner Victoria Nagy says that the owner will be able to delegate when this comes to the council meeting if they wish.

Tilley notes that HG didn't have access to some of the background materials through staff, but he was able to get them and has a long list of questions. Nagy says that's fine to email them to her.

Tilley asks to see the final heritage designation before it comes to council for approval. Nagy says they can do that. Due date is two weeks internally, so she will circulate it so long as HG understands that's the final report. If committee has Qs get them in soon.

Tremblay from the clerks office corrects and says if there's anything HG wants in the report, they need to make that motion now. Downer says this is problematic, that advisory groups are not getting the final form of a report before it goes to council.

This is the recommendation:

Mallon says that its staff's intention that any changes made to the report after today, come from Heritage Guelph.

Epp notes an addendum to highlight the notes outlined by committee members. Member Caroll asks how will committee be made aware of any changes to the final report. Epp suggests that Nagy reply all to members of committee when changes are made so that it's on one thread.

Epp suggests adding the line in quotes to the end of the motion: "And including all revisions noted at April 2023 meeting".

Motion approved by committee.

Tilley asks about the possibility of a designation working group, that might help with the facilitation of some of this. Tremblay says they will need to look at meeting procedures policy to figure out how that's going to work. Epp suggests making it an agenda item for May.

Next: 47 Alice Street: Staff Report on Intention to Designate. Nagy says this has been part of "corporate memory" for a while and they're finally bringing it to the finish line.

Photo from 1950 and a book called Alice Street: A Memoir.

Nagy explains that the old Valeriote shoe shop is an example of how new Italian immigrants to Guelph in the early 20th century adapted to their new homes and set up neighbourhood centric services to help their fellow new Canadians who settled in the Ward.

Under the new regulation 569/22, the heritage designation has to meet 2 of 9 criteria, and this property scores four:

Fun fact: the City of Guelph issued a notice of intention to designate 47 Aline on May 26, 2008. The owner objecting and the file was heard at the Conservation Review Board. In Dec 2008 they said there was enough evidence to designate.

After that though the City did not pursue designation due to relations with the owner. Since then, the new owner has been contacted and the hope is that this will be a friendlier process.

Staff is looking to have this staff report from to council on May 9.

Questions? Member Waverman thanks Nagy for including the setback as one of the heritage attributes saying this sort of thing often gets overlooked. Nagy credits senior heritage planner Robinson who wrote the original report in '08.

Cameletti asks if the Valeriotes were involved in developing this report. Nagy says they were in '08 and some of the images in the presentation were donated from the Valeriotes to Guelph Museums.

Nagy says she, Robinson and Mallon met with the current property owners to go over the attributes and most of the things identified had to do with the build form and placement. This is mostly a move to stop future demolition.

Tilley asks about taking this to council again as process. Nagy says it's because they didn't chase it after the CRB hearing, but it's essentially the same application. Nothing much changed in 15 years except support of owner. A "no brainer".

Tilley asks if there any other properties like this that were all lined up for approval but it was never approved. Robinson doesn't believe so.

Recommendation approved unanimously.

Next. 20 Cityview Drive: Cultural Heritage Resource Impact Assessment. Robinson presenting.

This about the barn. It's on the heritage register, but there's some doubt about its prominence.

The property is subject to a draft plan subdivision, so there's no protection now for either the house or the shed. Robinson says there's indication that the beams in the barn bear indication that they were reclaimed from another building, likely an older barn.

Robinson says that there's a modern framing too that suggests that this barn was built around the mid-20th century. So...

Abou-Jaoude asks if there was any agriculture function on this property recently. Robinson says this was historically agriculture land, the whole area was.

Tilley asks if there's any info that can pinpoint the date of construction. Robinson says this area is not traditionally where fire plans would take it into account. Report from MHBC had a couple of historical maps, in 1906 there was residence but no indication of barn.

Nick Bogaert from MHBC says by the 1950s the house and the bard were definitely there on the property because they have a photo, but they can't confirm if that's the same barn in the same spot back to turn of 20th c. Barn shows use of rubble in foundation.

Motion approved with one objection from Tilley.

Motion to extend meeting past 2 pm for the last item? Passes unanimously.

Last item: 65 Delhi Street: Conservation Plan with presentation by Deb Westman, +VG Architects.

Robinson says that staff are satisfied that this development will properly preserve the heritage attributes. He reminds that the intention to designate is coming up at next week's planning meeting. guelphpolitico.ca/2023/04/07/cit…

No questions from committee so we go to the motion:

Motion approved unanimously.

And that's it for this month's Heritage Guelph meeting!