News   Apr 24, 2024
That's Some Arm
 149     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
Madison Resubmits Midtown Proposals with Viñoly-Designed Towers
 2.1K     5 
News   Apr 23, 2024
Avontuura's Wanderer Guides Designed For Architecture Buffs to Geek-out in Toronto, and Worldwide
 602     0 

Toronto Entertainment District

dt_toronto_geek said:
How do you explain the Empress Hotel fiasco? Or even more recently, a building close to my heart, Odette House & Coach House being demolished.
Click to expand...

I think you've missed my point completely. Read the second sentence in my previous post (the one you quoted). I was responding to the claim that "the City needs strong powers to deal with owners like this". The City already has strong powers. It generally doesn't use them.
 
I'm just wondering, if the city has strong powers, why would they not use them? Why would they not hold property owners accountable?
 
Torontovibe said:
I'm just wondering, if the city has strong powers, why would they not use them? Why would they not hold property owners accountable?
Click to expand...

Therefore, my original question. Fact is, the City's powers are not strong enough, and that's my point.
 
Skeezix said:
What specific powers are missing?
Click to expand...

Look at so many heritage buildings and buildings of worth that are literally crumbling and falling to the street. Old buildings with bowed roofs. Old buildings with large, visible cracks on exterior walls or brickwork. Why did the Empress Hotel sit behind fences closing Gould Street, a sidewalk and a lane of Yonge Street with no activity to repair the fallen brick wall for 9 months? If the City indeed does have the teeth, why do they not demand that properties be brought up to code and repaired within a reasonable period of time? Buildings are neglected so long because property owners obviously can get away with it.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Look at so many heritage buildings and buildings of worth that are literally crumbling and falling to the street. Old buildings with bowed roofs. Old buildings with large, visible cracks on exterior walls or brickwork. Why did the Empress Hotel sit behind fences closing Gould Street, a sidewalk and a lane of Yonge Street with no activity to repair the fallen brick wall for 9 months? If the City indeed does have the teeth, why do they not demand that properties be brought up to code and repaired within a reasonable period of time? Buildings are neglected so long because property owners obviously can get away with it.
Click to expand...

You're not answering the question. None of the issues you have listed point to a lack of powers over a lack of enforcement of existing powers. I ask again: what specific powers do you believe that the City is missing? I'm not sure that it makes a lot of sense to point to inaction by a level of government and to jump to the conclusion that the government must therefore need more power. The City actually has extensive powers under both the Building Code Act, 1992 and Ontario Heritage Act, including, but not limited to, the power to enter onto premises without a warrant, the power to issue orders that work be done to bring the property up to standards and/or protect the heritage attributes of the property (including emergency orders), and the power to arrange to have the necessary work done itself without requiring the consent of the owner (with special provisions absolving the City of liability, and allowing them to use liens on the property to recover the costs). I actually think vague claims about the City needing more powers are counter-productive, as they deflect from the real problem (failure to enforce/use existing powers) and they spread the inaccurate message that the City should be let off the hook (what is the City to do, if it doesn't have powers to address the problem?). I don't mean to single you out or give you a hard time, since we share the same significant concern over the policing of the City's heritage buildings. It's just that I get frustrated sometimes with the City's failure to act. There may be additional powers they could use, but given they don't effectively use the powers they already have, I am not sure that it is useful question to put at the forefront of this problem.

To answer your other questions, there are various reasons why the City is unnecessarily and unreasonably timid with the powers it has. As mentioned above, lack of resources is the biggest problem. It doesn't actually have the staff for meaningful enforcement. I am not aware of any program or initiative to identify problems and to try to address them before they become crises or it becomes too late (someone correct me if I am wrong on this one). As a result, the City is reactive, not proactive. Even when there are identified problems, the City doesn't necessarily have easy access to the necessary expertise to guide it, nor does the bureaucracy move quickly. The City operates as a system of silos, and departments often pass the buck. The City is also loathe to force property owners (holding companies) into bankruptcy or to abandon properties, so as to not increase the likelihood that liabilities associated with the property (including maintenance and repair costs) will fall onto the public purse. So there is a tendency to coddle absentee/irresponsible owners, hoping that a carrot will work better than a stick. This isn't just a problem with heritage buildings.
 
