Real Housewives star and husband say the $3.7 million home’s historic designation should be removed because the man who built it was racist, after they were banned from renovating it due to its protected status
A Real Housewives star and her husband are calling for the historic designation of their $3.7 million home to be removed due to the original owner’s ‘anti-immigration’ views – after they were banned from using the home due to its protected status.
Dr. Arnold Mahesan, a fertility specialist, and his wife, entrepreneur and former Real Housewives of Toronto actor Roxanne Earle, purchased the home in 2022 for $5 million CAD (approximately $3.7 USD), unaware of its landmark status at the time to be.
Located at 64 Woodlawn Ave West in Toronto, Canada, the 6-bedroom house was built in 1906 for Stapleton Pitt Caldecott, a former president of the Toronto Board of Trade with anti-immigration views.
The couple claimed they only learned of the property’s heritage status last year when they tried to change the steep staircase and realized they needed city permission because of the designation.
Now they are asking the city to remove the heritage designation from their century-old home due to the original owner’s “racist beliefs.” CBC.
Dr. Arnold Mahesan, a fertility specialist (right) and his wife, entrepreneur and former Real Housewives of Toronto actor Roxanne Earle (left) bought the house in 2022 for $5 million CAD (approximately $3.7 USD), reportedly unaware at the time of purchase. heritage designation
Located at 64 Woodlawn Ave West in Toronto, Canada, the 6-bedroom house was built in 1906 for Stapleton Pitt Caldecott, a former president of the Toronto Board of Trade with reportedly anti-immigration views
Now the couple is asking the city to remove the heritage designation from their century-old home because of the “racist beliefs” of original owner Stapleton Caldecott.
“Stapleton Caldecott would have been shocked if we lived in the house he built,” Mahesan said at a March 28 meeting of the Toronto Preservation Board.
The two and a half story house is situated on a spacious 50×179 plot and boasts period architectural features.
The city gives approval to the Preservation Board for changes to historic homes.
The couple argued that the house should be exempt from preservation requirements due to the racist views of the original owner in 1906.
Despite the couple’s appeal, the board ultimately denied their request. However, the final decision lies with the municipal council.
Their attorney, Michael Campbell, said they are not giving up.
“We intend to take every opportunity we can to convince council to revoke the designation,” Campbell told CBC.
But a city report made clear that the house’s landmark status stemmed from its architectural significance, not its ownership history.
The couple argued that the house should be exempt from preservation requirements due to the racist views of the original owner in 1906.
A city report made it clear that the house’s landmark status stemmed from its architectural significance, not its ownership history (photo: the house’s newly renovated kitchen)
The report said its historical significance came from the fact that the house was designed by architect Eden Smith, and not because it was made for Caldecott.
The report said its historical significance came from the fact that the house was designed by architect Eden Smith, and not because it was made for Caldecott.
The report states: ‘Staff maintain that the property is valued as a fine representative example of an early 20th century house building designed in the Period Revival style influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement.’
“It is distinguished by its asymmetrical plan with the projecting bay windows, the intricate roofline with the gables and distinctive castellated chimneys, and the decorative wooden bandwork,” it continued.
Although the city agreed to remove references to Caldecott from heritage documents, they maintained the designation.
The city council’s decision is expected to be announced in May.
Earle criticized what she saw as the board’s endorsement of racism and vowed to continue their push to remove the heritage designation
The couple clarified that they have no immediate plans to renovate or demolish the home, but said they are committed to addressing what they see as a celebration of racism in their living space.
Earle criticized what she saw as the board’s endorsement of racism and vowed to continue their push to remove the heritage designation.
Speaking to CBC, she called the decision a “slap in the face” and said she is not fighting for this as a “tactic.”
“How would I know that a city like Toronto has a conservation organization that wants to celebrate racism more than the people who live in the houses?” she asked CBC. “How could an average homeowner know that?”
The couple clarified that they have no immediate plans to renovate or demolish the home, but reaffirmed their determination to address what they see as a celebration of racism in their living space.
“I have no plans to develop this house or change this house,” she told CBC Toronto.
“My problem is that I have done a great job in this city and yet I have to be racialized by living in a house that celebrates something so different from everything my husband and I are.”