HERITAGE MARKHAM COMMITTEE

TOWN OF MARKHAM

Canada Room, Markham Civic Centre

Wednesday, June 8, 2005

 

 

 

Members                                                                      Absent

Julie Christian, Chair                                                     Evelin Ellison (regrets)

Elizabeth Plashkes                                                        Rosemary Lamon (regrets)

Maria Pia Andrejin                                                       Regional Councillor Jim Jones (regrets)

Susan Casella                                                              

Judy Dawson-Ryan, Vice-Chair

Amar Banerjee

Joan Natoli      

Marie Jones

Councillor John Webster

                                                           

Staff

R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

G. Duncan, Senior Heritage Planner

Yvonne Hurst – Committee Secretary

 

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

 

Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest

 

Marie Jones disclosed a conflict with Item 11 as she is the owner of 11 Heritage Corners Lane, Markham Heritage Estates.

 

1.         APPROVAL OF AGENDA (16.11)

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the Heritage Markham agenda and addendum agenda be approved as circulated.

 

CARRIED.

 

2.         HERITAGE MARKHAM MINUTES, May 11, 2005 (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

Comments were received from Evelin Ellison with regard to the wording of the recommendation under Item 19 of the May 11th minutes.  The Committee concurred that the recommendation should be reviewed at the next meeting.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the Minutes of the Heritage Markham meeting held on May 11, 2005 be received and adopted with the exception of Item 19;

 

AND THAT Item 19 be deferred to the July meeting of Heritage Markham.

 

CARRIED.

 

3.         INFORMATION
            INFORMATION ON HERITAGE
MARKHAM MEETINGS (16.11)

            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

           

THAT Heritage Markham endorses the use of the “Information on Heritage Markham Meetings” handout prepared by Heritage section staff.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

4.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
12
ALEXANDER HUNTER PLACE, MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES
PROPOSED NEW OPEN PORCH (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
                        Ron and Ann Marie Waine (Owners)________________________

The Senior Heritage Planner reviewed the proposal for a new open porch at 12 Alexander Hunter Place, Markham Heritage Estates.  The proposed porch is to be added to the rear of the kitchen wing.  The design is based on the existing restored front and side porches.  The Architectural Review Sub-Committee has recommended a lower roof pitch and general simplification of the design.  Single posts and simpler brackets have been suggested as a way of simplifying the overall design.  The ARSC noted that the roof pitch was based on the wall where a woodshed was once attached and suggested that the design should reflect this vanished feature.

 

Mr. Waine was in attendance to address the recommendations of the ARSC.  He noted that two requests have been made: 1) lower the pitch of the roof and 2) simplify the design.

 

He stated that he is in agreement with the request to lower the pitch of the roof and by lowering the pitch of the roof, the portico can be made a little wider.  He did not, however, agree with the sub-committee’s recommendation to simplify the design and wishes to continue with the proposed design.  He noted that the design of the posts is consistent with the front and sides of the house and the overall design is in compliance with features found in a Gothic Revival house. 

 

He suggested that one slender post at each corner would not be adequate to support the proposed structure.  The proposed posts have a quatrefoil design and would complement the gingerbread trim found on the front and side of the house and the more elaborate posts found on the side of the house.  He also noted that the proposed porch cannot be seen from the street.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham request the applicant to submit new drawings showing the revised pitch of the roof;

 

AND THAT the applicant work with Town (Heritage Section) staff to finalized the details of the design.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

5.         SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
SC
04 016329
121 ROBINSON STREET
, MARKHAM
VILLAGE
WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS FOR NEW
OFFICE  BUILDING (16.11)

Extract:             R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
G. Duncan, Senior Heritage Planner

____________Ray and Carlo Farone_(Owners)_____________________________

The Senior Heritage Planner reviewed Site Plan Control Application SC 04 016329 – 121 Robinson Street, Markham Village.  He noted that the new office building is based somewhat on the design of the Maple Leaf Woollen Mill.  The owner is presently finalizing the Site Plan Agreement and is concerned with regard to the requirement for wood windows.  The style of the windows shown on the approved drawings is a 2/2 double hung window. 

