Colborne Street compromise rejected

By Christine Stonos, Special to B-cause.

It was bad news all around for members of the “Save the South Side of Colborne Street” group as Council rejected a resolution to allow private businesses to take over five of the Colborne Street buildings before their demolition.

Resolution 6.5, first raised by Coun. John Sless on April 6, was largely about putting the demolition of five Colborne Street business on hold and instead allowing private businesses to bid on projects to develop them.

After presenting the motion Monday night, Coun. Sless took the opportunity to speak to it.

“I didn’t realize that it would cause this much of a commotion, to be quite candid,” he said. “I view this as an opportunity to compromise … in a way that didn’t delay the plan that we have agreed to.”
Sless also pointed out that keeping the five buildings would allow Harmony Square to remain a square, and allow the city to take a “second look” at the demolition to ensure the most appropriate course of action is being taken.

Other councilors agreed.

“I think what’s being asked by Coun. Sless is reasonable,” said Coun. Martin. “I think it’s something that needs to be looked at.”

Though Martin supported the motion, he suspected the majority of councilors would not.

“It’s obvious this is going to go down in flames, because there are six people who are entrenched and won’t listen to argument, won’t listen to reason, won’t even consider anything.

“I think I can safely predict that this will be a 6-5 vote.”

While four councilors spoke in favour of the motion, only three spoke against it. The latter group included Mayor Hancock.

“The whole timing of this thing is something as well,” Mayor Hancock said, referring to the fact that if the city was to begin a request for proposals (RFP) process, it would take weeks, if not months, for parties interested in repurposing the buildings in question to respond.

“It’s just not practical what’s being proposed,” Mayor Hancock said. “But it does have the distinct possibility of doing everything that the motion says it isn’t trying to do, which is stop the entire demolition process.”

In a closing statement, Coun. Sless attempted to clarify his intentions in bringing forth the motion.

“This isn’t about stopping anything,” Coun. Sless said. “It’s about trying to use the time we had left wisely.”

The motion was defeated in a 6-5 recorded vote.

Vote:

Yes – Sless, Martin, Bucci, Calnan, McCreary

No – Carpenter, Littell, Bradford, Kinneman, Ceschi-Smith, Mayor Hancock