SECOND MEETING OF THE

HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE

 

TOWN OF MARKHAM

Canada Room, Markham Civic Centre

Wednesday, February 9, 2005

 

MINUTES

 

Members                                                                                  Regrets

Joan Natoli, Chair                                                                     Maria Pia Andrejin

Ted Chisholm, Vice-Chair       

Julie Christian                                                              

Elizabeth Plashkes                                                                   

Marie Jones                                                                             

Judy Dawson-Ryan

Evelin Ellison

Rosemary Lamon

Susan Casella

Councillor John Webster

Regional Councillor Jim Jones

 

Staff

R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

G. Duncan, Heritage & Conservation Planner

Yvonne Hurst – Committee Secretary

 

The Chair convened the meeting at the hour of 7:15 p.m. by reading an outline of the structure of Heritage Markham meetings including how delegations are received by the Committee.

 

1.         APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the Heritage Markham agenda and addendum agenda, dated February 9, 2005 be approved as circulated.

 

            CARRIED.

 

2.         ADOPTION OF MINUTES

FIRST HERITAGE MARKHAM MEETING

JANUARY 12, 2005 (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the Minutes of the Heritage Markham meeting held on January 12, 2005 be received and adopted.

 

CARRIED.

 

3.         HERITAGE DESIGNATION
            DESIGNATION RESEARCH REPORT - JOHN CAMERON JR. HOUSE

            BAYVIEW COUNTRY CLUB LTD.

            25 FAIRWAY HEIGHTS DRIVE (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

The Heritage and Conservation Planner advised that, as directed by Heritage Markham, staff have researched the property at 25 Fairway Heights Drive.  A detailed report outlining the historical attributes of the heritage structure was provided to the Committee in a report dated January, 2005. 

 

Mr. David McKay, representing the applicant, advised that Bayview Country Club Ltd. was initially unaware of the heritage nature of the building.  The original application was to allow the owners to make changes to the maintenance facilities.  Since becoming aware of the heritage aspects of the dwelling on this site, a revised site plan has been prepared preserving the heritage dwelling.   

 

Mr. David McKay advised that the owner is willing to work with Town (Heritage Section) staff and has retained the services of an architect with heritage experience. 

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the presentation by Mr. David Mckay on behalf of Bayview Country Club Ltd. be received;

 

AND THAT the Building Evaluation Sub-Committee be directed to carry out an evaluation of the John Cameron Jr. House and report back to the next meeting of Heritage Markham.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

4.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
           
MARKHAM VILLAGE LIBRARY EXPANSION

6031 HIGHWAY 7(16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Mr. Jerry Shoalts, Architect, was in attendance to discuss the proposed elevations for the Markham Village Library Expansion. He noted that a preliminary design and massing model was presented to Heritage Markham in October, 2004.  At that time, Heritage Markham raised four issues for consideration: a) need and size of roof top mechanical equipment; b) materials to be used (colours, types); c) window treatment and d) use of quality materials.

 

Mr. Shoalts provided the following information related to these four issues.  He noted that the mechanical roof platform had initiated concerns by Heritage Markham related to its size and appearance.  He advised that indoor equipment has been researched and approved by the Building and Parks Construction Committee, which would result in roof top equipment not being required.  He requested that Heritage Markham reiterate its concerns regarding roof top mechanical equipment so that a detailed business case can be presented to Council.

 

With regard to quality materials, Mr. Shoalts indicated that the best quality of materials within budget have been recommended.  