 

The owner wishes to use an aluminium clad window due to costs and maintenance issues.  A sample of the proposed window was brought for the committee’s review.  It was pointed out that this is a large commercial project and the Architectural Review Sub-Committee has been open to the idea of considering metal or vinyl clad wood windows provided that the proportions of the pane divisions are historically correct and the windows have externally–adhered muntin bars.

 

Jonas Perket, Ryan McGonigal and Carlo Farne were in attendance to address the

Committee.  A sample of a Pella aluminium clad window was brought in for the Committee’s review.  It was noted that the configuration of the windows would be 2/2 (the original mills windows were 4/4, however, the Committee has thought this to be too busy with the large amount of windows in the project).  The 2/2 configuration is more consistent with window treatments in the Markham area.

 

It was noted that the proposed colour of the windows is white.  The Committee expressed concerns that, with such a large amount of windows against a reddish brick the overall appearance would be somewhat glaring.  It was suggested that a softer colour would be more appropriate.

 

The issue of screens was also discussed.  It was noted that the Town has a screen policy and this will be provided to the applicants.

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham is generally supportive of the Pella sample window provided by the owner of 121 Robinson Street;

 

AND THAT, considering the colour of brick to be used on the building, the owner be encouraged to consider a slightly softer colour for the windows;

 

AND THAT the windows are to have historically correct proportions of pane division, externally-adhered muntin bars, and be a convincing facsimile of a traditional double-hung wood window.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

6.         SPECIAL STUDY
THORNHILL HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN REVIEW

ISSUE IDENTIFICATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning_________________

The Manager of Heritage Planning provided an overview of the status of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan Review.  A public meeting was held on March 23, 2005 to be followed by a second public meeting on June 9, 2005.  An Issue Identification Report has been prepared and will be reviewed with the public at the June 9th meeting.  Following the public meeting a presentation will be made to the Development Services Committee on June 21, 2005.


Phillip Carter and Paul Oberst, consultants for the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District Plan Review, were in attendance.  Phillip Carter advised that he was involved in the first Thornhill Heritage Conservation District study in 1985 and has been involved in a number of other heritage reviews over the years (e.g. Collingwood, Kleinburg) as well as sitting as a member of the Port Hope LACAC.  Mr. Carter made a number of comments related to his work on the THCD Review:

-                     he noted that Markham has shown a strong commitment to its heritage districts; 

-                     he outlined the boundaries of the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District (district extend to the creek on the east and Yonge Street on the west);

-                     Yonge Street will have a central focus in the study as this street keeps getting wider and wider;

-                     The Unionville Heritage Conservation District Plan (which is more current) is being used as a reference tool to develop the THCD plan;

-                     Issues being considered when preparing the THCD plan are: character and guidelines; administration and enforcement; communication; planning and landscaping; Yonge Street; roads and paths, dollars and cents (does it cost more to maintain properties in the district?); and district boundaries (should the boundaries stay the same, be enlarged or be reduced).

-                     A flexible approach for additions and materials is suggested for non-heritage properties;

-                     The importance of trees and landscaping will be recognized;

-                     The Official Plan and Zoning by-laws will be reviewed to ensure they help reinforce the varied character of the District;

-                     There will be a special effort to protect and enhance Yonge Street; the Thornhill Heritage Conservation District contains the only protected portion of the entire length of Yonge Street.

-                     The policies of the Heritage District Plan take precedence over municipal by-law requirements.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the suggested recommendations in the Issue Identification Report for the advancement of the Heritage District Plan Study.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

7.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE
43 ALBERT STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
                        Carole Danard, Agent____________________________________

 

            The Senior Heritage Planner provided an overview of the assessment of heritage significance for 43 Albert Street, Markham Village.  He noted that the Architectural Review Sub-Committee visited the house to examine the building and determine any potential heritage interest.   The house is a one and a half storey vernacular frame house built in 1951.  The basement shows evidence of water damage.  The house is rated a “C” in the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District Plan, however, in an on-going evaluation of buildings in the district, staff have identified 43 Albert Street as a potential “B” building.  The owner wants to be assured that the house can be demolished since potential purchasers do not want to retain and renovate. 

