HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 27
Page 1 of 7
Minutes/Meeting Summary
Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee June 27, 2018 7:00 pm Main Committee Room
Attendees: K. Borisko J. Dempsey W. Jamadar C. Sopher J. Van Huss
B. George, Pickering Public Library C. Celebre, Principal Planner, Development Review E. Martelluzzi, Planner II Heritage L. Roberts, Recording Secretary
Absent: D. Hazlett B. Lai T. Reimer
Guests: Julie Schembri, WDRA
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as
appropriate)
1. Welcome & Introductions
C. Celebre welcomed everyone to the meeting. She introduced the City’s new heritage planner, Elizabeth Martelluzzi. She noted that Elizabeth would be attending
future meetings.
2. Approval of Minutes
- March 28, 2018
Moved by K. Borisko
That the minutes of the March 28, 2018 meeting of the
Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be approved.
Carried
-Cd:Jof-
p](KERJNG
Page 2 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate) 3. Business Arising from Minutes
3.1) 1690 Whitevale Road C. Celebre provided an overview of the property at 1690 Whitevale Road, known as the Glen House which is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. She
provided a brief history of the designation of this property which occurred in 2006, for being of historical and architectural value. She advised that the property is owned by the Province.
Through the aid of a Power Point presentation, she outlined that the property is located north of Whitevale Road and located with the Seaton community and is 19.3 hectares in size. A portion of the designated lands are for sale by the Province. She also advised that the property limits appear to
run through or are adjacent to the farmhouse and outbuildings. She noted that the sale of these lands are currently pending between Mattamy Homes and IO. until such time as Council makes a decision regarding the repeal of the designation by-law.
She explained that the City retained a heritage consultant to evaluate the buildings and perform a destructive investigation given that the by-law indicated the house may have been of log construction which contributed to its architectural value.
Based on the findings of the destructive investigation, it was determined the house was not an original log structure but a typical vernacular farmhouse dating to the mid to late 1800s. The property maintains its cultural value related to its history and associations, though its architectural value is reduced as
it is a representative example of a rural vernacular house rather than an early log construction. She also stated that the house had been altered with replacement elements and over cladding. The property is
currently vacant and the majority of the property is located
within a natural heritage system. In recent years in Seaton, provincially owned lands that are not tenanted remain vacant and deteriorate over time.
She advised that given that the property maintains more
historical significance then architectural, if the by-law was repealed and the farmhouse demolished,
Page 3 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate) it was suggested that this could be an opportunity to work with Mattamy Homes to commemorate the history of the site. In addition investigate conservation options for the barn and
outhouse within a new public park.
She further advised the Committee that the property was designated by Council under 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) under municipal significance however the Province of
Ontario has not designated the property under 10/06 of the
OHA for provincial significance. C. Celebre introduced Julie Schembri, President, Whitevale and District Resident’s Association. Ms. Schembri appeared
before the Committee and through the aid of a Power Point
presentation, she outlined the background history of the Glen House from 2006 to present day. She outlined the reasons for the designation, noting family history, architectural value, heritage attributes, and stated that a Class A is a very
significant structure which predates 1840. She stated this is
of historical significance as well as a valuable heritage resource regionally. She questioned the justification for repealing the designation by-law, as well as the evaluation method used. She stated that while the farmhouse had been
altered, this did not take away from the important heritage
significance of the property. She stated that the original evaluation did not assume a log structure, and noted that a re-evaluation would still score as a Class A or at the least a B, regardless of any revised criteria. She also noted
concerns and questioned if this repeal is approved, are any
heritage designations safe. C. Celebre explained the benefits of commemorating the site, so residents can identify with the history of the site.
A discussion period ensued with Members and guests noting the following questions and comments;
Members were of the understanding that when the
property changed from public to private ownership, the designation by-law would transfer to the new owner
Concerned with the timing of this recommendation, not
enough time for Members to consider options
Page 4 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate)
Concerns over the message being sent to currently designated heritage home owners, and whether the
repeal would set a precedent
Find ways to appease Mattamy while retaining the designation
Sever the property to protect the heritage buildings
Change the boundaries in a reasonable way
Importance as a municipal heritage building regardless of it being a log structure and retaining in situ
Possibility of being a log house is irrelevant
Importance of Andrew Glen and the significant local
history with his association to the United Empire
Loyalists and the Co-operate Commonwealth Federation
Importance of Dorothy Glen as an amateur artist
Lack of mention of the Glens in the report
City has a poor history of saving heritage in Pickering
Need to look at significance of the entire 50 acres
How did we go from the report to the repeal so quickly?
