Canadian Demolitions

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by lio45

How much would that building sell for, out of curiosity?

(If you have no idea, but at least can give me a quick tutorial on how to look online at past sales records in NS -- which, in Canada, I know very well how to do in Quebec only -- then I may do so myself.)




From a 2009 article. That's all I cound find online about that building...

"[i]The historic Green Lantern building on Barrington Street will not be coming down down."

Oh yeah, more recently (month or so ago) there were a couple of stories in a private business focused publication here called AllNovaScotia. The gist of the stories was that Webber is again intending to demolish because he doesn't want to redevelop it according to the city's heritage regulations (though loads of other property owners on the street are doing so with their properties.) And he's ready for "war" with the city over it.

It's bizarre, because he has to pay taxes on the property, yet currently has no income from tenants, and said he's willing to wait years to demolish if need be. So it's either deep pockets or a scare tactic to goad the city into... I dunno. Something.

I don't know what it would sell for; Webber inherited it from his father's estate, so it probably hasn't changed hands in decades.

I do know that lots of other properties on the street are being remediated. Barrington had long been a down and out thoroughfare, and is suddenly in the midst of a serious rebirth--high end residential, the whole bit. And this, if it's saved, will be one of the biggest and potentially grandest of the street's restored properties.

[niwell]

I'm guessing he may try for the whole "demolition by neglect" route. I have heard stories from building officials about things as egregious as finding pallets of bricks on the roofs of vacant historic structures.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by niwell

I'm guessing he may try for the whole "demolition by neglect" route. I have heard stories from building officials about things as egregious as finding pallets of bricks on the roofs of vacant historic structures.

In Sherbrooke the city has to give its greenlight to demolitions and when the buildings are deemed savable they will refuse to issue a demo permit. Often the buildings end up lost to a criminal fire eventually, like one or two years later (usually in winter, it's less suspiscious), and the owner's reconstruction (or parking lot) project goes ahead, a couple years delayed.

This Halifax building, though -- it's non-detached on all sides, so if it spreads to the neighbors and Mr Webber's hired arsonist ends up being traced to him, he could be in big trouble.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Oh yeah, more recently (month or so ago) there were a couple of stories in a private business focused publication here called AllNovaScotia. The gist of the stories was that Webber is again intending to demolish because he doesn't want to redevelop it according to the city's heritage regulations (though loads of other property owners on the street are doing so with their properties.) And he's ready for "war" with the city over it.

It's bizarre, because he has to pay taxes on the property, yet currently has no income from tenants, and said he's willing to wait years to demolish if need be. So it's either deep pockets or a scare tactic to goad the city into... I dunno. Something.

I don't know what it would sell for; Webber inherited it from his father's estate, so it probably hasn't changed hands in decades.

I do know that lots of other properties on the street are being remediated. Barrington had long been a down and out thoroughfare, and is suddenly in the midst of a serious rebirth--high end residential, the whole bit. And this, if it's saved, will be one of the biggest and potentially grandest of the street's restored properties.

At first sight, one bad sign is that this guy owns quite a bit of real estate, so if this experienced Halifax investor/developer deems the rehab is not realistic financially, I would think that he's probably right.

On the other hand, I looked at his other properties from his site and what's encouraging is that they all seem newer... so to him, this one is probably just an old, outdated mess that requires a ton of work. Another encouraging factor is that he inherited it, so he never "chose" it. It's very possible that the potential value is lost on him.

There's no one in Halifax willing to speak to him about taking on that building? It's not that big... about similar in scale to my biggest downtown Sherbrooke one. Maybe worth putting the Florida project on the back burner for a little while. The area seems a safe bet. But I'm sure there's a ton of local guys in Halifax who could do it; you say he changes his mind every six months or so about that building -- but he never changes his mind to "I'll sell it", does he? If he can keep it empty for years and years just to spite the City, he certainly doesn't need to sell.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

At first sight, one bad sign is that this guy owns quite a bit of real estate, so if this experienced Halifax investor/developer deems the rehab is not realistic financially, I would think that he's probably right.

Well, many of these owners aren't looking at whether or not they can profitably rehab their heritage buildings. They're trying to maximize personal profit, and you tend to make more money from demolishing and building highrises than you do from preserving small heritage buildings. Most of the risk to Halifax's heritage buildings downtown is actually from development pressure, even though sometimes people try to say that their buildings are just falling down and there is nothing they can do about it.

It makes sense that many people will value personal profit, but the public value of these heritage buildings needs to be accounted for too. That's why there are heritage preservations and heritage credits. Sometimes the demolition threats are a negotiating tactic to try to get more money from City Hall.

There are dozens of comparable buildings in Halifax that are operated normally, including maybe a dozen or more on this street. A Chinese developer just bought the Pacific Building, a similarly-sized property one block away, and is rehabbing it. This building in particular is a huge outlier. Hopefully he'll just sell his building and move on.

Originally Posted by lio45

If he can keep it empty for years and years just to spite the City, he certainly doesn't need to sell.

