Heritage Markham Committee Minutes

Meeting Number: 9

Wednesday, September 08, 2021 at 7:00 P.m. - 10:00 P.m.

Electronic Meeting

Members

• Ken Davis, Vice Chair
• Doug Denby
• Shan Goel
• Councillor Keith Irish, Chair
• Councillor Reid McAlpine
• David Nesbitt
• Lake Trevelyan
• Councillor Karen Rea
• Paul Tiefenbach
• Victor Huang
• Elizabeth Wimmer

Regrets

• Nathan Proctor
• David Wilson

Staff

• Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
• Peter Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner
• Victoria Hamilton, Committee Secretary (PT)
• Mary-Jane Courchesne
• Evan Manning, Heritage Planner

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

Councillor Keith Irish, Chair, convened the meeting at 7:01 PM and informed the attendees that the meeting is being recorded. The Chair asked for any disclosures of interest with respect to items on the agenda.

2.

DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

David Nesbitt declared a conflict on Agenda Item 5.2 – Heritage Permit Applications, for 116 Main Street Unionville (UHCD), as his property abuts this property.

3.

PART ONE - ADMINISTRATION

3.1

APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)

A. Addendum Agenda

Item 6.4 – Committee of Adjustment Variance Application, 61 Peter Street (MVHD), Proposed New Dwelling

 

B. New Business from Committee Members

There was no new business.

• Recommendation:

  That the September 8, 2021 Heritage Markham Committee agenda be approved, as amended.

  Carried

3.2

MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 11, 2021 HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE MEETING (16.11)

Doug Denby expressed concern that the minutes only state that a motion was carried, but did not disclose the Mover and Seconder. Staff advised that the Clerk records who made the motion and seconded it, and that the Heritage Markham minutes have always been recorded in the same manner.

• Recommendation:

  That the minutes of the Heritage Markham Committee meeting held on August 11, 2021 be received and adopted, as presented.

  Carried

4.

PART TWO - DEPUTATIONS

5.

PART THREE - CONSENT

5.1

HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATIONS

DELEGATED APPROVAL BY HERITAGE SECTION STAFF
33 COLBORNE STREET (THCD)
1 BEECH STREET (MVHCD) (16.11)

FILE NUMBERS:
HE 21 132454
HE 21 134196

Extracts:
R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
E. Manning, Heritage Planner

• Recommendation:

  THAT Heritage Markham receive the information on heritage permits approved by Heritage Section staff under the delegated approval process.

  Carried

5.2

BUILDING OR SIGN PERMIT APPLICATIONS

DELEGATED APPROVAL BY HERITAGE SECTION STAFF
7859 YONGE STREET (THCD)
16 ECKARDT AVENUE (UHCD) 
116 MAIN STREET U. (UHCD)(16.11)

FILE NUMBERS:
PP 21 118590
HP 21 124354
HP 21 104546

Extracts:
R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
P. Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner

David Nesbitt declared a conflict on Agenda Item 5.2 – Heritage Permit Applications, for 116 Main Street Unionville (UHCD), as his property abuts this property.

• Recommendation:

  THAT Heritage Markham receive the information on building permits approved by Heritage Section staff under the delegated approval process.

  Carried

5.3

BUILDING OR SIGN PERMIT APPLICATIONS

REMOVAL AND RE-INSTALLATION OF HISTORIC BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING TO PERMIT THE INSTALLATION OF INSULATION
36 CHURCH STREET (MVHCD)(16.11) 

FILE NUMBERS:
HP 21 133311

Extracts:
R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
P. Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner

• Recommendations:

  THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the building permit application HP 21 133311 for 36 Church Street to remove and reinstall the historic board and batten siding to permit the insulation of the dwelling from the exterior;

  AND THAT final review of the application be delegated to Heritage Section staff.

  Carried

6.