Last edited:
My original statement was that the City needs stronger powers to deal with absentee landlords and address the many concerns with heritage properties. If they do indeed have the power but not the resources then this is a matter I'll take from here and back to my City Councillor, because that contradicts what she has stated on at least two occasions. How the City didn't have the resources to deal with the Empress Hotel matter before it finally burned down still makes no sense to me.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
My original statement was that the City needs stronger powers to deal with absentee landlords and address the many concerns with heritage properties. If they do indeed have the power but not the resources then this is a matter I'll take from here and back to my City Councillor, because that contradicts what she has stated on at least two occasions. How the City didn't have the resources to deal with the Empress Hotel matter before it finally burned down still makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

I'd be very interested in knowing what powers she thinks they need. There might be quite specific things that she wished they could do, stuff that isn't covered off in the broad powers they do have. On the other hand, to be less charitable, it's the same thing that Kyle Rae said when Walnut Hall collapsed - he claimed the City couldn't do anything because it hadn't yet enacted a property standards by-law under the Ontario Heritage Act (which it has since done), but there was never any response when it was pointed out that the City hadn't used the powers it did have under the Building Code Act. Whatever the problem, a common response from Councillors is that they need more powers (Unpopular development? The City needs more powers under the Planning Act. Budget issues? The City needs more powers under the City of Toronto Act. etc. etc.)

From what I know about the Empress, the City was dealing with the structural issues after the collapse. I don't know enough of the facts to have an opinion on whether the City was acting as quickly or a forcefully as they are entitled to. And I don't know who ultimately bears the most blame, the owner or the City, for failing to adequately secure the site such that an arsonist was able to get in.
 
I have no full grasp of what powers the City has, but if the City engineers determined that the Empress structure was sound shortly after the north wall collapsed to the ground (the brick) and it sits there, behind fences closing down Gould street to traffic and a lane of Yonge Street for 9 months while the owner does nothing, it seems to me that there has to be powers lacking somewhere.
Odette House & Coach House were torn down by a developer a few years ago (the lot still sits empty). After that stunning act Councillor Wong-Tam wrote a Motion, which Council passed, that ensures every demolition goes past the desk of the Councillor before permits are issued. Last week an historic school that was being studied for whether it should be listed as heritage was demolished by the land owner. So there is a power that clearly wasn't used. It's possible someone dropped the ball, it's also possible that the landowner would take a fine rather than be stuck with a listed historic structure that they have to deal with when the property is developed. The fact that these examples continue to happen supports that the City doesn't have teeth. When looking at old stock on Yonge Street, lower Church, West Queen West, Queen East, College Street etc. and seeing what terrible shape the exterior of many of the buildings are in, it again provides proof to my eyes that the City is lacking something that allows all these buildings to deteriorate to such a poor condition.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
I have no full grasp of what powers the City has, but if the City engineers determined that the Empress structure was sound shortly after the north wall collapsed to the ground (the brick) and it sits there, behind fences closing down Gould street to traffic and a lane of Yonge Street for 9 months while the owner does nothing, it seems to me that there has to be powers lacking somewhere.
Odette House & Coach House were torn down by a developer a few years ago (the lot still sits empty). After that stunning act Councillor Wong-Tam wrote a Motion, which Council passed, that ensures every demolition goes past the desk of the Councillor before permits are issued. Last week an historic school that was being studied for whether it should be listed as heritage was demolished by the land owner. So there is a power that clearly wasn't used. It's possible someone dropped the ball, it's also possible that the landowner would take a fine rather than be stuck with a listed historic structure that they have to deal with when the property is developed. The fact that these examples continue to happen supports that the City doesn't have teeth. When looking at old stock on Yonge Street, lower Church, West Queen West, Queen East, College Street etc. and seeing what terrible shape the exterior of many of the buildings are in, it again provides proof to my eyes that the City is lacking something that allows all these buildings to deteriorate to such a poor condition.
Click to expand...

