03-02-2019, 09:02 AM
Just to note that the ground contamination predates the present owner, afaik.
The Shannondale (née Electrohome, 152 Shanley St) | 8 fl | U/C
|
03-02-2019, 09:02 AM
Just to note that the ground contamination predates the present owner, afaik.
03-04-2019, 02:57 PM
(03-01-2019, 11:22 AM)Spokes Wrote:(03-01-2019, 10:23 AM)Chris Wrote: I think it's due for a new owner quickly. Maybe that 'break' makes clean-up and redevelopment feasible? Not saying it's' okay - but the reality is, this property was never going to be cleaned up and developed if that full tax bill was added to the cost as well (and if the city expropriated it as some have suggested, they would have had to foot the clean-up bill themselves - and I'm relatively confident that every single clean-up contractor quoting the job for the city would add the usual "government job" mark-up to their quotes.) Proof of this point is that it didn't move at $800k, but ultimately proof will be if it DOES now get cleaned up and redeveloped.
03-04-2019, 03:17 PM
Hopefully it means something happens with this. There's potential here, but not as it currently stands.
03-22-2019, 08:47 AM
Owner confident he can sell contaminated Kitchener site
Quote:Plans to develop a long-neglected industrial property are in the works and will make the long-suffering neighbours of the dilapidated site "tremendously happy," says the real estate agent trying to sell the former Electrohome site.https://www.therecord.com/news-story/923...ener-site/
03-22-2019, 10:01 AM
One wishes him well, of course, but is one a terrible person if one is sceptical about the future of this site?
03-22-2019, 10:29 AM
03-22-2019, 11:38 AM
And to be clear, cost the City more than two Ezra Avenue street parties.
05-07-2019, 06:54 PM
This news probably doesn't surprise too many people https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/form...sc=GD8rnse
05-07-2019, 08:16 PM
(05-07-2019, 06:54 PM)BruceAshe Wrote: This news probably doesn't surprise too many people https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/form...sc=GD8rnse Nope...not at all. My guess is that the owner purposely let it get to this point so that it'll become impossible to have it repair, thus avoiding the heritage "Save the Clock Tower" people.
05-07-2019, 09:43 PM
So now the city will pay to remedy the situation, then charge back to taxes, then after the owner doesnt pay, agree to a buy out by the current owner for 30 cents on the dollar again.
05-07-2019, 10:10 PM
(05-07-2019, 08:16 PM)jeffster Wrote:(05-07-2019, 06:54 PM)BruceAshe Wrote: This news probably doesn't surprise too many people https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/form...sc=GD8rnse That's a good point. Hard to sell a contaminated site with a heritage designation. Getting rid of the heritage obstacle might make it easier. Having the city forced to demolish it due to the owner's inaction would also ensure that the owner doesn't have to even remotely consider repairing it. Was there anything that Kitchener could have done differently to prevent this from happening? Property tax rules are provincial, right? What about allowing buildings to get to this state of disrepair? Who sets those laws?
05-07-2019, 10:37 PM
The icing on the cake will be the City being obliged to spend beaucoup bucks to clean up the site (and surrounding properties?).
05-08-2019, 06:19 AM
Now we'll just have an empty lot with contamination issues
05-08-2019, 06:27 AM
(05-07-2019, 10:10 PM)BruceAshe Wrote: Was there anything that Kitchener could have done differently to prevent this from happening? Property tax rules are provincial, right? What about allowing buildings to get to this state of disrepair? Who sets those laws? I still want to know why expropriation wouldn’t work. I’m pretty sure back taxes have to be paid out of the proceeds of any property transfer, so presumably it would just be an administrative action involving no transfer of money (assuming the taxes exceed the property value).
05-08-2019, 07:59 PM
(05-08-2019, 06:27 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(05-07-2019, 10:10 PM)BruceAshe Wrote: Was there anything that Kitchener could have done differently to prevent this from happening? Property tax rules are provincial, right? What about allowing buildings to get to this state of disrepair? Who sets those laws? I am pretty sure the city doesn't want to pay for clean-up, let alone buy it from the dead-beat owner. They already know that it's a huge expense + the "Save the Clock Tower" people who will balk at anything less than full remediation of property. This truly is a no-win situation for the city. The current owner won't fix it. The owner will get behind on property taxes again, obviously. I am guessing in the not too distant future, major water damage it going to occur, OR, it will burn to the ground. One of the two. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|