 

            He outlined a number of issues that will be addressed:

            Existing Building

-                     existing stucco will be repaired

-                     existing wood windows will be repaired

-                     replacement of all existing windows is not feasible within the budget

-                     existing wood lattice will be replaced by a new wood lattice installed on the face of the building (to discourage birds)

-                     existing roof to be replaced with new asphalt shingles (a metal roof was not an option within the budget)

-                     The existing north pedestrian access is currently not used and will be re-opened

 

New Addition

-                     windows will be bronze aluminium (maintenance concerns with wood windows) (aluminium will last indefinitely while the window glass would have to be replaced in approximately 15-20 years)

-                     new brick will be a buff colour to complement the existing brick (the original brick was not available) (stone was not an option within the budget)

-                      roof may be asphalt, however, a metal roof in warm grey is being recommended

-                     The window design is complementary to the existing structure

-                     A colour board will be presented to Heritage Markham when approvals have been given by Council

-                     The addition is the same width as the original building; massing is similar to the original model

-                     Operable windows to be included that will open approximately 4” to allow for ventilation of the building and assist in controlling the library environment

-                     As much natural lighting as possible has been provided to reduce the need for artificial lighting.  When there is no need for electric lights they will automatically turn off to save electricity.

-                     Indoor mechanical equipment is more energy efficient than outdoor equipment

-                     The building will be well insulated

 

The Committee expressed some concerns with regard to the massing and style of the windows and suggested that the massing on the west elevation in particular could be broken into four banks instead of the proposed two banks.  The Committee also asked if the existing front door would be a focal point.  Mr. Shoalts answered yes, it will be reopened when the renovations are complete.

 

Mr. Shoalts noted that March 7th has been tentatively scheduled for a public meeting. 

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham supports Town (Heritage Section) staff comments as outlined in the memo dated February 9, 2005;

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham strongly supports the installation of interior mechanical equipment since the use of roof top mechanical equipment would be inappropriate due to its size and appearance on the roof.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

5.        REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
UNIONVILLE PLAYGROUND AND PARKETTE
146 MAIN STREET, UNIONVILLE (16.11)
  Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        L. Irvine, Parks & Open Space Development

 

Ms. Linda Irvine was in attendance to make a presentation on the proposed playground at the Bandstand Millennium Park, 146 Main Street, Unionville.  She noted that a number of meetings have been held with the TRCA as well as with area residents to provide an opportunity for these residents to have input into the location and type of equipment for the proposed playground.  Her report, dated February 3, 2004, outlined the 5 potential sites that were identified for the proposed playground: Fred Varley Parkette; Parkview Public School; Corner of Carlton Road and Chamberty Court (south of Unionville Library); Fred Varley Park and Toogood Pond Park near the Varley Art Gallery. 

 

Ms. Irvine noted that the site supported by the majority of Unionville residents and businesses who participated in the public process, as well as the Unionville Villager’s Association, was the Fred Varley Parkette west of the Millennium Bandstand.  She noted that this site is centrally located within Unionville, is near Main Street and can be designed to create community focus for the Village.  This site requires TRCA approval and has certain constraints related to flooding.  The proposed play structure would have to be constructed outside of the 100 year flood line to satisfy TRCA requirements.  She outlined two areas with the Fred Varley Parkette that would be feasible for the structure to be located.  Ms. Irvine also provided sketches of possible playground equipment that would give a light and airy feel to the playground and not detract from the Millennium Bandstand. 

 

Ms. Irvine advised that $75,000 has been committed to this project to date ($45,000 from community fundraising and the remainder by the Town).  However, she outlined additional costs that would be required for excavation (resulting in a construction cost of approximately $175,000).  She noted that when a consensus is reached on the location of the playground then funding remains the only issue to be resolved. 

 

It was suggested that Heritage Markham focus its comment on the impact that the proposed structure may have on the Millennium Bandstand and what type of playground equipment would be more appropriate for the heritage area. 

 

The Committee discussed the issue at length.  Several concerns were raised including sound from the playground and its impact on events at the bandstand; site lines (would the playground structure impact the view of the bandstand); and design of the playground structure (would it complement the bandstand and the heritage area in which it is located?).

 

Mr. Richard Talbot, President of the Unionville Villager’s Association (UVA), advised that the Association has supported ‘in principle’ the proposed playground in the Fred Varley Parkette.  He indicated, however, that he was not aware that a vote would be taken at a recent meeting and expressed concerns that there was no record of who voted.  He also expressed concerns with the increased costs of constructing the playground at this location. 