Then, just to repeat the question, what powers are they missing? I can think of a dozen things they could have done for the Empress, most notably going in and doing the work. Unclear why instead of demanding better from your municipality you seem so intent on peddling this fiction that the City's hands were tied. In the case of the school near Dufferin Street and Eglinton Avenue West, as best as I can tell it wasn't even listed yet. WTF? Property was vacant, on the market, then purchased by a developer, and the City was still thinking about listing it (an action that requires no notice, can't be appealed, and ought to have been done several years ago in this case). The City dropped the ball - Catherine Nasmith's comment was "Snooze you lose." It's a hard lesson. If the property was listed, then the demo permit was issued in error. One can have all the powers in the world - in fact, one can have a magic freaking wand - but it's no use if the City sits on its ass, fails to do what it can under its existing powers and/or makes grievous errors. I'm not even intended to be critical of City staff who are involved -- lack of resources is the main problem.

As for the stock of older buildings on streets like Yonge and Queen, rather than settling for fairy tales from our Councillors about how they need more powers from Queen's Park, we need to demand more of the City under the rather broad powers it already has. Are they inventorying the properties to determine which ones still need to be listed and/or designated? Are they assessing the structural condition of heritage buildings? Are they issuing orders to have owners undertake necessary improvements and maintain the heritage elements? Are they stepping in when absentee landowners fail to communicate and/or adhere to orders? And are they doing all this while adhering to set timelines?

I would never suggest that there should be no discussions about what other tools the City might need for its toolbox. I am sure some heritage advocated would quickly give you a list, many of which have no realistic hope of becoming law. Part of the reason they have no realistic hope is because the City is not even coming close to using the full range of powers it already has. I think funding is, by far, the bigger issue. Let's look at the real issues.
 
Last edited:
Skeezix said:
Then, just to repeat the question, what powers are they missing? I can think of a dozen things they could have done for the Empress, most notably going in and doing the work. Unclear why instead of demanding better from your municipality you seem so intent on peddling this fiction that the City's hands were tied. In the case of the school near Dufferin Street and Eglinton Avenue West, as best as I can tell it wasn't even listed yet. WTF? Property was vacant, on the market, then purchased by a developer, and the City was still thinking about listing it (an action that requires no notice, can't be appealed, and ought to have been done several years ago in this case). The City dropped the ball - Catherine Nasmith's comment was "Snooze you lose." It's a hard lesson. If the property was listed, then the demo permit was issued in error. One can have all the powers in the world - in fact, one can have a magic freaking wand - but it's no use if the City sits on its ass, fails to do what it can under its existing powers and/or makes grievous errors. I'm not even intended to be critical of City staff who are involved -- lack of resources is the main problem.

As for the stock of older buildings on streets like Yonge and Queen, rather than settling for fairy tales from our Councillors about how they need more powers from Queen's Park, we need to demand more of the City under the rather broad powers it already has. Are they inventorying the properties to determine which ones still need to be listed and/or designated? Are they assessing the structural condition of heritage buildings? Are they issuing orders to have owners undertake necessary improvements and maintain the heritage elements? Are they stepping in when absentee landowners fail to communicate and/or adhere to orders? And are they doing all this while adhering to set timelines?

I would never suggest that there should be no discussions about what other tools the City might need for its toolbox. I am sure some heritage advocated would quickly give you a list, many of which have no realistic hope of becoming law. Part of the reason they have no realistic hope is because the City is not even coming close to using the full range of powers it already has. I think funding is, by far, the bigger issue. Let's look at the real issues.
Click to expand...

Why can't I post reply's / new threads?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top