 

            The Senior Heritage Planner explained the difference between the “A”, “B” and “C” categories of buildings within heritage districts:

-                     “A” buildings are heritage buildings

-                     “B” buildings are compatible buildings but not necessarily of heritage value

-                     “C” buildings do not fit in the heritage character 

 

The Manager of Heritage Planning noted that the categories were established in 1991.  The “A” and “C” categories do not present a problem.  However, the “B” category includes building from the 1920s, 30s and 40s that sometimes exhibit characteristics found within heritage buildings and “fit” in the district.

 

The question was raised: At what time does a structure become a “heritage building”. 

Should there be a cut-off year?  What happens to future heritage if the buildings of the 50s/60s/70s are taken down?

 

The Senior Heritage Planner noted that a list outlining the re-evaluation of the buildings in the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District will probably be finalized by the Fall of 2005 and provided to Heritage Markham for review.

 

            Ms. Carole Danard was in attendance with the owner of the property to hear the committee’s discussion and feedback with respect to the proposed demolition of 43 Albert Street.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the existing frame house at 43 Albert Street remain, possibly with an appropriately designed addition, due to its compatibility with the area.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

8.         REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK

            ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

            7 VICTORIA AVENUE, UNIONVILLE (16.11)
            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
                                    Donna Nitchie (Owner)__________________________________

 

The Senior Heritage Planner noted that there may be concerns from the Toronto Region Conservation Authority with regard to any changes to the structures on this property since a portion of the property appears to be within the flood plane.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the front part of the house at 7 Victoria Avenue, Unionville, has sufficient heritage significance to support its preservation and restoration, therefore demolition or removal is not supported;

 

AND THAT any plans to improve the house include an exterior restoration plan for the front part of the building and an architecturally compatible design for any additions based on the 1870s period of the house;

 

AND THAT it is recommended that the owner contact the TRCA to determine what restrictions may be applied to the property that may impact future development options.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

9          REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
CALIBER HOMES ESTATE LOTS – DESIGN
CONCEPTS
JAMES WALKER COURT
(16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
.                       Danny DiMeo   __________________________________________

 

The Senior Heritage Planner advised that revised front and rear elevations for the proposed house on Lot 31 (Caliber Homes Estate Lots) has been received.   Changes included removal of the stucco (replaced by brick); flattening of the tops of the bay windows; design of door revised to include sidelights; and a limited use of stone.  He noted that the builder is to give a written confirmation that the end unit will be designed in conformance with the heritage guidelines (this commitment has not yet been received). 

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

WHEREAS, the area that includes James Walker Court is in the gateway from the Rouge Park to the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District of downtown Markham;

 

THAT house designs in the gateway area should be sympathetic to the Heritage Conservation District;

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham recommends that, as the four properties on James Walker Court are within the Markham Heritage Conservation District; the applicant be requested to submit design proposals for these houses that fall within the heritage district guidelines.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

10.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
COMMUNITIES IN
BLOOM CEMETERY SIGNAGE PROJECT (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
.                       C. Harrison, Program Manager – Communities in Bloom______

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham recommends that the prototype for the proposed historic cemetery identification signs for the Communities in Bloom Cemetery Signage Project be standardized and simplified in the following manner:

-         use a standard colour for all cemetery signs Town-wide;

-         consider a historical grey-green as the background colour;

-         omit the arched top and logo;

-         make the sign a simple rectangular shape;

-         consider using a traditional decorative motif to accent the text;

-         use sharp serifs on the typeface rather than the rounded ones.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

 

Marie Jones, having previously declared a disclosure of interest with respect to Item #11, did not participate in the voting with respect to this item.  Ms. Jones sat in the delegate’s seat to answer questions from the committee.

 

 

11.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK

DESIGN CONCEPT FOR ENTRANCE PORCHES
11 HERITAGE
CORNERS LANE, MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
.                       Marie Jones (Owner)_____________________________________

 

The Manager of Heritage Planning noted that Town (Heritage Section) staff, Susan Casella (Heritage Markham) and Elizabeth Wimmer (Senior Landscape Planner – Urban Design) met with the applicant on site at 11 Heritage Corners Lane.  A number of recommendations emanated from the meeting: number of steps should be limited to five; steps and deck should have an overhang; deck boards should run perpendicular to house, stoops should be painted and a fence should be placed on a small fieldstone wall that would allow the grade to be raised.

