TENTH MEETING OF THE
HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE
TOWN OF MARKHAM
Canada Room, Markham Civic Centre
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
Julie Christian, Chair Keith Irish
Susan Casella Joan Natoli, Vice-Chair
Ted Chisholm Councillor Jack Heath
Judy Dawson-Ryan
Elizabeth Plashkes
Marie Jones
Councillor Joe Virgilio
Councillor Stan Daurio (left meeting at 7:45)
M. Seaman, Senior Planner, Heritage and Conservation
G. Duncan, Heritage and Conservation Planner
Yvonne Hurst – Committee Secretary
The meeting convened at the hour of 7:15 p.m.
1.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)
Ted Chisholm disclosed a conflict with Items #13, 14 and 31 as he has an interest in these properties.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the Heritage Markham agenda be approved as revised with the inclusion of the addendum agenda.
CARRIED.
2. SIGN PERMITS - SP 03 109386 & SP 03 109387
4340 HIGHWAY #7 - SIGN ISSUES (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Mr. John Srebot was in attendance to discuss the signage at 4340 Highway 7, Markham (Land Rover sign). The Heritage Planner briefly outlined the signage provisions at this location. He noted that a permit was applied for and obtained in the mid-90’s. However, the signage was approved at that time without consultation with Heritage Markham. The Town’s Building Department has advised that, to change any part of the signage, an application would be required.
Mr. Srebot noted that the existing sign is the only type of sign approved by Land Rover Canada Inc. (it is part of the company’s international corporate image and logo). He indicated that any change to the sign would involve considerable effort and would need approved from the head office on Conventry, England. He advised that a new site is being developed for the dealership at a location further west at 4072 Highway No. 7 (this is not in a heritage area). Therefore, the request to permit the existing signage to remain would only be for approximately 18 months. He suggested that the existing sign in terms of size, shape and appearance, is fairly unobtrusive and no illumination would be used. He also noted that the sign would be moved to the east facing elevation of the same building.
The Committee expressed concerns that any new owners of 4340 Highway 7 should not consider that the Land Rover signage would be allowed to remain. It was suggested that any new owner should be made aware that permission for the non-conforming Land Rover signage is only temporary and cannot be used by a new owner. It was suggested that a “sunset clause” be included as a condition of consent required by the Committee of Adjustment. It was further suggested that a Letter of Credit be required ($1,000) to ensure compliance. The applicant agreed to provide the letter of credit as a sign of good faith.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the material with respect to the Land Rover signage at 4340 Highway 7, Markham, be received as information;
AND THAT Heritage Markham does not object to the temporary use of the existing Land Rover signage for a period of eighteen (18) months;
AND FURTHER THAT the applicant be required to provide a Letter of Credit, to the Town of Markham, in the amount of $1,000.00 to ensure compliance with the temporary signage permissions.
CARRIED.
3. REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK - HE 03 113247 & HE 03 113172
121 JOHN STREET
METAL ROOF & PORCH ENCLOSURE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Prior to the meeting Ms. Sharon Sim requested deferral of the item concerning 121 John Street to allow more time to prepare her position on the issues.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT consideration of the request for feedback – 121 John Street – metal roof and porch enclosure be deferred to the November meeting of Heritage Markham.
CARRIED.
4. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
NINTH HERITAGE MARKHAM MEETING
SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the minutes of the ninth Heritage Markham meeting held on September 10, 2003 be adopted and received.
CARRIED.
5. CORRESPONDENCE LIST (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
A) Public Meeting Notice – 19 Rouge Street
B) Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, 8th Annual Fundraising Dinner, Friday, November 14, 2003
C) Frank Scarpitti’s Community Letter & Survey 2003
D) Article on Heritage Estates Markham – Saturday Night Sept. 2003 Issue
E) Unionville Villagers Association Minutes of September 8, 2003
F) Ontario Heritage Foundation “Young Heritage Leaders Program 2003”.
G) Firefly Books Ltd. Launch – Old Toronto Houses, Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2003
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the correspondence materials circulated at the October 8, 2003 meeting of Heritage Markham be received as information.
CARRIED.
6. INFORMATION
HERITAGE MARKHAM – EXTENDED TERMS (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the material regarding Heritage Markham – extended terms of office be received as information.
CARRIED.
