Transcript - Heritage Grants Approved, Waterfront Debated - Heritage Oakville Advisory Committee meeting of March 24, 2026 at 9:30 a.m.

Heritage Grants Approved, Waterfront Debated - Heritage Oakville Advisory Committee meeting of March 24, 2026 at 9:30 a.m.

recording in progress. Okay, good morning everyone. I'd like to call this meeting of Heritage Oakville to order and to welcome all those who are here with us today and others who may be watching us online. Those who are watching us online on the live stream who want to follow along the agenda that we're using today can do so by logging on to the town website and you can get access to the agenda there under the heading of of meetings and committees. Um the uh any anyone who wishes to delegate at the meeting must register uh by noon on the business day prior to the the meeting itself. Uh you can do that online. It's a very simple process, but you do have to register in order to delegate. Um, we are, as I remind everybody every time, um, uh, an advisory committee, and we make recommendations to council for actual approval. And any recommendations we make today will be dealt with by council at its meeting on April the 20th, which will begin at 6:30. And again, a reminder on the delegation process for that. Um, we have four discussion items on the agenda today. Um, so let's get right into it. Do we have any regrets, Madame Secretary? No, we don't. Good. Um, I think I see Jason online. I think Emma is also online. I can see councelor McNiss online. So again, if you want to speak, I'll try and keep an eye on the screen and watch for your hands, but banging a pot lid against a pot will probably get my attention more quickly. Um, do we have any declarations of pecunary interest? Nope. Nope. Good. Seeing none. Moving on. The confirmation of the minutes of our last meeting as the next item. These were distributed. Does anyone have any comment to make on them? Well, the minutes acceptable. George, thank you for the motion to approve the minutes as circulated. Any further discussion on that? No one opposed to that motion. The minutes are approved. Right. So, we're into our first discussion item, which is 4.1, the Heritage Grant working group, and that's Sue. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This will be a fairly short and sweet presentation um as uh we've done a lot of the work behind the scenes already. So, this is the 13th year of the Her Town's Heritage Grant Program. So, it's an annual program that provides $180,000 in funding. Um, this year we also have a rollover of about $10,000 from unused grants in 2021 that will be added to the pot. Um, and every year once the application period closes, we have a working group of committee members that come together to look at all of the submissions and recommend um funding amounts. So, that report um comes back to the committee. Uh we expect that to come at the April meeting and then on to planning and development council for final approval sometime in May. And so, um, based on a previous poll of the members, uh, the working group, uh, consists of our chair, uh, Drew Bucknell, vice chair Jerry Tino, counselor Jonathan Mcnes, and Bob Laughlin, and George Gordon, who will all be, uh, joining staff for a review of all of the submissions on Tuesday, March 31st, um, here at town hall. So, we're pleased to do that in person this year and we look forward to dividing up the funding as fairly and equitably as possible and supporting a lot of heritage conservation projects in the town. And so, the staff recommendation simply is that the heritage grant working group for 2026 be created and the membership be determined as I've noted in the presentation. Happy to answer any questions. Okay, super. Thanks, Sue. Any questions of Sue about this? Okay. So, the motion is to uh create the working group uh with the members as listed. Okay. Is that right, Madam Secretary? So, because the members have happy to move it. Okay. Would somebody like to give me a motion to that effect? Sorry. I'm happy to move it. Oh, counselor. Yes. Sorry. Good. I'm being helped by my vice chair. Thank you. So, you've given me the motion. Thank you, councelor McNes. Okay. Any further discussion on that motion? Anyone opposed to that motion? Fine. The group is established and the members are appointed. Thank you. So the next item is a heritage permit application for 361 McDonald and that's Carolyn. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so the property is 361 McDonald Road and it's located at the northeast corner of Allen Street in McDonald. This is one of the more recent part 4 designations that came out of the designation project. So it's not part of a district. Uh, but it is in the older Brandtwood uh neighborhood. So again, it's designated part 4. It includes the Miller House, which is a circa 1913 one and a half story brick and shingleclad house. It's a bungalow style house of the arts and crafts era. So the application is to construct a twostory rear edition and to make some minor alterations to the windows on the heritage house. Here's a view of the house from the front facing McDonald Road. So there's no changes that will be seen from this view. Most of the changes really will be visible from the public from this side here. So, what we're going to see is uh a new addition put on. I show where my mouse is here to the rear above the uh one-story mudroom wing that's currently there. So, the mudroom wing and the detachable garage were built in the early 2000s. And so, the addition will be um just to the rear of the Heritage House above the mudroom. And here's another view of it. So, it will be set back from that uh wall from the of the Heritage House along Allen Street. And here is a view from the backyard. So again, this will have the most impact. So um this section here to the left of the mudroom will be filled in. And then again, uh the twostory portion put above. So here's a site plan. Um the new addition is in the top corner if you can see it. So between the garage, you can see this small square that's been filled in here uh in terms of an additional footprint. And then again the second story above that and the view from Allen Street. So the existing roof line here of the heritage house is being extended to accommodate this pretty small addition. So they are going to incorporate a dormer here with uh two windows that are complementing the windows on the existing windows on the heritage house. The one over one uh windows you can see here and the mudroom wing here is being um extended above. The addition is to be clad and board and batten wood siding. So compatible with the heritage house but a little bit different. There is a board and batten wood siding on a couple areas of the house including the um extended bay window here. You can see in the same elevation. And then coming around to the rear again you can see it's a rather small addition lower in height than the main portion of the heritage house. And this is looking from the internal uh rear yard. And again, they've dealt with providing more space within the lower height by putting in a dormer here. And again, new windows in that sort of vertical proportionality to be in keeping with the windows that you see on the heritage house. So, for the most part, the heritage house will remain the same. I'll go back here. There is a change here where um the currently the windows which are not historic are being taken out and replaced with two one over one windows to match ones that are already on the heritage house. This area will be re-birricked with other brick that can be salvaged from the house. And then on this um this wall of the house here they are putting in a new wind excuse me a new window into this opening here uh for egress from the basement. Other than that, the Heritage House remains really as you see it today. So, in terms of our assessment, uh again, it's not a district plan and guidelines we're looking at. We're we're dealing with a part four bylaw. Uh but new addition is to the rear of the heritage house. It's lower in height. Again, it's tucked into that existing rear roof. Uh it's compatible with the uh existing heritage house in terms of its style and aesthetic, but it's been differentiated through different materials, the wood, board, and batt siding. And again, there are some minor changes to the heritage house, but they retain the arts and crafts character and none of the attributes in the designation bylaw are directly impacted and there are no minor variances required for the new addition. So staff is recommending that the application be approved again subject to our typical conditions that staff approve uh minor or the final details on materials and that the heritage permit expire two years from date of final approval. and I'm happy to answer any questions and I believe we have the owner um joining online as well. Good. Thank you, Carolyn. It is a very pretty house, isn't it? Really is pretty. Um any comments