Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: June 19, 2007

SUBJECT: Thornhill Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan

Revised Plan 2007

PREPARED BY: Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning, ext. 2080

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the report entitled “Thornhill Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan – Revised Plan 2007” be received;

AND THAT the revised Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) and District Inventory (2007), be endorsed;

AND THAT the By-law (attached as Appendix A) to amend the existing Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan By-law (270-86) by incorporating the revised Thornhill Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) and District Inventory (2007), together with the 1986 Study, be enacted;

AND THAT as per Section 41.1 (3) of the Ontario Heritage Act, Council shall cause notice of the by-law to be served on each owner of property located in the heritage conservation district and the Ontario Heritage Trust, and to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality;

AND THAT if there are any objections to the By-law under Section 41.1 (4) of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Town Solicitor be directed to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the By-law;

AND THAT staff be directed to examine the development of a matching grant program for non-commercial properties to assist in heritage restoration projects, potentially using some of the monies currently allocated to the Heritage Loan Fund;

AND THAT Council consents to the removal of the word ‘commercial’ in reference to the type of building subject to the maximum height of buildings on Yonge Street in the Heritage District to ensure that any type of building would be subject to the height restriction.

AND THAT should Council wish to ensure the building heights provided for on Yonge Street are consistent in both the Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan and the Thornhill Secondary Plan, staff be directed to prepare and present to Council for adoption, an amendment to the Thornhill Secondary Plan to amend the height provisions to be the same as the Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007);

AND THAT Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The purpose of this study was to undertake a comprehensive review of the Thornhill Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan, which was adopted by Council in 1986 to guide alterations and development within the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District. The vision for the review was to encourage the participation of local residents and other stakeholders to create a new, up-to-date plan which is illustrated, clear and concise in its message and recognizes the needs of its users – local citizens, property owners and Town Staff. The study was undertaken by Philip Carter and Associates with assistance from Heritage Section staff.

The study was initiated in the winter of 2005. A Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan Review Advisory Committee was established by Council to assist in the review of study documents.

The first phase of the study involved a complete review of the current heritage plan and the identification of issues that needed to be addressed. At the first community meeting, the public voiced their views and recommendations for improving the District Plan. The consultant prepared an Issues Identification Report which summarized the concerns, described the current situation, and suggested recommendations.

At the second community meeting, the Issues Identification Report was presented to the public and potential solutions to the issues and concerns were discussed. Markham Council then authorized the consultants to proceed to the second phase of the study and prepare a revised heritage conservation district plan for Thornhill Village.

A new heritage conservation district plan and building inventory was prepared and presented to Council in June 2006. Council asked staff to hold a further public information meeting in September 2006 to obtain further feedback from residents on two key issues: the building classification system and building heights on Yonge Street.

Based upon the comments and feedback received in September, staff felt that further review of the building classifications was warranted and that further consultation with affected property owners would be appropriate and useful. Council agreed and supported an extended public consultation period. Staff also used this opportunity to consult with Heritage Markham on a number of occasions and the Study Advisory Committee.

A new classification approach was presented to the public in April 2007 with slightly revised policies/guidelines which appears to have addressed the issue. The issue of height on Yonge Street was resolved through a separate Council resolution. The heritage conservation district plan and building inventory has been revised accordingly. It is recommended that it be approved.

1. Purpose 2. Background 3. Discussion 4. Financial

5. Others (Environmental, Accessibility, Engage 21st, Affected Units) 6. Attachment(s)

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to recommend endorsement of the revised Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) and District Inventory, and enactment of a by-law to implement the new plan.

BACKGROUND:

The Town has three heritage districts, each with an approved plan

The Town has three heritage conservation districts based on the former historical villages of Thornhill, Unionville and Markham Village. Each of these districts has an approved heritage district plan, adopted by Council, to help guide development activity and related matters within the district. Figure 1 illustrates the boundaries of the Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District.

The Thornhill Heritage Plan has been used since 1986

The Thornhill Heritage Conservation District was created by Council in 1986 and is the Town’s oldest heritage district. The current plan was adopted by Council after extensive review and re-drafting between 1984-86. The District Plan has been used to provide guidance for re-development projects for residents and Council for the last twenty years.