I could be misremembering this, but I think he inherited this building and potentially a bunch of others in his portfolio. A lot of weird property stories seem to come down to inheritance, properties won in divorce proceedings, etc.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by lio45

At first sight, one bad sign is that this guy owns quite a bit of real estate, so if this experienced Halifax investor/developer deems the rehab is not realistic financially, I would think that he's probably right.

On the other hand, I looked at his other properties from his site and what's encouraging is that they all seem newer... so to him, this one is probably just an old, outdated mess that requires a ton of work. Another encouraging factor is that he inherited it, so he never "chose" it. It's very possible that the potential value is lost on him.

I'm going to guess it's more the latter--he hasn't said that it's unsalvageable, more that he doesn't seem inclined to restore it (before the conservation district was implemented, a similar though less impressive building was torn down and a high rise is being built on its location--it's possible he thinks this is unfair, but it's really just timing.) He said just wants to knock it down now and not be bothered with the historic elements, and just build apartments on the site.

But it has a new roof as recently as 2003 (a hurricane ripped off the old one) and he spoke of renovating as recently as a couple of years ago. As Someone123 says, other similar properties are being rehabbed at a profit right now, though again, this is really a key one for the street, which already lost a fair bit of its historic fabric before the conservation district was implemented. It'd probably need major work on electrical, plumbing, etc, and major aesthetic overhauls to make it into condos or high-end retail or whatever, but my non-expert hunch is that it's structurally fine/mostly fine.

The local councillor has expressed frustration with Webber's plans, and certainly if it progresses there'll be more outrage. But still, this city is astonishingly poor about heritage preservation (there are two other major historic threatened buildings nearby, both publicly owned, to boot), so I don't think resting easy is an option. If he really follows through and wants to knock it down, he might just get to do so. And that'd be a tragedy for one of Canada's great historic main streets. It would, frankly, render it a lot less great, and a lot less historic.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by Daveography

Seems to me these should be in the Canadian Demolitions thread, and that this thread is for buildings being actively or recently restored.

That aside, that's just shameful. Unreal how little respect some people have for built heritage.

Absolutely it should. Sorry I forgot it existed lol.

[The_Architect]

Jesus that St. John's one is terrible..

I wonder if the developers are tone deaf or fully realize they're going to make a lot of people hate them. It's almost vindictive.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Jesus that St. John's one is terrible..

I wonder if the developers are tone deaf or fully realize they're going to make a lot of people hate them. It's almost vindictive.

This type of person (property holder more than developer, usually) really doesn't care what people think of them.

[SignalHillHiker]

He's been outed, at least. I won't post the info, not into spreading that sort of thing. But it's great to know who it is. I'll never set foot in his business.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Jesus that St. John's one is terrible..

I wonder if the developers are tone deaf or fully realize they're going to make a lot of people hate them. It's almost vindictive.

There is definitely a strange, terrible social dynamic at play. I think that's one reason why heritage preservation can be difficult; it is easy to inadvertently create negative incentives for property owners. They're often rewarded financially for threatening to demolish heritage buildings or making it look like heritage preservation is much harder to do than it is.

At an even more basic level, the common view of property rights and land ownership as "I or whoever I give my stuff to should be able to do whatever we want with it for all time" is insane and completely unworkable. Some of these property owners have simply inherited properties they did not create themselves and where most of the value comes from location (i.e. what everybody else, including the public sector, has built around them) and yet they act like victims as soon as there is any mention of balancing their property rights with the public good.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

That 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. If people are outraged about that, I hope they spare some outrage for this:



This is a registered heritage building in Halifax's only heritage conservation district, and its owner--who seems to change his mind about what to do with it every six months--has recently evicted every single tenant and announced that he plans to tear it down, no matter how long it takes to win approval.

The city's heritage bylaws are extraordinarily weak, and despite being a registered building in a conservation district, it has an owner who is actively attempting to destroy it, and is clearly not maintaining it in any significant way. So I think it's well within the realm of possibility that he'll eventually succeed, if city council doesn't get serious. Making matters worse, Halifax's only heritage-conservation lobbying group is a widely derided group of mostly elderly folks who have very little public support.

It's a massive failure of heritage preservation in an ostensibly historic city, and its loss will render the conservation district pretty meaningless.

I guess I'm going off topic since this is a restoration thread, but I was inspired by SignalHill's post...

First, I'd lie to point our that this building looks a lot like Ottawa's former Morgan's (then the Bay) store.


http://urbsite.blogspot.ca/2012/07/sparks-departed-department-stores.html

It was demolished, along with everything else in that picture including RBC's impressive early 60s tower on the far right, in the early 80s to make room for the new RBC tower.


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:90_Sparks_Street.jpg

Back to heritage demolitions; sad state of affairs. Cities and maybe even Provinces should start implementing strict rules against this kind of neglect of heritage buildings and start giving out steep fines to property owners.

We have a few of these people in Ottawa who don't do jack with their heritage buildings that eventually get the "demolition by neglect" treatment. Sometimes, the neglect does little to deteriorate the building so the City just approves demolition, in the case of Ogilvy's.

