Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date:
SUBJECT: REVISED SITE PLAN APPLICATION
Ter-Sky Developments/Caliber Homes
Preservation of a
Markham Village
FILE NO.: SC 05 022910
PREPARED BY: George
Duncan, Senior
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the revised Site Plan Control Application SC 05 022910 by Ter-Sky Developments Inc. (Caliber Homes) for 29 James Walker Court, as revised to retain the historic Archibald Barker House on its original site and foundation, be deferred on the basis that the Main Street Markham Class Environmental Assessment for Main Street, Markham needs to be completed in order to assess the impact on this and other heritage resources in the area;
And that the applicant be requested to put the Site Plan Application on hold until the Class Environmental Assessment has been completed;
And that the release of the
building permit for the last new house in the
And further that Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
After a long period of vacancy, the Archibald Barker House,
a significant heritage building within the southern portion of the Markham
Village
The Owner/Applicant has now decided to revise the site plan
to retain the heritage house in its existing location and restore it for residential
use on its original foundation. A
detached garage and driveway off
It should be noted that the relocation of the Archibald
Barker House is a matter of local interest, because the house is seen as a
potential obstacle to the future widening of
The appropriate treatment of cultural heritage resources
will be a key component of the Class EA.
In the Terms of Reference, it is stated that “Council has directed that
any improvements proposed for
The applicable Subdivision Agreement does not require the
relocation of the heritage house, only its restoration. The house complies with the existing zoning
standards, therefore the Owner/Applicant has taken the position that it is
within its rights to retain and restore the heritage house in its current
location. Minor variances, however, are
required to permit a detached garage in the front yard (which is now considered
to be adjacent to
Staff has reviewed three options, along with the pros and cons of each:
Option 1: Approval of the Revised
Site Plan Control Application;
Option 2: Refusal of the Revised
Site Plan Control Application
Option 3: Deferral of the Revised
Site Plan Control Application
As noted, staff recommend Option 3.
1.
Purpose 2. Background 3. Discussion 4. Financial
5. Others
(Environmental, Accessibility,
Engage 21st, Affected Units) 6.
Attachment(s)
PURPOSE:
To provide background information and a recommendation with respect to a revised application for Site Plan Approval, previously before Council in March, 2007.
BACKGROUND:
A version of this Site Plan Application was endorsed for approval by
Council at its meeting of
In the previous version of this
residential Site Plan Control Application, the Owner/Applicant obtained
approval in principle to move the heritage house back from the
When the Owner/Applicant submitted
detailed final plans to implement the relocation concept, it became clear that
the plans were problematic from a grading and drainage perspective and
presented challenges with respect to the treatment of the elevation of the
house visible from
A revised Site Plan has been received which does not involve relocation
of the heritage house
The Owner/Applicant is now presenting a revised Site Plan in which the heritage house will remain in its original (current) location, on its historic fieldstone foundation. This application is back before Development Services Committee as it was “bumped up” from delegated staff approval to Development Services Committee approval when circulated in the earlier part of 2007. This was due to the potentially controversial nature of the application, as there was some local opposition to the house relocation proposal at that time.
Property Context
The subject property is located on
the east side of
The existing house is a significant heritage building
The existing house on
The heritage house recently served as the sales centre for the
In December, 2004, the Owner/Applicant entered into a Sales Office Agreement with the Town in order to use the vacant building as sales centre for the development. Up until that point, the house had been vacant, boarded up and in a state of deterioration. Its use as a sales centre resulted in the restoration of the exterior and the retrofit of the ground floor interior.
A revised residential Site Plan has been submitted
The revised proposal (Figures 6 and 7) is to complete the exterior restoration of the house on its existing foundation and build a new, detached two-car garage with driveway access from James Walker Court. The property is zoned for a single detached residence (R9) under By-law 145-78. The Subdivision Agreement requires that the heritage house be restored and rendered habitable by the Owner before the Town will issue the second to last building permit in the subdivision. The Subdivision Agreement and zoning do not require the Owner to relocate the house back from the road allowance.
It should be noted that the house has recently been connected to municipal services, and the basement waterproofed at its current location. The owner wishes to market the house, once restored, in its present location.
DISCUSSION:
From a heritage
conservation policy perspective, the retention of a heritage resource in situ is always the first priority in
evaluating a proposal. However, in this
particular case, staff and
-
to
provide an environment more conducive to residential occupancy and preservation;
-
to
improve the marketability of the house;
-
to avoid
a potential cost to the public for any future relocation, should it be decided
to widen
The future treatment of
At this point in
time, the future of this portion of
Past transportation
studies including the 2002 Markham Transportation Study and the Greensborough
and Wismer Secondary Plan Transportation Studies indicate the need for
improvements on sections of Main Street Markham/Highway 48 to deal with future
north-south traffic demand. The Town has
also identified the need for streetscaping improvements in accordance with
heritage and design objectives. The Class
EA is being undertaken to establish a preferred design concept for
In the Terms of
Reference for the Study, it is noted that “Markham Council has directed that
any improvements proposed for
Any impact on the heritage house is to be addressed
through the Class EA process
The Town’s
Transportation Planning Section acknowledges that traffic volumes are
increasing and that this area of
The retention of the Archibald Barker House in its existing location
would not necessarily prevent road widening.
