Heritage Permit Review Subcommittee Meeting - June 16, 2026

The Heritage Permit Review Subcommittee met June 16, 2026, approved its agenda and previous minutes, and spent most of the meeting on a presentation about Hamilton's Urban Indigenous Strategy and how it is being implemented across city departments. The subcommittee did not review any heritage permit applications. Members also discussed proposed changes to the heritage permit process, including delegated approvals, maintenance exemptions, accessibility work, signage, tree removal, and how staff-approved permits would be reported back.

Topics Discussed

1. Indigenous Relations presentation and Urban Indigenous Strategy

Beth Doxater, manager of Indigenous Relations, presented on Hamilton's Urban Indigenous Strategy and implementation plan. She described her division as "a small but mighty team who's tasked with a really large portfolio that crosses the entire organization."

The presentation said council endorsed the Urban Indigenous Strategy implementation plan on Feb. 4, 2021. Staff said the work is organized around the themes of Land, Spirit and People, with 13 of 21 prioritized actions in progress, one ongoing and seven not yet started.

Doxater and other speakers framed the work as citywide and ongoing. One presenter said, "Reconciliation is everyone's work," while another said, "nothing for us without us. And that just sticks in your head. That's what you have we have to understand that we're not leading the conversation sometimes. We're listening to it and that's how you're an ally, right?"

2. Indigenous-led policy and heritage work

Staff outlined work underway on an Indigenous medicines policy, a sacred fire policy and procedure, a review of the city's land acknowledgement, and Indigenous engagement and procurement policies.

The discussion also turned to how Indigenous perspectives fit within heritage policy. Doxater said, "No, we just want ours heard too and it can sit beside yours. And even if it's different than yours, those two things are true."

Committee members also reflected on whether existing heritage rules privilege one historical perspective. Councillor Esther Pauls said there are "a lot of legislation and bylaws, policies, and all that sort of stuff, you know, designed to really specifically support and uphold these artifacts of one specific settler culture."

3. Heritage process review and delegated approval changes

Staff presented the Heritage Process Review, which they said is intended to "streamline our heritage processes to help decrease processing time, improve the efficiency of how we work as staff and as a city."

Proposed changes included extending heritage permit validity from two years to three years, allowing staff to enter timeline extension agreements without council approval, and formalizing submission requirements.

Staff also proposed expanding delegated authority so some minor alterations could be approved directly by staff. Esther Pauls said the current bylaw is unclear, stating, "the way that our current delegated authority bylaw is written is a little bit vague in terms of whether at any point council could say actually we undelegate that authority to staff."

Staff said clearer rules would help both staff and applicants. One staff member said, "we often make these calls as staff ourselves in terms of is this an impact or not? But having it laid out in a procedural bylaw would make that very clear to us, to the committee, and to property owners."

4. What counts as maintenance and what still needs review

The subcommittee reviewed proposed exemptions for routine maintenance, including repainting previously painted surfaces, replacing broken glass, roof repairs in kind, replacing non-heritage attributes, sidewalks and driveways in kind, and replacing non-heritage fencing in kind.

Members raised specific concerns about paint colour, historic windows, tree removal and foundation waterproofing that remains visible above grade. Graham said, "I think paint color is significantly important. It can totally change the look of something." Carol said she was "not very clear" on the policy document for historic windows and asked whether it addresses restoration as well as replacement.

On trees, Andy asked whether removing "a 100-year-old let's say maple tree" from a front lawn would still require a permit because it would affect the streetscape. Staff said tree trimming would count as maintenance, but tree removal would not.

Graeme also cautioned that foundation work can still alter a building's appearance, saying, "there'll always be a visual impact."

5. Accessibility, signage, and public reporting of approvals

Members discussed whether some accessibility interventions could be streamlined. Tammy Hwang said physical changes may still warrant review even when visual impacts are limited: "that level of impact would be physical impact would be more than minor even though the visual impact is minor." She suggested a policy document on accessibility interventions instead of a broad exemption.

Signage drew similar scrutiny. Councillor Andrea Horwath said the city will need "good wording in place when it comes to the sign policy of what they can and can't change on a heritage building," pointing to a Starbucks sign on the Lister Block as an example and adding, "It's not attractive on the building."

Members also asked how the subcommittee would be kept informed about permits approved directly by staff. Staff responded by asking, "how could we provide clear reporting back to you folks on things that if this is approved that we as staff are approving without your review so you know that that's taking place." The discussion pointed toward regular reporting on delegated approvals.

Motions

• Agenda approved — passed
• Minutes of the May 19, 2026 meeting approved — passed
• No heritage permit applications were reviewed at this meeting

Attendees

Named participants in the discussion included: - Beth Doxater - Alyssa Golden - Councillor Andrea Horwath - Councillor Esther Pauls - Tammy Hwang - Maureen Wilson - Graham / Graeme - Carol - Andy

A full attendance list was not provided in the notes.