Cambridge council blocks demolition of Parkhill Road building

A fire truck could be seen on Parkhill Road just after noon on Tuesday. (Hayden Phillips / CTV News)

Cambridge city council has voted to approve a heritage designation for an abandoned building on Parkhill Road just hours after a fire and despite a request from a developer to demolish it.

Crews from four Cambridge Fire Department stations were called to the building at 44-46 Park Hill Road East on Tuesday morning just after 11 a.m.

Officials say the damage was contained to the inside of the building and it is still structurally sound.

Plans for new development at the site

During a special council meeting Tuesday night, councillors voted to preserve the building after a developer submitted a demolition request last November.

According to city staff, some of the building’s exterior features, including brickwork and decorative details, could be considered historically significant.

The developer wants to turn the property into a three-storey residential building with ten residential units and three commercial spaces.

The residential units would be a mix of one-bedroom and two-bedroom rental units.

During the meeting, Scott Patterson, a representative for the developer, said council did not raise any heritage concerns when the developer initially submitted plans for the site.

Patterson told council the demolition permit application was submitted after the building was vandalized and people were living inside.

He said the developer paid the city a $6,950 fee to confirm that all municipal services were disconnected in preparation for demolition.

“My client has incurred significant costs in application fees and the fees for disconnects to the city,” Patterson explained.

“This does also not account for the soft costs of retaining an architect, a civil engineer, a landscape architect, lighting engineer and myself to facilitate the site plan approval application.”

He added the landowner is willing to work on a salvage plan to retain, integrate and mimic the building’s brick masonry into the design of the proposed development.

“We would ask council to please support the salvage plan option that has been proposed and the landowner is agreeing to, and forego the designation of this property. The brickwork can and will be recreated in the new building and I also suggest that a commemorative plaque can be placed in a suitable location acknowledging the history of the building,” Patterson said.

He said his client likely would not have bought the property if he had known the building was of historical interest to the city.

Issue divides council

Coun. Ross Earnshaw put forward a motion to withdrawal the heritage designation proposal to allow the developer’s plans to move forward as long as the developer temporarily withdrew his demolition permit application in order to submit a salvage plan to incorporate the brickwork into the new building.

“My primary concern, which echoes many of the questions that were asked around the horseshoe, is one of timing,” Earnshaw said.

“I’m concerned about the fact that the owner has, in good faith, gone forward and expended a great deal of money, but I’m trying to balance the heritage aspects of this property identified in the reports we’ve received against the fact that it’s in bad shape and its likely that within the foreseeable future it will be worse.”

He said he believes the city will have a greater chance of preserving the heritage aspects of the building by allowing the project to move forward instead of prolonging the process and potentially dealing with an appeal from the developer.

Several councillors raised concerns with the motion. In particular, they worried about losing control of the building and relying only on the developer’s good faith.

“We need to designate in order to keep our options open,” Coun. Adam Cooper said.

“I feel that we could go down a path that we may regret if we don’t. And this in no way means that we want to screw the developer over,” Cooper added.

“We do know the state of this building here and it probably takes some modification to make it work. But I feel in order to maintain that control and enable us to all work together to do what’s right for this building and the people of Cambridge that I do believe that designation is the path right now.”

Earnshaw’s motion was defeated 5-4 and council ultimately decided to move ahead with the heritage designation process by a vote of 6-3.