A heritage impact assessment on the eight-storey building, located at 2323 Yonge St., was submitted to the city by the applicant. The assessment, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., states that, after evaluating the property using the Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest of the Ontario Heritage Act, ERA found the property does not satisfy the criteria and thus does not warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act.
The office building at 2323 Yonge St. was designed by architect E. I. Richmond, completed in approximately 1970. The building is clad with precast concrete panels, a common cladding system for commercial buildings constructed in the 1960s and ’70s. It is rock solid, in appearance.
The assessment states the building has no design or physical value, as many similar buildings were constructed in Toronto in the 1960s and ’70s. It does not demonstrate a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit and does not demonstrate a high degree of scientific or technical achievement. The assessment concludes that the building has no historical value, as ERA did not uncover evidence of a direct association with a person or organization that is significant to the community, and it has no contextual value as the surrounding area does not have a unique or definable character and the building is not considered a landmark.
“It’s an opinion,” said city councillor Josh Matlow, regarding ERA’s heritage impact assessment. “They’re hired by the applicant who certainly would not want it to be protected. Should we understand their arguments? Of course. I’m sure they’re professionals, and you want to hear them out. Would I have a grain of salt on my shoulder based on the fact they are employed by the people who have vested interest in not having it designated for heritage protection? Of course. That’s just reasonable.”
Matlow said the current building’s status as a potential heritage resource on its own offers no concrete protection but that the city’s heritage planning staff and city council will ultimately make the call regarding heritage designation, and that will be part of the application process.
“What it means is they [heritage planning staff] are flagging it as a question that needs to be answered, not that they know that it must be designated or listed, but they understand aspects of the building that should be further explored,” said Matlow. He added that the staff will be looking to determine the building’s architectural and cultural significance.
“It means don’t go knock it down until we figure out if it should be recommended for protection or not,” he said.
Matlow said community consultation on the proposed development will likely be scheduled for November.