or questions of of of Carolyn? Jerry. Thank you, Mr. Chair, through you. Um I think that the addition overall is um compatible in size. Um the only comment I have to say is from an aesthetic standpoint and that is um just as my eye sees this the west the west view the horizontal windows seem to float in the facade um both on the west window and that little portion on the south view. Uh, and that would be the only thing that when I'm looking at this building in a two-dimensional drawing format, um, they just seem to float and not quite land, um, happily in the in the elevation. So, that would be my only comment if was that a question to um, it's a question. Was that addressed or is that I think we talked about it at one point. Yeah, through you, Mr. Sher to Jerry. We did talk about it. So the mud room um the south or sorry the um I guess be really west facing um the the elevation facing Allen Street. So that already condition already exists with the existing mud room with that style. And then when we were looking I think this came up when we were talking um in that one meeting and the elevation you see on it's page 27 of the agenda. It's labeled the like the rear elevation that won't really be clearly visible because the garage is actually right next to it. It's just to provide a little bit of light into that mudroom uh and to allow for them to have storage of, you know, boots and clothes and everything on the but below that on the interior. So, from our perspective, we weren't concerned because I I agree that when you're looking at it two-dimensionally, it looks a little odd, but there's a functionality to it and it really won't be visible from most views, at least from the public view especially. Okay, Jenny. Good. Any other questions of count? No. Good. Thank you very much. Now we have a a Miss Danielle Hibbert who has been uh registered as a delegate. Um are you online, Miss Hibbert? Hi there. Good morning. Good morning. I can hear you. Good. Thank you. Um do you have any uh comment to make on on uh Carolyn's presentation? No, nothing to add. I was just here in case there were any questions that came up, but um appreciate Caroline's help on this. I think she went over the project well and and we're super excited to make this more compatible for our young family. Okay, good. Thank you. Are there any questions of uh the applicant? Nope. Good. Thank you very much for uh for for delegating. Okay. Um there are no other delegations, so we're now confined to the board. Any comments or discussion from anybody about this application? Good. Does somebody want to give me a motion? Councelor U. Councelor Longo has given me the motion that the staff recommendation be approved. Is there any further discussion on that? Seeing none, um are any opposed to that motion? Again, none, the motion is carried and the application will be recommended to council at its next meeting. Okay. Thank you. So the next item that we have on the agenda is the heritage application for 53 Dun Street and that's also Carolyn. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So uh most of you are familiar with this property. It is located in the old Oakville district in the southeast corner of Dun Street and William Street. And it is a contributing property within the district. It includes a late 19th century vernacular frame house and the application is to replace the existing detached garage with a new one in the same location and there were minor variances approved um in February for this uh new garage and they were explained in the report but generally speaking there were four. One was the flankage sideyard which was is a current condition with the existing garage because it is in the same location. Secondly is a separation distance between the garage and the house again a current condition. Thirdly, it was for height. This is a slight increase to the existing uh garage that you see. And the fourth is lock coverage. Again, a slight increase because the new garage has a little storage area out the back. So, not these were all four of them were approved because they were um supported by staff because obviously two of them are existing scenario or conditions that you can see on site and the other two were still in keeping with the heritage district. The height of the building, which I'll show you, is actually sort of more in keeping with the heritage character of the district. And the lot coverage is really minimal in terms of the impact on the streetscape because it's really tucked behind the garage. So, I'll show you some views to see the existing conditions. This is looking down in the house with the garage to the left. You can see there are some mature trees there. The goal is to keep those and retain them and um you know, ensure that there's hoarding and proper conservation of those trees. And then the next view here shows it from uh that same front of that house with the garage to the left. And here's another view. So you can see the garage is about in line with the house uh the heritage house and then the house next door. Again, that will be in the same location. So here is the site plan. What's new is going to be that lighter share shaded box to the to the bottom below uh the garage that you can see. And again, that's to provide some storage space because the existing garage really just holds two cars and that's it. So, here's an elevation view. You can see the uh additional height that's being asked for. This is for two reasons. One is to accommodate more standard cars of today. The current height is quite low where the garage door is not actually high enough to accommodate more some some standard cars. So, the idea is to raise the height and get a standard two standard size garage doors in there. And secondly, it also allows the new garage to actually um mimic the slopes of the heritage house you can see in those gables. So you can see again there's a little bit more consistency and fluidity in the design you see before you rather than the more squat mid-century sort of 1950s60s um excuse me style of the existing garage. And then this is from the rear and you can see that small storage area. They're doing two over two wood windows to uh be compatible with the existing heritage house board and batten siding. The goal with this was to do something that's compatible but a little bit different. And they are repainting. They have a heritage permit already to repaint the house in a a light um sage green and then that darker olive color on the new garage and also on the new uh or on the the existing and new shut wood shutters. So that's the idea is to sort of match but keep things a little bit different at the same time. So, here's the floor plan. Again, pretty small in size, two cars, and then that storage area to the rear. Simple roof plan. And then here's a closer up elevation views. So, this is the side facing internally to the heritage house and the rear. And then this is the blank wall that's facing the neighbor. So, again, in terms of our assessment, the garage is detached, which is supported. It's in the same location, so the impact is rather minimal. It is lower in height than the heritage house. There's no views of the heritage buildings that are obstructed. This is something that we need to take into consideration in the new guidelines, the new planning guidelines. So, these are all um related to those guidelines that we have to um make sure we're looking at that weren't all in the old planning guidelines. Again, it's in the same location. The impact of the streetscape is very minimal and the design materials are compatible with the house and the overall district. And again, the variances were supported and approved. And the staff recommendation is that the application be approved subject to this typical condition that staff deal with the final details and that the heritage permit expire two years. And I'm not sure I think the owners or applicant was trying to join, but I don't think they were able to. But I'm happy to answer any questions. Yeah. Thank you, Carolyn. Thank you. Okay. Any questions of Catalyn? Yes, Bob. through you, Mr. Chair. Carolyn, the tree that has to be removed for that uh um extension, is it it looks like a fairly large uh canopy? Is it in good shape or uh excuse me through you, Mr. Sherob? So, yeah, that one is actually not a mature tree. It's more like a shrub. It has a wider um they're bushes. Oh, and I think so they're actually I think I'm trying to remember if it was cedar. I don't know if I wrote it into the report. Uh but they are bushes. So they're actually it's a wider canopy, but it's they're not a full actual mature tree. Uh but the goal is to really focus on the two that you can see in the site plan uh that are along the edge of the property along the edge of the garage and the driveway. So that is really the goal. We had no concerns with the bushes being removed to the rear. Thank you. Okay, Bob. Any other questions of Canada? No. Good. Thank you. Um, we