7. INFORMATION
ONTARIO HISTORICAL SOCIETY AWARDS 2003 (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham recommends the following nominations for Ontario Historical Society Awards:
1. B. Napier Simpson Jr. Award of Merit - Heritage Markham
2. The Fred Landon Award – George Duncan for York County Moulding for Historic Interiors
3. The Scadding Award of Excellence – The Markham Village Conservancy
CARRIED.
8. INFORMATION
7111 REESOR ROAD, TORONTO CATHOLIC CEMETERIES PROPERTY
(MILROY FARM)
BARN DOCUMENTATION REPORT (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the material with respect to 7111 Reesor Road, Toronto Catholic Cemeteries Property (Milroy Farm) be received as information.
CARRIED.
9. INFORMATION
9451 NINTH LINE
BARN DISMANTLING/DEMOLITION (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the material with respect to 9451 Ninth Line – barn dismantling/demolition be received as information.
CARRIED.
10. BUILDING PERMIT
76 PETER STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD
DEMOLITION OF NON-HERITAGE HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the building permit application for 76 Peter Street, Markham Village Heritage Conservation District – demolition of non-heritage house.
CARRIED.
11. SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
SC 03 115208
14 ALEXANDER HUNTER PLACE
RESTORATION PLAN/SITE PLAN (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports the restoration plan
for the Peter Mustard House (14 Alexander Hunter Place) subject to the
following conditions:
- the ground floor level should not be more than 2 feet above grade;
- the owner is to submit an appropriate brick restoration plan to the satisfaction of Heritage Section Staff, including the dying of the brick to a colour representative of 1840’s period;
- original exterior wood components (windows, window frames and sills, doors, door frames and sills, soffits, fascia and cornice mouldings) are to be preserved and repaired in consultation with Town Heritage Section staff, rather than replaced;
- windows to be restored to their original glazing pattern wherever they are absent, and repaired wherever they remain;
- new doors to be wood and 6 panelled in wood, in a traditional manner typical of the 1840s date of construction;
- shutters are to be installed on all historic window openings;
- shutters are to be operational, wood, louvered shutters sized to close the window opening and attached to the window frame with hinges in a traditional manner;
- details of the porch post turnings to be subject to final approval by Heritage Section Staff;
- porch flooring is to be tongue and groove wood extending in a right angle from the front wall not parallel to it;
- an appropriate garage design to be submitted and subject to final approval by Heritage Section Staff;
- an appropriate period landscaping plan to be submitted and subject to final approval by Town Staff;
- the exposed foundation is to be clad in fieldstone;
- final drawings are to be presented at an accurate scale prior to site plan approval.
- 3/8” taper sawn western cedar shingles, high grade with a 5” weather.
- all historic chimneys are to be restored to their original 1840’s appearance.
CARRIED.
Ted Chisholm declared a disclosure of interest with respect to Item #12 as he is a prospective purchaser of the property. He did not participate in the voting with respect to Item #12.
12. SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
SC 03 115943
8 ECKARDT STREET, UNIONVILLE HCD
PROPOSED NEW HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site
Plan Approval Application – 8 Eckardt Street, Unionville Heritage Conservation
District – proposed new house, subject to the following conditions:
- brick to be a traditional dark red with angled brick voussoirs in the same brick colour;
- windows to be wood, sash-style with one over one glazing on front and where visible from the street and internal screens on the front elevation;
- window sills to be wood, stone or concrete;
- front gable wall finish to be plain or patterned wood shingles;
- chimney to be brick;
- porch columns and railing to be wood, in a traditional form in keeping with the Edwardian period theme;
- mature trees are to be preserved wherever possible;
- garage design to be appropriate to the Edwardian period theme;
- -colours are to be from a heritage palette.
CARRIED.
Ted Chisholm declared a disclosure of interest with respect to Item #13 as he is the prospective purchaser of this property. He did not participate in the voting with respect to Item #13.
13. SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
SC
116 038
10
ECKARDT STREET
PROPOSED
NEW HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site Plan Approval Application – 10 Eckardt Street – proposed new house, subject to the following details:
- brick to be a traditional red trimmed with alternating, buff brick quoins and angled voussoirs;
- plinth should be at ground floor level and of buff brick and at least four brick courses high;
- siding of rear wing to be painted or stained in a solid colour (not wood tone);
- windows to be wood on the visible elevations, sash style with either true divided lights or exterior adhered muntins, and internal screens on the front elevation;
- window sills on brick portion are to be wood, stone or concrete and to be projecting lugsills;
- shutters are to be louvered and sized to fit the opening if closed, and fastened to the brick mould with hinges, in order to appear operational;
- windows on the frame rear wing to have
wood architraves of at least four inches in width, and projecting wood lugsills.
CARRIED.
14. SITE
PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION - SC 03 115932
16
MAPLE LANE, UNIONVILLE
PROPOSED
NEW HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site
Plan Approval Application – 16 Maple Lane, Unionville – proposed new house,
subject to the following conditions:
- the front face of the west wings are to be
clad in wood board and batten;
- the
porch base is to be screened with vegetation (a wood screen would also be
appropriate in this location;
- brick to be a traditional red trimmed with buff;
- wood siding to be board and batten, finished in a solid colour paint or stain, not wood tone from a heritage palette;
- windows on visible elevations to be wood with true divided panes or exterior applied muntins and internal screens on the front elevation;
- window sills on the brick portion to project and be of wood, stone or concrete but not of brick;
- windows on the frame portion to have frames not less than 3 ½ inches wide, and to have projecting window sills;
- shutters to be of wood, sized to appear that they would cover the opening if closed, and fastened to the window frames with appropriate hardware;
- exterior doors to be wood and designed in keeping with the vernacular Gothic Revival style of the house;
- exposed foundation is to be clad in fieldstone;
- porch railings are to be made of wood, plain, with a top & bottom rail.
CARRIED.
15. SITE
PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
SC
3 116051
17
MAPLE LANE, UNIONVILLE HCD
ADDITIONS
& ALTERATIONS TO A NON-HERITAGE HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Hanna
deLaszac
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site
Plan Approval application – 17 Maple Lane, Unionville Heritage Conservation
District, subject to the following conditions:
- siding to be vertical, wood tongue and groove;
- gable wall finish to be plain or shaped wood shingles;
- windows on visible elevations to be wood, sash-style with either true divided panes or exterior adhered wood muntins, and internal screens on the front elevation;
- front door to be wood;
- garage door to be sectional and painted to match the house siding colour;
-
exterior window frames to be a minimum of 3 ½ inches wide, and
to include projecting wood window sills;
-
chimney brick to be clay brick in a traditional colour.
CARRIED.
16. SITE
PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
03
116371
24
PETER STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD
ADDITIONS
& ALTERATIONS TO A LISTED HERITAGE HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Christine
Wood, designer for 24 Peter Street, requested that the committee consider a
small dormer and peak on the proposed addition. The committee suggested that a
dormer on the addition would not compliment the heritage house and urged the
applicants to work with Town (Heritage Section) staff with respect to a
complimentary design.
Ms. Wood
also informed the committee that the applicant is restoring the gingerbread
trim that can be seen in a number of heritage photographs of this house.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the
proposed additions and alterations to 24 Peter Street subject to the following
conditions:
- the additions to be clad in wood board and batten siding treated with a solid colour paint or stain (not a wood tone);
- historic wood windows in the original portion of the house to be retained, with exterior wood storm windows added where required;
- new windows to be wood sash style windows with one over one glazing;
- windows in the frame portion of the house are to have exterior frames not less than 3 ½ inches wide, and to have projecting wood sills;
- exterior doors to be wood and to follow designs appropriate to a vernacular house of the 1890s;
- the owner is requested to remove the angelstone and stucco from the original brick using a method subject to the approval of Heritage Section Staff.
- Heritage Section Staff are delegated approval of specific details of any decorative woodwork on the exterior, provided the designs are based on local examples of the period.
CARRIED.
17. REQUEST
FOR FEEDBACK - 7 STATION LANE, UNIONVILLE
NEW DOORS,
STATION PLATFORM SIDE AND PROPOSAL FOR ENHANCEMENT WORKS (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Joe Virgilio, Councillor
Glen Taylor, Facilities Manager
Susan
Styles, Community Services
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT regarding the request for feedback – 7 Station
Lane, Heritage Markham recommends that the south doors be replaced with wood
doors with an industrial-utilitarian character appropriate to the period and
original use of the Unionville Station;
AND THAT if the existing plate glass window on the
north side of the building is to be replaced, that its replacement be a
multi-paned window, possibly with an inward-tilting upper sash,
industrial-utilitarian in character;
AND FURTHER THAT the other proposed enhancement
initiatives including the north porch railing, community centre sign, historic
reproduction signage, historic photographs for the interior, and clean-up of
scrub on the railway side of the property are supported.
