IanO
Superstar
^Normally I would disagree, but in this case please get this one down.
We regularly tear down far more attractive and less troublesome buildings than this one in this city all the time. There is no redeeming reason to keep it at this point.Disagree. This would be 100% better for the community if this lot were vacant or even a parking lot than the state it has been left in. The building is the definition of derelict, pretty sure there have been several fires.
I'm in favour of deconstruct on this building. That statement was an add on to Ian's statement. You missed the 1888 date joke.Disagree. This would be 100% better for the community if this lot were vacant or even a parking lot than the state it has been left in. The building is the definition of derelict, pretty sure there have been several fires.
Please send your concerns to George and Sherry Schluessel...^Normally I would disagree, but in this case please get this one down.
Please send your concerns to George and Sherry Schluessel...
I just saw this so someone would have to follow up with Councillor Stevenson's office or someone at the City to find out what action is being done.
Probably another stern sounding letter that can just be ignoredSo what’s the penalty for non-compliance?