In a historic Toronto neighborhood, a couple’s pursuit of modifying their home has evolved into a challenging dialogue on the intersection of heritage preservation and the legacies of historical figures. The owners, Dr. Arnold Mahesan and his wife Roxanne Earle, are grappling with a heritage designation that ties their property to an original owner with contentious views on race and immigration.
The house in question, a grand 9,000-square-foot structure designed by renowned architect Eden Smith, was commissioned by Robert Stapleton Pitt Caldecott in 1906. Caldecott’s standing as a president of the Toronto Board of Trade and a “highly regarded businessman” initially justified the home’s inclusion on Toronto’s Heritage Register in 2018. However, the couple points to a report by University of Toronto lecturer Michael Akladios, suggesting Caldecott held restrictive views on immigration and advocated for assimilation to protect the character of Canada under the Empire.
The couple’s contention revolves around their assertion that Caldecott would have disapproved of them inhabiting the house he commissioned. This sentiment was voiced powerfully by Mahesan, who, during a March 28 meeting of the Toronto Preservation Board, stated: “Stapleton Caldecott would’ve been appalled by us living in the house he commissioned.”
While the city’s staff report emphasizes the architectural significance of the house, separate from its association with Caldecott, the couple insists that the heritage designation, with its roots in Caldecott’s legacy, is incongruent with the values they uphold. The City Planning Division’s report highlighted the property’s unique structural qualities, saying, “It is valued as a fine representative example of an early 20th century house form building designed in the Period Revival style influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement.”
Despite the couple’s efforts, the board declined to repeal the heritage designation bylaw. Yet, it did vote to remove all references to Caldecott from city documents explaining the house’s significance. This resolution, though not final until city council approval.
In their quest to disentangle their home’s architectural value from Caldecott’s controversial legacy, the couple’s lawyer, Michael Campbell, expressed their determination to leverage “every opportunity” to persuade the council to repeal the designation. Meanwhile, a board member, Paul Cordingley, addressed the broader implications of heritage preservation, stating, “I think we have to find a way of disengaging preservation from celebrating because I would not want anyone to think that if we’re trying to maintain the designation of this house, that we are celebrating or downplaying what goes along with that.”
Earle told CBC Toronto she’s upset with the board’s decision, calling it “a smack in the face.” “How would I know that a city like Toronto has a preservation society which intends to celebrate racism more than the people living in the homes?” she asked. “How is that something an average homeowner is supposed to know?” The couple’s lawyer also raised the possibility of approaching the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal if necessary.
Relevant articles:
– Toronto couple want heritage status removed from home, say original owner ‘racist’
– Couple fights to rid Toronto home of heritage status, CBC.ca, Fri, 05 Apr 2024 22:34:44 GMT
– Wichita is poised to settle a lawsuit challenging police gang list. Here’s what it means, Yahoo News Canada, Fri, 05 Apr 2024 20:50:04 GMT