CARRIED.
18.
COMMITTEE
OF ADJUSTMENT
MINOR
VARIANCE APPLICATION
27-55
MAIN STREET SOUTH
PROPOSED
BUILDING ELEVATIONS (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Scott
Heaslip, Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no comments with respect
to the Minor Variance Application for 27-55 Main Street South;
AND THAT for the front elevations of the proposed
houses, the following guidelines are recommended:
- Lower
the pitch and mass of the high rooflines;
- Use 2
over 2 window design;
- Don’t
mix building materials on front elevations;
- Consider
having some one-car garages or one and a half width garages;
- Split
double car garage doors with a central divider;
- Front
entrances should be either single doors, or if sidelights are used they should
be on both sides of the door, and the door should be solid, not glazed.
AND FURTHER THAT for the rear elevations facing Main
Street South, the following guidelines are recommended:
- Rear
elevations should echo the design of the front, with windows inserted where
garage doors are on the front;
- Face
basement walls with Bradstone;
- Use same
quality and design for windows on the front and the rear;
- Use
French doors instead of sliders;
- Have
rear porches or verandas recessed into the mass of the house rather than decks
attached and projecting from the rear wall;
- Staircases
from the porches to the ground should not be allowed;
- Construct
railings as a traditional balustrade, with an upper and lower rail;
- Finish
porches or verandas in solid colours;
- Use
landscape screening to soften the effect of the 3 storey height at the rear;
- Try
to stagger the units to avoid the effect of a continuous wall facing Main
Street South.
CARRIED.
19. ZONING
BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION
PLAN
OF SUBDIVISION
ZA
03 115538 and SU 03 115555
7124
& 7166 – 14th AVENUE
TREATMENT
OF DESIGNATED HOUSES (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Stacia
Muradali
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the designated heritage buildings at 7124 and
7166 Fourteenth Avenue be preserved on lots within the draft plan of
subdivision;
AND THAT the subdivision agreement is to include the
following heritage provisions:
Heritage
1.
Prior to
final approval of the draft plan of subdivision or any plans thereof, the
Owners shall carry out a cultural heritage assessment for the lands within the
draft plan to ensure the assessment and identification of appropriate treatment
of built heritage and archaeological resources, and further to mitigate any
identified adverse impacts to significant heritage resources to the satisfaction
of the Town (Commissioner of Development Services) and the Minister of
Culture. No demolition, grading ,
filling or any form of soil disturbance shall take place on the lands within
the draft plan prior to the issuance of a letter from the Ministry of Culture
to the Town indicating that all matters relating to heritage resources have
been addressed in accordance with licensing and resource conservation
requirements.
2.
The Owners
shall covenant and agree in the subdivision agreement to implement any measures
recommended by the heritage resource assessment, to the satisfaction of the
Town and the Ministry of Culture.
3.
The Owners
covenants and agrees to retain the Heritage Buildings, known municipally as
7124 and 7166 Fourteenth Avenue on appropriately sized lots identified as ___
and ___.
4.
The Owners
covenants and agrees to protect the Heritage Buildings through the following
means:
5.
a)
to enter
into a Heritage Easement Agreement for the building with the Town prior to the
release of the plan of subdivision or any component of the plan for
registration;
b) to permit the designation of the property
under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act prior to the release of the
plan of subdivision or any component of the plan for registration;
c)
to provide
$25,000 Letter of Credits to ensure the preservation of the designated
buildings. The letter of credit shall
be retained for use by the Town and shall not be released until the
construction and grading on the subject lands and adjacent lots, and roads has
been completed to the satisfaction of the Town (Commissioner of Development
Services), and the building has been connected to services;
d) to maintain the Heritage Building in good
and sound condition at all times prior to and during the development of the
property;
e)
to secure and
protect the Heritage Buildings from damage through procedures carried out
according to the Town of Markham Guidelines for the Boarding of Heritage
Structures;
f)
to erect a
“No trespassing” sign in a visible location on the property indicating that the
Heritage Houses are to be preserved on site and should not be vandalized and/or
scavenged, and install a 4m high fence around the perimeter of each house (snow
fence is permissible) to protect the dwellings until the completion of
construction in the vicinity or the commencement of long-term occupancy of the
dwellings as confirmed by Town (Heritage Section) staff.
