322-326 King Street East | ? | ? | Planning

[SteelTown]

http://www.myhamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/D09187BA-7606-46DF-85BC-07970FF82656/0/Sep08PED09215.pdf

Demolition Permit – 322-326 King Street East

Denningers is proposing to demolish the existing three storey commercial/residential mixed use building and construct a new commercial/residential mixed use building in the future. The building contains ground floor commercial with eight residential units on the upper floors. As of this date the required building permit application has not been submitted for the replacement dwellings.

This is the ugly building behind the downtown Hamilton sign at Wellington and King. Think there was a large fire that left the building vacant.

[emge]

I wonder if they own the parking lot beside it too, and if they plan to use that at all with it?

This is good news.... the building all but disappears into the background right now, but that corner has great exposure and great potential.

[LikeHamilton]

I wonder if they own the parking lot beside it too

Yes they own the empty lot on the corner next to this building.

[emge]

I hope that gets incorporated into the new building then. I can't imagine they'd let a corner location go undeveloped just to keep parking that could be repositioned.

[SteelTown]

I think I heard from Bratina that Denningers was looking at 10 or 11 storey commercial/residential mixed use building for that corner.

[realcity]

nice

[matt602]

I don't like this at all simply because of one part: "construct a new commercial/residential mixed use building in the future."

I'm sick of seeing buildings torn down and then having to deal with an empty lot for ages until the developer gets off their ass to actually build something. The abandoned building that is currently there at least contributes some kind of presence in the form of a streetwall, a lot more than an empty lot will do. We have more than enough of those as it is.

The building itself is also really not doing all that badly. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to restore.

[FairHamilton]

^Agreed. Though per the Building Permit there needs to be a building erected within 2 years there is a $160K penalty. Lets hope that's enforced to the letter and is enough of an incentive to ensure a building on the site.

I'm reassured that Denningers has a long standing relationship with the City of Hamilton, and downtown.

[urban_planner]

^Also agree with Matt Here and Fair hamilton Although We have seen how much the city inforces those laws look at bay and King. Unless things have changes but I don't know

[SteelTown]

There's conditions included with this demolition permit that's not usually applied. The owner must submit a building permit first before it can proceed with the demolition. A believe each permit has an expiry date (like you must complete the construction of the building within say 24 months or the permit expires).

I also believe once a demolition permit has been approved by council it comes with an expiry date, no demo within say 24 months than the demolition permit is no good.

Should see a replacement by Sept 8, 2011.

[markbarbera]

This is a good news story. The empty building on the current site is an eyesore and an embarrasing entry into the downtown. I get the feeling that Denningers is going to redevelop the site to provide itself an updated retail flagship in a more visible location. Their current location needs to be brought up to date. It makes sense that they build new on a neighbouring site so there's no interruption to their business. The buiding permit application, when submitted, will give a clear indication of their intentions. The condition to build within two years does give reassurance that the site won't sit empty for an undetermined period of time.

[BrianE]

Smart people these Denningers folk, you build a grocery store then have your customers live on top of it... its strange how in all of down town, nobody else has thought of this.

[LikeHamilton]

I think that we need to give Denningers a break here. They have been good corporate citizens and have always kept their property up even in bad times. No mater what happened to the core and that part of King Street they have stayed there putting money into the area. They still have their head office in their King Street store.

To do final drawings, they have to be able to get core samples of the ground so I expect that is why the delay between pulling the building down and starting a new one. Some of the delay will be the cities fault.

Maybe we can get Denningers to put up a large sign with a picture of the new building on the site so at least it does no look like an abandoned site.

http://www.denningers.com/

[emge]

Today there's a For Sale sign on that building and parking lot - wonder exactly what's happening there?

[FairHamilton]

^It appears to be for the vacant lot on the corner, 328 King Street. Not the one owned by Denninger, 322, 324, & 326.

[emge]

I thought it was just that too but then I saw the sign on the building as well, so I think it's the whole thing that's up for sale.

*edit: here's the listing (http://www.icx.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8823377) for the building, and the listing (http://www.icx.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8823380) for the lot*

[FairHamilton]

Groan......I was hoping they weren't connected. It looks to me like nothing is going to happen at the site.

Denninger had already obtained a building permit, the demolition permit was 'carried', but now Denninger is selling. Maybe he didn't like the 2 years to replace the building, or face a $160K penalty.

[SteelTown]

Denningers probably got the demolition permit before putting up the land for sale to recruit potential buyers, Dennigers already did all the dirty work of getting the demolition permit.

[FairHamilton]

Yeah, but I would think you'd only do that if you had a buyer waiting in the wings.

The conditions of the demolition were to be registered on the title, so they would transfer to a new owner. $160K penalty if demolition occurs and no building within 2 years would surely be a disincentive to purchase, unless the buyer has fairly immediate plans.

I don't know if the demolition permit has an expiry, but the city should now just pull it.

[realcity]

so another land speculation job


I'm going to have to put a list together of all the proposals over the last 5 years and show how many get built.

[LikeHamilton]

Budget Demolition is on site.

[JoeyColeman]

Started today. Working on the story. There has been some changes to the situation. Will be in print tomorrow.

In short, a Unsafe Order was issued and a today a demolition permit was applied for and received.

[SteelTown]

Demolition starts on downtown building

June 08, 2010
Joey Coleman
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/783964

Demolition began yesterday on an unsafe building at a downtown intersection.

Unlike with recent city-ordered demolitions, there has been no public outrage.

Community advocate Matt Jelly, organizer of the grassroots Bylaw Crawl, and Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina say the building's demolition reflects the city's increased vigilance with enforcing building standards in the downtown core.

A recent engineering report said the building at 322-326 King St. E. at Wellington, estimated to be 60 to 70 years old, is "in danger of imminent collapse" and the city issued an unsafe order requiring it to be demolished. It's owned by R. Denninger Ltd., the specialty food shop, and once housed street-level retail space and eight apartments above it.

In August 2009, Denninger's applied for a demolition permit for the building with the stipulation that a replacement building be built within two years or a fine of $160,000 would be imposed against the company. The permit was approved by council but not issued.

With the unsafe order, the fine no longer applies if the land remains vacant.

"I'm pretty sure that lot won't remain empty," Bratina said. "I've heard two proposals for that site."

No applications for building permits have yet been requested for the site.

Jelly said he is not opposed to the demolition.

"I don't think every building should be saved," he said. "I would just hope that the developer is acting in good faith and does plan to rebuild on the site."

Attempts to reach a Denninger's spokesperson were unsuccessful.

[realcity]

So how long until Arts Inc. has to pay a $160k fine? or does everyone use this 'unsafe' loophole.

I agree with Mr Jelly that building was a disaster waiting to happen. Glad it's coming down. It'll make a nice parking lot for Denninger customers.