The issue of the heritage house location is only one of many factors
that would be considered in the evaluation of a proposed road widening.
Consideration of the revised
Site Plan Control application is premature
Consideration of the
revised Site Plan Control application for the heritage house in its current
location is premature, pending the approval of the preferred design
option for
The Owner is not required to
relocate the heritage house, only to restore it
The applicable Subdivision Agreement (
OPTIONS:
Option 1: Approval
of the Revised Site Plan Control Application
Although not staff’s
recommended course of action at this time, if Council decides that the revised
Site Plan Control Application for
Site Plan Agreement
Staff recommend that a provision
be included in the Site Plan Agreement requiring that fencing along the Main
Street South frontage be limited in height to four feet (the maximum height of
a front yard fence) to maintain an open view to the original façade. Having the garage on the James Walker
frontage will eliminate a difficult driveway access and will allow the garage
to be visible from the modern development area rather than being a feature of
the view from
The site plan agreement will contain appropriate provisions to ensure the completion of the exterior restoration, tree preservation and other details of site development.
In order to address the potential outcome of the as yet unknown impact of the EA, the Site Plan Agreement should contain a condition that a warning clause about the EA and the potential need to move the house be included in any agreement of purchase and sale for the property.
Minor variances will be needed to accommodate a detached garage in the
front yard
A zoning review has determined that minor variances will be needed to implement the site plan as proposed. These include permission to place a detached garage in the front yard, and coverage for the garage.
Option 2: Refusal of the Revised
Site Plan Control Application
Council may decide to refuse the revised Site Plan Control Application and request the applicant to proceed with the original plans endorsed for approval in March, 2007, which requires the house to be moved back on the lot approximately 40 feet and for the owner to dedicate a road widening to the Town.
In this scenario, the issue of how
to deal with the site grading conditions and the impact on the elevations of
the heritage house would remain. Either the
west (original front) of the Archibald Barker House would have a high
foundation wall facing
Alternatively, it may be possible
to excavate the site, and with the use of retaining walls have the heritage
house maintain its current relationship to grade, with the garage and driveway
at a higher level, accessible by steps from the rear of the house (this has
been done for some of the houses on Cornell Meadows Avenue). This would allow the heritage house to be
moved back from the road without altering its historic relationship to the
existing grade conditions on
Option 3: Deferral of the
Revised Site Plan Control Application
Staff recommend Council defer the
revised Site Plan Control Application for consideration until after the Main Street
Markham Class Environmental Assessment is completed and the preferred design
for
In the meantime, the Town may consider allowing the release of the final building permit for the last of the new houses in the Walker’s Hill subdivision (which, according to the Subdivision Agreement is withheld until the heritage house is restored and rendered habitable) in exchange for the owner’s agreement to put the site plan application on hold until after the Class EA process. In order to ensure completion of the restoration, an increase in the $25,000 Letter of Credit to $75,000, with the owner’s agreement, is recommended.
If the applicant does not wish to pursue options 2 or 3, they could decide to appeal their application to the Ontario Municipal Board.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND TEMPLATE: (external link)
Not applicable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable.
ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS:
Not applicable.
ENGAGE 21ST CONSIDERATIONS:
The preservation of a threatened heritage resource through successful integration into new development aligns with the Corporate Goal of a Quality Community.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
This application was circulated to various Town departments for review and comment, in keeping with the standard process for site plan control applications.
RECOMMENDED BY:
______________________________ _________________________________
Valerie Shuttleworth, MCIP, RPP Jim Baird, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning & Urban
Design Commissioner of Development
Services
FILE PATH: Q:\Development\Heritage\PROPERTY\JAMESWKR\29heritagehouse\DSCasrevisedMarch182008.doc
ATTACHMENTS:
Figure 1: Location Map
Figure 2: Air Photo
Figure 3: Area Context
Figure 4: Endorsed Site Plan
Figure 5: Proposed
Figure 6: Revised Site Plan
Figure 7: Revised Building Elevations
Appendix ‘A’ Subdivision Agreement Excerpt
Appendix ‘B’ Recommended Site Plan Conditions
FIGURE 1
APPLICANT: Ter-Sky Developments Inc. Telephone 1-905-264-0100
L4L 8P9
Application Contacts: Dave DiMeo or Danny DiMeo
LOCATION MAP