A few examples are the "Our Lady School", reduced to a few walls earlier this year. I don't have any pictures of what it looked like in its hay days.:

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Claude Lauzon's former Our Lady schoolhouse on Murray St. is now just a supported façade:


Photo by me
Mar 19, 2015

This one on Somerset has been neglected while the City and the owner sue each other over a partial collapse years ago.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeygottawa/sets/72157625047890029/

Proposed restoration:



And Ogilvy's, demolished to make way for Rideau Centre expansion. They'll rebuild a 1908 replica using bricks, windows and spandrels salvaged from the original building, however as seen on the rendering, the floors of the expansion don't align with the original. Slap in the face!


http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/pdc/2001/01-22/ACS2000-PW-PLN-0183.htm

http://www.rideaucentre.com/en/Redevelopment/Pages/Renderings.aspx

[J.OT13]

Bit of a change from the constant depressing loss of historic buildings, something positive.

The Scotiabank Building on Rideau Street, across from Ogilvy's, has been demolished to make way for a subway entrance:





Note Rideau Centre expansion across the street, where the Ogilvy corner will be replicated.


http://www.ligneconfederationline.ca/

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

A Chinese developer just bought the Pacific Building, a similarly-sized property one block away, and is rehabbing it. This building in particular is a huge outlier. Hopefully he'll just sell his building and move on.

You know Halifax very well, may I ask you for a rough ballpark figure for those buildings? (Same question to Drybrain, if he happens to know the answer.)

[someone123]

The Pacific Building was listed for $5.3M back in 2009. It's 50,000 square feet and 5 floors (the Green Lantern is also 5 on the Granville side).

The owners are restoring the white terracotta facade. There might also be some cast iron columns hidden under the ugly plywood storefronts at ground level; not sure what their plans are with that. Barrington is a heritage district so I think they qualify for rebates on this work.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

He's been outed, at least. I won't post the info, not into spreading that sort of thing. But it's great to know who it is. I'll never set foot in his business.

Maybe you should publish the name locally, it would seem to me that the owners must have purchased this property with only the destruction and profit in mind. Deliberate destruction of heritage should be a crime. What good are all the tourism ads if this antiquated attitude is still the reality?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Architype

Maybe you should publish the name locally, it would seem to me that the owners must have purchased this property with only the destruction and profit in mind. Deliberate destruction of heritage should be a crime.

So should "accidental".

[Architype]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

So should "accidental".

These things aren't usually accidental. Someone should be aware of all the facts and costs before making such a large investment. The laws here are actually at fault. I know in Vancouver people complain about demolitions of 1930s homes, but it has nothing on this. I've seen heritage homes (far less historic than this) relocated to other sites to make way for development in Vancouver; that would have been an appropriate solution here. Intact homes of this age and quality are actually very rare in St. John's, and this one had historical significance.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

The Pacific Building was listed for $5.3M back in 2009. It's 50,000 square feet and 5 floors (the Green Lantern is also 5 on the Granville side).

The owners are restoring the white terracotta facade. There might also be some cast iron columns hidden under the ugly plywood storefronts at ground level; not sure what their plans are with that. Barrington is a heritage district so I think they qualify for rebates on this work.

~$5M for the Keith / Green Lantern building seems quite unreasonable at first sight, unless Halifax is really pricey (and rents are too) for whatever reason.

I agree that this building would be a great loss for Barringston St, after checking out the area on Street View. The good news is that if they really bring this kind of money (several millions for a four-story shell needing a complete rehab) then this guy might well change his mind if the City holds firm...

Regardless of the personal appeal to him of the project he might have for this site, with an infusion of several millions in exchange for this shell that he won't be able to demolish anytime soon, he probably can get a suitable spot nearby that's currently empty and/or has a valueless building on it.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

~$5M for the Keith / Green Lantern building seems quite unreasonable at first sight, unless Halifax is really pricey (and rents are too) for whatever reason.

The Pacific Building was in reasonable condition. I'm not sure the Green Lantern Building is really a shell either; its ground floor is empty because the owner effectively kicked out his remaining tenants and refused to renew their leases. Apparently he didn't maintain or repair the upper floors because he wanted some kind of insurance payout, and then for a couple years he was waiting for heritage funding.

I have a feeling the downtown property values are extremely volatile and that buying property with the intent to develop it was, up until recently, a big 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. Within a two block radius there is nearly a billion dollars in construction happening right now. 2 blocks over, there's a 30 year old office building assessed at around $80M. Then again, there are other lots where property owners were only allowed to go to 5 or 6 floors. Land suitable for highrise development in that area is extremely valuable, but up until recently it wasn't possible to tell ahead of time what you'd be allowed to build on your property. As a result of this, a lot of people hold out hoping to sell land to a big developer and get a windfall of millions of dollars. The planning rules are clearer now (the heritage district is in place and the height/density limits are set ahead of time), so hopefully this situation will improve. I wonder if the Green Lantern building owner isn't still in the highrise mindset even though his property is in a heritage district (and under a low height limit).