have nobody registered to delegate for this, so it's now confined to the board. Any comments, Jerry? No. Do you want to give me a motion to approve the staff recommendation? Jerry has given the motion. Any further discussion on that motion? Anyone opposed to that motion? The motion is carried. Thank you very much. Okay. The next item on the agenda is the Bronty Harbor and Bluffs uh cultural heritage landscape and the Bronty waterfront strategy associated with that and some of us had the opportunity to pay a site visit there. Um it rained quite a lot of the time, but it it was a it was it was a really good and informative visit and we got a real good feel for the place and some of the things that are being done. So now it's come to the committee for comments. So I think Sue is going to start us off in this and then there are others from the consultancy and the staff uh able to assist us with any questions that we might have. So off you go Sue. Uh thank you Mr. Chair. Um so yes uh what we're doing today is a high level discussion of the town's Bronty waterfront strategy. And so uh as many of you will remember the Bronny Harbor and Bluffs is a cultural heritage landscape. It's been protected since um uh uh sorry 2022 by a heritage designation bylaw and it also includes the Metro Marine Building which is also known as the Oakville Harbors building in that bylaw and Sovereign House both of which were previously protected as individual elements but have now been recognized also as part of this significant cultural heritage landscape. And so, uh, really what we're here today is, uh, to give our parks and open space staff and their consulting team some, uh, time to, uh, go over, uh, some of the research and the process that they've been going through on this very kind of, uh, long running policy work that they've been doing to create a strategy, an overall strategy for the Bronny Harbor area. So, what I just note to kind of frame this discussion is that this is considered high level um anything that directly impacts uh a heritage attribute in the cultural heritage landscape would come back for a heritage permit application at a future date. Um the Bronny waterfront strategy is really about getting a highlevel strategy in place to manage this area over the long term. um protect cultural heritage resources and accomplish a number of other goals uh that our staff and consulting team will go over you with go over with you. And what they'd like today is to hear some uh feedback from committee members about some of the items that uh will directly impact those heritage attributes. And uh in the end, the recommendation uh put before the committee is simply to receive. We're not being asked to approve anything at this point in time because they are not heritage permit applications. So, um, at this point in the proceedings, I would like to turn things over, um, to our consultants for the project who will introduce themselves and take it away. Okay. Good morning. So, if you would give your name, rank, and serial number to the secretary just for the record. Get the mic on. Button on that mic. Thank you. Great. Good morning. Uh my name is Mike Hudson. I'm a consultant with the firm the planning partnership in Toronto. We've been retained by the TR of Oakville to undertake the uh Bronty Waterfront strategy on their behalf. Uh we've been working um with staff and the community for a while now um to bring this forward and we wanted as Sue mentioned we wanted to bring this forward uh in a in a kind of informal discussion uh manner today um to advance the slide do I there we go um so um to to permit the discussion we wanted to just outline for those of you who didn't have the benefit of of attending the the kind kind of the informal discussion we had the other day. Just I'm going to run through what we're what we're proposing, what we've heard from the community, some of the landscape strategies we'd like um and then review those in relation to the cultural heritage issues and landscapes here and then just to have a quick discussion at the end about moving forward. So, as Sue mentioned, it's it's this is a high level plan, right? There are no specific, you know, construction projects or anything coming out of this. This is a series of implementation strategies uh separate projects that will come forward in the next you know short medium and long period up to 105 years ultimately for some of these projects as council considers them and allocates budget and as funding becomes available. Um but our our our staff team has been very clear right let's get some uh capital projects that can be moved on very quickly um the lowhanging fruit when funding is available so it's a whole series of interlin projects the study area is fairly large 24 hectares some of that's water but there's actually over four kilometers of water's edge when you measure all the ins and outs so it's a tremendous opportunity to create a great new waterfront um we've been working since uh September 2025 we've had the initial kind of rounds of consultation with the community. Uh we've met we've had the initial public visioning workshop. We followed that up with uh some concepts that I'll be showing you today. We've had a second public meeting about those to receive feedback. And we are here in the third phase. So this is where we're starting to wrap wrap up the report, bring forward recommendations to council. We have a public meeting tonight in fact to review the same materials you guys are seeing today. And we'll take your input, the public's input. We'll refine the plan and bring it forward. The target date is May 19th to go to council with this. I'm going to break the design concepts down into a couple of areas. First of all, Bronny Harbor. So, this is on the west side of Bronny Creek, uh, also known as the inner harbor. One of the things we heard clearly from the public, from all stakeholders, um, throughout the project is clear public access access is essential to this plan. multiple ways in and out connecting the creek on both sides. Um, and this will be a theme throughout. Um, other proposals on this side is to upgrade the metro marine building. It becomes a kind of a nucleus for this side of the revitalization of the waterfront that also is piggybacking on a new prominade on that side. And I'm going to talk about this flexible space approach. It is a it is still a working boating harbor and we're not uh we're not changing that. But what we want to introduce is new public amenities especially in the summertime when it's when the when the boat storage is not required. You have a land asset there that can be used for public benefit. So we're going to talk about popup uses and um cultural uses and those kind of things. So here's our concept plan is based on a few things. One is the Metro Marine Building. That's the blue rectangle you're seeing there roughly in the middle is is revitalized and repurposed as a community hub. You're seeing it rotated 90 degrees in its current in the in the configuration in the drawing here from its current uh configuration. And I'll speak to that a bit as we go through. Um and the area around that building can be a flexible kind of plaza space for pop-up uses. And I'll show you some images of what we mean by that. That's additional commercial uses, pop-up park uses, things that kind of create a draw with the with the uh Metroarine building all along the north seaw wall there. We're proposing a kind of linear pedestrian prominade. So shifting the boating and parking uses back a little bit. Uh we're thinking 30 40 feet to introduce, you know, a green spine with with with um different amenities and uses for the public. All the other functions will remain the same. still a parking lot. It can still do boat storage in the winter, but it has this kind of dual uh purpose now, not unlike Granville Island and Vancouver where you get pedestrians and bikes and cars and industrial all mixing together. The the view today um eastwards you see the Metroarine there on the left. So, the idea here is first of all, you may know the building uh is not on a solid foundation. That's an old marsh underneath. So, uh, to put this thing on a solid foundation is a significant enterprise to go down to bedrock. Um, it it needs repairs and addressing. You know, there's asbestous shingles. There's, you know, we on our site visit, we could literally see through holes in in the building to daylight. Um, there's servicing issues. So, all of that needs to get um addressed. We plan to maintain, you know, ultimately when the project comes forward, it would be planned to maintain all those heritage attributes that are listed in in the reports, right? The the plan of the building, the massing, the roof forms, the doors, um all that interior kind of exposed structure that make it such um really a fascinating interior space that that many people in the public have never never seen before. The idea though is to rotate it to get