Mark Smith, the city manager of development services, explained the reports were not contradictory and that the building on Cumberland Street has just held up better than expected.
“What (the first report) said, it was within a year that the building would have to be demolished,” Smith said Tuesday.
“This second study really just confirmed that the property hasn’t deteriorated with the speed the first engineer thought it might. The building is still structurally sound.”
That sounds great Mark. The building hasn’t deteriorated with the speed the first engineer thought it might. But what about the order to demolish. You forgot about that. That was also based on an inspection and showed the building was in contravention of subsection 15.9(2) of the Building Code Act. S.O. 1992, c.23, as amended. A serious matter.
This order was posted in the front window of the Lyceum building. The inspection that triggered the order to demolish took place on July 03, 2013. (See previous post for entire order)
The order to demolish the building immediately was issued on July 15, 2013. (See previous post for entire order)
Those two dates are not a year ago. They are four and six weeks ago. So, Mark…I believe your explanation is full of shit.
As I asked in the earlier post, why was there another engineering report? You had two opinions that required the building be demolished, the last one only 6 weeks ago.
It will be interesting to see who eventually buys this building and how much they pay.