6.
The Owner
covenants and agrees to preserve the Heritage Buildings through the following
means:
a) to enter
into a site plan agreement with the Town for the Heritage
Buildings, containing details on the site plan
such as driveway,
grading, connection to municipal services,
trees to be preserved
and detailed elevations outlining the
proposed restoration and
any additions and alterations to be carried out on the dwellings
prior to the release of the plan of subdivision or any component of the plan for
registration. Details of the proposed garages or any other outbuildings,
including elevations are also to be provided;
b)
to provide
and implement a traditional restoration plan for the Heritage Buildings that
would be reviewed and approved by the Town (Heritage Section). The restoration plan is to be included in the site plan
agreement for each property;
c)
to complete
the exterior restoration of the Heritage Buildings, connect all municipal
services to allocated lot (water, gas, hydro, cable, telephone etc.) and ensure
basic standards of occupancy as confirmed by Building Standards Department
within one year of registration of the plan of subdivision.
d)
to ensure
that the architectural design and elevations of dwellings proposed for adjacent
lots is compatible with the restored heritage dwelling.
7.
The Owner
covenants and agrees to provide notice of the Heritage Buildings through the
following means:
· to provide and install at its cost, an
interpretative baked enamel plaque for the Heritage Buildings, in a publicly
visible location on the property. The
plaque is to be designed according to the specifications of the “Markham
Remembered” program, and outline the history of the houses. Details of the design and location of the
plaques are to be submitted for review and approval of the Town (Heritage
Section);
· to include the following notice in each
Offer of Purchase and Sale for the Heritage Buildings on Lots ___ and ___:
“PURCHASERS ARE ADVISED THAT THE EXISTING BUILDING
ON THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED PURSUANT TO THE ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT AND IS SUBJECT
TO A HERITAGE EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF MARKHAM. ANY PROPOSED ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS TO THE
EXTERIOR OF THE EXISTING BUILDING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF
PLANS BY THE TOWN.”
CARRIED.
20. ZONING
BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION
ZA
03 113694 - 9442 HIGHWAY #48
REZONING
– MILLER – BROWN HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
D.
Wylie
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Zoning By-law Amendment Application – 9442 Highway 48 – Miller/Brown house.
CARRIED.
21. BUILDING
PERMIT APPLICATION
2938
MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE EAST
DEMOLITION
OF HOUSE AND BARN (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
Heritage Markham has no objection to the Building Permit Application – 2938
Major Mackenzie Drive East – demolition of house and barn.
CARRIED.
22. REQUEST
FOR FEEDBACK
8966
WOODBINE AVENUE
SITE
VISIT TO FORMER BUTTONVILLE P.O. (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the building
at 8966 Woodbine Avenue, in the Buttonville Heritage Conservation District
Study Area, be retained and restored in any proposed development application on
the property;
AND THAT Heritage Markham supports in principle an appropriately designed addition if required to make the building more viable for a new use.
CARRIED.
23. BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
NA 03 116218
6742 STEELES AVENUE
ADDITION TO BARN (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Wanda
Stover, Applications Administrator, Building Dept.
The Heritage Planner provided an overview of the building permit application for 6742 Steeles Avenue – addition to barn. He noted that the barn is a ‘working’ building with an existing agricultural use. He further noted that the addition would not impact the heritage barn.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Building Permit Application – 6742 Steeles Avenue – addition to barn.
CARRIED.
24. PLAN OF SUBDIVISION
SU 03 115642
10271 WOODBINE AVENUE (37 ARTISAN TRAIL)
SUBDIVISION, PART LOT CONTROL (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
R.
Blake, Planning
The Heritage Planner advised that the heritage home is to be retained in the plan of subdivision for 10271 Woodbine Avenue (37 Artisan Trail).