 

A motion was moved and supported by the Committee to permit Ms. Jeanne Ker-Hornell to speak to this item.

 

Ms. Ker-Hornell urged the Committee to consider a number of issues including: view of the structure in relation to the bandstand, noise from the playground; is a playground compatible with the Millennium Bandstand; suggested construction of the proposed playground in the corner of the parkette away from the bandstand; many community events that have space requirements are held in the area; suggested an area on Eureka Street that may be appropriate.

 

A motion was moved and supported by the Committee to permit Brian Roman to speak to this item.

 

Mr. Roman noted that all members of the UVA were notified of the recent meeting held to discuss the location and equipment for the proposed playground.  He advised that the process to have a playground constructed was started 4 years ago.  The Unionville Gala initially raised $50,000 but provided this money to fund landscaping for the Millennium Bandstand.  The Gala then raised $45,000 and this money is intended to fund the proposed playground.  It was agreed that with community support, consensus with respect to the location and TRCA approval, the Unionville Gala committee would provide funds to assist with this project.

 

A motion was moved and supported by the Committee to permit Greg McCormick, of the Unionville BIA to speak to this item.

 

Mr. McCormick, Unionville BIA, advised that the BIA were a major supporter of the Millennium Bandstand and playground.  He noted that over 125 performances have been held at the bandstand.  He expressed concerns with regard to the site lines (visibility) from the street as this project is in the heritage area.  He noted that the BIA supports construction of a playground in the area, however, he suggested that the scale of the equipment and colours should be addressed by Heritage Markham to ensure that these items are compatible to the heritage nature of the surrounding buildings.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the information regarding the proposed Unionville Playground be received;

 

AND THAT the Manager of Parks and Open Space be requested to take comments received at the Heritage Markham meeting of February 9, 2005 into consideration when finalizing her report on the proposed playground;

 

AND FURTHER THAT, the Manager of Parks and Open Space be requested to attend the next Heritage Markham meeting to provide an opportunity for further comment.

 

CARRIED.

 

 


6.         INFORMATION

MAIN STREET UNIONVILLE SOUTH STREETSCAPE CONSULTATION (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

 THAT the information regarding the Main Street Unionville South Streetscape Consultation be received.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

7.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            PROPOSED FAÇADE CHANGES

            45 JOSEPH STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        G. Duncan, Heritage Planner______________________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed façade changes to 45 Joseph Street based on the revised design dated January 31, 2005, and delegates approval authority to Heritage Section staff subject to:

-         narrowing of the sidelights and addition of muntin bars;

-         windows are to be wood, with exterior adhered muntin bars;

-         exterior colours to be submitted for approval by Heritage Section staff;

-         the applicant demonstrating that enough matching brick is available to carry out the design.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

8.         SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION AND DECK
30
WALES AVENUE, MARKHAM
FILE NO.  SC 05 007216 (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        M. Seaman, Senior  Heritage Planner__________________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

            THAT the applicant be requested to provide to Town (Heritage Section) staff and

            Heritage Markham a copy of elevations of the proposed addition and deck.
           

AND THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed design of the garage subject to it conforming to the requirements of the Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan and the inclusion of requirements in the site plan agreement confirming design, window type and design, materials, amendments to design during the construction process, etc.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

9.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            HISTORIC BRIDGE REPLACEMENT C.1910-20 (16.11)

            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        T. Yeung, Engineering Department

                        K. Bartusevicius, G.D. Jewell Engineering Inc._______________

The Committee reviewed the suggested staff recommendation (new design of bridge to be complementary to the old, installation of a Markham Remembered plaque) and after some discussion it was indicated that the bridge should not be demolished due to its cultural heritage significance.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT  the information from the Town (Engineering Department) regarding the condition of the historic reinforced concrete bridge on 19th Avenue, west of Highway 48 be received.

