Heritage Markham Committee Minutes

Meeting Number: 8

Wednesday, September 09, 2020 at 7:15 P.m. - 10:15 P.m.

Electronic Meeting

Members

• Councillor Keith Irish
• Councillor Reid McAlpine
• Councillor Karen Rea
• Graham Dewar
• Ken Davis
• Doug Denby
• Evelin Ellison
• Shan Goel
• Anthony Farr
• Paul Tiefenbach
• Lake Trevelyan

Regrets

• Jason McCauley
• David Nesbitt

Staff

• Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning
• Peter Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner
• Laura Gold, Council/Committee Coordinator
• Scott Chapman, Corporate Privacy & Records Coordinator

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

Under the authority of the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act (Bill 197) and the City of Markham's Council Procedural By-law 2017-5, and in consideration of the advice of public health authorities, this meeting was conducted electronically with members of the Heritage Markham Committee, staff, and guests participating remotely.

 

Graham Dewar, Chair, convened the meeting at 7:15 PM by asking for any disclosures of interest with respect to items on the agenda.

 

The Heritage Markham Committee recessed at 9:00 PM and reconvened at 9:05 PM.

2.

DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

Councillor Reid McAlpine disclosed an interest with respect to Item #6.1 (Heritage Permit Application: 3 Victoria Lane and 31 Victoria Avenue) by nature of his being a neighbour and friend of the applicants, and did not participate in the discussion or vote on the question of this matter. 

3.

PART ONE - ADMINISTRATION

3.1

APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)

A. Addendum Agenda

There was no addendum agenda.

 

B. New Business from Committee Members

There was no new business from the Committee Members.

• Recommendation:

  That the September 9, 2020 Heritage Markham Committee agenda be approved.

  Carried

3.2

MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 12, 2020 HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE MEETING (16.11)

• Recommendation:

  That the minutes of the Heritage Markham Committee meeting held on August 12, 2020 be received and adopted.

  Carried

4.

PART TWO - DEPUTATIONS

Deputations were made for the following items:

6.1 - Heritage Permit Application: 3 Victoria Lane and 31 Victoria Avenue

Refer to the individual item for the deputation details.

5.

PART THREE - CONSENT

5.1

HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATIONS

28 DAVID GOHN CIRCLE MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES 
7 VICTORIA AVENUE UNIONVILLE HCD 
2 DAVID GOHN CIRCLE MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES 
171 MAIN ST. N. MARKHAM VILLAGE HCD (16.11) 
FILE NUMBERS:
• HE 20 124644
• HE 20 125034
• HE 20 124649
• HE 20 125271

It was noted that the heritage permit application identified in the staff memorandum for 7 Victoria Lane was submitted for the property at 7 Victoria Avenue in Unionville.

• 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

10346 MCCOWAN RD - NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM (16.11)
FILE NUMBER: HP 20 121112

• Recommendation:

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

  Carried

5.3

INFORMATION

PROPOSED DEMOLITIONS – ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK
COUNCIL RESOLUTION (16.11)

• Recommendation:

  That Heritage Markham receive as information the staff memorandum entitled "Proposed Demolitions - Rouge National Urban Park Council Resolution."

  Carried

5.4

BUILDING OR SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION

7792 HWY. 7 E. LOCUST HILL - PROPOSED TWO STOREY ADDITION WITH ATTACHED GARAGE TO A 1-1/2 STOREY LISTED HERITAGE DWELLING (16.11)
FILE NUMBER: HP 20 124512

• Recommendation:

  1. That Heritage Markham has no objection from a heritage perspective to the proposed two storey addition to the heritage dwelling at 7792 Highway 7 E. and the proposed alterations to the original house; and,
  2. That final review of the building permit application HP 20 124512 for 7792 Hwy. 7 E be delegated to Heritage Section Staff.
  Carried

6.

PART FOUR - REGULAR

6.1

HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION

3 VICTORIA LANE AND 31 VICTORIA AVENUE
UNAUTHORIZED CHAIN LINK FENCE AND PROPOSED WOODEN PICKET FENCE (16.11)
FILE NUMBERS: HE 20 125034 & HE 20 125580

• Councillor Reid McAlpine declared a conflict on this item. (He is a neighbour and friend of the applicants.)

 

Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff memorandum.

 

Shanta Sundarason, owner of 31 Victoria Avenue, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the unauthorized chain link fence installed at 3 Victoria Lane, including the incompatibility of the fence with the character of the Unionville Heritage Conservation District as well as its high visibility from the neighbouring property and public realm. Ms. Sundarason requested that the Committee express its objection to the heritage permit application submitted by the applicant and recommend the removal of the fence. 

 

There was discussion regarding the retroactive timing of the heritage permit application submitted for the chain link fence at 3 Victoria Lane. Members of the Committee expressed concerns regarding the applicant's installation of the fence prior to seeking approval from the City and without consultation with the neighbouring property owner. Concerns were also expressed regarding the visibility of the chain link fence from the pedestrian pathway and right-of-way as well as the mature vegetation removed along the pathway to install the fence.

• Recommendation:

  1. That the heritage permit application seeking permission to install a new wooden picket fence along the mutual property line of 31 Victoria Ave. and 3 Victoria Lane be approved from a heritage perspective and subject to complying with the City’s Fence By-law; and,
  2. That the heritage permit seeking approval for the chain link fence installed without approval be denied from a heritage perspective and that the existing chain link fence be removed.
  Carried

6.2

HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION

8 DAVID GOHN CIRCLE, MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES
PROPOSED METAL ROOFING FOR THE DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING / GARAGE AND THE REAR ADDITION OF THE HOUSE (16.11)
FILE NUMBER: HE 20 124651

 

Peter Wokral, Senior Planner, Heritage, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff memorandum.