A number of systemic problems are associated with the current Heritage Plan

The overall goal of the District Plan is to provide policies and guidelines in order to ensure the continuation and enhancement of the district’s historical, village-like ambience while providing for contemporary needs. Over the years, a number of issues have arisen and the District Plan has had minor amendments to selected policies in 1994 and 1999. However, a number of concerns remain, including:

• The guidelines are not always clear and often require municipal staff or the heritage advisory committee to interpret them;
• In some policy areas, additional guidelines are required. For example, there is little guidance given on appropriate direction for alteration to non-heritage properties;
• Some policies and guidelines require updating as situations and procedures have evolved or require removal from the Plan as they are no longer needed or relevant;
• The Plan is not user-friendly in its current format and there are few illustrations or graphics to explain concepts.

Over the last decade in particular, a number of issues have been raised which have challenged both the local community and the District Plan. Issues of note include: the severance of larger lots, the appropriate design and size of new infill construction, the treatment of non-heritage properties and inappropriate alterations to heritage properties. Some of the above issues have been extremely controversial and have, on occasion, divided community opinion.

A number of planning initiatives have also impacted the Heritage District

Also, since the District Plan was approved, a number of planning policies have been adopted that impact the Heritage District including:

· the Thornhill Secondary Plan;

· the Heritage Main Street commercial policies in the Official Plan;

· the Town’s new sign by-law;

· an infill housing zoning by-law;

· the Thornhill Yonge Street Study which includes a component of the Heritage District;

· the Region of York’s Yonge Street transit system improvements; and

· Regional Official Plan Amendment No.43 - Centres and Corridors.

Study was authorized by Council

In 2004, Council authorized a study to review the current Heritage District Plan and to revise the Plan, as necessary. The Town retained the services of Phillip Carter, Architect and Planner to undertake the study. The Town also retained the services of Larry Sherman, a professional facilitator to assist during the study.

A study advisory committee was created

A District Plan Advisory Committee was also established. The advisory committee included members from Council, Heritage Markham, Society of the Preservation of Historic Thornhill, the Ward 1 (South) Thornhill Residents Inc and the local community.

The mandate of the Advisory Committee was to advise staff and the consultants on local matters, provide a community perspective, review work undertaken by the consultant and assist during any public participation component of the study.

The study was undertaken in two phases

The first phase of the study involved a complete review of the current heritage plan and the identification of issues that needed to be addressed. At the first community public meeting, staff heard the public’s views and recommendations for improving the District Plan. The consultant prepared an Issues Identification Report which summarized the major concerns, described the current situation, offered options, and made suggested recommendations.

At the second community meeting, the Issues Identification Report was reviewed with the public and potential solutions to the issues and concerns were discussed. In June 2005, Markham Council authorized the consultants to proceed to the second phase of the study and prepare a revised heritage conservation district plan for Thornhill Village.

Council directed that further consultation be undertaken

The revised heritage conservation district plan was prepared based on the format used for the Unionville Heritage Conservation District Plan. On June 20, 2006, Council held a Statutory Public Meeting to consider approving the revised Thornhill Village Heritage Conservation District Plan 2006. Council asked staff to hold a further public information meeting in September 2006 to obtain further feedback from residents on the issues raised at the public meeting. At the meeting held on September 11, 2006, issues related to the proposed building classification approach and the issue of appropriate height for new development on Yonge Street were discussed.

Based upon the comments and feedback received in September, staff felt that further review of the building classifications was warranted and that further consultation with affected property owners would be appropriate and useful. In October 2006, Council agreed and supported an extended public consultation period. Staff also used this opportunity to consult with Heritage Markham (Council’s municipal heritage committee) on the classification approach.

The original building classification approach (June 2006) needed further refinement

As part of the overall study, the consultants were requested in the terms of reference to review the existing building stock and classify the buildings/properties into 3 categories similar to the approach used in Unionville and Markham Village. These classifications were:

Class A – Buildings of major importance to the District

Class B – Buildings that are important in terms of contextual value

Class C – Buildings that do not relate to the heritage character of the District

The objective was to re-evaluate the properties in the district to assess what properties are currently considered to be significant as well as contributing to the character of the area.  

In the 1986 Plan only those buildings of “architectural or historical significance” were identified (37 properties). The June 2006 classification approach proposed to retain 35 of the significant buildings as Class A and add 12 additional properties (primarily buildings from the early 20^th Century- 1910-1940s). It was proposed to have 55 new Class B buildings and the remainder as Class C.

A number of residents expressed concern with the classification approach. There were two basic issues: a) a number of the owners of properties recommended to become Class A did not support this approach and felt they were not heritage buildings; and b) a number of residents did not support the classification of “B” properties (contextual value) and preferred the existing “heritage” and “non-heritage” approach. Individuals were also concerned with the lack of direct notification with property owners who were to be placed in a new classification.

