HERITAGE
TOWN OF
MINUTES
|
Members |
Regrets |
|
Councillor Valerie Burke Susan Casella Ted Chisholm Judith Dawson Deirdre Kavanagh |
Councillor Carolina Moretti Sylvia Morris Ronald Waine |
|
Jeanne Ker-Hornell James Makaruk, Vice Chair Richard Morales |
|
|
Barry Nelson, Chair Regional Councillor Joe Virgilio |
|
George Duncan, Senior Heritage Planner
Peter Wokral, Heritage Planner
Kitty Bavington, Committee Clerk
Barry Nelson, Chair, convened the meeting
at 7:23 p.m. by asking for any declarations of interest with respect to items
on the agenda.
Councillor Valerie Burke disclosed an
interest with respect to item # 11, 26 Colborne Street, by nature of owning the
subject property, and did not take part in the discussion of or vote on the
question of the approval of such matters.
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)
A) Addendum
Agenda
B) New Business from Committee Members
HERITAGE
THAT the
Heritage Markham agenda be approved.
CARRIED
2. MINUTES OF THE JUNE
9, 2010
HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the Minutes of the Heritage Markham
meeting held on June 9, 2010 be received and adopted.
CARRIED
3. SITE PLAN APPROVAL
APPLICATION
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION
FILE NO. SC 10 118308 AND A/59/10
93 JOHN STREET
PROPOSED NEW HOUSE & VARIANCE APPLICATION (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
P. Wokral, Heritage
Planner
R. Cefaratti, Committee
of Adjustment
The Heritage Planner provided background
information, explaining that this application had been referred to the
Architectural Review Sub-committee. He advised that the Sub-committee supports
the variance in principle subject to modified designs. A further Sub-committee
meeting has been scheduled for a final review and approval is proposed to be
delegated to the Sub-Committee.
Mr. Mozaffari was in attendance to answer
any questions.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports in principle
the revised design for the proposed new house at 93 John Street subject to the
applicant addressing the design and material recommendations discussed at the
Architectural Review Sub-Committee meeting (as noted in the meeting notes) of
July 13, 2010;
THAT the Architectural Review Sub-Committee
be delegated authority to approve for the review of a further revised design;
AND THAT review and approval of building
materials be delegated to Heritage Section staff, with the participation of the
Ward Councillor.
CARRIED
4. SITE PLAN APPROVAL
APPLICATION
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION
FILE NOS. SC 10 116533 AND A/56/10
94 JOHN STREET
PROPOSED NEW HOUSE AND MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
P. Wokral,
Heritage Planner
R. Cefaratti, Committee
of Adjustment
The Heritage Planner gave an overview of
the Minor Variance and Site Plan applications, which had been referred to the
Architectural Review Sub-committee. A streetscape drawing has been provided by
the applicant. Staff displayed elevations of the proposed dwelling and noted a
revised recommendation in the Addendum agenda.
The Chair read correspondence from Rob
Armstrong, President of the Ward One (South) Thornhill Residents Inc.
Association, in objection to the variances.
Elena Bevilalqua, owner of the heritage house
across the road known as the “Edey House” stated her opposition to the proposal
and referred to the OMB decision. Ms. Bevilalqua considered the application that
had been before the OMB premature without details of the proposed dwelling
being provided.
Judson Whiteside spoke in opposition to the
proposal, stating that the two approved variances and the current four proposed
variances and not appropriate for the substandard lot.
Morton Roseman, 11 Deanbank Drive, stated
that his property is most directly affected by the proposal, and he discussed
shading and privacy impacts. Mr. Roseman noted previous incidents when Heritage
Markham had strictly upheld the Heritage policies and he requested that the
variances not be approved.
Marion Matthias spoke of the substandard
lot and suggested that the increase in the Gross Floor Area Ratio from 33% to 46%
is a major adjustment and inappropriate. Ms. Matthias noted that the OMB had
permitted a 2700 sq ft. dwelling, and that the area has been subject to several
applications recently, resulting in larger “monster” homes. The issue of chain
link fences being permitted, contrary to Heritage policies, was also discussed.
Carmen Naccarato, applicant, responded to
comments made and issues discussed. He reviewed the OMB decision which does not
prohibit further variances, but does recognize that 11 Deanbank would be the
property most affected and also acknowledged that there are no guarantees to
protect a view. Mr. Naccarato discussed the impact of building a two-storey house
instead of a one-and-a-half storey house. He advised that 11 Deanbank
encroaches and impacts his property in several ways with respect to setback,
driveway, and drainage, and he considered it inappropriate for the neighbours
to demand a view or dictate what he can build.