the long side of the building now parallel to the harbor and to open up that side of the building through, you know, roll up garage doors and windows so that you get a that a much better indoor outdoor kind of connective relationship. And one of the thoughts is that'll be much more attractive to the to holding community events to attracting tenants to have that kind of waterfront presence in a in a stronger way. Uh we've we've done a little bit of architectural testing of the building and what we've found is that the main volume of that shed can accommodate um the community uses that we're proposing and we've we think we can put 12 to 14 kind of vendor spaces within that main main shed. So enough kind of critical mass to create a you know a nucleus or a draw that would bring people across. And of course, this can spill out into that surrounding flexible space around it as well for bigger events. And then we've talked to the town about, you know, putting their town harbor offices and potentially other harbor operations. Those can all fit actually within that twotory sideshed addition. So, we've we've tested the kind of the square footages that would be involved and we we think that's quite doable. So this is a view of that same that same photograph showing the building rotated the doors open and you can see what we mean by that that long side of the building being exposed allowing the indoor outdoor connectivity. Then on the left in the foreground is this notion of popup uses whether they be shipping containers or um you know mobile food trucks or or what have you. uh kind of milling about that summertime activity that that draws people and and there at the top right you can see the idea of the indooroutdoor connectivity that we'd like to create with the building. This is now with our back to metramarine looking the other way we're proposing the the kind of the linear public prominade. So, it's shifting those boating vehicular uses back and then creating a series of outdoor rooms with very simple means, right? Like planters and some trees that create a series of spaces that can be programmed. You know, at the start, they can be all popup kind of park uses. The town can experiment to see what works well. Um, the advantage of this is is it can cater to different ages. You can kind of shift it over time depending on how people react to to various uses. Here's a here's a images of other waterfronts that are exploring this kind of idea of you know everybody wants to be close to the water of course that prominade notion but then the immediate strip behind it there's a whole series of almost infinite possibilities that can be be done there second second kind of heritage impact area is the bluffs area again clear public access is what we heard the most from the public uh multiple ways in and out connecting the creek And then on this side, there's opportunities to expand the usable waterfront space. The town's recently invested in, you know, in the beach area there in the playground, which is great, but the west side of the creek there, there's currently not a path, and we we'd like to propose again a waterfront prominade along there. And then the foot of the bluffs themselves, this is where we're proposing new parkland. So, new fill out into the lake. We wouldn't touch the bluffs themselves or the forested area on the bluffs. This is about adding out into the water at the foot of those bluffs to create safe public access along the waterfront. This would be part of a long-term vision as well as the town looks to create a continuous waterfront uh route. For now, it would connect up into West River. And of course, as part of that, there's always shoreline enhancements that you do from a um a habitat perspective, both terrestrially and and aquatically. This is a a quick concept plan of what that would look like. So the two key areas there, the the bluffs, a new parkland at the foot of it, and then along the creek side, a new boardwalk and kind of a terrace or stepped area along the water's edge to create, you know, viewing and activity of the harbor. The metramarine would be just off to the north side, you know, just above this plan. And, you know, cities all over the world are doing these kinds of things. um this kind of ecological restoration of our shorelines which you know have you know right now it's concrete rubble and that's at the foot of those bluffs. So cities are saying you know the climate change let's reinforce these shorelines properly with with current engineering but also paying attention to the ecological function of it. And so I the top two images are from Bisagi Park in in Toronto. If you haven't been there yet, it's one of the best projects in North America that demonstrate the principles of ecological uh restoration and habitat creation uh through New Lake Phil and uh the town has, you know, a recent experience doing this in Tannery Park. This is a little more manicured uh perhaps, but as as this matures, the the naturalization will fill in and create habitat that comes right down to the lakefront. Um the parkland, you know, sign significant endeavor. We see this being approved in several locations on the north shore of Lake Ontario, right? It can be done but recognize that it is a long approvals process. You have to involve all the ministries, conservation authority, uh DFO, first nations, etc. to make sure this is done properly, that it's assessed, that there's community input. Um, as you might expect, all those ministries ensure that any, you know, there's net habitat gain, um, DFO, right? Fish compensation. And so you uh you create new habitat both on the land and in the water. The advantages of it stabilizes the shoreline shoreline. It provides that new parkland connection, right? That safe accessible waterfront route and it's part of a long-term connectivity initiative. This is the view from West River. This would be that the elevated position at the top of the bluffs and a sketch of, you know, the idea that you could create a little lookout or something at West River. It's great place for a piece of public art and it's not a vehicular access like like Tannery Park is. This is just pedestrian and cyclist. So, you would move on to this new parkland and then immediately start dipping down the down the hill um along the foot of the bluffs to to access the beach. Um just like Tannery Park, there's opportunities for signage and wayfinding, both wayfinding signage as well as interpretive, you know, heritage signage. Uh we're developing that as we speak. in effect um that's well underway now. So this is a preliminary series of images of of a wayfinding system. We haven't touched the interpretive thing. Obviously that's something that would come forward um through the town staff and through this committee uh in the future about how that can be told. But just based on our informal discussion the other day about several members noted the importance of making sure the story of the harbor is told through the interpretive elements not only within the building at Metroarine itself but also along the shoreline. And so these are just some images of different ways other cities handle this. You know, when when we were in the space the other day, we could see the boats up on the lifts. And, you know, there's a lot of great ideas out there of of, you know, bringing these artifacts in and telling the story that way, not only through signage, but through, you know, the the way the building is restored, how the how the architecture speaks to the old structure as it's reinforced for its new role. Um, the other thing uh we we heard the other day was the notion that the building in its current orientation functions as a bit of a landmark as you're sailing uh back up up the creek in uh into birth and that the gable end forms forms a recognizable landmark and we acknowledge that rotating the building will change this relationship. But the the two images there on the left speaks to the notion that there might be some creative ways you can acknowledge you know the current situation by by by you know perhaps having a superructure that that suggests the gable end and then becomes you know a shade structure first spill out in the summer or what have you. If the lower left image there is a is this really neat sculpture in Halifax if you're familiar with this kind of this abstract wire sculpture but when you see it from a certain angle all the wires line up and and it forms the image of a ship. So there's might might be some creative strategies there where you can kind of get that notion of the landmark view even though the building has been rotated. And then the other images show signage you know either standalone or even built right into some of the landscape elements that could tell the story. So from a cultural heritage impact perspective, the red area, you know, we know recognize the whole low-lying harbor is a cultural heritage landscape and then the the white outline area, the