A revised classification approach was developed to address concerns

In December 2006, staff prepared a comprehensive property classification package explaining the concept and addressing frequently asked questions, and sent this to every property owner in the District. Staff had a number of discussions and received extensive feedback from local residents on these issues and ultimately developed a revised Classification Approach option that attempts to strike the right balance between the issues raised by residents and the objectives of a Heritage District. The revised approach was presented on April 18, 2007 at a community information meeting held by Councillor Burke, and was well received. It is defined as follows:

Class A – Buildings/properties of major importance to the District

(this would apply to all 1986 significant properties plus 4 new properties)

Class B - Buildings/properties of importance to the District

(this would apply to 8 properties previously identified as Class A and 7 properties previously identified as Class B)

Class C – Other Buildings/properties in the District

(this would apply to all 87 remaining properties both complementary and non-complementary)

Revised policies/guidelines were also developed to reflect the changes, primarily for Class B properties. On April 27, 2007, each proposed new Class A and Class B property owner was sent an individual letter and information package including an explanation of the revised classification approach, the handout from the April 18^th community meeting and a document summarizing the cultural heritage value of the property. In addition, all other property owners were sent a letter describing the revised classification approach and directing them to the Town website or Heritage Staff for additional details.

A process for future changes to building classification

District property owners have requested that a process be identified in the District Plan outlining how a property could be changed to a different classification in the future, and that the homeowner be involved in the process.

Staff has explained that once approved, the classification for each property would be in place unless formally changed by Council, with opportunity for both owner and public input. Neither staff nor a consultant can arbitrarily change a classification. If change was proposed, there would definitely be direct communication and dialogue with the affected property owner (staff made this commitment in June 2006). Any classification review would be a professional, objective analysis undertaken by staff and, if supported, approved by Council. The Plan now includes a process where the owner will be advised of any proposed classification change, provided an explanation of the reasoning related to a change and given the opportunity to discuss it as varies stages of review. It would still be Council’s decision if a classification change was to occur.

Height of new development on Yonge Street

The matter of an appropriate height for new development on Yonge Street was also an issue. The policies/guidelines included in the June 2006 draft of the Heritage District Plan reflected the Council endorsed “Thornhill Yonge Street Study, 2005: A Framework for Renewal, Reinvestment and Community Building”, and the recently approved amendments to the Thornhill Secondary Plan.

Historically, building heights on Yonge Street were in the 2-3 storey range and the buildings were, for the most part, independent structures. However, most of the historic fabric of old Thornhill within the Yonge Street portion of the Heritage District has disappeared and has been replaced with one-two storey, commercial strip mall type development that is not compatible. Unlike places such as Unionville, Forest Hill Village or Kleinburg, a large amount of the area needs to be redeveloped to improve its overall character. The opportunity to replace the existing strip plazas with three-storey mixed use development has existed for a number of years, but has not been pursued as it does not appear economically feasible.

The Thornhill Yonge Street Study and the revised Secondary Plan proposed a new form of village environment which is greater in height and density. There are a number of reasons why this approach was supported, including:

• a desire to use the mass and scale of the building fabric to help narrow the perceived width of Yonge Street,
• a desire to encourage reinvestment and offer development opportunities which will in turn improve the urban experience and commercial strength of the area,
• mixed retail-residential redevelopment appears to be the most viable development typology based on existing market conditions, but this requires a certain level of intensification and height to offset the land development and construction costs and attract investment; and
• a desire to achieve below grade parking facilities which is both expensive and necessary for most mixed use redevelopment projects, contemporary development and market demand.

The objective of the revised Heritage District Plan was to have ensured that the new 3-5 storey infill was compatible with the Heritage District’s character and that any new mid-rise development was compatible with the basic tenets of traditional historical commercial architecture typically found in an older downtown setting. Given Council had just approved the Official Plan Amendment to the Thornhill Secondary Plan regarding land uses and height, staff included this policy direction in the revised Heritage District Plan. It was also important to have consistency between the two documents since the revised Ontario Heritage Act provides that in the event of a conflict between the Heritage Plan and a municipal by-law that affects the District, the Heritage Plan prevails to the extent of the conflict.

However, on April 24, 2007, Council endorsed a notice of motion, and passed a resolution, that supported the wording of, and direction contained in, Section 3.4.1.5 of the 1986 Heritage District Plan. Further, staff were directed that this be reflected in the new Thornhill Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan when the final version is brought forward for approval to Council, and that no special policies which would modify or be contrary to the wording of and the direction contained in Section 3.4.1.5, such as “bonusing,” be included in the new plan.