PART FOUR - REGULAR

6.1

PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT

DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
10225-10227 KENNEDY ROAD
4638 MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE EAST (16.11)

FILE NUMBER:
PLAN 20 113780

Extracts:
R.Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
E. Manning, Heritage Planner

Evan Manning, Heritage Planner, addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the staff memorandum. He noted that the application was brought before the Committee on August 12, 2020 and that revisions were requested. A Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Addendum Report (CHIA) has been produced by the applicant’s heritage consultant, which outlines a relocation strategy for the Homer Wilson Farmhouse and J. P. Carr Cottage northwest of their current locations while retaining the contextual relationship of the buildings to each other as well as Kennedy Road and the Pingle Cemetery. Mr. Manning noted that the cultural heritage resource, Pingle-Brown House, at 4638 Major Mackenzie Drive East was further reviewed by Heritage Section staff. Two site visits where undertaken and it was the consensus of staff that the property had minimal cultural heritage value due to the number and extent of alterations which had occurred. The applicant’ heritage consultant came to the same conclusion.

The Committee provided the following feedback:

• Expressed concern that insufficient attention is being paid to the Pingle Cemetery in the proposed development plan.
• Commented that priority should be given to the Pingle Cemetery and that sufficient distance should be placed between the cemetery and the proposed street.
• Commented that ownership of the land containing the 3 graves is currently unknown.

Staff advised that the ownership of Pingle Cemetery lands is still being explored. Staff is awaiting confirmation from the Legal Department whether further investigation into the current land ownership is possible.

• Recommendations:

  THAT Heritage Markham supports the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment applications at this time as they appropriately address the retention of the relevant identified cultural heritage resources;

  THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the Homer Wilson House and J.P Carr Cottage be relocated to the location illustrated in the appended conceptual drawings, and that the standard heritage conditions of approval be secured (i.e. heritage easement agreement, site plan approval/restoration plan, Markham Remembered plaques, etc);

  THAT Heritage Markham recommends the Pingle Cemetery area be sensitively integrated with adjacent development in a respectful manner to protect and preserve its integrity including the requirement for appropriate fencing, landscaping and a Markham Remembered plaque;

  THAT Heritage Markham supports the recommendation of the CHIA report which would allow the Pingle Brown House to be deconstructed and documented during demolition to provide an opportunity to learn more about the mid-nineteenth century construction methods and materials and allow the possible salvage of building components, and that these findings would be provided to the municipality;

  AND THAT final review of the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment, and any other development application required to approve the proposed development, be delegated to Heritage Section staff should the siting of the retained heritage resources be generally consistent with the conceptual drawings appended to this memo.

  Carried

6.2

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE

PROPOSED REAR ADDITION AND FRONT PORCH ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO-STOREY DWELLING
329 MAIN STREET NORTH (MVHCD) (16.11)

FILE NUMBER:
A/119/21

Extracts:
R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
E. Manning, Heritage Planner

Evan Manning, Heritage Planner, addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the staff memorandum. He commented that the property is categorized as a Type A property in the MVHCD Plan, and that the 3 variances being requested are for maximum building depth, the encroachment of an unenclosed porch and stairs into the front yard, and the siting of a new driveway adjacent to the interior lot line. Mr. Manning advised that the proposal included relocation of the driveway from the north to the south of the dwelling. He advised that the proposal retained the prominence of the heritage building relative to Main Street North.

The Committee provided the following feedback:

• Questioned the plan for the area of the existing driveway.
• Commented that the design of the new addition was complementary to the Heritage District.
• Recommended that a friendly amendment be made to remove the existing driveway asphalt and restore the area with soft landscaping and then re-instate the curb.
• Questioned the applicant’s plans for an enclosed garage in the future and whether a variance would be required.

Shane Gregory, a representative of the applicant, advised that soft landscaping was planned for the area of the existing driveway. He commented that the applicant would take responsibility for the curb to the north lot line of the property.

Amira Tadros, the applicant, advised that there were no plans for a garage, and that they had considered it previously, but it was not pursued due to the location of an existing tree. Shane Gregory noted that the addition of a garage in future should not require a variance.