 

Ms. Marie Jones, indicated that she has reviewed staff recommendation and, while supportive of the design and number of steps, she could not support the recommendation pertaining to the retaining wall.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed stoop designs for 11 Heritage Corners Lane (two front elevation stoops) subject to the following design guidelines;

-         maximum number of steps is to be five and this is to be achieved by raising the grade in front of the house upon which a historic fence can be installed;

-         the design of the stoop to generally reflect the sketch received on June 8, 2005 with the following modifications:

o       posts to be a 4/4 dressed with quality wood

o       overhang on steps and deck

o       bullnose treatment on exposed ends

o       panelling under the deck to be vertical wood with small spacing framed with larger framing member on the bottom;

o       any additional design features to be confirmed with staff including paint colours.

-         The applicant to work with the Town’s Landscape-Urban Design Section to achieve a historic landscape treatment in the front area of the dwelling.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

 

12.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
ASSESSMENT OF CONDITION OF WINDOWS

124 MAIN STREET, UNIONVILLE (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
.                       Julia Jordon, Owner_____________________________________

 

            The Senior Heritage Planner noted that staff and the Architectural Review Sub-Committee have visited the property at 124 Main Street, Unionville, at the request of the owner, to assess the condition of the wood windows.  Staff and the ARSC stressed the importance of maintaining the original wood windows (especially in a property with the historical significance of 124 Main Street).  Mrs. Julia Jordan (the owner) is concerned with heat loss, maintenance and the annual installation/removal of the traditional wood storm windows.

 

            Mrs. Jordan was in attendance and noted that she has received an estimate of $22,000 to restore the existing windows.  She indicated that new replica windows would cost $5,000 less.  She also noted that heat loss is a serious problem, however, not all the windows need to be replaced.  Further, some of the windows in poor condition are not original to the heritage structure.  She asked which, if any, of the windows could be replaced.  

 

David Jordan, Mrs. Jordan’s brother-in-law, indicated that the existing Unionville Heritage District guidelines are not clear and provide insufficient direction to heritage home owners. 

 

The following comments were provided by the Committee:

-         it was suggested that the Committee could support the installation of new replicated windows on the addition to the main house provided that the windows were compatible to the heritage fabric of the original home;

-         the owner could investigate the possibility of offsetting costs through the heritage property tax reduction program;

-         the Committee could not support new windows on the original heritage brick building;

-         the Heritage Guidelines require the windows on heritage buildings to be retained and restored; replacement being a last option when restoration is not possible;

-         the applicant was encouraged to explore all options and that committee members would endeavour to provide possible contacts with respect to restoration of the windows;

-         while the present guidelines states that it is a “preference” to retain and restore heritage windows, the Council has supported the committee’s position that heritage windows are to be retained and restored.  

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham sympathizes with the window-related issues of the owner of the designated heritage house at 124 Main Street, Unionville, however, the preservation of original materials is a guiding principle of heritage conservation, therefore the replacement of the original wood windows on the brick heritage structure cannot be supported;

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham recommends that since the original wood windows are in a restorable condition, the owner consider other options for improving the operability and energy-efficiency of the windows;

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham supports the replacement of windows in the addition to the main house provided that the windows have historically correct proportions of pane division, externally-adhered muntin bars, and be a convincing facsimile of a traditional double-hung wood window;

 

AND THAT a Heritage Permit will be required for any work to be done on the exterior architectural features of the house.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

13.       SITE PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION
FILE NO. SC 05 012214
SECOND STOREY ADDITION
22 DEANBANK DRIVE (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
                        G. Duncan, Senior Heritage Planner

                        R. Robotham, Architect.__________________________________

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham generally supports the design concept for the expansion and remodelling of the house at 22 Deanbank Drive, subject to:

