Vacant buildings or empty land? Councillors divided over developer requests to tear down boarded-up homes

Extensive water damage at a vacant home in downtown Hamilton has left it uninhabitable, say developers who own it and other nearby properties where they plan to build residential high rises in the coming years. 

But the developers' request to tear down the two-storey house at 85 Catharine St. N., has so far been denied, even if it means the building will sit empty and continue to deteriorate for the foreseeable future. 

Under the city's demolition bylaw, the developers are required to have submitted plans to build something new there within two years of tearing the original structure down, city staff say. Otherwise they need to get special permission from councillors. 

That route has so far been blocked when earlier this month, in a 5-5 vote, the planning committee also didn't allow demolition. Council gets the final say Wednesday, where the mayor and some councillors who aren't on the planning committee can weigh in. 

The debate centered around whether its worth barring developers from demolishing houses until they have an actual plan for the property. While it could spur them to develop faster, it could also result in buildings sitting empty and deteriorating for years and posing safety concerns in the community. 

Coun. Craig Cassar said at the committee meeting he voted against demolition to deter other developers from buying up homes with no intention of renting them out.

"We want to keep housing available," he said. 

Coun. Jeff Beattie, on the other hand, questioned the point of keeping a vacant home standing. 

"What is it we are protecting?" Beattie said. "It's an empty building that will deteriorate and cause problems in the community." 

Hamilton has had its fair share of problems with abandoned and derelict buildings in the lower city. 

In recent years, a building on King Street East's facade crumbled onto the street below, and two buildings near Gore Park collapsed last November. A Hess Street building was deemed unsafe in 2023 resulting in a lane on Main Street to be blocked off for months. 

Too costly to restore, developers say

Kaneff Properties Limited and 1926 Acquisitions Corp. bought the Catharine Street property in 2023 as it borders the large surface parking lot they own at 80 John St. N., and nobody has been living there since. They plan to build two, 30-storey towers with about 700 rental units but it needs more than two years. 

"We have every intention of building a really great development when the time is right to do so," Kevin Freeman, director of planning and development at the Kaneff Group, told the committee June 10. 

"To invest more money to a point [that the house] can be rented, it would be extensive and extremely costly when the plan is to consolidate the block." 

The developers submitted an application to the city for the development in 2021, but staff found several issues and sent it back, a city report said. Their application has not been resubmitted. 

Meanwhile, from the outside of the Catharine Street house, it appears to be in good condition with the utilities still connected, staff said. They did not do an inspection inside as they're not required to under the city's bylaw. 

A similar conundrum is playing out on Upper James Street. 

Bill Johnston, president of KTJ Investments Limited, bought two single-family houses on the busy commercial strip in August 2024, he wrote in a letter to council dated June 13. He did not respond to an interview request. 

Johnston said he pursued demolition after a rash of break ins, water damage and mould problems.

"Some of the damages includes but is not limited to: copper pipes and electrical wiring have been stripped, HVAC systems dismantled, exterior siding stripped, and multiple doors and windows have been broken," he wrote. 

He's in the process of disconnecting utilities and said he's prepared to let them deteriorate. 

His application was denied by both the city and planning committee, in another 5-5 vote, because he doesn't have "imminent" plans to redevelop. Johnston noted he's not a developer but intends to consolidate lots in the future for redevelopment. 

Stoney Creek houses to be torn down

Staff did not inspect inside the homes, but Coun. Esther Pauls, who is in favour of allowing demolition, said she did a tour. 

"I was shocked at the conditions," she told the planning committee. "These two houses are literally falling apart. You're wanting this gentleman to spend hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars. That's not how we solve the [housing] problem, we solve it by building more homes." 

Coun. Tammy Hwang voted to deny the demolition because there are no concrete plans to develop the properties. She said she hoped sticking with the bylaw to require developers to have a plan in place before demolishing buildings would be an incentive to build faster. 

For the Catharine Street and Upper James Street properties, councillors were divided with Tammy Hwang, Nrinder Nann, Alex Wilson, Maureen Wilson and Cassar successfully voting against demolition. Ted McMeekin, Mark Tadeson, Matt Francis, Pauls and Beattie voted in favour of demolition. Coun. Cameron Kroetsch wasn't in attendance. 

There was more requests for demolition at planning committee, including for four vacant properties on and around McDonalds Lane in Stoney Creek.

Like the other properties, staff had denied demolition, stating it was "premature," but the planning committee didn't agree.

"The applications are not premature, they are very mature," said Beattie. "We're not talking about removing housing stock. we're talking about derelict buildings. Kids are breaking in and vandalizing properties over and over again." 

He said some of the homes were identified 14 years ago as needing to go for a road expansion. 

The committee unanimously voted to allow their demolition.