HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRPS-09-037 - 65 Weber St E - Demolition•
Carparate 5ervi[es
REPORT TO: Mayor Zehr and Members of Council
DATE OF MEETING: May 19, 2009
SUBMITTED BY: Troy Speck, General Manager of Corporate Services
PREPARED BY: Shayne Turner, Director of By-law Enforcement
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Bridgeport-Centre
DATE OF REPORT: May 4, 2009
REPORT NO.: CRPS-09-037
SUBJECT: 65 WEBER STREET EAST -DEMOLITION
RECOMMENDATION:
For Information
BACKGROUND:
The property address known as 65 Weber Street East, a residential dwelling unit, has been the
subject of property standards enforcement action by the By-law Enforcement Division, for
several years, relating to a variety of concerns.
It is staff's opinion that the current state of deterioration of the property constitutes a situation
whereby the removal of the subject building is a more feasible and logical option than to
undertake the renovations necessary to bring the building up to an acceptable standard.
It should also be noted that staff continue to receive concerns from the public with regard to the
condition of the property.
REPORT:
The Property Standards Order currently outstanding on the property, copy attached, was issued
on May 14, 2007. The property owner, Otakar Buryanek, appealed the order to the Property
Standards Appeal Committee. The subsequent decision of the Committee was to grant an
extension for compliance with the Order to October 25, 2007.
During this time period, the owner indicated that there may be an opportunity to sell arising, and
he wanted to explore some potential options, which may include discussions with the owner of
properties adjacent to his.
Enforcement staff chose to give the property owner a great deal of latitude to explore his
options. By November of 2008, it became clear that no meaningful progress on redevelopment
or attempts at repairs had been undertaken or were being contemplated. As such, staff issued
notice to the owner that they intended to pursue action to bring the property into compliance
with the subject Order. A copy of that notification is attached. Since receiving the notification,
the owner has not provided staff with any specifics on his intentions and has, for the most part,
failed to communicate with staff on any level.
Some may be of the opinion that more time was provided to the property owner than should
have been. That said, the time and latitude provided to the owner only serves to show that the
staff have been very reasonable in allowing him to pursue options.
The most recent incident relating to this building occurred on April 28, 2009, where the building
was found to be insecure, with water running onto an adjacent property. The building was
secured, and City staff arranged to have the hydro and other services to the building
disconnected. This occurrence underscores staff's concerns with this vacant building.
Section 15.4 of the Building Code Act allows the municipality to take action to ensure
compliance with Property Standards orders when the owner has failed to comply. Such action
includes undertaking the repairs or removing the building. Several quotes have been obtained,
comparing the cost of remediation versus demolition. The results indicate that removal of the
building is the most viable option.
Council approval is not required, in order for staff to exercise their authority under section 15.4
when they undertake repairs or cleanups to properties. In fact, staff do so on a regular basis, on
much smaller scales. However, staff have previously committed to Council to advise them
when serious actions, such as demolishing a building, is contemplated.
It is staff's opinion, based on regular monitoring, that the building is essentially vacant, with no
obvious signs of regular habitation. Attached are several photos of the property depicting its
state of disrepair.
Given the residential zoning designation on this property, the City's Demolition Control By-law
may apply. Enforcement staff are working with Development and Technical Services staff to
work through any issues this may present. If necessary, a subsequent report will be brought to
Council to address the Demolition Control By-law implications.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
No specific corporate financial implications identified at this time. Should City forces proceed
with the demolition, all costs associated with the work will be applied to tax roll for the subject
property.
COMMUNICATIONS:
No Corporate Communications required. A copy of this report was delivered to the property
owner at least 2 weeks prior to the May 19th meeting date. In addition, a copy of the report was
sent to the existing mortgage holder as identified on the land registry files.
CONCLUSION:
Staff intends to pursue the necessary action to demolish the building on the property known as
65 Weber Street East. However, such actions would be suspended in the event that the
property owner takes all necessary steps, immediately, to comply with the subject Property
Standards Order to the satisfaction of the By-law Enforcement Division.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Troy Speck, General Manager of Corporate Services