He further advised that the height issue
has been eliminated, and that the GFA is proposed at 43%, not 46%. In his
opinion, this proposal is compatible with the neighbourhood as there are several
smaller lots in the area, several larger houses, and every house and property is
unique.
The Committee discussed the method of
determining the setback measurements, and the provisions of the OMB ruling with
respect to conforming to the policies of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District
Plan. The height issue was of specific concern in relation to adjacent
dwellings. It was suggested that the design of the house could have more impact
that the size. The placement of the garage was also discussed.
At the Committee’s request, staff
summarized the issues and how they can be addressed. Staff indicated support
for the variances except for the height variance, and noted that the lot
alignment is unique and challenging.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham received
correspondence from Rob Armstrong, President of the Ward One (South) Thornhill
Residents Inc. Association, in objection to the variances;
AND THAT Heritage Markham upholds the
original decision and does not support any variances for height, size, and
location of the proposed dwelling.
CARRIED
5. SITE PLAN APPROVAL
APPLICATION
FILE NO. SC 10 118997
86 MAIN STREET NORTH
FAÇADE RENOVATIONS (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Duncan, Senior Heritage Planner
The Senior Heritage Planner summarized the
proposal to update the façade at 86 Main Street North, advising that there will
be minimal impact.
Mr. Aziz, architect representing the
applicant, displayed a coloured rendering.
The Committee recommended that gooseneck
lighting be used, and discussed window treatments. Staff was directed to give particular attention to the brick
colour. A correction was noted that this site is located in Markham Village.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham supports the proposed
façade renovations to the Bank of Montreal branch at 86 Main Street North,
subject to the standard conditions regarding materials, colours, etc. being
included in the Site Plan Agreement.
CARRIED
6. REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
7 VICTORIA AVENUE, UNIONVILLE
REQUEST TO DEMOLISH DWELLING (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
The Senior Heritage Planner explained the cultural
heritage value of the house and the proposal for demolition of the dwelling.
The Architectural Review Sub-committee had inspected the property in 2005 and had
acknowledged that renovations had been done to the original structure. It was noted
that the property is in the TRCA screening area, and that the required grading
elevations for a new building would be substantial. Staff support retaining the
dwelling with a possible addition.
Donna Nitchie, applicant, gave a written
presentation and spoke in support of the application. Ms. Nitchie reviewed the
history of the property and the extensive renovations that had been done over
the years, rendering it a replica building in her opinion. Neighbours had
confirmed that the building had been demolished to the ground and rebuilt. She
referred to similar circumstances at 12 Euclid where a demolition permit had
been granted and requested that this application be granted as well.
The Committee agreed that renovations may
have been made to the interior, but the preservation issues relate more to
scale, massing, shape and compatibility of the building to the streetscape.
Concern was expressed for the elevation of the lot and the potential foundation
height of any new dwelling built on the property. Ms. Nitchie advised that to
her knowledge, no flooding had occurred since 1984.
Staff advised that there is no definitive evidence
of complete demolition. The Committee agreed to defer the application pending a
review and site visit by the Architectural Review Sub-Committee.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham receives the written
submission from Ms. Nitchie regarding 7 Victoria Avenue;
AND THAT Heritage Markham refer the matter to the Architectural Review Sub-Committee
for a site visit to report back to the meeting on August 11, 2010.
CARRIED
7. SITE
PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
FILE NO. SC 10
118844
25 JOHN STREET
PROPOSED ADDITION
AND ATTACHED GARAGE (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
P. Wokral, Heritage
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed scale, massing, form
and architectural style of the proposed addition and attached garage for 25
John St. provided that the owner restore the front windows of the original
house to their original appearance based on the archival photograph of the
house;
THAT Heritage Markham considers the window
replication work to be eligible for the Town of Markham Designated Property
Grant Program;
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to
any variances to the By-law required to bring the existing house into
compliance with the By-law or permit the construction of the proposed addition
and attached garage;
THAT the owner enter into a Site Plan
agreement for the addition and attached garage to 25 John St. containing the
standard provisions regarding materials, colours, windows, etc.;
AND THAT final approval of the Site Plan
application or Minor Variance application, if required, be
delegated to Heritage Section Staff provided that the design reviewed by the
Committee is not significantly altered.