bluffs specifically. So that's what we're here to talk about today contextually. Um there's a few things going on. One is work is has has started at least in the design phase right now to address the Northshore seaw wall because it is below the 100red-year flood level. So that needs to be raised and that's going to be ongoing in a couple years. That directly impacts Metroine of course because there's tiebacks. Metroen is below that 100year level. So it's recommended that that building is also raised up. It would be you know 8 to 10 inches or so I believe is the figure to get it up to that 100redyear um level so it's less susceptible to storm events. And then of course there's always ongoing uh work with conservation haltons all in the flood plane. Um the current use as you know is the is a boat repair and paint shop. Um it's clad and spustice shingles there's deterioration HVAC issues. Um to bring this up to modern code of course we got to add insulation. Uh you know there's two basic ways to do that to the exterior or to the interior of the shell. Recognizing most of the heritage uh value and and and value to the public as a as a as an attraction is on the inside. We would imagine that insulation layer gets added to the outside. But again minimal changes as possible. You know the whatever the town would work with the heritage architect ultimately to bring forward a building massing and shape and the windows everything would be done um in a in a compatible way. It is a very substantial construction project to lift this building up build that seaw wall do proper foundations that's like 20 meters down to bedrock in the in this sand. So it's it's a pretty substantial uh project. So again, we're not here for any kind of formal recommendation, but the the idea or with a formal project, but the idea is just to look at it through the lens of ultimately heritage permits will be sought. So what what are the changes that are being proposed by this master plan? So the you know the landscape um we know it's designated as a because of its um evol it's an evolving landscape, right? came from that kind of fishing and industrial past and now more recreational. Um the the building itself is a you know rare 20th century ship building shed. Um there you can see on the right that you know just these are just little bullet points we've pulled out of the heritage report and what the what the key characteristics are. Why rotate the building? Uh the long side facing the harbor uh generates that just allows that better kind of indooroutdoor connectivity. Um, again, we think it's probably better for for ultimate attracting tenants and and creating the kind of nucleus that we'd like. Um, currently the doors are non-functioning. So, again, we can we can kind of address that recognizing it does change the relationship of the har of the building to the harbor with especially with the tall doors. Obviously, it was built to launch ships into the harbor. So, that hopefully can be told. And we just took the the attributes as we saw them and and said what you know if we did need to response to these to this list what you know what what is the response and for the most part we're not suggesting any change right the landscape itself the treed slope the paths hopefully what we're doing is augmenting those there's no removals of that we're adding new ones most of the um change or the impact to the from a heritage perspective as we see it is to the marine building and two two ways. One is the rotation and opening up that building and and then the second would be to bring it up to code obviously uh requires uh some some level of impact to the building but we would be maintaining the the beautiful you know the the wood and the that kind of beautiful exposed structure on the inside. Uh also in the checklist there's um 12 views identified around the harbor. Again I think our argument would be we're not we're not we're not certainly changing those views. Uh we're hopefully augmenting those views, making them nicer by inviting more public. More public will get to be at those viewpoints, so to speak as well as the the the view shed that you're looking at. Uh would be enhanced. View one there. It's that's from the top of the bluffs. You see the image on the left. This is from the heritage report. This would be impacted only in the sense that at the bottom of that view, there would be additional parkland. But the view itself from the top of the bluffs, again, we're not proposing any changes to the bluffs themselves. So again, we went through all those all those points that, you know, an ultimate application would need to address point by point. And again, we we think we're fairly compatible with with the exceptions of of what I've noted. Um, so the, you know, the this strategy is all about bringing more public to the waterfront. Um, you creating dynamic new spaces, especially on the west side of the creek where those don't exist today. um the alterations to the Metroarine building. You know, there's we've we spoke with you and there are pros and cons uh to it. It is a sign significant endeavor. Um but it is an important endeavor because you know through new uses it allows us to retain the building and kind of adapt it to a new life and kind of in some ways that's kind of what what the building has always done. Just to reiterate um this is a high level road map, right? frames a series of projects for council to to bring forward over time. Um, Metroarine would be part of an early implementation in the sense that the seaw wall needs to get addressed and so that kind of lifting of the building and and storing it temporarily and then bringing it back and then upgrading it to current uses. So, it'll be kind of a short to medium term before it's then open to public uses, but there are some decisions that need to get done uh right away. Okay, the inner the prominadal along the north side could be an early project that would follow right on the seaw wall construction and again that would be an opportunity to to kind of bring in some uh some initial heritage interpretation signage or features into that. Um the bluffs would be a longer term project and of course there's environmental assessment process you know that's three four five years and then capital budgets and then construction that's probably a 10y year plus project. Each one of these would come, you know, that that needs approval would come to this committee for approval with with more specific plans at that time. And so today, we just wanted to have a discussion with you folks. Um there's three questions here. You know, does is this generally compatible with the with the cultural heritage landscape? How can heritage be celebrated in the Metroine building and in the landscape? And then how do the proposed alterations, you know, what's what's their impacts? No, I'm just uh ready here to to uh let you know that there is a staff recommendation that's been added back in. Um it didn't show up in the agenda package, but it will be part of the minute simply to again receive the report. And we'll flip back to that last slide um because it did have those uh great questions to kind of frame some of the discussion that we felt might be helpful. um the staff report and and the presentation I think have tried to identify areas within the cultural heritage landscape that may be impacted um by some of the uh you know the the high level projects that we're talking about now and really what we want to hear from the committee I mean do you think that those uh potential impacts are they positive are they negative um you know and and do you feel that this concept plan that we're bringing for today. Um, overall, you know, what is its uh is it going to have a a a positive impact on retaining those cultural heritage values and attributes. And so, at this point in time, we would turn it over to the committee for discussion, noting that um both staff and the consultants are here to help answer any questions you might have. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you, Sue, and and and thank you, Mike. Um, normally we would sort of do questions and stuff, but I think we'll be a little less formal in in how we how we approach this. Um, I know you've had a lot of input from the community meetings that you've had and certainly the heritage committee members appreciate the opportunity to participate in that process. Um but we will also have a role to play later when it gets down the pipe because we will be part of the approvals that are required um before it gets to council for the final considerations. And of course as chair my job is to make sure that the committee deals with things in due order and that it sticks to its own guidelines. So in that context I I raised the issue of the reorientation of the part four building not to say that I didn't think it should be reoriented but rather to remind us that when that actually comes forward um we will have to follow our general guidelines which are with respect to a part four building you leave it where it is. If there's a really compelling reason to move it you keep it on site. I don't need to go any further than that because it is being kept on site here. So the committee will have to satisfy itself that there are compelling reasons. When I look at the overall excitement of this project and the amount of of of rejuvenation and revital revitalization that's going to take place, that may be a bar that that that you can cross. I think it was a pleasant surprise for you to discover that the leanto structures were in fact not part of the bylaw. so that when you're having to lift the building to do all the foundations and stuff, you don't have to worry about all these sort of extraneous pieces of construction. Um so, so that's good. Um I just think that um the bit you're doing around the bluffs is is really beautiful, really wonderful. and the opportunity to link that linking the walk from the outer harbor to the inner harbor will be a very significant improvement uh over what it is today. Uh but to to link across to the bluffs, I know that's kind of down the road that you might be able to have some kind of foot bridge uh installed, but that would be a wonderful way to sort of integrate the the entire the entire place. So, okay, it's really a question of what do you folks think? Have you got comments to make? Have you got um concerns? Do you see anything that may need to be addressed at at some future date? And and either Mike or Sue or other members of the project team uh will be able to chip in and and help you answer these things. I'm sure everybody's going to want to say something. So, I'll try and keep some maybe I should just go around the table. I'll start off with you, Peter, if that's okay. and and just go around and if you want to say something, say it. Perfect. Thanks uh chair. Uh Mike, thanks for the presentation. I had a couple uh kind of comments. I've had a lot of time I spent a lot of time actually at the Halifax waterfront and some of the key features that that are there um which I think are applicable here are just accessibility, being able for people to have access to it. Um, but there's a real um, sense of the popups and, you know, being able to walk, get something to eat, buy some things, but it's the cultural heritage. There's a lot of placards that are there that talk about the heritage of uh, of Halifax. And I think, you know, Tannery Park, I think, has something in HM HMCS Oakville, huge part of our history. So, if that could be incorporated into this uh, on a on a big level, I think that would be great. Um, so, and then the other part on the bluffs. So I'm a I'm a big student of Frederick Law Olmstead Michael Huff if you know him you know I I actually was taught by him I had the pleasure of learning from him but from the natural heritage is to to build or work with what exists. So without really changing a huge amount of that natural heritage is to actually keep stuff in place but then you know work around it kind of thing. So hopefully that's part of the consideration that's going to happen for the bluffs because I think having access to it and actually making usable will be wonderful for the community. Um so anyway, I think right direction but uh those are just kind of my comments. Great. Thank you. Good. Thank you, Peter. Carrie through you, Mr. Chair. Um yeah, so there's a lot to love about your proposal. Um, you know, we did the hard work to propose or get this designated as a cultural heritage landscape. And to me, the Metroine building in its current orientation is a large part of that cultural heritage landscape. Um the I'm curious if you've calculated how much parking has been reduced by your plan, especially given that there will be additional uh traffic to that area because it looks like there's a significant reduction. Um and there are certainly times of the year where that is fully utilized. Um the bridges that are being proposed to me particularly the north one uh doesn't impact functionality but I think the south southern bridge uh would have an extreme reduction in the functionality of the of the inner harbor its current uses. Um, and I would just note that the Tannery Park uh rehabilitation or uh improvements didn't actually affect functionality in in any regards. So, as I said, there's a lot to love, but I think the Metro Marine and its current orientation is a is a key cultural heritage landscape part of that. Thank you. I can maybe Yes, I was going to say if you wanted to helpful for context, I can just address the bridge. do so the bridges if that's helpful. The the north bridge uh is not on the table any longer. We've heard uh fairly strongly from the public. They also think that's uh kind of redundant there is so close to Lake Shore. The bridge over the mouth of the creek which has been on various town of Oakville waterfront plans from since the '9s. Uh everybody recognizes this is really important. We've actually heard from quite a lot of members of the public who also say it's a really important kind of connectivity piece going directly from Bronny Heritage Waterfront Park to the beach would be fabulous and we all acknowledge it would be fabulous but we all acknow it's not on the table right now. It's premature because of the importance of sailing in the harbor. The way the boating works today, way the way Bronny Harbor Yacht Club functions today, it's just not practical to consider this today. It would be a very expensive bridge to have a, you know, some kind of swing bridge or some other thing that kind of allowed both the pedestrians and the boats uh to work, but that it should be re-evaluated. Recognizing it has been rec, you know, has been a great idea. It is still a great idea. Just every five or 10 years, the town should probably just re-evaluate that. how's the yach club doing? What's the function of the of the boating? You know, there's been talk of moving all the sailboats, say, to the outer harbor and figuring out, you know, can it work with just power boats in this harbor? So, there's there are options on the table. We've sp spoken with the yacht club um in terms of shifting around the way their operations work that might make a bridge make sense. So, lots of variables in play with the with the bridge in particular. um but not not uh from today's perspective no impact from bridges like they're not being proposed right now if if that's helpful. Thank you George. Now thank you Mr. Chair. I think you've just answered you just answered one of the one of the one of the thoughts that I had. Uh, but I also uh um wonder about the uh the marine building and the the focus that that it originally inspired and I can understand why you'd want to make the change and open it up, but I have I have a difficulty with that. I guess as the chair mentioned that's that's one of the other but otherwise I think the other the strategy is I think is uh is very big pro long long long project it's very encompassing of of both sides but parking is the other thing I thought of initially when you were looking at the sovereign house and down that area that's uh that the neighbors would be upset with that I think but these are all things that need to be discussed I think and worked through by uh by all by the neighbors on that side. But as as far as the inner harbor is concerned, I think it's a great idea to keep the accessibility. I'd like I like the concepts that you've put forth at this stage. Thank you, George. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I do think that the overall theme is excellent. I really like the um extent of diversity on the waterfront. I've just come back from Chile and uh we've been we were touring waterfronts I would say almost every day and the um quantity of or the quantity of elements on the waterfront to make um them accessible to the broader public was very impressive. Uh and I think that in the past we've lacked that here. it's been a uni function or it hasn't been really used by the broader public. So I think that the the broader accessibility of this area is um is you know is finally warranted and timely. Um, and you know whether or not like for the boating community, um, I think the the fact that you are asking the questions about, uh, power boating versus sailboating and where they should be located and whether or not there will be a bridge are really excellent um, things to look forward to in the future. Um the marine building is seems to be um a large issue with this committee here and uh I wanted to ask the question um I mean I can see the uh rationality of rotating the building 90 degrees but what have you so I know of course you've considered leaving it in place um leaving it in place and still continuing the east west access would mean that there would be chunks of the building on the sides um broken up so that you can still carry that almost crucififor element. So you can carry that east to west function of the