Over a year and a half after the front facade of a Hamilton building crumbled onto the busy downtown street below, it sits vacant, derelict and close to collapsing, say city staff.
A tall metal fence surrounds the property on King Street East, comprised of three, three-storey buildings, blocking pedestrians from using the sidewalk, nearby crosswalk and lane of traffic.
Garbage accumulates in the area and police officers regularly respond to calls for assaults, shootings and weapons at the vacant site, staff reported to council’s planning committee last week.
Despite all of these issues dating back to August 2022, the city is only now moving to have it demolished, much to the frustration of the community, said Ward 3 Coun. Nrinder Nann.
It’s a “blight” on the street, impacting local businesses and families trying to walk their kids to the nearby elementary school, she said.
“Why did we wait so long to enforce compliance?” Nann said in an interview. “At what point do we value public safety as a paramount? It just does not make sense.”
Tenants evicted due to unsafe conditions
The ordeal began on Aug. 5, 2022 with a complaint from the Hamilton fire department and police service. A portion of brick masonry collapsed and wooden beams across the front of the buildings had deteriorated, among other issues.
That day, the city’s building division ordered the property owner to address the safety issues, the recent staff report said. Tenants also had to vacate their six units, and were assisted by police and firefighters due to “structural safety concerns.”
The property owner did not comply, so the the building division had the front facade fully removed from all three buildings and installed temporary fencing to protect passersby from “the potential collapse of the buildings or falling debris,” the report said.
The property owner did not respond to a request for comment.
Bob Nuttall, building inspections manager with the city, told CBC Hamilton that after the buildings were secured, the owner was required to decide what to with the property.
“That inability to make forward progress in those decisions” resulted in the building division passing the file to municipal law enforcement in January, Nuttall said.
Bylaw officers first tried to work with the property owner to gain compliance, said Dan Smith, acting director for municipal licensing and bylaw services, at the committee meeting last week.
When that didn’t work, bylaw issued multiple orders to the owner in May 2023 — about eight months after the facade collapsed. The owner appealed the orders, requesting more time to address the issues, which the property standards committee granted until Aug. 30, said the staff report.
That deadline came and went without the necessary work being done and since then the city has been determining the best way forward, said Kim Coombs, enforcement manager.
‘Tangible health and safety concerns’
Meanwhile, Nann said the community suffered “tangible health and safety concerns” that weren’t adequately addressed while the city spent thousands of dollars in police resources that can’t be recovered from the owner.
“All of that because this property owner wasn’t able to take care of the building when it was operating, let alone subsequently when the facade had fallen down,” Nann said.
The city has added $240,000 to the owner’s property tax bill to pay for the initial work to make the building temporarily safe, as well as nearly $8,000 in fees and penalties, the report said.
Staff have recommended the city move forward with demolition, which was approved by the planning committee and will go to council this week. If approved, demolition will likely be complete around June, said Smith.
It will cost about $242,000, to be billed to the owner, and be a quicker, simpler fix than trying to repair the building.
Nann said she and Coun. Cameron Kroetsch (Ward 2) will be tabling a motion this summer for staff to look into revising how bylaws are enforced so that if there are public health and safety concerns, orders can be fast tracked.
A major concern is that “bad faith” property owners are getting an “unfair advantage” if the city tries to get compliance before enforcing its rules, which also draws out the process, Nann said.
“That has to stop,” she said.