CARRIED
8. HERITAGE PERMIT
APPLICATION
FILE NO. HE 10 116013
104 JOHN STREET
PRIVACY FENCE AND
DRIVEWAY RE-SURFACING (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham receive
the memorandum on the approval of the Heritage Permit for privacy fencing and
driveway re-surfacing at 104 John Street, as information.
CARRIED
9. REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
FILE NO. PRE 10
113731
7681 YONGE STREET
SCOTIABANK RENOVATIONS AND PLAZA UPGRADES (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Duncan, Senior
Heritage Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
AND THAT final approval of the Site Plan
Control Application to implement the proposal be
delegated to Heritage Section staff and the Ward Councillor.
CARRIED
10. SITE PLAN APPROVAL
APPLICATION
FILE NO. SC 10 119189
93 MAIN STREET UNIONVILLE
PROPOSED RAISING OF EXISTING HOUSE (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
P. Wokral, Heritage
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to
the proposed raising of the existing house at 93 Main Street Unionville
provided that the owner plants ornamental shrubs to screen the concrete block
foundation;
AND THAT final approval of the Site Plan
application and Building permit application be delegated to Heritage Section
Staff provided that there are no significant changes to the existing
application.
CARRIED
11. HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION(S)
APPROVED BY STAFF ON BEHALF
OF HERITAGE MARKHAM
FILE NOS. HE 10
11910, HE 10 118733, HE 10 118 166 AND HE 10 118201
26 COLBORNE STREET, 5 MAIN STREET NORTH,
12 DAVID GOHN CIRCLE, AND 91 MAIN ST. UNIONVILLE (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
Councillor Valerie Burke disclosed an
interest with respect to item # 11, 26 Colborne Street, by nature of owning the
subject property, and did not take part in the discussion of or vote on the
question of the approval of such matters.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham receive
the memorandum on compliant Heritage Permits approved by Heritage Section staff
on behalf of Heritage Markham as information.
CARRIED
12. NOTICE OF CLASS
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR DISPOSITION OF
PROPERTY AT
YONGE STREET AND LANGSTAFF(16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
Receive as
Information.
CARRIED
13. BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION
FILE NO. 10-119109
15 ROUGE STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE
DEMOLITION OF DWELLING (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
C. Doyle-Dimou, Building
Department
The Senior Heritage Planner reviewed the
proposal for demolition. This is a Class B building and Heritage resources are
getting scare in this area, making it a valuable asset.
Joseph Dimartino, applicant, spoke to the Committee
regarding the poor condition of the dwelling and the remodelling challenges,
and he felt that demolition and rebuilding is the most sensible solution.
Dixie White, representing the Vinegar Hill
Ratepayers Association, spoke in support of the application, advising that the Association
has considered the proposal and agreed that there is no redeemable value to the
house and that it is an eyesore. The dwelling is overshadowed by the larger adjacent
houses and no longer fits within the streetscape. A petition with the
signatures of six residents in support of the application,
was presented.
The Committee considered that the building
is a specific and uncommon architectural style that needs care and preservation,
not demolition. Discussions included the current heritage policies and whether
they should be revised, or whether the house should be reclassified to Class C.
It was acknowledged that the neighbourhood is undergoing rejuvenation and there
is little heritage character left in the area.
Councillor John Webster spoke of the scarce
heritage values in this neighbourhood and the changing character of this isolated
community. He requested support for the application.
A motion to not support the demolition
application was lost.
The Committee agreed to refer this matter
to the Architectural Review Sub-committee for a site visit and to report back
to Heritage Markham. It was confirmed that members of the public are entitled
to attend the Sub-committee site visit. Staff will advise the Ward Councillor and
Ms. White, who will notify the other members of the public once the date has
been set.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT the petition from the residents in
support of the application to demolish 15 Rouge Street,
be received;
AND THAT Heritage Markham refer the
demolition of the existing dwelling at 15 Rouge Street to the Architectural
Review Sub-committee for a site visit and to report back at the next Heritage Markham
meeting with recommendations.
CARRIED
14. BUTTONVILLE HERITAGE
CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Duncan, Senior Heritage
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham refer
the Buttonville Heritage Conservation District Plan to the Architectural Review
Sub-Committee, with authority to approve, for comment.