As directed by Council, staff has revised the proposed Heritage District Plan by including the following wording from the original Section 3.4.1.5 in the appropriate sections of the Heritage Plan:

“The height of new residential buildings should not be less than 80% and not more than 120% of the average height of the residential buildings on immediately adjacent properties.  Historically appropriate heights for new residential buildings are considered to be 1-1/2 or 2 storeys, subject to an actual height in metres compatible with immediately adjacent buildings and complying with zoning provisions.”

(this wording has been included in the Plan in reference to single detached dwellings on the traditional residential streets)

“The height of the St. Vladimir Church steeple (12 metres) is the maximum height considered appropriate for commercial buildings on Yonge Street in the District.”

(this wording has been included in the Plan in reference to development on Yonge Street. To avoid confusion, staff has removed the word ‘commercial’ so that any building on Yonge Street (commercial, commercial/residential or all residential) would be subject to the maximum height of 12 metres. Also Vladimir has been changed to Volodymyr)

This direction from Council has resulted in the proposed Heritage District Plan and the existing Thornhill Secondary Plan providing conflicting direction regarding height of future development on Yonge Street. Should Council wish to ensure the two documents are compatible, a direction to staff to bring forward a further amendment to the Thornhill Secondary Plan is appropriate.

Consultation with the local community

Extensive notice was provided to the local community as part of the consultation process and all meetings were well attended. The following meetings were held with members of the public:

Meeting	Date	Location	Purpose
Open House and Public Information Plus Survey	March 23, 2005	Thornhill Community Centre	Issue Identification
Public Information Meeting	June 9, 2005	Thornhill Community Centre	Review of Issues and Recommendations
Development Services Committee	June 21, 2005	Civic Centre	Endorsement of Phase 1 Study
Public Information Meeting	June 8, 2006	Heintzman House	Review of Draft Plan (policies, guidelines, etc)
Statutory Public Meeting *	June 20, 2006	Civic Centre	Review of Draft Plan (policies , guidelines, etc.)
Development Services Committee	June 20, 2006	Civic Centre	Recommendation Report (Endorse Plan)
Public Information Meeting	September 11, 2006	Thornhill Community Centre	Review of Outstanding Issues
Development Services Committee	October 17, 2006	Civic Centre	Request for extended public consultation period
Concerned Residents Meeting	January 23, 2007	Civic Centre	Building Classification Issues
Public Information Meeting	April 18, 2007	Heintzman House	Review of Building Classification Issues
Development Services Committee	June 19, 2007	Civic Centre	Recommendation Report (Endorse Plan)

* A statutory public meeting is required prior to adoption of a heritage conservation district plan under the new provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Every property owner was mailed a written notice for all public information meetings. Additional information on building classifications was mailed to each property owner in December 2006 and April 2007.

The proposed District Plan was the subject of 6 meetings of Study Advisory Committee and 7 meetings with Heritage Markham to review the document and the issues:

Group	Date of Meeting
Study Advisory Committee	January 26, 2005
Study Advisory Committee	February 23, 2005
Study Advisory Committee	May 18, 2005
Heritage Markham	June 8, 2005
Heritage Markham	May 10, 2006
Heritage Markham	May 24, 2006
Study Advisory Committee	May 25, 2006
Heritage Markham	June 14, 2006
Heritage Markham	July 12, 2006
Study Advisory Committee	August 24, 2006
Heritage Markham	October 11, 2006
Study Advisory Committee	March 13, 2007
Heritage Markham	May 9, 2007

OPTIONS/ DISCUSSION:

A revised Heritage District Plan

The product of the review study is a new Heritage District Plan document which provides a comprehensive framework to guide the development, re-development and alteration of properties and streetscapes located within the boundaries of the Heritage District.

As the prime audience for this document is local residents and property owners, the new plan strives to be clear and concise, and use terminology that should be easily understood by the reader. It is user-friendly in its format and presentation with illustrations and graphics utilized to explain concepts. The policies and guidelines of the new plan respect heritage planning objectives, but are also relevant in the “real world”. It provides understandable policies for new construction, alterations and additions to heritage properties, and alterations and additions to non-heritage properties. This new plan will be extremely useful not only to local residents and property owners, but also for Heritage Markham members, Town staff and Council by providing clear direction to allow a review of applications in a fair and consistent manner.