 

THAT the 19th Avenue bridge be designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

 

10.       INFORMATION

            DESIGN WORKSHOP

HWY 48, 16TH AVENUE TO MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the information regarding the Design Workshop, Highway 48, 16 Avenue to Major MacKenzie Drive, be received as information.

 

CARRIED.

 

 


11.       CORRESPONDENCE (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

           

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:


            THAT the following correspondence be received as information:

a)      Ontario Historical Society – Heritage Day Reception, Monday, February 21, 2005.

b)      Built Heritage News – Issue No. 56, January 17, 2004.

c)      Architectural Conservancy of Ontario – ACORN Journal, Fall 2004.

d)      Heritage Canada Media Review, January 5, 2005.

e)      Canadian Heritage (Federal Department) – 2005 Theme Calendar.

f)        Built Heritage News – Issue No. 57, Feb. 1, 2005.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

12.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
PRESERVATION OPTIONS – JOSHUA MILLER HOUSE (16.11)
10192 NINTH LINE (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Due to time constraints the following recommendation was deferred to the March meeting of Heritage Markham:

 

“THAT although Heritage Markham would prefer to see the Joshua Miller House retained, restored and tenanted on its original site as a first option, or relocated and restored as a building available to the public at the Markham Museum as a second option, given the current owner is unwilling to pursue the first option and the Markham Museum Board has indicated that it is not able to accept the dwelling and supports its transfer to Markham Heritage Estates, Heritage Markham recommends that the Joshua Miller House be declared eligible for relocation to Markham Heritage Estates.”

 

 

13.       COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION
PROPOSED COACH HOUSE
237 MAIN STREET, UNIONVILLE HCD (16.11)
FILE NO.  A 29/05
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                                    S.  Muradali, Secretary Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment

 


HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

           

            THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Minor Variance Application A/29/05 to allow the construction of a new garage with loft at 237 Main Street Unionville subject to the applicant being required to apply for and receive Site Plan Approval.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

14.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            CALIBER HOMES

USE OF VINYL WINDOWS IN NEW HOMES

49 MAIN STREET SOUTH, MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Due to time constraints the following recommendation was deferred to the March meeting of Heritage Markham:

 

“THAT Heritage Markham receive the Council Resolution dated January 18, 2005, regarding the use of vinyl windows for the new houses in the Caliber Homes development;

AND THAT the Architectural Review Sub-Committee meet to discuss a review of the Town’s window policy for heritage districts in light of recent development in the quality of non-wood windows.”

 

15.       SPECIAL EVENTS
            HERITAGE EVENT PLANNING (16.11)
            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Due to time constraints the following recommendation was deferred to the March meeting of Heritage Markham:

 

“THAT the memo regarding Heritage Markham upcoming events be received as information.”

 

 

16.       OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTS

7751 YONGE STREET, THORNHILL
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMERCIAL BUILDING (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        Ron Blake, District Co-ordinator___________________________

 

The Manager, Heritage Planning, reviewed the application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for 7751 Yonge Street, Thornhill.  The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Yonge Street and Thornhill Summit Drive.  At present, the former Thornhill Post Office is on this site.  The proposal requires the demolition of the post office that would be replaced with a mixed use residential commercial building.  The proposed building is 7 storeys high.  The Manager, Heritage Planning, noted that the application does not comply with the Thornhill Secondary Plan or the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan.

 

The Committee supported a motion to permit the following Thornhill residents to express their concerns with respect to this issue.

 

Jerry Grassby, Thornhill resident, noted that there has been a steady deterioration of Yonge Street over the past years.  He supported the need for redevelopment, however, he asked that Heritage Markham ensure that any proposed development enhance and improve the heritage district.  He requested that Heritage Markham send a clear message to developers that Yonge Street in the heritage area should maintain its heritage characteristics and that the existing homes behind the post office and parkette be respected.