CARRIED
15. ZONING BY-LAW
AMENDMENT APPLICATION
OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION
FILE NO. SU 10 118 874 AND ZA 10 118 878
4672 16 TH AVENUE AND 9451 KENNEDY ROAD
UPPER UNIONVILLE INC.
(BECKETT FARM) (16.11)
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Sellars, Project
Planner
The Senior Heritage Planner gave a brief
explanation of the applications for the Beckett Farm lands, advising that heritage
attributes are being protected and staff are confident
that the recommendations are thorough.
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
THAT the entrance drive or portions thereof
where possible leading from Kennedy Road to the Eckardt Log House and the
associated White Spruce and Silver Maples be retained;
THAT Heritage Markham supports the
recommendations of the applicant’s report entitled “Cultural Heritage
Evaluation Report – Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage Landscapes”
(March 2010) prepared by Archaeological Services Inc. and supports
implementation of the recommendations regarding the measures to be undertaken to
document and protect the two heritage house during the planning and
construction phases (i.e. measured drawings, condition reports, maintenance,
boarding);
THAT the existing conditions and placement
of the heritage features on site (barns, houses, entrance driveways, screening
vegetation, windbreaks and views of the houses and cemetery) and the physical
relationships between them should be subject to heritage recording to serve as
final documentation of the agricultural setting of this farmstead and that the
report be provided to the Town of Markham for archival reference purposes;
THAT in order to provide views to the west
elevation (front) of the Beckett Farm House, the application be
revised as follows:
a)
Reconfigure the plan to place
the heritage building on a corner lot to allow the front of the dwelling to
face the street; or
b)
Combine Lot 926 and 927
(Heritage Lot) to provide a larger lot to provide a streetscape view to the
west elevation of the house and to accommodate a garage and amenity area to make
the house a viable, marketable residence within the community;
THAT a preliminary site plan for the
Beckett Farm House lot be requested to be submitted to allow analysis of the
appropriateness of the property’s dimensions and to determine if remnant portions
of the former apple orchard can be maintained;
THAT the Town’s Engineering Department be
requested to carefully examine the grading around both heritage house lots and nay vegetation that
is to be retained to ensure that proposed grades are sympathetic to the
existing grade relationship of the houses and that the houses can be retained
on their original foundations;
THAT the barns and the mid-20th
C brick house (west of the Eckardt House) on the property be advertised for
potential relocation or salvage as per heritage requirements and that the Town
consider using the barns in an adaptive re-use for public use or as part of a
recreational or park area;
THAT given that the Eckardt Log House is to
be transferred to the Town of Markham as part of a parkette, the applicant
provide a financial contribution to the municipality to assist with the future
restoration of the building;
AND THAT the Town’s standard Heritage
requirements be included in the Conditions of Draft
Approval and Subdivision Agreement, including but not limited to:
CARRIED
16. REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
MARKHAM GO TRAIN STATION PARKING LOT
UPGRADE
214 MAIN STREET NORTH,
MARKHAM VILLAGE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Duncan, Senior Heritage
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
That Heritage Markham has no objection to
the proposed parking lot upgrades for the Markham GO Train Station subject to
the landscaping being preserved and restored following construction.
CARRIED
17. SITE PLAN CONTROL APPLICATION SC 10
120774
NICHOLS FARMHOUSE, LOUIS NICHOLS
HOUSE
10519 AND 10521 WOODBINE AVENUE
VICTORIA SQUARE COMMUNITY
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Duncan, Senior Heritage
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to
the Site Plan Control Application for
the heritage houses at 10519 and 10521 Woodbine Avenue, subject to the
applicant entering into a site plan agreement including colours, materials,
etc.
CARRIED
18. SALES OFFICE AGREEMENT
REDEVELOPMENT
OF MARKHAM VILLAGE SHOPPES
58-72 MAIN STREET NORTH,
MARKHAM VILLAGE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
P. Wokral, Project
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
AND THAT final approval of the design for
the proposed Sales Office be delegated to Heritage
Section Staff.
CARRIED
19. SITE PLAN CONTROL APPLICATION SC 10
120435
PROPOSED NEW PRIVATE SCHOOL BUILDING
21 RENFREW DRIVE, BUTTONVILLE
COMMUNITY
Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage
Planning
G. Sellars, Project
Planner
HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:
THAT
AND THAT final approval of the materials
and colours of the proposed new J Addison School be delegated to Heritage
Section Staff;
CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.