The Thornhill Heritage Plan document cannot be expected to answer or address every possible scenario or situation.  The Plan’s policies and guidelines try to address the most common issues.  The policies and guidelines reflect the basic principles that the Town wants to achieve for a specific grouping of properties, but cannot always address the unique circumstances related to a specific site or property.  Issues that arise over time which are not addressed in the Plan can be considered by staff and/or Heritage Markham (which is Council’s advisory committee) and ultimately supported or not by Council.  Council can also deviate from approved policies on a case by case basis if it deems it appropriate.

Members of Council received a copy of the revised Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan under separate cover.

The key issues of concern are addressed in the new plan

The Plan has attempted to address all the key issues of concern raised by the public as well as reflect current standards of heritage practice. Each of the major issues identified in the Issue Identification Report- May 2005 is listed by subject in Appendix ‘B’ with an explanation as to how the new Plan addresses the issue/concern.

Revisions to the Heritage District Plan

Based on feedback from the public, the Study Advisory Committee, Town departments and Heritage Markham, there were extensive revisions to the draft Heritage District Plan presented in June 2006. Since that time, a number of additional revisions have been made to the document. See the Change Table of modifications in Appendix ‘C’ for a summary of post June 2006 revisions.

The revised building classification approach is supported

The response to the revised building classification approach that was presented in April 2007 has been extremely positive and appears to have addressed the concerns of most property owners in the district. However, a few owners continue to have concerns:

94 John Street – Class B - owner wishes to demolish the dwelling

Staff: The house at 94 John Street is a prime example of the early 20^th century bungalow style, and is very well preserved. The barn in the rear yard is a rare survivor from Thornhill’s early history as a mill village. Demolition is not supported. A separate report has been prepared for Council’s consideration.

149 and 159 John Street,24 Deanbank and 7699 Yonge Street– owners do not want to be Class A

Staff: Both of the John Street properties were identified as being of architectural and historical significance in the 1986 Heritage District Plan. In the June 2006 version of the revised Plan, the properties were identified as Class B (complementary) as there had been some modifications that negatively affected their heritage attributes. However, under the revised classification approach (April 2007), it was decided that all buildings that were significant in 1986 would continue to have that designation and be identified as Class A. Heritage Markham also supported this approach.

The property owner at 149 John Street is concerned about energy efficiency. Staff has indicated that often solutions can be found that enhance energy efficiencies without destroying the heritage attributes of the building. The owner at 159 John Street would like to be able to replace the modern siding on his dwelling with new modern siding rather than using the opportunity to restore the dwelling with traditional material. The guidelines recommend the use of traditional materials when alterations are to occur. However, Council can deviate from approved policies on a case by case basis at the time of application, if it deems it appropriate.

The property owner at 24 Deanbank notes that the dwelling was built in 1963, is a good neighbour to the Class A homes, but is not an original heritage home. She notes that the house is made of modern materials and should not be held to the same regulations as the Class A homes that were built in the early 19th century. Staff note that this building was identified in 1986 as a significant building and is considered a Class A building as an example of a contemporary home designed to incorporate elements of early Ontario Regency style architecture to create a unique vernacular expression. It also has considerable associative value as the former home of local architect Napier Simpson Jr. It is recommended that the property remain Class A and that appropriate discretion be used when addressing future alteration requests.

The property owner at 7699 Yonge Street has suggested that the property be classified as Class B as there have been additions added to the building. The building was constructed in 1847 and was identified as a significant building in 1986. The owner has indicated that he is concerned about property values and the fact that district designation has led to few improvements on Yonge Street. It is recommended that the property remain Class A.

129 John Street - owner does not want to be Class C

Staff: The property owner has indicated that there should be no classifications for non-heritage properties and changes should be left to the discretion of the owner. Staff has explained that the Heritage Act allows a municipality to use design guidelines when alterations are undertaken in order to enhance the area’s character. The guidelines for Class C buildings provide flexibility in terms of modern materials and designs. It is recommended that the property remain Class C.

Other issues

A resident has suggested that no changes be permitted to the Plan for a substantial period of time (25 years). The District Plan indicates that the document should be reviewed on a regular basis as it is not a static document and should be monitored to ensure that the Plan’s objectives are being achieved. Any amendment to policies or guidelines would be approved through Council, by by-law, after consultation with impacted parties and public notification. Minor administrative and technical changes can be implemented by a resolution of Council. There is also a separate process included in the Plan for requests to change building classification, which involves full participation of the property owner and requires approval by Council resolution.