-         simplification of the window pane pattern;

-         compliance with the height provisions of the by-law;

-         preservation of existing vegetation.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

14.       HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION
            SIDING REPLACEMENT –
THORNHILL MEWS PLAZA

7787 YONGE STREET, THORNHILL (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        Bryan Sloss, Owner_____________________________________

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham recommends that horizontal vinyl clapboard in an appropriate heritage colour be approved for the replacement of the existing aluminium siding on the Thornhill Mews building at 7787 Yonge Street, Thornhill;

 

AND THAT the recently installed stone patterned vinyl panels above the restaurant windows be removed and replaced with horizontal vinyl siding or left plain to receive a sign band;

 

AND THAT the recently installed stone patterned vinyl siding on the ground floor level south wall be permitted to remain since its visual impact is not significant.

 

      CARRIED.

 

 

15.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            8 GREEN HOLLOW COURT (FORMERLY 9516 NINTH LINE)

PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR A DAYCARE (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning
                        S. Heaslip, East District Planning Co-ordinator

                                    Farrah Jethwani, Owner__________________________________

 

The Senior Heritage Planner noted that the heritage structure at 8 Green Hollow Court is a Georgian style brick house that has been preserved as part of the Greensborough Community.  The applicant wishes to obtain approval to begin restoration of the house that will include removal of the one storey kitchen addition. The applicant will be restoring all heritage aspect of the house.  The sub-committee was in general support of the concept plans with the following comments:

-         remove the gable roofed portico (the previous canopy was a 20th century addition;

-         use wood shingles for the roof the heritage house;

-         use landscaping to draw attention to the house.

 

Ms. Farrah Jethwani, accompanied by her father, was in attendance to hear the committee’s feedback with regard to the preliminary plans for a daycare at 8 Green Hollow Court.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham generally supports the concept plan for the restoration of the Clendenen House, 8 Green Hollow Court (formerly 9516 Ninth Line) and the additions required to create a daycare facility;

 

AND THAT the removal of the rear kitchen wing to facilitate the additions is supported as the frame wing is in poor condition, it has no basement and is a secondary feature of the house;

 

AND THAT in the development of a future site plan application, the addition should not overwhelm the heritage house, and should be treated in materials and colours that will complement the older building.

 

            CARRIED.

 

            HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham supports the Restoration Plan for the Adam Clendenen House at 8 Green Hollow Court and delegates approval of final design details for the Restoration Plan only to Town (Heritage Section) staff on the understanding that the future Site Plan Application for the daycare facility will come to Heritage Markham for review and comments.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

16.       BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS
FILE NOS. 05 013 915 HP, 05 013 911 DP
NEW DETACHED GARAGE/DEMOLITION OF EXISTING GARAGE
26 FRANKLIN STREET, MARKHAM VILLAGE (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        Michelle Au, Zoning Examiner______________________

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

           

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the removal of the existing garage at 26 Franklin Street, Markham Village;

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the proposed new garage subject to the following:

·        Colour to confirmed with Heritage Section staff;

·        Garage door to be a simple treatment

 

CARRIED.

 

 

17.       INFORMATION
HERITAGE
MARKHAM POLICY: DOCUMENTATION AND SALVAGING (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning________________
        

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham endorses the revised policy on documentation and salvaging subject to the following minor changes:

·        that the Heritage Markham repository of salvaged architectural features should be included in the salvaging policy, and

·        that the items under Policy Guideline 2 should be placed in order of priority.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

18.       INFORMATION

VARLEY GALLERY – ACQUISITION OF A BERCZY PORTRAIT (16.11)
Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning________________

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the information regarding the Varley Gallery – acquisition of a Berczy portrait, be received as Information.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

 

19.       CORRESPONDENCE (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning________________

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT the following Correspondence be received as information:

1.      Harrowsmith Country Life Magazine: Article on Markham Heritage Estates.

2.      Community Heritage Ontario: CHO News, May 2005 addition.

3.      Edifice Magazine: Issue No. 5

4.      Society for the Preservation of Historic Thornhill: May 2005 Newsletter

5.      Heritage Canada Foundation: Heritage Magazine, Spring 2005 issue.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