 

There was discussion regarding the compatibility of the proposed metal roofing relative to the strict conservation and restoration practices desired for properties within Markham Heritage Estates. The Committee noted the importance of maintaining historically accurate and consistent roof treatments throughout the Heritage Estates, and expressed concerns regarding the potential precedent that may be set for the use of metal roofs on additions through the approval of this component of the application.

• Recommendation:

  1. That Heritage Markham objects to the installation of a galvanized metal roof on the addition to the dwelling at 8 David Gohn Circle; and,
  2. That Heritage Markham has no objection to the installation of a galvanized metal roof on the garage/accessory building at 8 David Gohn Circle provided the finish and profile matches that of historical metal roofs in Markham as close as possible; and further,
  3. That Heritage Section staff be delegated final review of the heritage permit application to install metal roofing at 8 David Gohn Circle.
  Carried

6.3

HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION

1 CHURCH LANE, THORNHILL HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WROUGHT IRON FENCE DUE TO DAMAGE CAUSED BY AN AUTOMOBILE (16.11)
FILE NUMBER: HE 20 126092

 

Peter Wokral, Senior Planner, Heritage, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff memorandum.

 

There was discussion regarding the design of the new wrought iron fence proposed to be installed by the City. It was noted that the existing fence is identified as a contributing heritage attribute in the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan. Committee members inquired as to the feasibility and relative cost of repairing and/or replicating the existing fence with materials of a design which are more in keeping with the existing heritage resource and historic character of the Thornhill Cemetery.

 

There were concerns that the new fence design would no longer match the historic fence installed along the frontage of the adjacent Ukrainian Catholic Church to the north. The Committee also expressed concerns that a heritage permit was not previously secured for this work by City staff and inquired as to how to better educate staff from other departments regarding the requirement to secure heritage review or heritage permits for public works in heritage conservation districts. 

 

The Committee requested that staff report back before the next meeting to a sub-committee of Heritage Markham with more information on the relative cost and options for restoring the existing fence. The Committee also resolved that the sub-committee be delegated authority to review and comment on the heritage permit application on behalf of Heritage Markham.

• Recommendation:

  1. That Heritage Section staff be requested to report back to a sub-committee of Heritage Markham on options that were explored and cost implications of restoring the existing wrought iron fence at 1 Church Lane relative to replacement with the same or similar product; and,
  2. That the sub-committee be delegated authority to review and comment on the heritage permit application submitted for the wrought iron fence at 1 Church Lane on behalf of Heritage Markham. 
  Carried

6.4

REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK

7265 & 7323 HWY. 7 E.
OPTIONS FOR RELOCATING THE ABRAHAM REESOR HOUSE & FRANK ALBERT REESOR HOUSE IN A DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION (16.11)
FILE NUMBER: SU 18 154617

 

Peter Wokral, Senior Planner, Heritage, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff memorandum.

 

Scott Rushlow, consultant to the applicant, was in attendance and answered questions on the proposed site plan for the preferred relocation option identified by Heritage Section staff.

 

There was discussion regarding the importance of ensuring an appropriate transition and design integration between the relocated heritage dwellings and the proposed adjacent townhouses. Committee members inquired as to the feasibility of allocating additional lot space to the heritage dwellings to provide for greater setbacks from the townhouses and street frontages.

• Recommendation:

  That Heritage Markham supports Option 1 and the associated lots proposed by Lindwide for the relocation of the Abraham Reesor and Frank Albert Reesor Houses.

  Carried

6.5

REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK

7111 REESOR ROAD, MARKHAM
THE ROBERT MILROY HOUSE
ROOFING MATERIAL (16.11)

 

Peter Wokral, Senior Planner, Heritage, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff memorandum.

 

The Committee discussed the sample metal roofing product proposed by the property owner. Members inquired as to the potential consideration of alternate roofing materials more authentic in appearance, such as fibreglass asphalt roof shingles. The Committee also discussed the potential need to reconsider its historical perspective on metal roofing where more traditional materials may not be economically feasible for the applicant or provide for appropriate sustainability.  

• Recommendation:

  That Heritage Markham would prefer a traditional metal roofing type such as a standing seam roof or corrugated, galvanized metal panels or sheets as opposed to the proposed stone clad metal panels for the Robert Milroy House.

  Carried

7.

PART FIVE - STUDIES/PROJECTS AFFECTING HERITAGE RESOURCES - UPDATES

7.1

STAFF PRESENTATION

INCORPORATING CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES IN NEW DEVELOPMENT (16.11)

Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning, delivered a presentation providing members of the Committee with examples of cultural heritage resources which have been incorporated into new developments within the City of Markham. Successes and lessons from the past examples were discussed.

 

The Committee commended Heritage Section staff for their work in promoting and facilitating the continued preservation and integration of cultural heritage resources in the City of Markham. The Committee also recognized the past members of Heritage Markham for their contributions in helping to further these objectives.

• Recommendation:

  That Heritage Markham Committee receive as information the staff presentation entitled "Incorporating Cultural Heritage Resources in New Development."

  Carried

8.

PART SIX - NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business.

9.

ADJOURNMENT

The Heritage Markham Committee meeting adjourned at 10:12 PM.