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the application for Plan of Subdivision – 10271 Woodbine Avenue (37 Artisan Trail) – Part Lot Control.
CARRIED.
25. BOX GROVE COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN
HERITAGE BUILDINGS (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
Teema
Kanji, Planning
The Planner, Heritage and Conservation, noted that there are 19 heritage homes in the existing hamlet of Box Grove. These 19 homes do not appear to be impacted by any new development. Retention of these buildings will reflect the heritage aspects of the hamlet. He noted that the developer has been requested to board those houses that are not tenanted, however, most homes are occupied. Four of the heritage structures have been designated to date. Future planning for the Box Grove area will be to designate Box Grove as a heritage district.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham endorses the comments made on the Box Grove Community Design Plan in the memo from the Manager of Heritage Planning to the East District Landscape Planner dated September 23, 2003;
AND THAT the existing 19 heritage resources in the existing hamlet of Box Grove should be retained on their original sites;
AND THAT Heritage Markham would prefer to see the
designated building at 7124 14th
Avenue remain on its original site as a residential dwelling, however if
Council supports the introduction of a storm water management facility at this
location, Heritage Markham does not object to the relocation and restoration of
the dwelling to a separate lot at the northwest corner of 14 Ave and 9th
Line By-Pass in the Village Centre;
AND THAT Heritage Markham would prefer to see the
designated building at 7166 14th Avenue remain on its original site
as a residential dwelling, however if Council supports the introduction of a
storm water management facility at this location, Heritage Markham does not
object to the relocation and restoration of the dwelling to a separate lot at
the northwest corner of 14 Ave and 9th Line By-Pass in the Village
Centre;
AND THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the
designated building at 7447 9th Line remain on its original site,
restored and integrated into the proposed residential community planned at this
location on an appropriately sized lot.
AND THAT Heritage Markham supports the retention of
the designated building at 7449 9th Line on its original site and
its restoration and integration into the proposed residential community on an
appropriately sized lot. The one storey
addition to the east of the dwelling should be retained.
AND THAT pending further research and evaluation of
the historical and architectural attributes of this property, Heritage Markham supports the retention of
the heritage building at 6889 14th Avenue on its original site and
its restoration and integration into the proposed community amenity area on an
appropriately sized lot;
AND THAT pending further research and evaluation of
the historical and architectural attributes of this property, Heritage Markham
supports the retention of the heritage building at 7085 14th Avenue on its
original site and its restoration and integration into the proposed community
amenity area on an appropriately sized lot;
AND THAT pending further research and evaluation of
the historical and architectural attributes of this property, Heritage Markham
would prefer to see the heritage building at 7943 9th Line remain on
its original site as a residential dwelling, however if Council supports the
introduction of a community park at this location, Heritage Markham does not
object to the relocation and restoration of the dwelling to a separate lot in
the immediate area;
AND THAT pending further research and evaluation of
the historical and architectural attributes of this property, Heritage Markham
supports the retention of the heritage building at 7960 Reesor Road on its
original site and its restoration and integration into the proposed business
community on an appropriately sized lot;
AND THAT pending further research and evaluation of
the historical and architectural attributes of this property, Heritage Markham
supports the retention of the heritage building at 8042 Reesor Road on its
original site and its restoration and integration into the proposed business
community on an appropriately sized lot;
AND FURTHER THAT reference be included in the
community design plan that Box Grove will become a Heritage District.
CARRIED.
26. PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION
80 JOHN STREET, THORNHILL HCD (16.11)
Extracts:
Manager of Heritage Planning
The committee noted that any consideration for an allowance that would permit a garage to project from the front of the house at 80 John Street, Thornhill should not be considered as precedent setting. It was pointed out that the house has a unique siting on its lot and the entrance to the proposed garage would be from the side, thereby presenting a residential appearance to the street. The committee indicated that it would consider a garage addition that would project from the front of the house provided that it meets the by-law requirement of extending a maximum of one meter past the front wall of the house closest to the street.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports in principle a garage that projects from the home at 80 John Street subject to the proposal meeting the applicable by-law requirements;
AND THAT, when the proposal is formally submitted, it must conform to the guidelines of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District.
AND THAT Heritage Markham’s support for this item is premised on the unique circumstances of the lot and is not to be considered a precedent;
CARRIED AS AMENDED.
