There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By kevlahan (registered) | Posted September 26, 2013 at 12:20:09
The big difference between this case and the Gore Park building is that the developers knew it was designated when they bought it, and with designation comes responsibility.
This means there should be a higher standard imposed for what the owners should be required to do, at their own expense. The City must commission a truly independent engineering report: any report commissioned by the owners, whose goal is to re-develop most of the site, cannot be seen as unbiased. Consultants know what their clients want, and rarely come to conclusions that they know would be strongly opposed by their clients.
As in the Gore Park case the owners are proposing saving only the facade and do not have any clear idea of what the rest of the site would look like. And like Blanchard, they are pushing to demolish now and then think about what to to build and how to finance it later. Both owners claim their buildings "are falling down", although Stanton apparently have stronger evidence that at least part of the building has severe structural problems.
However, the claim that they must demolish now seems dubious. This is a building designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, and claims that the building is structurally unsound and will collapse within a few months are surprising. This must be confirmed by a truly independent engineering report commissioned by the city.
As the committee noted, we've seen this claim over and over that a building is "shot", "falling down", "beyond repair", "at the end of its life". Mostly, this has been an excuse to demolish now to avoid future "risk" of heritage preservation orders. These claims may actually be true here, but given recent history Hamiltonians have the right to be extremely skeptical.
The statement that the freeze-thaw cycle is especially damaging on stone buildings (with the implication that stone buildings are not durable) is clearly ridiculous. A properly constructed and maintained stone building will last centuries, and even poorly maintained stone buildings can last for decades of winters without falling down. Europe (and Quebec) is full of stone buildings that have survived centuries of winters, often with little maintenance.
Comment edited by kevlahan on 2013-09-26 12:22:47
Permalink | Context