kiosks and and um vendors but retaining the north south um strong gable facade of the building that's seen from the waterfront. I think this is what we're hearing from a few of the committee members and the boating community is the iconic presence of the elevation the gable elevation uh both from the I guess the the lake shore and the waterfront particularly. So the question is um can we see an option or or has there been an option where the building has been retained without rotating and what are the pros and cons so that everybody can be um satisfied that this is the best approach right thank you I can perhaps address that now um yeah we have looked at maintaining the building and you know it certainly is functional you could open those southerntherly doors to have indoor outdoor connectivity between the building and the harbor, but it becomes one or twosided. And I'll I'll back up and say from from the conservation authorities perspective, this building is in the flood plane. Of course, you may know that they require when when you do work on buildings, they require the exact same footprint. So keeping that the existing footprint um uh including um the sideshed is an important thing to kind of maintain what we have so to speak as a kind of critical mass of space to put in new uses. So if you maintain that that building in its current use and you put the harbor officers into the twotory addition on the side of the building, what we felt was that kind of doesn't allow the kind of east west indooroutdoor connectivity on that side of the building as much as the benefit of of rotating building. Plus with the rotation you get the longer side exposed. So those were kind of for us it was two factors that you know from a from a physical design from trying to create a a nucleus of change like a kind of critical mass of attraction just doing all the little things you can now seem to us to be of of benefit recognize you know if the building uh needs to stay you know it can probably function as a community hub but it's uh in our opinion it's not as strong that's all yeah yeah that that just simply is an issue because right now, well, the way you're showing it, it's a an east-west flow. There's a flow across. Yeah. Whereas, if you left the building on north south, people would go in on the south, but then kind of dead end in the car park. Yeah. Rather than flowing off into other activities and other activity areas. That's what we see. And of course, we're not heritage first people. We're trying to plan for a people space, a community space. And, you know, we can see this kind of open building on three sides and flow in and out and these vendors spilling out. If you know, wouldn't it be fabulous if this is an extremely successful place and you get more than 14 vendors who want to be here on a great Sunday afternoon and you get 30 or 40 and having that kind of kind of continuity of of folks in around here, that would be fabulous. You know, that would be the ultimate goal. Good. Thank you. All good points, Jerry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I think in in um one of your slides, you addressed um um the iconic gable that can be structured in a a park uh park structure. Yeah. Like like there's creative ways that heritage architects and public art um artists can can interpret this that are, you know, beyond my conception at this point in the master plan process without a specific. But yeah, like if that's an important kind of community landmark, an important part of telling the story of this building, then perhaps in the rotation there's something that can be added, whether it's a public art or even to the structure of the building itself or something on the inside that speaks to it. I I don't know, but Okay. Thank you. Okay. I'm going to now sort of include the people who are online now. Emma, I don't see you anywhere. Are you still with us? No, she's not. Okay. Uh Jason, I can see you on my screen. Uh would you like to to give us your comments? Great. Thank you for you, Mr. Chair. Excellent work. Um obviously a lot of thought has gone into producing something of this caliber. So congrats on that front. Really a lot of colleagues have already mentioned a lot of concerns that we we would all share PCV parking and access. And my my real key thing is is to make it a year round space. Um, I see the skating loop there, but obviously we're focused on pop-ups and such and so forth, but really that needs to be 12 months of the year considered. I just wondered if that's something that in the next round I said you've got public workshops and an emerging plan. Is that something that that is being considered and how that links to the town of Oakville's maybe our counselors can speak more um to that about linking with events and such that would happen throughout the the seasons. Thank you. Yeah, like a Christmas market or something like that to get into winter. Anyway, do you want to comment on that or Yeah. No, absolutely. We'd be looking for for year round um activity there. There is the thought that the boat storage would could continue in in that in that harbor in the win in the winter now, but of course you could organize that boat storage to create space around the Metroarine building where absolutely you could have a Christmas Christmas market. And yeah, I didn't speak to the entire east side of the of the plan because there are no particular heritage uh issues over there, but the skating loop is an an important part of winter activation. So, we think this metroarine idea as well as this skating loop would be two kind of wintertime anchors. Um, and again, because of its kind of popup nature or experimental nature at first, the town can kind of experiment to see what kind of events at what time are working well and then build on those, you know, add more infrastructure to support those uh over time. Good. Thank you. Thank you, Jonathan. Yes. Uh, thank you. Obviously, I'm a I'm a fan of this uh project. Um, and I think as a as a heritage committee, we're really seeing the value and and the foresight in creating this as a cultural heritage landscape because now we get to go through this process of uh, you know, many new features, but also making sure that we reflect our past. So I think we should uh or the committee that had the foresight to make this a cultural heritage landscape should really be patting themselves on the back for that foresight. Um I mean just to you know touch on a few of the points that have been raised. Um you know I I see the thinking around the orientation there. I I wonder if um and I you know I I see the aspect of the shed on the side which could sort of interrupt the flow. I wonder if the notion that the shed has to be sort of office space is precluding that being used as say public space if the orientation were to stay the same. Um you know possibly there's other options for office space for the harbors that we could find in there that don't necessarily have to be a part of the heritage structure. But um I too I mean I sort of think more visually and I think a few have mentioned if there could be a visual of um sort of leaving it somewhat in situ. I mean we know it has to be raised for flooding reasons and could maybe get a slight shift as it gets raised whether it goes back a little bit from the seaw wall which will change or or it gets a 10 degree pivot or something to to line it up with the harbor. But um I wonder if that side shed space could be considered as part of the you know retail attraction that would maybe help out with the flow. Um so I don't expect an answer on the fly but uh just putting that out there and and maybe when the renovation comes to committee you know that that could um be part of the consideration. Um just in addressing the year year round I mean I think you know I think we got answers there. the um you know the thinking I mean Bronny especially I mean we have probably you know 30 times the traffic in the summer season as we do the winter so we're very seasonal community and have been for quite a while. Certainly our small businesses would love to see that round out a little bit more and the uh skating loop in the outer harbor I think will be a priority project. We've got a parking lot right there, 250 some odd spots that's pretty much vacant in the winter offseason time. Um, you know, Coronation has lovely lights and attractions that everybody loves. So, I think it makes sense that Coronation has that feature. We could have this feature and um get some more use out of the the outer harbor. Um, you know, the the inner harbor we're thinking is a little bit more seasonal. Um but certainly the MetroMarine building with the restorations discussed you know would be an attraction I think for periodic events but largely it would you know retain the function of a um somewhat of a working harbor with boat storage and those are important things uh as well and um I believe we can actually keep the same amount of boat storage