HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE MEETING

TOWN OF MARKHAM

Canada Room, Markham Civic Centre

Monday, November 27, 2006.

Members Regrets

Julie Christian, Chair Amar Banerjee

Judy Dawson-Ryan, Vice Chair Ted Chisolm

Judith Dawson Nelson Torres

Evelin Ellison Councillor John Webster

Joyce Nelson-Watt Regional Councillor Jim Jones

Elizabeth Plashkes

Councillor Stan Daurio

Staff

Regan Hutcheson

George Duncan

Peter Wokral

Disclosure Of Pecuniary Interest

The Chair convened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. by asking for any declarations of interest with respect to items on the agenda.

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

That the Heritage Markham agenda be approved.

CARRIED

2. REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK

John Street Bridge Replacement

Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning

T. Yeung, Project Manager

There was much discussion about the proposed work on the John Street bridge. It was agreed that this bridge is an important entry feature into the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District and should be treated appropriately. Staff explained that the project involves replacement of the deck and parapet (railings) but not the piers. The width of the deck will be increased and a sidewalk will be added to the north side of the bridge. It was noted that the drawings are difficult to read due to their small size, and that a full-size version needs to be obtained for the committee’s review.

Thirteenth Heritage Markham Minutes

November 27, 2006

Page 2

Heritage Markham members indicated their preference for stone facing for the railings, and cited smaller examples within the Thornhill-Vaughan Heritage Conservation District that employ rounded, local fieldstone. The use of cut stone facing was also mentioned as a possible option to be recommended. The members also stated that the metal guardrails at either end of the bridge were not appropriate. It was decided that more information on local examples of bridges should be found to be used for reference purposes before specific recommendations are made.

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS

THAT the John Street bridge project be referred to the upcoming Heritage Markham meeting scheduled for December 13, 2006, when larger plans will be available and examples of local bridges can be discussed.

CARRIED

3. STUDY

Thornhill Village Heritage Conservation District Plan 2006

Classification of Buildings

Extracts: R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning

Heritage Markham reviewed the list of buildings that were reclassified as “A” type buildings (significant or heritage buildings) in the updated District Plan. Each building was carefully considered to determine if the new classification as recommended by the consultant team is appropriate. It was determined that the addition to the log house at 166 John Street could be considered a “B” or compatible building while the original 1951 portion should retain its recommended “A” status. The mid 1920s house at 23 John Street was added to the list of “A” buildings based on its age and stylistic characteristics.

The buildings at 149 and 159 John Street, classified as “Significant Buildings” under the existing, 1986 District Plan were re-affirmed as “A” buildings due to their cultural heritage value. The consultants had recommended that these buildings, due to alterations, be classified as “B” type buildings.

Elizabeth Plashkes spoke about the need for an expanded heritage grant program to encourage good heritage conservation practice and reward property owners for being good stewards of the Town’s heritage resources.

There was some debate about the necessity to regulate building features not readily visible from the street or other public areas. Some members were of the opinion that for “A” buildings, it was important to preserve significant architectural features even where

Thirteenth Heritage Markham Minutes

November 27, 2006

Page 3

those elevations cannot be readily viewed by the public, in the interest of the conservation of cultural heritage resources.

There was a consensus that the A, B, and C classification system is appropriate for the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District as it is a system used in the other Districts in the Town, and works well to maintain the progression of architecture within these areas. Having the B classification limits demolition and thus preserves the scale of the buildings that complement the heritage structures. The proposed new policies in the draft Heritage Plan also provide for more flexibility with B buildings in terms of materials and alterations.

It was agreed that the owners of properties where the buildings are being reclassified to “A” type buildings should be notified and informed of the reasons for this change and the implications under the new District Plan policies.

With respect to references to future changes to building classifications (after the new Plan is adopted), it was suggested that the wording in the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District Plan be used. The wording is as follows:

“It should be noted that this classification is based on 1988-89 information and as such may be subject to change as more information becomes available. Thus the inventory and classification must be kept up-to-date to realize its full value.”

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

THAT Heritage Markham has reviewed the list of properties that are proposed to be reclassified as Class A (properties of cultural heritage value) as prepared by the study consultants and Heritage Section staff, and support the Class A classification for the following properties:

· 33 Colborne Street – built c.1900, 2-storey, vernacular with clipped gable roof and Edwardian Classical porch

· 26 Church Lane –built 1953, historic value in its association with historical personage- Sit Robert Watson-Watt (credited as the inventor of radar)

· Church Lane – Thornhill Community Cemetery, est. 1867- park-like setting, many historical markers

Thirteenth Heritage Markham Minutes

November 27, 2006

Page 4

· St. Luke’s Roman Catholic Cemetery, est. 1847- park-like setting, historical markers, until 1954, it was only Catholic burial ground between Toronto and Newmarket.

· 23 John Street, built 1920, Bungalow style (early 20^th C style)

· 25 John Street, built 1927, Bungalow style (classic early 20^th C style)

· 27 John Street, built 1935, Four-Square House (early 20^th C style)

· 34 John Street, built c. 1895/1925, Dutch Colonial Revival Style (a popular builders revival style of the early 20^th C)

· 68 John Street, c. 1911, Bungalow style (classic early 20^th C style)

· 82 John Street, 1924, Bungalow style (classic early 20^th C style)

· 94 John Street, 1929, Bungalow style (classic early 20^th C style)

· 166 John Street, 1951, addition in 1964, Log house (Note: only original dwelling component is Class A)

· 7877 Yonge Street, c.1900, Radial Railway Kiosk

THAT Heritage Markham supports the use of an A/B/C classification system for the properties within the Thornhill Village Heritage Conservation District

AND THAT concerning the reference to potential future changes to building classifications, Heritage Markham recommends that the wording used in the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District Plan be used:

CARRIED

THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the following properties be classified as Class A:

- 149 John Street

- 159 John Street

CARRIED

The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.

Q:\Development\Heritage\ADMINISTRATION\AGENDAS (HM and Team)\SPECIAL HM MTG\November 27 2006 minutes.doc