admin
Toronto city council will mull over a streamlined process to designate and preserve heritage buildings in the future due to the fallout from the overnight destruction of a 114-year-old structure at Yonge and Bloor streets.
The demolition was done to make way for a proposed 80-storey condominium.
While developer Sam Mizrahi plans for a 318-metre tower of luxury condos and retail units, which would put it as the second tallest structure in the city behind the CN Tower, it must yet be approved by Toronto planners and city council.
The tower’s audacious design, both from an esthetic and height perspective, however, pales compared to the anger Mizrahi caused among heritage groups when he drew a demolition permit on Jan. 16 and sent crews to the site on Jan. 17 who went to work tearing it down.
Certainly, many will argue Stollery’s wasn’t the poster child of classic Toronto edifices or a strong representative of a particular school of architecture but it was the speed of the demolition action which raised ire among preservationists. It’s conceded, however, that Mizrahi acted legally and by the rules.
While critics decry his actions, they are now focused on trying to close the gap in getting a building registered as a heritage structure of interest and in buying time for appraisal and assessment before a demolition permit is issued.
From the developer’s reported perspective, swift action was imperative because getting caught in a heritage designation process can add years to timelines and impact design and ultimately costs.
The deal for the building closed last fall and the permit was issued mid-January. The structure had not been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act nor was it in a designated heritage area as the act empowers municipalities to declare.
Had it been on the registry of heritage buildings there would have been a 60-day cooling off period while the city scrambled to get it designated. It would have required substantial reports and assessments and likely have triggered appeals and a process which could have locked up development for at least a year.
While local councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam had gotten wind of the risk to the building in her riding and was apparently working at city hall to try and do something a few days earlier, in the end, the developer moved too quickly.
Ideally, said Catherine Nasmith, an architect and president of the Toronto branch of Ontario’s architectural conservancy, there should have been discussion and a cooling off period between the time the demolition permit was applied for and when the sledgehammers started swinging.
While the four-storey building was not all original it does retain some early Art Deco carvings which were added in a 1920s era expansion and were somewhat rare examples in Toronto.
"There’s more protection for trees than for heritage structures," said Naismith who was also upset the carvings, especially the deer over the main entrance, seem to have been destroyed in the process and not carefully extracted for future reuse.
"Someone carved those with their hands, it’s sad."
She said the battle over York Square at Avenue Road and Yorkville took two years to get a water tight report supporting heritage designation which would withstand pressure at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) and it illustrates that current process is too cumbersome.
It’s ironic, she added, because Toronto took the lead on heritage building designation when the Ontario Heritage Act was first passed in 1975 and other municipalities followed its lead. Since then it’s become overly complex from a designation point of view.
As it stands now, the rules allow for municipalities to prevent buildings from being demolished only if they can prove to the OMB the heritage value outweighs government intruding on property owner rights.
Councillor Wong-Tam and Councillor Josh Matlow have asked city staff to see about amending Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act to allow an inventory of heritage properties with potential value to qualify for a 60-day hold on receipt of a demolition permit.
They also want the developer to pay for any reports required to designate the building on top of any other development fees.
In the meantime the motion to council calls for a cataloguing of "significant historic resources throughout our city, much like the SurveyLA program currently being undertaken in Los Angeles."
"Unfortunately, the current scope of the City of Toronto’s Inventory of Heritage Properties falls short," Matlow said in his notice of motion.
Recent Comments
comments for this post are closed