uh just by putting some on other parts of the harbor so that there wouldn't be a lot of displacement. Um and then just related to parking that's come up. Um so you know this project's happening in conjunction with the streetscape project along Lake Road which is identified in number six. That streetscape project will bring us uh street parking which would be a net gain of I believe it's 50 to 70 spots along Lake Shore. Um I think we'd get a lot of efficiency out of the inner harbor. We have an overflow seasonal lot there now that gets next to no usage. Um, and I think that's because we don't have the connections and we don't have the activities over there. And the parking sort of more public parking on the inner harbor I think bal seasonally balances nicely with the boat storage during the winter months. So, you know, boats go back in the water, a lot of space opens up. It's not fully utilized for parking. Um, but then we don't have the same parking demands in the winter months. you know, we can sort of take take away some of the temporary seasonal parking and then open that up for boat boat stores. So, I think it's a nice seasonal balance that can be optimized better and and um you know, work work well for the Boers and the boat uh industry and um as well as uh visitors to the area. And then I'll also note finally just, you know, we've engaged with the yacht club throughout this. you know, it's um um they've gone back and thought about it, talked to uh their members and sort of come forward with plans. I think um you know, they they sort of kicked around the idea of, you know, a few different things. Um you know, Outer Harbor, everybody seems to want to be in the Metroarine building, but I think ultimately I think they're they're kind of wanting to ride it out where they are. Um now, those things change over time. So, I think there's some flexibility still left in this plan. And as mentioned in the past, you know, there's been this idea of sailboats in the outer harbor, motorboats in the inner harbor. And seems like maybe right now we're not at that point, but I agree. F, you know, maybe every 5 years we sort of check in, see where we're at. Um, I would think number eight on the plan of the uh bluffs restoration, which is probably 8 to 10 years out considering all permits and and clearances that would be needed, would be a good time to take another look at better pedestrian connections because you could really start getting a nice loop there. um if you're going in or outer harbor into the bluffs um you know in a kind of medium to longer term time frame there. Um and then I'll just sort of not not too heritage related but just another sort of feature a challenge we're having is the beach has been restored and it's a lovely space now just um uh number nine on sort of by number nine on the list. Um, but we have real water quality and water flow issues there. And um, I'm hoping that the restoration of the bluffs can help get us better current in there. I think we had the most ecoli days out of any of the beaches kind of along Oakville, Burlington this this past season. Um, so I think part of that restoration work is to try to get us some better water flow through there to kind of wash things out. um you know and uh and just make it for better public use as well. So um so anyways, those are those are my thoughts. Um but overall I think this is very exciting and a great balance of um you know a harbor that's sort of infill in the outer harbor and then a heritage historic harbor that can still retain you know many of those features. So great work to everyone involved. Well, thank you. Thank you counselor. Okay, back to the live meeting. Sue, do this. There you go. Okay. Uh, regarding the bridge, and I know that's a long way down, but I know we molded over a little bit at the site visit. Maybe something closer to where the number three is. That's uh just a out out there comment. But the big issue around the marine building, I'm very pro- rotating it. I think leaving it where it is and trying to hash out a way to play around with the addition on the side where the offices are. It really is going to be a huge investment and you're going to end up with something that really doesn't work nearly as well as if you rotate that building. I mean it will be a dead end as it is of people going in the front and you know having to fight the crowds to get out back. I it just honestly leaving it as it is and it designwise is it's it's halfass you know it should be rotated as the uh for the use. I I don't I I just don't think that the heritage value is of leaving it where it is and messing around trying to make it work well where it is is worth the investment that's going to need to be put into this building to make it have full public access that's useful, that's efficient, that people are going to enjoy. It'll be intuitive is what I'm saying. It is intuitive to rotate it to have the full use of the investment and the enjoyment of the waterfront for the folks. Um some of the ideas that were in the inspiration photos notably um you know the one with hanging the boat from the roof that's lovely. All those ideas can be done. All the interpretive ideas can be put in place. So many of the other issues regarding the heritage value of the building are maintained. The massing, the doors, the amazing roof structure, that 90° rotation to me is not important. Thanks. Good. Thanks. So these that input will be particularly important when we actually deal with a permit. So I appreciate Yes. It's it's you know sometimes some compromises have to be made to me that that is a compromise. I don't think it's a big one for for what we get. Okay. Thanks. Good. Good. Okay. Russ as a person who is a boater and also lives there um or has lived there. I think it's a huge improvement over what is. There's no question about it. Um so I don't have any particular comments. I agree with the comments around rotating the um the marine building. I just think uh will the marine building stand being moved at all or will it fall down and do we need to consider uh you know salvaging it and rebuilding it rather than trying to stick around moving it? It's the only comment I have. I I'll say our we have an architect on our team who's giving us some advice. You know, we we're not structural engineers. We haven't done a detailed assessment of this. Uh he's had experience doing similar things on the Toronto Waterfront, moving heritage uh buildings. And he notes, yeah, it is a significant thing. You need to get um a structural engineer involved because it's a large volume shed that needs to get and moved. That said, money will fix any problem. He says both ways. That's right. So, you know, it it it needs further technical study to answer that question. I guess the fact of the matter is it has to be lifted anyway. So, you can redo the foundations. So, lifting it is the the big challenge. You can always turn it or move it a little bit if you can lift it safely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Russ. Yeah. Fine. Okay. Can switch off. Bob, I think most things that I would want to say have been said, but I I do commend you on the emphasis on access uh in the plan. Um there's obviously a lot of uh building construction in the Bronty area uh increasing the population. So turning what now is probably a theoretical park on Bronty Bluffs into a real usable park for those folks I think is very important. Um same with the uh east east uh part of the uh project. Uh improving the gardens uh where you have 13 14 15 area looks like a a very positive uh move to to me. So thank you. It's I would answer three that uh it has a positive effect. Sorry. Thank you. Good. Well, I hope you've heard um you've heard enough um Mike and the rest of the team and Sue. Um that's a lot of good input. Um is there anything further that we need to add? So George has just given me the motion that we uh receive this item for information. So thank you George. I don't know if we can receive it enthusiastically. I don't I don't think that's appropriate but but we do receive it. So, um, and is there any further discussion on that? Anyone opposed to that motion? No. Thank you. So, we've received it. So, thank you very much for all the work that's been done so far on this. And as I say, those of us who were there for the site visit got a real sense of the reality of the of the the physical changes that are going to be made there. So, thank you very much indeed. Thank you everybody for your hard work on this. Okay. We have no uh information items as as such on our agenda today. The date and time of our next meeting is April the 28th, 2026 uh here at 9:30 a.m. And Sue has just given me the motion to adjourn. Nobody will be opposed to that. So, I'll thank everybody for the gift of their time. But I will ask everybody to just stand fast. Don't sign off yet. And uh because I want to share something with you once we're off air recording Stop.

Full Transcript