A resident has indicated that if Heritage Markham does not support an application, rather than having the issue go to Council, some form of alternate appeal process should be developed. This type of alternate process is not permitted under the Ontario Heritage Act. The Act requires Council to make a decision on applications within a prescribed time period (approval, refusal or approval with conditions). Council also has the ability to delegate its power to grant permits for the alteration of property to an employee or official of the municipality (which Markham has done). Therefore, as per the Markham delegation by-law, Council is the ultimate decision-maker when issues cannot be resolved by staff or Heritage Markham review.

The need for a residential grant program was raised

A number of residents during the study process noted that property owners in a District possessing heritage buildings would benefit from some form of financial assistance to undertake small restoration projects or maintenance work of heritage attributes. A matching grant program similar to the Commercial Façade Improvement Grant Program was mentioned. In response to this issue, it is recommended that staff be directed to examine the potential of such a program for non-commercial properties in heritage conservation districts, perhaps utilizing some of the resources currently set aside for the heritage loan program, and report back to Council on its feasibility.

The District Inventory is published separately

As part of this review, the District Inventory has been revised and updated. All properties in the District are inventoried. For each property identified as Class A and Class B, a statement of cultural heritage value or interest has been included. A sample of the District Inventory is attached as Appendix ‘D’.

The District Plan addresses the requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act

As per the new requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, the heritage conservation district plan includes:

a) a statement of the objectives to be achieved in designating the area as a heritage conservation district;

b) a statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the heritage conservation district;

c) a description of the heritage attributes of the heritage conservation district and of properties in the district;

d) policy statements, guidelines and procedures for achieving the stated objectives and managing change in the heritage conservation district; and

e) a description of the alterations or classes of alteration that are minor in nature and that the owner of property in the heritage conservation district may carry out or permit to be carried out on any part of the property, other than the interior of any structure or building on the property, without obtaining a permit under Section 42.

Before adopting a by-law to enact the revised Heritage Conservation District Plan, the municipality is required to undertake certain prescribed consultation. Information relating to the proposed heritage conservation district plan, including a copy of the plan, is to be made available to the public. The Heritage District Plan (both Draft 1-June 2006 and Draft 2-June 2007) was made available to the public on the Town’s website and copies of the draft Plan were available to any person upon request. All property owners, as well as local community organizations, received notice concerning the proposed Plan.

At least one public meeting must be held with respect to the proposed heritage conservation district plan. During the study process, two public meetings were held in Phase 1 to address issues of concern and four public meetings (including the Statutory Public Meeting) were held in Phase 2. If the municipality has a municipal heritage committee, the committee is to be consulted with respect to the proposed heritage conservation district. Heritage Markham had two members on the Study Advisory Committee and the committee reviewed the plan at a special Heritage Markham meeting on May 24, 2006 and changes to the Plan in October 2006 and May 2007.

Approval of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan

It is recommended that the revised Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan (2007) and District Inventory (2007) be endorsed. A by-law to amend the existing District Plan is attached as Appendix ‘A’.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND TEMPLATE: (external link)

Not Applicable

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

The Heritage District Plan provides policies on protection of mature vegetation and guidelines on heritage landscape treatments, appropriate indigenous species, salt tolerant indigenous species, and invasive species to avoid. The Plan’s policies on retention and reuse of existing building materials and demolition policies help prevent materials going to landfill sites.

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS:

The Heritage District Plan addresses accessibility considerations. Guidelines indicate that barrier-free access should be provided to promote independence for the disabled person to the highest degree practicable while preserving significant historical features such as character defining spaces, architectural details, and finishes.

ENGAGE 21^ST CONSIDERATIONS:

This project aligns with the corporate goal of achieving a Quality Community through recognizing, promoting and strengthening a sense of community.

BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:

The revised heritage conservation district plan has been reviewed by Heritage Markham and by affected Town departments.

RECOMMENDED BY:

Valerie Shuttleworth, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning & Urban Design

Jim Baird, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Commissioner of Development Services

ATTACHMENTS:

Figure 1 Boundary of Thornhill Heritage Conservation District (1986)

Appendix ‘A’ Thornhill-Markham Heritage Conservation District Plan By-law

Appendix ‘B’ How Identified Issues are Addressed

Appendix ‘C’ Change Table of Modifications (June 2006-present)

Appendix ‘D’ Sample District Inventory Pages

Q:\Development\Heritage\SUBJECT\thornhill\District Plan Review 2004\Discussion Paper and Reports\DSC Final Report June 19 2007.doc