 

Bill Wylie, presenting SPOHT (Society for the Preservation of Historic Thornhill), distributed an artist’s sketch of historic houses on Yonge street.  He noted that there are few buildings remaining on Yonge Street that represent Ontario heritage.  He indicated that he supports deferral of comments on this issue by Heritage Markham.

 

Mr. Ricciuti advised that he lives directly east of the proposed development.  He noted that he wants the Town to uphold its by-laws that do not permit this development in the area.  He stated that he has serious reservations with the proposed development and suggested that the Town of Markham should provide the applicant with a copy of the current density by-laws.  He stated that the proposed development would have a serious impact on his personal privacy and quiet enjoyment as well as a lowering property values in the area.  He also suggested that the proposal, if approved, would set an unfavourable precedent for the area.  He urged the Committee to reject the proposal and direct the developer to return to the drawing board to develop a proposal that complies with the Town’s Official Plan, Thornhill Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law.   He also requested that his email to the Town (Ron Blake) be included as part of his presentation.

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the presentations and correspondence received from Thornhill residents regarding proposed residential and commercial development at 7751 Yonge Street, be received as information.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham defer comment on these applications until the Thornhill Yonge Street Study and the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Review Study are addressed by Council.

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham be provided the opportunity to comment on the Thornhill Yonge Street Study and Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Review Study before they are endorsed by Council.

            CARRIED.

 

 

17.       MARKHAM ECONOMIST

            TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2005 EDITION

            MARKHAM HERITAGE WEEK EVENTS (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Due to time constraints the following recommendation was deferred to the March meeting of Heritage Markham:

            “THAT Heritage Markham receive the Item from the Markham Economist regarding Markham Heritage Week Events for information purposes.”

 

 

18.       HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION

            REPLACEMENT OF METAL ROOF WITH ASPHALT SHINGLES

MS. CINDY HONG

            121 JOHN STREET, THORNHILL HCD (16.11)

            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

            THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the removal of the existing metal tile roof at 121 John Street and its replacement with Cambridge-Harvard slate asphalt shingles;

 

            AND THAT the metal roofing on the front porch enclosure also be replaced with the same asphalt shingles at the same time;

 

AND FURTHER THAT the owner of 121 John Street be thanked for their co-operation in complying with the heritage district guidelines.

 

            CARRIED.

19.       SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION

            REAR YARD RESTAURANT PATIO

            DUCHESS OF MARKHAM (1159982 ONTARIO LTD.)

            53 MAIN STREET NORTH

            MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD (16.11)

            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning____________________

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the commercial patio at 53 Main Street North (Duchess of Markham) from a heritage perspective.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

20.       SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION

            GARAGE AND REAR ADDITION TO AN EXISTING NON-HERITAGE HOUSE

            SAM AND DEBBIE MADURI

            270 MAIN STREET, UNIONVILLE HCD (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        M. Seaman, Senior Heritage Planner

                                    G. Duncan, Heritage Planner_________________________________

                       

The Heritage and Conservation Planner noted that a concept plan for the proposed garage and rear addition was presented to Heritage Markham in November, 2004.  At that time the Committee had supported the front yard garage owing to the unique circumstances of the property and the fact that the front yard and garage will be well screened from Main Street by a dense stand of mature spruce trees.  He advised that the applicant has agreed with the condition that he enter into a Heritage Conservation Easement Agreement to ensure the long term protection of these mature trees.

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site Plan Approval Application for additions to 270 Main Street Unionville on the understanding that special circumstances necessitated the front yard placement of the garage and that this application should in no way be considered a precedent;

 

AND THAT as a condition of Site Plan Approval, the owner be required to enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the Town of Markham for the long-term protection of the mature coniferous trees in the front yard that will screen the new garage from view;

 


AND FURTHER THAT Heritage Section staff be delegated authority to fine-tune design details.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

21.       RESTORATION PLAN  - JOHN REESOR HOUSE

            H & R DEVELOPMENTS

            6937 HIGHWAY 7 (16.11)

            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                                    S. Heaslip, District Co-ordinator________________________