 

20.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

7509 YONGE STREET, THORNHILL (16.11)
            Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                        Ron Blake, West District Co-ordinator

                                    Nigel Connell (SPOHT)____________________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

           

THAT Heritage Markham acknowledges the cultural heritage significance of the York Farmers’ Market at 7509 Yonge Street, Thornhill;

 

AND THAT Heritage Markham recommends to Planning staff and to Council that land use planning policies be put in place through the Yonge Street study to help ensure the continuing existence of a farmers’ market on the site.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

21.       REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK
            16 DAVID GOHN CIRCLE,

MARKHAM HERITAGE ESTATES
            PROPOSED GARAGE/URBAN BARN (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                                    Kevin Habib (Owner)_________________________________

 

The Manager of Heritage Planning outlined the design of the garage proposed for 16 David Gohn Circle, Markham Heritage Estates.  He noted that a garage was approved in the original site plan agreement, attached to the side of the house by a breeze-way.  The owner has now requested to build a fully detached, larger garage based on the design of an urban barn.  Minor variances will be required to accommodate the footprint and height.  The garage is similar to other examples in the Heritage Estates.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham will support future Site Plan Control and Minor Variance applications for the proposed garage/urban barn at 16 David Gohn Circle based on the drawings as submitted.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

 

22.              SITE PLAN CONTROL APPLICATION

ALTERATIONS TO HERITAGE BUILDING

8127 BAYVIEW AVENUE, THORNHILL
JABEZ CHILDREN’S CENTRE INC. (16.11)

Extracts:           R. Hutcheson, Manager of Heritage Planning

                                    T. Williams, Planner_____________________________________

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Site Plan Control Application for the Jabez Children’s Centre subject to the porch railings being made of painted wood in a traditional design, with a top and bottom rail and plain square or rectangular pickets, and having corner posts and end posts with simple moulded caps;

 

AND THAT all existing wood windows and doors and other original exterior details on the heritage building are to remain and be repaired as required;

 

AND THAT the applicant be requested to provide details of the railing to Town (Heritage Section) staff;

 

AND FURTHER THAT the applicant be encouraged to meet with Town (Heritage Section) staff and then attend an Architectural Review Sub-Committee with respect to appropriate signage for the property.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

23.       COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

            FILE A/102/05

            58 ROUGE STREET, MARKHAM (16.11)

            Extracts:  R. Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning

                            Stacia Muradali, Committee of Adjustment   

 

The Manager, Heritage Planning, provided an overview of Committee of Adjustment Application A/102/05 – 58 Rouge Street, Markham.  The property is located within the Markham Village Heritage Conservation District and the owner is seeking permission to enclose a porch at the rear of the property.  The structure is not identified as a heritage property.

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no comment on Committee of Adjustment application A/102/05 regarding a rear porch at 58 Rouge Street, Markham Village.

 

            CARRIED.

 

 

24,       DRAFT SECONDARY PLAN

            HIGHWAY 404 NORTH PLANNING DISTRICT

            REVIEW OF HERITAGE COMPONENT (16.11)

            Extracts:  Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning

                            Tim Lambe, Manager of Policy and Research

 

The Manager, Heritage Planning, provided an overview of the heritage components of the Draft Secondary Plan, Highway 404 North Planning District.  The sections that contain heritage references were pointed out to the committee.  Under 4.2 the addition of the words “and cultural heritage” is recommended by Town (Heritage Section) staff.  A map showing the boundaries of the Official Plan Amendment and a list of the Heritage Properties located within these boundaries are attached to the draft O.P. 

 

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

 

THAT Heritage Markham has no objection to the Draft Secondary Plan for the Highway 404 North Planning District subject to the addition of ‘cultural heritage’ to the Goal Section of the plan (4.2g) and the inclusion of a map indicating the location of the cultural heritage resources as part of Appendix 2;

 

AND THAT Town (Heritage Section) staff ensure that the proposed road network and storm water retention ponds do not negatively impact the existing cultural heritage resources.

 

CARRIED.

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m.

 

Heritage Minutes 2005-06-08