Quote:
Originally Posted by Vin
This really makes me angry. Both Holborn and the City are at fault for not ensuring that this 1909-built heritage building is kept in tip-top condition. Another example of how turning heritage buildings into SROs will ensure their destruction: either through neglect or constant abuse. Many structures were burned down in this region because they house irresponsible addicts who smoke, etc. Others are neglected so much they cannot be utilized to their fullest potential to house ordinary people, or turn into profitable business venues such as hotels or hostels, retail or food & beverage businesses. I am very appalled at what this City has come to.
|
It's 100% Holborn's responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the building. The City's responsibility is ensuring it's safe, and if it isn't safe, doing something about it (which is what they're doing now). All Holborn had to do was protect the roof. Even a wooden subframe on the roof, with plywood and heavy-duty tarps would have worked. Because they didn't protect it, the building has deteriorated to the point that it's unsafe.
The potential addition of the building as a protected heritage resource was an opportunity to get residential density, but being Holborn, they've even blown that. Ironically, I think they're still on the hook to replace the 187 SRO rooms (which they briefly managed as a student residence, as the canopy shows, before the building was closed as unsafe, and they chose not to make the necessary repairs to reopen it). BC Housing paid to repair the plumbing and roof about 15 years ago, so there's even less excuse for Holborn's neglect.
It's sad because it was avoidable, and it's a good example of the hotels from the early 1900s that's still relatively unaltered. When it was still a prestigeous hotel, in the early 1920s, it ran electric buss to transport clients from the stations. Early history
here and
here.
Threaded Mode