• Recommendations:

  THAT the existing driveway asphalt be removed and that sod or soft landscaping be installed, as well as the curb; and

  THAT Heritage Markham has no objection from a heritage perspective to the requested variances to permit a rear addition, new driveway, and front porch addition to the existing two-storey dwelling; and

  AND THAT final review of the forthcoming site plan control application, and any other development application required to approve the proposed development, be delegated to Heritage Section staff should the design be generally consistent with the conceptual drawings appended to this memo.

  Carried

6.3

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE

PROPOSED TWO-STOREY REAR ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO-STOREY DWELLING
336 MAIN STREET NORTH (MVHCD) (16.11)

FILE NUMBER:
A/057/21

Extracts:
R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
E. Manning, Heritage Planner

Note: Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning departed the meeting at 7:43 pm. at the conclusion of this item.

Evan Manning, Heritage Planner, addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the staff memorandum. The three variances requested are for maximum building depth, front yard setback, and unenclosed porch and stairs encroachment into the front yard. Mr. Manning advised that the property is categorized as a Type B property in the MVHCD Plan, for its importance in terms of contextual value. He noted that the applicant included a set back to maintain visibility of the heritage building’s west return wall, and positioned the interface of the new roof below the ridge line of the heritage building. He also noted that this design approach maintains the prominence of the heritage building relative to the addition. Mr. Manning then briefly described the conservation approach for the heritage building.

The Committee provided the following feedback:

• Requested that, if possible, staff include floor plans with the info memorandums going forward.
• Questioned whether the internal space by the proposed stairs was open to the area below.
• Commented that the design of the addition should be modified to better complement the existing dwelling and the Heritage District.
• Requested that further comment be deferred until a redesign has been completed that is more sympathetic to the neighbourhood.

The applicant advised that the identified internal space was not ‘open to below’ and that the design was attempting to minimize height. Staff advised that a property with similar design was located at 370 Main Street North and provided a photo of the property.  Staff requested that further direction be provided to the applicant for revisions. Councillor Rea offered to assist staff when meeting with the applicant.

• Recommendation:

  THAT Heritage Markham defer further discussion regarding 336 Main Street North (MVHCD) until adjustments are made to the design to better complement the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District plan.

  Carried

6.4

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION

PROPOSED NEW DWELLING
61 PETER STREET (MVHCD) (16.11)

FILE NUMBER:
A/118/21

Peter Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner, addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the staff memorandum. He noted that the dwelling was not part of the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District (MVHCD) but it abuts the rear yards of dwellings in the MVHCD. Mr. Wokral noted that the Official Plan policy was to review proposed development that was ‘adjacent’ to a cultural heritage resource (which includes a Heritage District) to ensure it does not negatively impact the cultural heritage resource or the heritage attributes. The three variances requested were for an increase in maximum building height, maximum building depth, and maximum floor area ratio. Mr. Wokral noted that the new dwelling was to be constructed on a street outside of the Heritage District and that there was backyard separation between the District properties and the rear elevation of the new dwelling.

The Committee provided the following feedback:

• Commented that Peter Street should have been included in the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District, and that greater consideration should be given to changes that are permitted to homes on streets adjacent to the MVHCD.
• Questioned whether the increase in dwelling height would be visible from the MVHCD properties on Markham Main Street North.

Staff advised that the buildings on Peter Street, including the proposed dwelling, would be difficult to see from Markham Main Street North.

• Recommendations:

  THAT Heritage Markham has no comment from a heritage perspective regarding the variance application A/118/21 for 61 Peter Street.

  Carried

7.

PART FIVE - STUDIES/PROJECTS AFFECTING HERITAGE RESOURCES - UPDATES

There was no discussion.

8.

PART SIX - NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business.

9.

ADJOURNMENT

The Heritage Markham Committee adjourned at 7:50 p.m.