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 seancb (registered) - website | Posted February 08, 2013 at 12:05:32 in reply to Comment 86033
This issue is not getting nearly as much attention as it deserves.
This is not about a handful of buildings.
The way council handles this case will set a path for the downtown which could result in years of stagnation.
Why?
Let's say Blanchard gets his wish - some or all of the buildings come down, he gets a property tax credit, and he starts trying to sell the parcel to a developer (or tries to acquire the rest of the block).
What message does that send to other landowners on the gore, and in downtown in general?
What will happen is that the speculators on other properties will hold on even tighter and hold out for even more money. They will see that the city will not put up a fight over demolition. They will stare longingly into the dream of a condo-building saviour to swoop in and make them rich.
This will essentially take all of the other properties on the gore off of the table for adaptive reuse and small scale development. It could also start a wave of more demolition permits as landowners clue in to the fact that the city can be held hostage over the destruction of heritage buildings.
The city needs to take a hard line on Blanchard, designate the properties (which voids the demolition permits), and force him to either come up with a better plan, or sell the land. This is fully within their power, and Blanchard was aware of this when he bought those buildings (if he wasn't aware, that is a lack of due diligence on his part and there's no reason to feel sorry for him). The rules are set - the city has the power. They just have to USE THE LAWS AS A NEGOTIATING TOOL instead of letting the speculators walk all over them. Their incompetence in negotiating is costing us money and potential tax income.
What is the worst case that would happen if the city did this? Blanchard leaves town? Not likely. Blanchard sells off his buildings? Who cares. Blanchard whines louder? Just stop listening. The city cannot lose by designating these properties.
Comment edited by seancb on 2013-02-08 12:08:47
I vote down for offensiveness and up for humour. I cast no votes based on my level of agreement.
Permalink | Context