27. TWO NEW HOMES
77 JOHN STREET, THORNHILL HCD (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
The Committee discussed at length the proposal for two new homes at 77 John Street, Thornhill. It was pointed out that, in 1992, an application to sever was approved. At that time a site plan was provided to the Town showing the garages at the rear of the lots. The present owners have submitted plans that show the garages at the front of the house (one garage facing forward to the street and one garage facing sideways).
The question arose: was the site plan showing rear garages a condition of the original severance? Were the lots, in fact, severed? Town (Heritage Section) staff advised that the registry office confirmed that the lots were severed. There are two deeds to the severed lots.
Tim Williams, Secretary, Committee of Adjustment, joined the meeting to answer questions from Heritage Markham with respect to the 77 John Street severance application. Mr. Williams advised that the former Secretary for the Committee of Adjustment stamped the decision for one of the lots and the registry office took that as sufficient evidence to create the two lots. He noted that he has a copy of the stamped deed. He indicated that Heritage Markham is dealing with two severed lots but these lots may have conditions attached (the file is presently not available and staff are investigating).
The Planner, Heritage and Conservation, noted that the severance had nine conditions; including approval of a minor variance. The minor variance was conditional on Site Plan Approval of the design by Heritage Markham.
It was noted that the Architectural Review Sub-Committee did not approve the drawings presented but indicated that the designs were moving closer to a design concept that the full committee could consider for approval.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham advise the owner of 77 John Street that the design process for the two proposed houses is moving closer to the type of houses that could be supported;
AND THAT, once the issues of height and gross floor area are dealt with by the designer, designs revised to reflect the comments of Heritage Markham should be submitted for the committee’s review.
CARRIED
28. PROPOSED NEW GARAGE
109 MAIN STREET, UNIONVILLE HCD (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
The Heritage and Conservation Planner indicated that the owner of 109 Main Street, Unionville, has redesigned the building to meet the recommendations provided by the Architectural Review Sub-Committee.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports in principle the design for the proposed garage at 109 Main Street, Unionville, subject to the following considerations:
- the building height meets the existing by-law requirements;
- the windows be wood with true divided panes or exterior adhered muntins in a 2 over 2 glazing pattern;
- door and window trim to be wood, a minimum of 3 ½ inches in width, and windows are to have projecting windows sills;
- siding to be wood board and batten, finished with a solid colour paint or stain, but not a wood tone.
CARRIED.
29. SIDING REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT
69 MAIN STREET NORTH, MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the owners of 69 Main Street North be contacted to advise them of the need to obtain a Heritage Permit in order to undertake work on the exterior of their building.
CARRIED.
30. CUT/FILL AND ARCHAEOLOGY (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
Manager,
Engineering
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Town (Heritage Section) staff be directed to follow up with Town staff on the issue of cut and fill permit administration.
CARRIED.
Ted Chisholm declared a disclosure of interest with respect to Item #31 as he is the prospective purchase of this property. He did not participate in the voting with respect to Item #31.
31. DEMOLITION APPLICATION
10 ECKARDT STREET, UNIONVILLE HCD (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
Peter
Raynes
The Heritage and Conservation Planner indicated that Heritage Markham indicated “no objection” to the demolition” at its July 9, 2003 meeting.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the material with respect to demolition application – 10 Eckardt Street, Unionville Heritage Conservation District, be received as information.
CARRIED.
32. PROPOSED FENCE
81 JOHN STREET, THORNHILL HDC (16.11)
Extracts: Manager of Heritage Planning
The Heritage and Conservation Planner indicated that the applicants wish to install a wrought iron fence at 81 John Street, Thornhill. He noted that they would use the existing wrought iron gate design. He advised that the Thornhill Heritage District Conservation plan outlines a preference for white picket fences, however, it does not prohibit a wrought iron fence. The list of fences not allowed is found in the plan. Wrought iron is not listed as a prohibited fence.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the installation of a “Rockefeller” model wrought iron fence at 81 John Street, Thornhill, subject to the owner applying for a Heritage Permit.
CARRIED.
33. HERITAGE EASEMENT
49 MAIN STREET SOUTH (16.11)
Extracts: Manager, Heritage Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports the registration of a Heritage Easement against 49 Main Street South.
CARRIED.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30pm.