Understanding that Provincial policy views buildings in
situ as opposed to being moved
A new consultant report should have been conducted by the City
Why were other options not presented to the
Committee – such as revising the by-law
Retain the designation by-law and see what the Province does
What does the City gain by repealing the by-law?
The condition of the building should not dictate the signification of the heritage designation
Great educational and cultural opportunity for Heritage Pickering to work with the Cultural Advisory Committee on this
Rehabilitation of the farmhouse
Requires a positive recommendation in order to make a strong case to gain support of Mayor and Council
Members noted their strong objection to the repeal of the
heritage designation by-law. A member moved the staff recommendation in order for the Committee to object to staff’s recommendation. Further discussion ensued with respect to a revised recommendation.
Page 5 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate) Moved by C. Sopher 1) That Heritage Pickering does not object to the repeal of
Designation By-law 6692/06;
2) That Heritage Pickering does not object to the demolition of the farmhouse; and
3) That Staff and Heritage Pickering work with Seaton TFPM
Inc. (Mattamy Homes) and Infrastructure Ontario to commemorate the site and to investigate conservation options for the outhouse and barn.
Motion Defeated
Moved by J. Van Huss 1. That Heritage Pickering objects to the repeal of
Designation By-law 6692/06;
2. That consideration be given to the possibility of severing the empty land from the heritage buildings site; and
3. That further research be conducted on the built, cultural
and natural heritage of the subject lands by a certified heritage professional and submitted to Heritage Pickering. Carried
C. Celebre indicated she would bring back the comments to senior staff. Further, she would possibly need to seek legal advice on some of the matters discussed.
It was requested that the Committee Members be kept
updated on the status of this. 3.2) Icon Forest District Limited Application C. Celebre provided an overview of the application submitted
by Icon Forest District Limited to facilitate a residential condominium development at the northwest corner of Finch Avenue and Altona Road. She noted that an existing detached dwelling with potentially significant heritage resource is located northwest of the subject lands. She also
Page 6 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate) provided an outline of the information report which was presented to the Planning & Development Committee on June 18th. She noted the report indicates that the building is
located outside of the floodplain, but within areas of spill over
from Petticoat Creek, stating that Icon Homes is proposing to build up the north boundary which could make the building inhabitable.
C. Celebre stated that the potential heritage home is not
currently listed or designated, but had been identified as having cultural heritage value as a result of the consultant’s findings. She stated that staff will continue to consult with Infrastructure Ontario and Icon Homes as well as the
Heritage Pickering Committee in order to review options and
explore opportunities for relocation and/or salvage of materials. 3.3) 425 Whitevale Road
E. Martelluzzi provided an overview of the property known as the Whitevale Mill, located at 425 Whitevale Road. She outlined the background history of this property, stating that it had been destroyed by fire in 1961 and reopened in 1962.
Through the aid of a Power Point presentation, she identified
the previous changes which have occurred to the property in recent years, as well as what is currently being submitted. It was also noted that the property uses have also changed over the years.
She informed the Members that this was being provided to the Committee for information purposes as City staff had requested that the applicant submit a site plan application due to discrepancies between what was approved in the
original 2014 Heritage Permit application and what has now
been applied for. She noted this will bring into conformity any changes which were completed without permits. Members questioned any consequences such as fines with respect to work being altered or completed without permits.
Members also noted concerns over the applicant changing the materials from what was submitted, and questioned any ensuing consequences.
Page 7 of 7
Item/ Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items/Status (include deadline as appropriate) 4. New Business
4.1) E. Martelluzzi provided Members with a brief overview of a new mapping tool being implemented for heritage properties. She stated that she would be working with City staff in geomatics over the next few months and that getting the designated properties on the system would be their first
priority. She also noted they would be updating the Heritage Register as well and that it would eventually include photos. It was noted they could work in conjunction with the Pickering Library on this project.
5. Next Meeting –September 26, 2018
Meeting Adjourned: 9:20 pm Copy: City Clerk