De­mo­li­tion be­gins on his­toric Thorn­hill home

Coun­cil voted to de­mol­ish ad­di­tion against Her­itage Markham rec­om­men­da­tion

Thornhill Post - - News - by Jes­sica Wei

De­mo­li­tion has started on an ad­di­tion to a her­itage-clas­si­fied prop­erty at 30 Col­borne St. fol­low­ing two years of com­mu­nity con­tention. The ad­di­tion, put on in 1958 by a prom­i­nent Thorn­hill sur­geon, was the topic of mul­ti­ple meet­ings at Markham City Coun­cil and Her­itage Markham.

The house is a her­itage-pro­tected build­ing in the Thorn­hill Her­itage Con­ser­va­tion Dis­trict, built in 1852. In the 1950s, the prop­erty was pur­chased by the Glas­sow fam­ily and the ad­di­tion was built. The prop­erty was sold to Shahram Hei­dari and Ladislava Stahlova.

“The ad­di­tion was so com­ple­men­tary that many of us thought it was orig­i­nal,” said Keith Ir­ish, from the So­ci­ety for the Preser­va­tion of Old Thorn­hill. “We thought it dated at the same time as the front half of the build­ing in the 1840s, that’s how com­ple­men­tary it was.”

Af­ter the new own­ers bought the house, they filed a pro­posal to ren­o­vate the house, which would have re­quired a small vari­ance, but her­itage staff re­jected their pro­posal. Mul­ti­ple re­vi­sions and site con­trol ap­pli­ca­tions were sub­mit­ted and sent back. Coun­cil voted to de­mol­ish the ad­di­tion in May Al­though it is an 2017, against Her­itage in­ter­est­ing Markham’s rec­om­men­da­tion.

Her­itage rec­om­mended replica, it’s only

clas­si­fy­ing the 1958 ad­di­tion for that: a replica.” its es­thetic faith­ful­ness to the orig­i­nal build­ing, as well its as­so­ci­a­tion with Dr. Glas­sow, who was a prom­i­nent sur­geon at Shouldice Hos­pi­tal and lived in the house un­til he died in 2009.

“It’s a shame, be­cause we have a her­itage com­mit­tee,” said Ward 4 coun­cil­lor Karen Rea, who also sits on Her­itage Markham. “The On­tario Her­itage Act is in place so that mu­nic­i­pal­i­ties can en­force and pre­serve her­itage, be­cause once [a prop­er­ties is] lost, it’s for­got­ten.”

At the coun­cil meet­ing from last May, Am­ber Ste­wart, the at­tor­ney for the own­ers, ar­gued that be­fore the own­ers bought the prop­erty, they were told by her­itage staff that they could make mod­i­fi­ca­tions to the ad­di­tion.

“It’s im­por­tant to re­mem­ber that what we are deal­ing with, al­though it is an in­ter­est­ing replica, be­cause it looks like the orig­i­nal, it’s only that: a replica,” said Ste­wart. In the meet­ing, she ques­tioned whether or not Dr. Glas­sow was a prom­i­nent enough fig­ure to have his prop­erty clas­si­fied.

“While the his­tory of that ad­di­tion is in­ter­est­ing, it does not rise to the level of sig­nif­i­cance.” she said.

In the end, coun­cil, voted in favour of the own­ers and car­ried the site con­trol ap­pli­ca­tion for the new pro­posed ad­di­tion by a vote of nine to two.

Keith Ir­ish, from the So­ci­ety for the Preser­va­tion of Old Thorn­hill

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.