Regan Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning presented the staff memorandum on the incorporation of the Sommerfeldt heritage structures into the subdivision proposal for 10379 and 10411 Kennedy Road. Staff have not taken a position on the relocation of the heritage cultural resources, but have provided the Committee with options for its consideration. The heritage resources should be kept occupied as long as possible, and should continue to be maintained.
Dan Currie, MHBC Planning reported that in order to make the plan of subdivision work the grading of the site needs to be altered. In order for the cultural heritage resources to remain in their current locations, the foundation would need to be lifted, as the site is too low. He noted the cultural heritage resources are both in good structural condition and can be moved. The consultant indicated that relocating the cultural heritage resources, to the northwest mixed-use section (Block ‘A’) of the subdivision permits the house to be used for non-residential uses, such as a restaurant or daycare. Integrating the cultural heritage resources with the park also makes them more of a landmark.
Clay Leibel, applicant noted examples of how the heritage homes can be successfully incorporated into a condominium by making them into condo units, a fitness room, or party room. The Applicant is open to working with staff on the configuration of the cultural heritage resources.. The Applicant is committed to addressing all deficiencies with respect to the cultural heritage resources and is willing to keep the use open to both residential and non-residential uses, but would like them relocated to the northwest section of the development where mixed uses will be permitted.
Committee provided the following feedback on the incorporation of the Sommerfeldt cultural heritage structures into the subdivision proposal for 10379 and 10411 Kennedy Road:
- Suggested that the cultural heritage resources remain in their current location or be relocated as close to their original location as possible if required to be moved and remain in residential use, as the argument to depart from the City’s Heritage Policy and move the resources was not strong enough (some members supported);
- Suggested that it is important to maintain the physical connection between the two related houses;
- Supported the re-location of the cultural heritage resources, but suggested that heritage resources be able to be used for residential or non-residential uses (some members supported);
- Ensure the orientation of the cultural heritage resources is appropriate, so that the front of the houses face the street.
After a lengthy discussion, the Committee asked the Applicant come back to the next meeting with more information on why the cultural heritage resources are required to be moved.
Recommendation:
THAT the Heritage Markham Committee has no objection from a heritage perspective to the relocation of the two Sommerfeldt Houses to Block ‘A’ (Mixed Use Block) and adapted to other non-residential uses subject to the submission of a building relocation plan.
Lost
Recommendation:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection from a heritage perspective to the relocation of the two Sommerfeldt Houses to Block ‘A’ (Mixed Use Block) if used for residential use.
Lost