Hamilton councillors reverse course after opposing demolition of vacant, deteriorating homes

There's hope for owners of three vacant Hamilton houses who want to tear them down. 

After the planning committee rejected demolition requests for two homes, side-by-side, on Upper James Street, a busy commercial stretch, council reversed course.

It "makes absolutely no sense" to think council could force an owner to renovate them so they can be rented out when he has future plans to tear them down to make way for a large development, said Coun. Mike Spadafora, who was weighing in for the first time as he's not a member of the planning committee. 

These houses need "to be torn down .... instead of allowing fires, black mould and everything else," Spadafora said.

Coun. Brad Clark toured inside one of the houses leading up to the council vote Wednesday and agreed, noting the owner, Bill Johnston, president of KTJ Investments Limited, had purchased the homes in already "horrific conditions."

Clark is also not on the planning committee.

"He keeps boarding up the buildings and people keep going inside," Clark said. "They keep setting fires in the basement to stay warm and he's afraid the building is going to catch fire with people in or the floor is going to collapse and he has full liability." 

The city's current demolition bylaw requires developers to have submitted plans to build something new within two years to get a permit, says a staff report. Otherwise, they need to get special permission from councillors. 

Planning committee, where the requests go before council's final vote, was divided on demolition, with some councillors arguing developers shouldn't be allowed to tear down housing unless they have real intentions to start building. In a 5-5 split, councillors defeated the request. 

Coun. Tammy Hwang voted against demolition, but changed her mind at council after speaking with Johnston about his plans for the properties. She said he's working with a developer on a plan for a building with both commercial and residential units. 

"It is imminent," she said of the development. 

Council voted unanimously Wednesday to allow the demolition of both Upper James homes with Hwang, Nrinder Nann, Alex Wilson and Maureen Wilson switching from opposing it at the planning committee. 

Mayor Andrea Horwath and Coun. Craig Cassar were not present. 

No decision on downtown property  

The owners of 85 Catharine St. N. had also applied to tear a single-family house down, which was similarly denied by the planning committee.

Council decided to defer the final demolition decision at the request of the owners Kaneff Properties Limited and 1926 Acquisitions Corp. 

In a letter to council, lawyer Mark Flowers said the owners would like time to consider and address concerns raised by the planning committee. 

Coun. Ted McMeekin said staff may assess conditions inside the home.

At this time, they've only done inspections from the outside, as required by city rules, and determined it looked to be in good condition. The owners, however, say water damage has made it uninhabitable and expensive to fix.

They have plans to build two, 30-storey towers on the downtown land that included 85 Catharine St. N. and a lot next door that's currently surface parking. They're continuing to work on the site plan, they previously told the committee. 

"I don't want to lose that development," McMeekin told council, adding Kaneff is a reputable company that hasn't made many investments in Hamilton. 

"I'd like to change that," he said. 

Staff reviewing demolition rules

Staff are already reviewing the demolition bylaw and will bring forward a report later this year, said Robert Lalli, the city's chief building official. 

It will address concerns raised by councillors, including that staff don't go inside buildings during inspections, that developers have to prove they'll be building within two years of demolition, or that the city isn't doing enough to force owners of unsafe, derelict buildings to tear them down. 

Coun. Nrinder Nann said they're working to "ensure the checks and balances" are in place to show developers are close to building and "we are not enabling demolition by neglect."