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed restoration plan and site plan for the John Reesor House at 6937 Highway #7 subject to the following

conditions:

Overall

a)                  The stone basement entrance on the west elevation should be retained and restored;

b)                  The frame basement entrance on the west elevation may be removed;

c)                  The building is to be restored as per the approved elevations;

d)                  The design of the adjacent building on lot 216 should be articulated to be compatible with the character of the heritage house and submitted for review and approval by Town (Heritage Section) staff;

e)                  Trees should be planted to the west of the heritage house to provide for a softer transition between the new construction and the heritage house;

f)                    The elevation drawings should include notations specifying work to be undertaken;

g)                  The legal front of the property should be the north elevation.  The building should be addressed off the street to the north of the building;

 

Windows

a)                  All historic windows are to be retained and restored;

b)                  Where original wood storm windows are missing, new wood storm windows should be manufactured for each window, which are consistent with the original (wood resembling a 2/2 pane division with a chamfered top where appropriate;

c)                  While repair and restoration of original windows is the first option, in the event that any existing windows have deteriorated, as determined by Town (Heritage Section) staff, replacement windows are to match the originals as wood, double hung with a 2/2 pan division and a chamfered top;

d)                  All window sills are to be retained and restored;

 


Shutters

a)                  All historic shutters are to be retained and restored;

b)                  Any new shutters are to match the specification of the original and be louvered wood and attached to the window frame with traditional hinges;

 

Veranda

a)                  The original bell-cast roof veranda is to be reconstructed to original specifications as documented on the historic photograph;

b)                  The veranda ceiling is to be sloped in a traditional manner;

c)                  The veranda posts are to be as per the approved elevations;

d)                  The Edwardian Veranda at the front of the building should be carefully taken down and any components offered to the Museum and the Heritage Markham Salvage Repository (e.g. columns);

 

Soffits and Facia

a)                  All soffits and facia are to remain as wood;

 

Roof

a)                  The roof is to be re-clad in traditional shingles.  High grade wood, cedar shingles with a 4 ˝” weather are recommended;

b)                  The roof cresting should be installed as specified in the approved elevations;

c)                  The finial should be restored to original specifications;

 

Chimneys

a)                  The chimneys should be restored to original specifications and properly repointed;

 

Grading/Drainage

a)                  The drainage should be constructed to take water away from the house;

b)                  A sensitive transition should be implemented between the heritage house and the roadway which is slightly higher than the finished first floor of the house;

 

Servicing

a)                  The house is to be connected to all municipal services by the owner;

 

Siding

a)                  The wood siding on the rear addition is to be wood, board and batten with a traditional profile;

b)                  All battens on the house are to be chamfered battens;

 

Markham Remembered Plaque

a)                  The Owner is to provide and install at its cost a full-sized, baked enamel plaque outlining the history of the building according to the Markham Remembered program format;

 

Designation Plaque

a)                  The Owner is to permit the Town to install a bronze designation plaque on the building;

 

Garage

a)                  Details of the proposed garage design are to be submitted to Town (Heritage Section) staff for review and approval;

 

Fencing

a)                  The proposed landscape plan is to include a traditional low wood picket fence along the perimeter of the property;

b)                  The design of the fencing is to be submitted for review and approval by Town (Heritage Section) staff in conjunction with Town (Design Group) staff;

 

Adjacent Dwellings

a)                  The architecture of adjacent dwellings is to be complementary in style, materials and ornamentation to the adjacent heritage house;

b)                  Evergreen trees should be plated to the west of the heritage house along the property line with the adjacent new buildings in order to enhance the transition between old and new;

 

Security

a)                  The owner is to provide a Letter of Credit with the Town in the amount of $25,000 to be released upon completion of works outlined in the Site Plan Agreement;

 

AND THAT review and approval of final details and conditions is delegated to Town (Heritage Section) staff.

 

CARRIED.

 

The meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m.

 

Heritage Minutes 2005-02-09